The Wild Life (2016) User Reviews

Not as bad as reviews say

[zzzorf · 6/10 · 8 March 2018]

I went into this movie not expecting much, the reviews I had read where not very promising but I thought well it is still worth a try. It is not as bad as reports say. The story was fine, I like when movies take another point of view of a well known story, makes you look at things in different ways. The characters were entertaining and the graphics were good so I don't see much of a problem with it.

I will say the two of my kids that I watched it with (ages 10 and 3) did walk away from the movie to do other things but I don't think that was due to the movie but interest in doing other things at the time but take it as you will.

Near Pixar Quality Animation, Not Pixar Quality Storytelling

[tiagodb · 5/10 · 16 April 2016]

It may not be fair to compare an independent Belgian animation to industry dominators like Pixar, but the film industry is competitive.

This film has excellent animation considering it was made by an independent company. Many vibrant colours are featured, and although the don't burst of the screen like Rio, it does add to the aesthetics of the film. Yet, it does feel like the film is very self contained, but it doesn't impact it in a good way. The setting explored (or not) has a lack of scope and the film clearly suffers from this. But for kids, this will not be a problem.

Despite strong design and animation, the direction is nothing notable. There are a maximum of two slightly interesting ideas (in the form of transitions) but other than that, everything else seems average, with no courageous attempts add to adding anything to the story.

Unfortunately, the film falls flat on the storytelling (particularly through dialogue) which just results in everything being cliché and predictable; it brings nothing new to the table. It appears that the writers just gave up, a shame considering if the dialogue wasn't so forced then the film wouldn't suffer so much. There isn't even an innuendo to keep the adults entertained.

This film is a good way to keep the kids occupied for 90mins, but nothing that adults will obtain any pleasure from (unless you are in awe of the animation which I doubt you will be).

Definitely not the best animated film I've seen.

[subxerogravity · 5/10 · 30 September 2016]

It was very cute but that was not enough to make it all that good.

The animation was pretty good, and I love the fact that the animation seem to be the focus of the film. So much in fact that no big name stars voiced any of the characters in the movie (Being a very small section of the end credits).

Although this did effect the story greatly. The movie is a retelling of Robinson Crusoe, from the point of view of the animals that help him survive on the uncharted desert isle for so long with most of the focus being on a parrot named mac, but Crusoe calls him Tuesday.

The story is not as good as the animation that is telling it, which is going to cost it from being a classic, but it still a OK animated film to see.

Good for the kids but not much for adults

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 2 August 2016]

As a family film, 'Robinson Crusoe' is a long way from awful but it misses the mark. It may be good for kids, providing that they don't expect too much, but adults won't find much for them.

Just for the record, this is coming from a huge lifelong animation fan in her early 20s with many animated films being considered favourites, just in case one accuses me (as is so the standard thing on this site these days) of seeing it through adults eyes too much.

The best thing about 'Robinson Crusoe' is the animation, with the exception of stiff human designs and lack of scope for the setting. There is a lot of gorgeous detail, especially the parrot's feathers, rich vibrant colour, good smoothness of movement and the animals look good.

'Robinson Crusoe' also has a groovy and dynamic soundtrack, the story (even if a very, very loose adaptation of the story) is at least coherent and easy to follow and some of the characters have charm, especially Ainsley (though really disliked the rather cheap treatment of him) and the humorous if slightly over-used villainous cats.

On the other hand, while the story is coherent it is also very predictable, too safe and bland, not much to be excited by here, even the climax feels like very watered down Looney Tunes/Tom and Jerry or something. The human characters do lack the colour and charm that went into some of the animals, especially the dull and unsympathetic protagonist, and other characters veer on the annoying. The script is lacking in laughs, emotion or any kind of colour. The voice acting is not too great, there's been worse but it does sound inexperienced with clichéd and obviously false accents.

In conclusion, good for the kids but little for adults. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Awesome 3D

[rsr-14 · 7/10 · 9 April 2017]

This movie is one of the best 3D movies ever made, there're simply tons of pop out effects. Actually this is 3D done right - you're constantly experiencing both pop out and depth effects. So the story is what it is, neither bad nor fantastic - but if you're seeing this movie in 2D, then I'd probably not bother, this is a 3D movie, the movie is completely designed to the 3d format, and this movie needs 3D to come to life. After so many years with mediocre 3D movies it's great to see a movie truly using 3D - and then they cancel all 3D TVs, argh... :-)

Not a total shipwreck but still needed rescuing

[SpoilerAlertReviews · 5/10 · 5 May 2016]

An animated feature that isn't Dreamworks or Pixar Disney? Instead an independent animation studios based in Brussels by the name of nWave Pictures. Having a small portfolio but boasting the first 3D animation feature 'Fly Me To The Moon' in 2008 and a fairly successful 'House of Magic' (2013) I'm impressed by their ambition.

I have to remind myself that it's a cartoon movie and the target audience would be children as it's based loosely on Daniel Dafoe's pioneering novel, which is much darker involving cannibalism and murder. It's probably more on an ideas of Crusoe as oppose to a movie about the book.

It's very vibrant and the animation is great, crewed by voice actor regulars but unknowns. I do wonder if a bigger voice would have promoted this film more; I'm not saying the acting was bad because it isn't. I suppose the budget wouldn't allow the team to do so.It unfortunately doesn't bring the same level of entertainment or laughs that the big guns like Disney and Dreamworks do, however it doesn't feel rushed and is structured quite nicely; I just doubt there enough going on to keep the attention of viewers, especially the younger ones.

The characters are good but again just falls short of feeling anything towards any of them. I couldn't pick a favourite character and some actually start to be annoyingly clichéd more than anything. Even with a character death, it just hits the deck.

It's a good effort and easy to watch, but there's little else to note about it. But keep up the good work nWave! There's some serious hidden treasure there and this isn't a complete shipwreck. 

Running Time: 6 The Cast: 4 Performance: 8 Direction: 6 Story: 6 Script: 5 Creativity: 5 Soundtrack: 6 Job Description: 5 The Extra Bonus Point: 0

51% 5/10

Visually strong, story-wise so-so

[Horst_In_Translation · 6/10 · 9 September 2016]

"Robinson Crusoe" is a co-production between France and Belgium between experienced animation filmmakers Vincent Kesteloot and Ben Stassen and the outcome is this really new take on the character of Robinson Crusoe. Being from Germany, I watched the version with the German voice actors of course. This list includes quite a few famous names and Ilka Bessin (Cindy aus Marzahn) and Didi Hallervorden were immediately recognizable. Kaya Yanar voices a pirate and I did not realize it was him right away. Also took me a bit longer with Matthias Schweighöfer, but that's actually a positive note as I think he did a pretty decent job with Crusoe and I don't think much of him as an actor at all. But if you don't see him (playing the same character again and again) and only hear his voice, it is pretty solid I have to admit. I must say I have seen better work from the filmmakers in the past, for example Stassen, but this 90-minute movie here was nonetheless worth seeing. It's tough what the best thing about it really is, but I am tempted to go with Hallervorden if only his character did not have so few lines. Oh wait, like I write in the title, the best thing is easily the animation and it elevates the material a lot. The characters look really nice, which sparkled my interest on several occasions. The story sadly is not on par. The cat characters as main antagonists are as bland and uninteresting as the pirates near the beginning and end. Crusoe's final decision to stick with animals instead of humans may have been meaningful, but the execution did not really feel convincing and the dog's death 8as usual) really only felt as if it was in there to get Crusoe closer to the island animals and did not make half the emotional impact it should have. And the worst scene is possibly Crusoe shooting at the cats who are in a brawl with his beloved dog that he easily could have shot in that scene. No idea what they were thinking. Like I said, the story (including the last half hour and grand final scenes) was nothing too great or memorable at all, but the familiar voices and stunning animation make this one worth seeing nonetheless. I give it a thumbs-up.

Not fair

[kosmasp · 4/10 · 27 September 2016]

Is it fair to judge a kids movie on its appeal to adults? On the other hand, with all the good animated movies that came out recently which also appeal to adults/parents and have quality that can be reviewed by "older" people to a better degree, I'd say all is fair. So consider this when seeing the rating and make up your mind, if it's important or what's important in its appeal.

Having said that, there is also the very real thing of having "star" names of German comedy or cinema taking on major roles here. People have made the argument, that there are professional animation dubbers, who know their job. Depending on your liking or disliking for that matter, someone like Schweighöfer will get a reaction from you. Again, as a kid you won't care, but probably also not read this. So it's the parents who if the kids want something new and you want something that they can watch by themselves, there are worse choices than this

One of the better cartoon movies!

[mm-39 · 7/10 · 23 September 2016]

One of the better cartoon movies! Not the usual home protagonist is lost and finds home again. The Wild life is a new plot about acceptance an adaptation to a new environment.Robinson Crusoe and loyal dog must endure a ship wreck. What do the islands' animals thinks of there new guests. Tuesday the parrot dreams of what the great new possibilities of meeting Crusoe and what adventures await off the island. The goat, pig, bird all have there doubts about Crusoe. The predator cats escape the shipwreck look for dinner creating an unknown new danger. Problems arouse! Friends are made. Crusoe has choices. Makes for a fresh new story. The bond between Tuesday and Crusoe drives the story line. The characters, voice, animation, blends into an a great escape movie. 7 out of 10!

reallly??? cats are like that???

[nalaka_hrth · 1/10 · 2 September 2018]

I wonder why the script writer so much hated cats.... this is one of stupid animation i've ever watched. in vain i wasted my time and money over this. to be honest an animal lover.

What a pleasant movie for both kids and adults

[Dallas71 · 8/10 · 29 June 2016]

I almost missed this movie - that my daughter at 8 and her coisin at 10 wanted to see - after reading the harsh comments here on IMDb. 5/10? come on!... But I decided to give it a go. And what a pleasant surprise it was. The animations are superb, I missed nothing here compared to Pixar and Dreamworks. And the story and screenplay was above average too. I could name dozens of high profiled animation movies with worse stories. I was entertained all the way, and had to stop myself from breaking out in applause at the end. There's something this studio does in its own way, which is not typical the big studios, and thats refreshing. Looking forward to their next piece. Im giving it a solid 8 out 10, and will definitely recommend this film to everyone. A very fine piece of art. Thank you.

I'm an adult and i loved it

[chenggaga · 7/10 · 3 October 2016]

The Wild Life is a movie with little bad quality graphics, not looks so amazing as other recent animation movies. So what? Didn't you watch Japanese animation My neighbor Totoro? Or Grave of the Fireflies?

Both movie looks like old cartoon but amazing story. So let go the graphics. Let's talk about the story.

The wild life, a pretty cute and funny for both kids and adults. The story was different and laughable. I watched it with my younger cousins and they really loved it. The parrot was my favorite character on this movie. He dreams of many things.

Don't listen to rubbish Reviews from "Adult" people. Let your kids watch it. They will enjoy.

Terrible terrible movie!

[cullenmhobbs · 1/10 · 28 November 2016]

Holy crap. I feel like I just sat through torture!!! This movie is terrible! There is almost nothing redeeming about this movie!

Pros. Good animation The 2 main characters are good enough. They have some good character development....... Waddaya waiting for! Oh you want more pros well I don't have any more so maybe you should just move along to the cons section! Cons. You know how I said the 2 main characters are good. Yeah well the rest of the characters have NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT WHATSOEVER! You just don't care about them at all! I also hated how everything was explained to you like your some kinda! I don't know 4 year old! It's that bad! The story Is so cliché and stupid!!! I hate the story It makes no sense and there are some huge plot holes in this movie! I don't mean little holes I mean BIG BULGING HOLES IN THE PLOT BARELY LEAVING ANY PLOT LEFT AT ALL! And the humor in this movie is horrendous! The only type of reaction I got out of the humor was maybe a grin every now and then. A very very very small grin that lasts 2 seconds. So overall The Wild Life is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life I absolutely hate it I definitely don't recommend you watch it ever and It's incredibly bad. The Wild Life gets an F

Doesn't even qualify for the bargain bin at Roses

[robert-durant-626-472948 · 1/10 · 10 September 2016]

In all the years I've been watching movies in the theater I've never once found a movie bad enough that I forced myself to get my money back and leave. Had I not had my daughter with me today to see this I would have broken that promise.

I went into this thinking "hey Rio meets Robinson Crusoe" with funny animals. My kid would like it and I'd be entertained. NOPE!!! By the way did anyone else see the trailer for this and think this was Rio 3 but with a red bird? This looked like something that had a lot of potential going into it and that quickly died the moment i started checking my watch.

Somebody must have been scammed out of their money for this to get a theatrical release because it barely qualifies as Netflix only kind of movie. The animation is passable but other than that it's just not worth your time or money. Studio Canal and nWave made a much better a movie a few years ago, "The House of Magic" that by far is a hundred times better than this and I didn't have to pay anything to see that, in fact it's on Netflix RIGHT NOW.

There were no funny jokes, repetitious dialogue, multiple endings that made this thing go on and on and on. Save your money or pay for something much better. If you have to see this wait for Netflix but other than that it's completely avoidable.

Nothing here for adults

[neil-476 · 6/10 · 16 May 2016]

Nerdy Klutz Robinson Crusoe is shipwrecked on a tiny island where, with the assistance of various helpful members of the local wildlife, he manages to survive despite the depredations of pirates and some feral cats.

This CGI feature originates from Belgium. It is bright, colourful with attractive set and character design and animation.

But it is populated with extremely annoying characters – almost all of them - a story which is almost totally uninteresting, an over-reliance on the villainous cats to drive the plot, an unsympathetic protagonist and a number of things which took me straight out of the film (the island is hardly bigger than a ten-bob note – how on earth does it manage to sustain the varied wildlife?).

There is little here for adults and, like Ratchet and Clank just a week ago, I imagine it will be successful with an undemanding audience of youngsters.

A very boring and uninteresting waste.

[Animated_Antic · 3/10 · 24 July 2017]

One of the biggest rules of a movie is that the audience has to be entertained. That is basically what the purpose of film is about and if the audience is not entertained, they can become quickly bored. That was what happened to me when I went to see the movie, "The Wild Life." A film that had very little going for it due to the fact that is was both boring and uninteresting. I went into this film expecting to see childish elements I usually in stupid animated movies, and left bored out of mind. Nothing stood out about this film. I was hoping something interesting would happen, but nope. It was just boredom disguised as a movie. I'll go into more detail explaining why that is.

The film is based on the classic novel "Robison Crusoe" by Daniel Defoe. Actually, more of a "loose adaptation" as this movie is told from animals point of view. Yeah, it's that kind of movie. As you all know, Crusoe (Yuri Lowenthal) is shipwrecked on an island alone after a storm gets him trapped in the hull. When he lands, Crusoe tries to make the best of it using the ships remaining supplies. Meanwhile on the island, a scarlet macaw named Mac (David Howard Thornton), who dreams of another world outside the island, decides to keep an eye on him while his other animal friends hide. Crusoe finds the macaw and decides to call him Tuesday. Why Tuesday, you may ask? Well, its because it was the second day that Crusoe was stranded on the island. How original. Afterwards, Crusoe begins to get used to his habitat and decides to make the best of it while trying to get help. What he doesn't know is that two evil cats who were on the ship, have survived the shipwreck and want revenge. Or at least, the female does because the male is a complete idiot.

The biggest problem with this movie is the story. The reason why is because of how boring and uninteresting it was. Despite the film being only an hour and half long, it felt like it was at least three hours. I really didn't care what would happen with any of these characters, whose names were pretty forgettable and I had no interest where the story was going to go. I also didn't think that the narration from Mac was needed at all. He basically "narrates" the story or in reality just says what the audience is seeing. For example, when he does a trick, the narration describes it to the audience as if we were stupid and don't see what was happening. The animation was also very unimpressive. Watching this film in 2D, I could clearly see scenes that were meant for a 3D viewing. Some characters would get obnoxiously close to the screen as if they were trying to kiss the camera or something. Speaking of characters, apart from being unimpressive most are just stupid. One notable example is a pirate captain at the beginning of the film that apparently never seen a talking parrot before. What kind of pirate never seen a talking parrot before? Did the writers not realize that most pirates have a talking parrot?

Well, in any case, I could care less because "The Wild Life" was just dull. I think the only smart choice that the creators did for this movie is rename the title from the original European release. It was named after the book is was "based on" in Europe even though it had little to anything to do with it. But, either way, the movie was still pretty boring. If I were you, keep yourself away from this dull waste of time. There's really nothing interesting here.

A pretty decent animation from Lionsgate/NWave animation

[pranayjalvi · 6/10 · 3 September 2016]

Considering that nWave doesn't have the budget to compete with DreamWorks or Pixar (typically the most conservative when it comes to 3D), 'The Wild Life' does well to the match the storytelling of Robinson Crusoe into an animation flick. This clever animal-centric perspective offers a playfully anti-imperialistic spin on Dafoe's classic tale of Western superiority. Director Stassen's 'The Wild Life" offers them another dynamic playground in animation to look for. A small budget animation but was beautifully made.A by the numbers retelling of the classic survival story. With a few funny moments this is nowhere near as anything good from the likes of Pixar but it does just enough to keep you entertained. I go with 3/5 for the work by this new animation studio.

do not see this film

[grumpy-3 · 1/10 · 9 May 2016]

this easily goes into my top ten worst films ever made, the animation was passable, but script, story, dialogue, and especially the dreadful voices were all the worst i have seen for a very long time. i expect anyone over five years old would come away with a splitting headache. when will europeans stop trying to make American films, they completely lack the sensibility and cultural aspect that you need. this was such a misguided film, trying to tick what the producers thought were all the right boxes for a commercial family film. but they got every single thing wrong in a big way. how this managed to get a release here in the UK is beyond me.

My review on this movie

[Honestguy90 · 7/10 · 16 August 2016]

I admit that when I first saw the trailer to this movie, I immediately thought that it was going to be a terrible movie. However, I cannot judge a movie until I have watched it. After taking my niece to watch it, I was surprised to how well done this movie was. I will break down this review into each sections.

The cast: the voice actors for this movie were a good choice. Each one of them fits their character well and while I admit a couple of the voice actors do have room for improvement, they were definitely not terrible by a long shot. Out of them all, Marieve Herington was the best. She is definitely an underrated actor who deserves more shots at other movies and TV shows.

The animation: the animation to this movie was superb and very well detailed.The CGI works well, it flows smoothly and it didn't appear to skip any frames or cuts. You can see the amount of detail they put into each character and all of the surroundings. The people who worked on this definitely put a lot of work into this and deserve praise for that.

The story: The Robinson Crusoe (AKA Wild Life) is based of Robinson Crusoe, a novel written in 1719 by Daniel Defoe. The movie follows a similar plot as the book but instead, the movie decides to take a more kid friendly route. The story to this movie is simple, it doesn't try to copy any other movie plots and it's original as movies get. Overall, the story is quite decent and it is something kids can enjoy. Certain adults may enjoy this as well.

Overall, this was a good movie. My only complaint really is that it didn't really need to be based off Robinson Crusoe book and could have been it's own stand-alone that wasn't based off any material. I give this a strong 7 out of 10.

A Total Shipwreck!

[wackywookie · 1/10 · 27 June 2020]

The animation is passable, but the highlights end there. This loose adaptation of the classic novel is just so boring and dull. In fact, I watched it only an hour or two ago and I've forgotten most points.

In particular, the plot is predictable, the characters uninteresting and lacking sufficient development; there are barely any jokes and the relation to it's source material stops at the title and a few character names!

Now, I know this is solely just for kids and I'm in my late teens, but even five year olds deserve much better films than this! Give them a Pixar or something, but stay far away from this as possible!

Great animation and 3D Stereography, Not for younger Children though

[3DPhil · 10/10 · 10 January 2017]

I watched this with an open mind Knowing that this was an independent Belgium film, Why people judge everything against multi million dollar Pixar and Disney films i do not understand it. I thought the film to be very well animated for a film with a fraction of what it would cost in Hollywood, with wonderful set design and landscapes, hair and costumes were very good too, The water effects during the storm and ship wreck were absolutely fantastic, This was one of the best 3D stereoscopic animation films that I have seen, great use of perspective, occasionally the use of wide angle shots gave too much distortion and the stereo window was broken at times, but Wow what a great effort, lots of in and out of the screen stereo effects that really worked well, Some reviewers say it was to cramped in its location, hello, this is called Robinson Crusoe, a man shipwreked and surviving on an island, they did try to expand this by adding the island of bugs but it perhaps was not featured enough. This film is not suitable for younger Children though as there are a few adult themes, namely the death of one of the dogs, and some very scary cats. But apart from these reservations I thoroughly enjoyed the film and the 3d experience and highly recommend anyone who loves good looking animation to give it a look. and just think about what this independent company have managed to achieve, I say well done to them all. I give it 9 out of 10

Great for adventure kids

[edenfairbrother · 16 April 2017]

I'm a mildly annoying middle aged woman who doesn't know anything about wildlife stuff but they sometimes have internet stuff about fun facts so this was a good choice by me and yes I'd love to recommend it. I'm told the fx are good but I still think they look fake. The story was a but absurd as if anything can survive out there on treasure island.

How did they pick the animals?

[cam-88268 · 7/10 · 25 April 2019]

I probably don't have to add to much more about storyline or animation that hasn't already been said. However, I'm confused over where this is supposed to be set? We have a South American Macaw, a Malayan Tapir, Asian Pangolin, Australian Echidna (or is it a European Hedgehog? My daughter thinks the nose is more like an Echidna), Asian Blue Eared Kingfisher, African Chameleon and what looks like a Russian Goat. I'm all for artistic license, but surely some sort of consistency. Otherwise, a reasonable enough movie, definitely for kids though, my daughter really enjoyed it. Also, anybody else think the cat looks like one of the Gremlins?

Worth Skipping

[janevicsimonp · 3/10 · 6 May 2018]

This isn't the worst animated talking-animal movie I've ever seen. It's better than Leo The Lion, The Pebble And The Penguin, and probably better than Ice Age: Collision Course, but is it still bad? Absolutely.

The animation is pretty good, although it's nothing to write home about. The lighting is spot on.

The characters are extremely bland at best and extremely forgettable at worst. Many are cliches: Mak the macaw is the "character confined who wants to see the world, much to his/her friend's dismay". The cats are just the "evil cats" .Robinston is the "kindhearted, animal-befriending human" .Rosie the tapir is the "fat girl". Scrubby the goat is the "old geezer". Epi the echidna is the "shy girl". Kiki the kingfisher is the "sassy girl". The other two of the heros, Pango the chameleon and the pangolin whose name I can't place both have no characterization whatsoever and aside from the former who does some tounge action during the battle against the cats, add nothing to the story. Mak's character design also looks ripped straight out of Rio. The dog isn't mentioned above because although he appears to be one of the main characters towards the film's beginning, he dies fairly early on and is never mentioned afterwords.

The story is also subar at best; due to my limited review space I won't really get into it, but what I will say is that most of the film is Rob figuring out ways to survive on the island with the help of his new creature friends, which is actually a tale Mak is telling some mice on a ship. After he is through with this, you'd expect the movie to just end, but instead goes on for one climactic battle between Rob and Mak and the pirates. The ending is rather unsatisfying- Curusoe just lives out his days with the animals on the island. it is mentioned during the credits that a woman washes up too and presumedly marries the only male of her species there but we never hear more than one sentence about it.

The dubbed voice acting is actually good, which is more than I can expect from a lot of the movies I've seen from this genre.

Among other stuff, two more things I will give it credit for was its effort to use animals such as a tapir, an echidna, and a pangolin that do not commonly show up in fiction (What a shame they're still all from different continent, though) and the lack of references to pop culture any studio that isn't Disney or Pixar seems to be full of these days.

Overall, pretty bad, but I've seen worse.

The whole plot tends to be open-minded.

[yoggwork · 4/10 · 19 February 2019]

The whole plot tends to be open-minded. Personally, I don't like the plot very much. But as far as the film is concerned, a few aboriginal animals talk a lot of nonsense, which slows down the overall rhythm.