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.