Wilding

There seem to be extremely positive and extremely negative comments generated by this film which is interesting. I found the best way to view this was to sit back and just enjoy the journey. Of course it's highly edited and geared to show only one outcome: what the land CAN do if we let it. That's a hugely valuable experiment that few dare to take on, whatever the motivations.

The detail - the obvious wealth involved, the actual animal management, the final settlement of the controversies with neighbours - could be argued forever. Without going into the rights and wrongs this film is a cinematically beautiful product and it hits the spot in surprising ways. If nothing else it makes us think outside the box. This was a visual feast and came with an eye-opening view of what's possible! Let's celebrate that at least!

Really? A huge estate just left to run wild? And you can afford to let that happen with no visible means of financial support while you breezily dream away your days interspersed with the odd game if polo? Well fine, I suppose, if you have the cash. But it's not really going to help in the long run. The country needs to embrace nature while maintaining a stable food production base. I can't believe I'm saying this, but Clarkeson's farm demonstrates a far more sustainable way of caring for the land of this planet than this sentimental slice of environmentalism lite. Photography was quite nice though.

I was disappointed, I expected organic farming. I got some rich couple who sell expensive tours of a estate with some animals running about on it.

Not wild boar, of course not, might be a wee bit dangerous?

Not wild cattle, but a breed. And regular horses.

This is how the world was they claim. Well, explain New Zealand then. Or the Pacific Islands.

They also forget most of the people way back when, were not well fed. Animals and plants went extinct even then, they suffered from disease, hunger, climate change, disasters.

Right... Watch bats eat for 70 pounds. Look at butterflies for another 70.

"visit wildlife refugia" it actually says in yep a 4WD vehicle for 110 pounds.

What a joke.

I think the film invites to dream about a different reality.

It doesn't provide the viewers with a complete study on how to shift from commercial farming to permaculture, but, what it gives us is a glimpse of the possibilities that lie beneath this practice and the unlimited wisdom that the earth carry with it.

The visuals are beyond beautiful, the directing work, the sound design and music are meticulously crafted .

I'm very happy that I got to discover this film in Phoenix Cinema in Leicester and it feels like there is a movement of collective consciousness happening right now that bring back the long lost harmony to our current broken system.

I attended the world premiere of this documentary in a small but packed cinema during the 2023 London Film Festival. It tells of the efforts of Charlie Burrell and Isabella Tree to 'rewild' the former's family farm after many years of intensive agriculture have left the land exhausted.

Townie lovers of nature will find much to enjoy here: not only the amusing antics of horses and pigs (the re-enacted escapade of the porkers in a refreshment marquee could have been written by James Herriot); but insects, flowers and tree roots are all amply featured. The camera work is spectacular (what ever did we do before drones?), even if some of the sequences are obviously staged (eg, a harvest mouse running through a drain pipe) or use CGI.

But it is what is left out that makes this less a documentary than an unquestioning filmed hymn to Burrell and Tree. Basic information is not given: for instance, how extensive is the rewilding experiment - does it cover all of the farm, or just a small part of it? (And if all the farm is involved, how profitable is it?) Also, in her narration Tree makes a quick reference to the farm's animals being 'managed' - but 'managed' how? In many institutions involving animals, 'managing' them is done with a gun - if that is the case here, why not say so and explain why it is necessary? And what is the purpose to the farm of the camera-friendly animals we see - are they merely decoration, pets, or are they eventually sent for slaughter?

Also missing is hardly any expression of differing points of view - essential for creating a balanced piece of non-fiction work. A brief sequence of neighbouring farmers having doubts about the Burrell/Tree experiment sees them dismissed as old-fashioned meanies; their concerns about ragwort - apparently an extremely damaging plant which Burrell and Tree have growing in abundance - are never addressed. And if all the UK were turned over to rewilding, how would that affect our ability to feed a population fast heading toward 70million?

So, for all the spectacular camera work, this is pretty much a propaganda piece only. The missed opportunity to counter alternative points of view - leaving the viewer with the impression Burrell, Tree and the film-makers do not have the courage of their convictions, which I admit may be doing them a dis-service - weakens their own argument.