Wounded

When a pair of park rangers discover a host of dead bears they call in reinforcements to track down those responsible. Sadly they get more than they bargained for, one single man who is far more dangerous than they imagined.

Essentially at its core Wounded is a revenge thriller starring Madchen Amick and a host of faces you'll recognise but struggle to put a name to. Among them is Jim "Bobby from Supernatural" Beaver who doesn't get all too much camera time.

I like the story, I think it's fantastic but somewhere along the way the creators dropped the ball and wasted it. It could/should have been so much more but the finished product is a really rather boring little thriller.

It's movies like Wounded that need remaking, a film with a great story but was made by people who didn't know just quite what they had.

Damn shame.

The Good:

Great story

The Bad:

Really boring

Horrible opening

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

At no point did I care about a human more than the bears and the dog

Jim Beaver in something without him calling someone an idjit is just weird

while i didn't hate this movie,i didn't find it spectacular either.the first twenty minutes or so are quite good,with some action and tension.the last ten minutes are also good,again with some action and suspense.the problem is the middle of the movie.it's just too damn slow moving.i kept hoping and waiting for something to happen.there's a lot of talking in this one.however,i really liked Graham Greene as a bitter former cop.Madchen Amick is convincing in the role of action heroine by the way,is it just me,or could she pass for Kim Delaney's twin sister?anyway,the star of this movie is Adrian Pasdar,who plays the bad guy,and really well,i might add.his character is definitely very chilling and sadistic.unfortunately,the the movie itself falls short.my vote for "Wounded" is 5/10

On the surface, this is like the hundreds of other movies I've seen. There's a psychotic killer who kills the partner/sibling/best friend/S.O. of the main hero who then avenges his/her death. But this is not one of those films. This is different.

Granted, the main plot is familiar. Julie and Don are living in the wilderness tracking bears when a poacher kills Don and almost does the same to Julie. With extraordinary luck, she survives but has lost her will to live. The poacher, however, is a well-paid professional hunter who has no plans to leave any witnesses alive so when Julie is sent to the city to recover, he follows her to finish what he started. Meanwhile, a suicidal Julie must find a will to live with some help from an alcoholic cop, Rollins.

So that's the setting. Sounds simple? It is. On paper. But surprisingly enough, not in the movie. You see, the film is NOT just a revenge action-thriller. It's more of a character study. In a "normal" film, the death of a friend would cause the hero to grieve for about 30 seconds (possibly accompanied later by a few flashback-scenes). In this film, the main thing is Julie's recovery - especially mentally. The objective is to show what Julie goes through after the death of the only person she cared about. Revenge is not a clear course of action. It's not something this film takes lightly. But as things move along, it comes apparent that the officials can't help and she can't start a new life until the nightmares of the old one has been taken care of.

It's important to notice that the setting and the characters really aren't as black and white as the basic plot would have you believe. Julie doesn't go from happy to sad to happy again at the flick of a switch. She knows that even if she gets her revenge, things will never be the same but has decided to cross that bridge once she gets there. For now, revenge provides her the strength to move on. Also, Rollins is a flawed character who has some skeletons in the closet but still has found a will to live – he's not a generic loose cannon.

Technically, the movie is very low-key. There are no explosions, no big chases, nothing like that. Still, the film was never boring to me. Everything was there for a purpose. The production values are flawless, rivalling those of big budget theatrical releases. Lots of beautiful scenery shots, nice editing, brilliant directing. The score by Ross Vannelli is excellent, including beautiful, atmospheric and aggressive moments. I'd buy it in an instant but of course it isn't available. And this is probably only the second film I've seen where you actually can randomly use freeze frame and at least 9 times out of 10 you'd see a beautifully composed shot which wouldn't look out of place in a lobby card (the other film is "American Dragons/Double Edge", a Michael Biehn-actioner directed by Ralph Hemecker which was also elevated above it's standard material because of some unique stylistic touches).

If you allow it, this movie raises some interesting questions. What would you do in a similar situation? Revenge won't bring your life back but could you ever find the balance if you knew that the man who ruined your life is out there? Is the character in a true no-win situation? If the only person you cared about would be murdered and you had the opportunity to either kill the murderer or to walk away knowing that the case would soon be forgotten by everyone but you and you'd never see the murderer brought to justice? After I had watched the film a few times, I realized that there really should be an instruction manual with films like these indicating who it's for and the best way to watch the film. I don't know if the filmmakers would agree with me, but in my opinion if you just keep it in the background or watch it with some friends over pop corn, it'll never work. You only want to see action? Forget it. You're the type of person who always watches films with friends, talking while watching them and making fun of them in MST3K-style? Don't see this one. But if you like reading dark novels, staying up late at night listening to the rain while doing nothing but thinking, this is the one to watch. Open-minded, emotional people will like this.

I have to mention that I still adore those straightforward revenge-actioners where a flawless martial arts-hero kills everyone in sight in the most violent way imaginable without ever getting hurt himself and which you forget 5 seconds after the movie is over (coincidentally director Richard Martin has also directed `White Tiger' which is a great example of that kind of a film). But "Wounded" is a more ambitious film and one which succeeds in everything it sets out to do - and that's no small feat! Highly recommended.

This film, while not Oscar material by any means, is an enjoyable Saturday night movie. As many others have commented, the cinematography is creative and pleasant to the eye, enticing one to become a game warden in the northwest. It also has an impressive cast that does the best it can with a script that bounces around at times and is, for the most part, predictable.

The beginning of the film does a fine job of illustrating the setting of the northwest, with sweeping landscape shots that really gives the viewer an idea of vastness of the wilderness. Mountain fans will be inclined to rewind and play the aerial shots again just for the view.

Regarding the predictability of the story, there are a few surprises that keep it from being clichéd. There is also a subtlety about it that prevents it from looking like a female on a Rambo rampage. Unfortunately, this creates some lagging spots where the story must develop. Still, it does move along, recovering from those moments and jumping back into the story with both feet.

Amick's performance as Julie Clayton has some rough spots, but is otherwise enjoyable. However, the most notable performance is given by Graham Greene, as Nick Rollins, an SFPD officer with issues. The interplay between Amick and Greene is not over the top, keeping the film on an even keel. Graham's smooth delivery is what keeps the story afloat at key moments. If the movie had not been about Julie Clayton, Nick Rollins would have had his own story to tell.

One gets the feeling that WOUNDED would play well in book form, but it holds its own as a film due to its cast. Adrian Pasdar, of HEROES fame, does his best work as a voice on a phone line. He has an eerie tone that is taunting and cold. His dialogue could have used a little streamlining to increase the threat, but one could argue that it is not the character's way. Hanaghan is a very focused character, and perhaps the dialogue is that way to keep in line with that.

Overall, this film is worth picking up as a rental. It holds a viewer's interest long enough to see it through the end. Yes, there are some nitpicking points that could be made regarding the story or the actions of the characters, but that can be said of just about any film. There are no major sins against real life policies or physics that cannot be overlooked in the name of entertainment. If anything, check it out for the great wilderness shots. They are eye candy in and of themselves.

Forget about Charles Bronson and Deathwish, this is a film with at least a couple of more levels in the sweet, cold sensation of revenge. This film takes the old saying of: `Revenge is a dish best served cool' and turns it into a very good film. In contrast from the `Deathwish' movies which can be very one-dimensional in its revenge-seeking, this one really makes one understand what Mädchen Amick must feel like. This pleasant but scary journey takes us from the innocent peace-loving girl that she was all the way to the killing machine she becomes in a very deep and colorful way. And it doesn't exactly hurt that her sidekick is, the always great, Graham Greene!

If you're looking for an action-packed movie with a lot of cool camera shots (a la N.Y.P.D Blue) this one is not for you. But if you're looking for a high suspense thriller on an emotional level with a lot of great lines and character development this one will be right up your alley!