IMDb RATING
7.1/10
6.5K
YOUR RATING
Wanda, a lonely housewife, drifts through mining country until she meets a petty thief who takes her in.Wanda, a lonely housewife, drifts through mining country until she meets a petty thief who takes her in.Wanda, a lonely housewife, drifts through mining country until she meets a petty thief who takes her in.
- Awards
- 2 wins total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
...WANDA is nonetheless a stirring portrait of a woman who has lost her direction in life; that is, assuming she wasn't just going through the societally-mandated paces from the start, which I suspect.
Abandoning her husband and children without a second thought, she sets off on a journey to...nowhere in particular. Latching ignobly onto any man who will pick her up for a quickie, Wanda, played with remarkable veracity by the film's director Barbara Loden, drifts for a while until she stumbles upon a nomadic, dyspeptic robber, whom she meekly accompanies in his run from the law. After a series of escalating events which could have led to tragedy for her, Wanda is given a reprieve. Instead of taking advantage of her second chance, her detached indolence is too strong to overcome, and the cycle of soul-searching is apparently ordained to continue ad infinitum.
Recalling such contemporary cinematic works as FIVE EASY PIECES (1970), A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE (1974), the great GOIN' DOWN THE ROAD (1970), and TWO-LANE BLACKTOP (1971) in its characters' aimlessness and blind existentialism, "Wanda" also has echoes of Bresson's oeuvre; most of all, the film seems to have been a direct influence on Susan Seidelman's SMITHEREENS (1982), an equally good picture.
To the film's detriment, its characters are such pathetic no-hopers that they are not easy to relate to, especially since they are given no biographical framework whatsoever. Moreover, the cinema verite direction is a little too self-consciously austere, lingering unduly on some scenes. Loden seems unaware of the misconception that merely letting the camera run on automatically lends a scene profundity; sometimes the film seems as hollow as its characters. Then again, that's the point. I liked "Wanda" quite a bit, but it takes patience to tease out its nuances, and is hence not for all tastes.
Abandoning her husband and children without a second thought, she sets off on a journey to...nowhere in particular. Latching ignobly onto any man who will pick her up for a quickie, Wanda, played with remarkable veracity by the film's director Barbara Loden, drifts for a while until she stumbles upon a nomadic, dyspeptic robber, whom she meekly accompanies in his run from the law. After a series of escalating events which could have led to tragedy for her, Wanda is given a reprieve. Instead of taking advantage of her second chance, her detached indolence is too strong to overcome, and the cycle of soul-searching is apparently ordained to continue ad infinitum.
Recalling such contemporary cinematic works as FIVE EASY PIECES (1970), A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE (1974), the great GOIN' DOWN THE ROAD (1970), and TWO-LANE BLACKTOP (1971) in its characters' aimlessness and blind existentialism, "Wanda" also has echoes of Bresson's oeuvre; most of all, the film seems to have been a direct influence on Susan Seidelman's SMITHEREENS (1982), an equally good picture.
To the film's detriment, its characters are such pathetic no-hopers that they are not easy to relate to, especially since they are given no biographical framework whatsoever. Moreover, the cinema verite direction is a little too self-consciously austere, lingering unduly on some scenes. Loden seems unaware of the misconception that merely letting the camera run on automatically lends a scene profundity; sometimes the film seems as hollow as its characters. Then again, that's the point. I liked "Wanda" quite a bit, but it takes patience to tease out its nuances, and is hence not for all tastes.
Sheez, what a depressing film. I think a lot of people can identify with it. A woman has no direction and no hope. She just sinks lower and lower without anyone to help her.
The film is slow and has quite a few unneccesary scenes, just like Wanda's life.
It is amazing a woman got this project made and was allowed to direct. I'm glad it exists as tribute to her. She passed away far too young. I hope her life wasn't as bleak as this story.
The film is slow and has quite a few unneccesary scenes, just like Wanda's life.
It is amazing a woman got this project made and was allowed to direct. I'm glad it exists as tribute to her. She passed away far too young. I hope her life wasn't as bleak as this story.
There is a scene, near the beginning, that shows our main character from a distance walking through mounds of coal to get to her father to ask him for some money. The shot stays on her for what seems like several minutes. The camera simply and slowly pans forwarded as she progresses. Some may say this is boring, others the work of a amateur that doesn't know when to cut. Yet this is a very brilliant shot that shows the true essence of what this film is about and the plight of our character. In life she is constantly walking. Unable to fully grasp the true dissolution of her existence she continues to search for something, anything. She is the victim of life's cruel riddle. A riddle that has no answer.
This is a very sad movie, probably one of the saddest movies you will ever see. It is sad because Wanda's condition is not unique and probably makes up more of the working poor than we care to think. It helps clarify the desperation that people in these circumstances both live and feel. It also helps explain why they will get into such stupid situations and at times make such dumb and illogical choices.
Here drifter Wanda meets up with a two bit crook named Mr Davis. The two create a very odd relationship and actually prove beneficial to each other. She brings out his long dormant tenderness, while he, in one truly touching moment, actually gives her some confidence. Of course it doesn't last, but it is an inspiring piece nonetheless. It shows that even the most pathetic of people, in the most bleakest of situations, can still transcend themselves.
This is actually quite a powerful film. It's very stark, grimy, almost home movie look is actually an asset. No stylized interpretations here. The dingy bars, restaurants, homes, hotels, and factories are all very, very real. You start to feel as trapped in their grayness as the characters. This is a far more billiant and manipulative film than one might initially believe.
This is a very sad movie, probably one of the saddest movies you will ever see. It is sad because Wanda's condition is not unique and probably makes up more of the working poor than we care to think. It helps clarify the desperation that people in these circumstances both live and feel. It also helps explain why they will get into such stupid situations and at times make such dumb and illogical choices.
Here drifter Wanda meets up with a two bit crook named Mr Davis. The two create a very odd relationship and actually prove beneficial to each other. She brings out his long dormant tenderness, while he, in one truly touching moment, actually gives her some confidence. Of course it doesn't last, but it is an inspiring piece nonetheless. It shows that even the most pathetic of people, in the most bleakest of situations, can still transcend themselves.
This is actually quite a powerful film. It's very stark, grimy, almost home movie look is actually an asset. No stylized interpretations here. The dingy bars, restaurants, homes, hotels, and factories are all very, very real. You start to feel as trapped in their grayness as the characters. This is a far more billiant and manipulative film than one might initially believe.
These sort of movies tend to be or get pretentious and annoying pretty easily but not this one though, which makes this simply a good and perfectly watchable little movie.
I wouldn't even call this movie an independent one. It's being more one that feels and look like it got shot guerrilla style, so without any planning and preparations to it. They simply shot stuff on the spot, with the available equipment and actors and would also improvise most of their lines. That at least was the feeling this movie gave me but I don't actually know if this truly was the case for this movie.
The approach definitely adds to the realistic feeling of the movie. It's being a random slice of life if you will, though it still is very much following a type of story that you will only see in a movie. The characters and the way how they are handling certain situations still make sure that the movie feels like a realistic one.
But because of it that the movie feels like it got done guerrilla style, the movie also doesn't have the best looking and sounding quality to it. The sound is simply just bad at times and the cinematography also really isn't being anything all too special or stylish to watch. Guess they thought that in this cast the story and the storytelling would be enough to create a great movie with but I just still missed far too many (basic) movie-making ingredients in this movie, that can make a movie of this sort great for me.
And lets face it, the main reason why this movie still floats around is because it got directed, written and stars Barbara Loden, who was married to legendary film-maker Elia Kazan, making this a bit of a curiosity piece perhaps. But really, there is not much about this movie that stands out. It's being a good and original little movie within its genre but I only wished that the movie also would had had more to offer, with its main story and characters perhaps. I simply didn't got an awful lot out of this movie but I can at least say about this movie that I was never annoyed or bored with it.
Definitely a watchable and good movie but just nothing to run out for, in my opinion.
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
I wouldn't even call this movie an independent one. It's being more one that feels and look like it got shot guerrilla style, so without any planning and preparations to it. They simply shot stuff on the spot, with the available equipment and actors and would also improvise most of their lines. That at least was the feeling this movie gave me but I don't actually know if this truly was the case for this movie.
The approach definitely adds to the realistic feeling of the movie. It's being a random slice of life if you will, though it still is very much following a type of story that you will only see in a movie. The characters and the way how they are handling certain situations still make sure that the movie feels like a realistic one.
But because of it that the movie feels like it got done guerrilla style, the movie also doesn't have the best looking and sounding quality to it. The sound is simply just bad at times and the cinematography also really isn't being anything all too special or stylish to watch. Guess they thought that in this cast the story and the storytelling would be enough to create a great movie with but I just still missed far too many (basic) movie-making ingredients in this movie, that can make a movie of this sort great for me.
And lets face it, the main reason why this movie still floats around is because it got directed, written and stars Barbara Loden, who was married to legendary film-maker Elia Kazan, making this a bit of a curiosity piece perhaps. But really, there is not much about this movie that stands out. It's being a good and original little movie within its genre but I only wished that the movie also would had had more to offer, with its main story and characters perhaps. I simply didn't got an awful lot out of this movie but I can at least say about this movie that I was never annoyed or bored with it.
Definitely a watchable and good movie but just nothing to run out for, in my opinion.
7/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Mousy, uneducated, impoverished Wanda falls for a sleazy small-time crook, and they hit the road together. This movie has everything going against it--it's very low-key, cheaply made (dig that shaking camera), and paced only a little more swiftly than your average Andy Warhol film. But even though it plays like a cut-rate "Badlands," it succeeds powerfully in evoking sympathy for its pathetic title character. Its slow pace gives it a meditative quality for the patient viewer. Depressing but memorable; it should be more widely seen.
Discover the nominees, explore red carpet fashion, and cast your ballot!
Did you know
- TriviaWanda (1970) was shot with a crew of only four people.
- GoofsWhen Mr. Dennis takes the banker from his home, his daughters are seen swimming in the lake. Moments later, they are inside one with the dummy bomb on her lap, both girls' hair and bathing suits are completely dry.
- Quotes
Norman Dennis: If you don't want anything you won't have anything, and if you don't have anything, you're as good as dead.
- Alternate versionsPROLOGUE TO 2010 RESTORATION: "Wanda has been preserved from the original 16mm color reversal a/b rolls, the original 16mm optical tract, and an original 35mm release print. Digital restoration has been conducted on selected sequences to repair damage to the source elements. In keeping with the film's low budget, certain production artifacts have been left intact." "The 35mm preservation elements restore Wanda's original sound mix and shooting aspect ratio. Restoration completed 2010."
- ConnectionsEdited into Histoire(s) du cinéma: Fatale beauté (1994)
- How long is Wanda?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $115,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $51,713
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $10,679
- Jul 22, 2018
- Gross worldwide
- $108,692
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content