Wild Fire (2005 Video) User Reviews

terrible story

[manicflow · 5/10 · 19 May 2006]

stupid story and looks like a weird version of a Dukes of Hazzard episode. The only bright note is that the lead male "kennedy" is great. Maybe a little eager at times, but he is a star in the making and is really HOT. Nevertheless, the direction is horrible and most of the acting is pathetic. Michael Preston is the only one I even care about looking at; at least he seems excited to be doing what he is doing. Other than that, forget about it! The plot is by no mean inventive and is seems like half of the movie is stock footage blended with a freshman attempt at building a story around it. It is nice to bring this topic of Wild Fire's to the public attention, but just not in such a pathetic way. Please make a movie with that Michael kid and do something with him. By the way, are we suppose to by that these sister's just went through some terrible family tragedy. both of the lead females in this movie just seem detached from the whole experience. Just don't even bother buying this movie unless you wanna see some stock smoke jumper footage mixed with a "hotty" acting like he is doing all the fire fighting. A really bad flick.

Are you kidding me ? Why is such rubbish still produced ?

[evdz · 26 February 2005]

Believe me, any $ spent on this movie is too much.

2 Sisters living on a wild life farm, and guess what: some real estate people want their land!! Oh no, we've NEVER heard that one before.. Of course the sisters won't budge to these bad bad people, so the real estate guys hire even badder people to bug them.. I wonder how the story ends....

Some key words to help you decide if you really want to see this monstrosity:

Bad acting, Bad screenplay, Bad story, Bad acting (oh did I mention that one already ?? Ah well, it was SO bad we can mention it twice..)

So bad I couldn't stop laughing

[imdb-188-901150 · 1/10 · 17 October 2011]

Do you know those films that are so bad they make you laugh at the poor acting, dialogue and ridiculous plot, well this is one of those films.

The most convincing performance and line is given by a parrot as it nervously paces across it's cage. Obviously the parrot realises that it won't get any more work after this film.

I watched the film to the end and laughed. We did have fun spotting continuity errors. The best are where the actors suddenly grow loose beards as the camera switches between shots with real fire and fire fighters and shots with dialogue.

The plot (sic) involves a forest fire or two, some fire fighters, two girls who look after an animal sanctuary/zoo in a Calafornian forest and a mean guy who wants to buy the land used by the zoo. You can guess the rest.

Not bad for a non pretentious family flick.

[celticfilmworks · 7/10 · 13 February 2006]

The fellow in the Netherlands saw a different movie, apparently. Wild Fire is clean, runs smoothly, and gives the kind of escapist entertainment one needs in these rough and tumble times. Yes, I agree the acting is uneven at times. The writing is not all bad - and there are moments of brilliance (depending on which actor says what line). The producers are not trying to make GONE WITH THE WIND, and they don't pretend to be. They just set up to entertain, and in that they do. What kid, for example, isn't going to love animals? Wild Fire has critters everywhere. And unlike these days when heroes and bad guys are loosely defined, in WILD FIRE they are very much defined. You KNOW who to root for. You know who to boo. Yes, you know the ending, but so what? in STAR WARS you knew the ending, too. Good guys win. Bad guys lose. End of story.