Wild Horses

"Don't ever forget the obvious. Those clues will lead you to where you need to be." Scott Briggs (Duvall) is a rancher who comes home and finds something he doesn't like. His emotions get the better of him and something terrible happens. 15 years later an investigator shows up and begins to ask questions about his past. Now Scott is forced to try and hide the truth from everyone while trying to help his family. First and foremost this is a good movie. That said Duvall is starting to fall into the legend trap. By that I mean he is really doing a characteture of himself in every movie lately. He is still great but the person he plays in Night in Old Mexico and this one is pretty much the same person. That is not a bad thing, but it also takes away from the personalization of the movie. Also much like Night in Old Mexico this is not a western even though the cover seems like it is. All that said, the movie is very good and if you liked Night in Old Mexico you will like this as well. Overall, an enjoyable movie to watch, but Duvall really seems to be phoning in every one of his performances lately. I give this a B.

This film tells the story of a Texas ranger who opens up a case of a teenage boy who went missing fifteen years ago. This opens up the wounds in a ranch, where the head of the family disowns his gay son.

I did not quite expect "Wild Horses" to be so emotional and touching. On the surface it is about the disappearance of Jimmy Davis, but the other subplot of Mr Briggs and the relationship with his children steals the site. It is almost inconceivable that he would treat two of his children in such a manner. The story also seeks redemption and forgiveness, which makes it even more powerful. It's an unexpected surprise, especially because it's not getting much love from the internet users. I wish more people would appreciate how beautiful this film is.

What attracted me to this film was the name Robert Duvall , who is almost certainly America's greatest living character actor . Add to that he also directed WILD HORSES so this looked like a film worth going out of my way to see and while not being a complete waste of time I expected better

In reply to my fellow IMDb peer Arfdawg I agree the actress playing the lead Texas Ranger is rather dreadful . The actress birth name was Luciana Pedraza and is now known as Luciana Duvall . I guess that answers a few questions doesn't it ? Despite having a few other well known names in the shape of Franco and Hartnett most of the story is told via Pedraza/Duvall's female Ranger and she's just not a good enough actress to carry the film and gives a very wooden and stilted performance which becomes annoying . On top of that the film moves at a very slow pace which made me think the director was copying wholesale the Coens' style from NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN . Unlike that film WILD HORSES is far from compelling and feels like two separate stories , one featuring a crime drama and one featuring a angst ridden family drama stuck together in a rather unsatisfying manner and means we're left with an unsatisfying film

Bad directing. The first thing you notice is too much time between actors giving their lines to each other. I hate that. Duvall's wife can't act. English isn't her first language and may have a small part to do with that, but she rubbed me the wrong way right off the bat. Did not buy her as a ranger and her delivery was too slow as well. Duvall himself made me anxious because of his breathing. He seemed to be straining for each breath, yet lights up a cigarette, cause that's what cowboys do! Did he also allow himself some ad libbing here and there? Scenes were choppy. Fade to black then start up again without any smoothness whatsoever. James Franco is a great actor and besides Harnett was the only one worth watching. I kept wanting to give up so many times watching this but stuck with it.

The first part of the film was a little erratic, jumping abruptly from one situation to another. Not sure if that was intentional or if editing created continuity issues.

Also in the beginning some of the minor actors seemed to be quite literally reading their lines from a teleprompter that wasn't keeping up.

If you stuck with it, things did improve. Duvall both starred in the film and wrote it. He was, as always, excellent and I'm impressed that he (apparently?) came up with the story idea. Possibly he personally had some past demons he wished to put to rest.

It deals with a Texas rancher coming to terms with changing times, a need to address past wrongs and an attempt to reconstitute a family that his attitudes and behavior had torn apart. His efforts are not entirely successful in many ways and yet may have been the catalyst for some painful healing nonetheless.

James Franco was quite good. His acting is so much better when Seth Rogan is not involved. Maybe a hint of James Dean dealing with father-son alienation but with more understated drama. Josh Hartnett was also excellent.

It is not really a feel-good sort of movie, but there is a comforting sense that some things are changing for the better no matter how painful the process.