pretty disappointing. i was expecting more of a horror/thriller -- but this seemed to be more of an episode of dawson's creek but with out the acting. there were some very impressive shots, though -- almost worth seeing. maybe future efforts will improve.
20 Reviews
where was the plot???
binural_pearl_jam24 May 2004
alright this movie might have been good if there was a plot behind it. the title didn't even fit the it after the first ten minutes. the wind didn't have a whole lot to do with the rest of the movie. the acting was sub-par and the writing reminded me of something you would read in a children's book of scary stories.
as far as horror movies go this shouldn't even be classified as one. this was a disgrace to horror and thriller fans everywhere. I hate to be so harsh but I felt I want the time I spent watching this movie back. hopefully there will not be a follow up to this. this movie should be locked in a vault and never released to the public for viewing.
as far as horror movies go this shouldn't even be classified as one. this was a disgrace to horror and thriller fans everywhere. I hate to be so harsh but I felt I want the time I spent watching this movie back. hopefully there will not be a follow up to this. this movie should be locked in a vault and never released to the public for viewing.
the wind stinks!
pixelpops8 April 2004
The beginning voice over sounds like 'The Wind' could be quite an intriguing movie, but as the story unfolded I knew it was downhill from there. The major things about this movie that blew were the terribly bad acting jobs all the main characters did, (except for a few scenes involving the inner turmoil of Mic), there was a total lack of character development and absolutely no point to the plot - What were the writers thinking?
Michael Mongillo won 2 'horror/sci fi' awards for 'The Wind'. HUH? What was so scary about this movie? NOTHING! Except for the resident evil 2 video shots, the rest was more of a 'made for t.v thriller' - it wouldn't even have to be edited. If you want a far better movie about 'murder among friends' rent "Shallow Grave" instead.
'The Wind' */*****
Michael Mongillo won 2 'horror/sci fi' awards for 'The Wind'. HUH? What was so scary about this movie? NOTHING! Except for the resident evil 2 video shots, the rest was more of a 'made for t.v thriller' - it wouldn't even have to be edited. If you want a far better movie about 'murder among friends' rent "Shallow Grave" instead.
'The Wind' */*****
A curious and compelling waste of time
cthonas13 June 2004
It is the early morning of our discontent, and some friends of mine and I have just gotten through watching "The Wind." Truly a disaster film. Not in the sense of forces of nature wreaking havoc on an unsuspecting populace, but rather an awful movie wreaking havoc on an unsuspecting audience. To give you an indication of how frustrating it was to watch this particular bomb, I'll give you an example quoted during my first pained viewing. If given the choice of watching this movie for a second time and, say, boiling myself, I'm afraid to say the choice would not be an immediate one. But rather than simply ranting "ad peliculam" with lousy one-liners, I'm going to get specific as to why exactly my friends and I panned this particular film.
To start this off, I like low-budget horror flicks. I even like artsy, low-budget horror flicks. I liked "Cold Hearts", "Midnight Mass," "Jugular Wine," etc. Films that were ambitious and daring, even if they were lacking in production value, execution and even acting. Generally, an interesting premise, unusual camera technique or merely just a well done scene or two will save a movie that is running a little rough around the edges. With these provisos in mind, I would like to say conclusively that I hated "The Wind."
The movie was probably most disappointing in the sense that it was incredibly frustrating to watch. From the actions of the main characters, to the flow (?) of the plot, to the big portents hinted at by the opening which ultimately aspired to dust (and did not even attach themselves logically to what transpired in the remainder of the film, and left the viewer, expecting something more, with a sense of much ado about nothing). The dialogue was spotty at best, woodenly delivered and completely unrealistic. By this I mean, no one in any of the situations that the characters were in would have reacted the way the characters did, or said the things that they said in the way that they said them. There was an obvious lack of vision and direction that would have corrected this problem.
Character interaction and development was abysmal. Claire, the "lambent sex goddess," or so the aggravating, passive-aggressive lamesters in the movie thought, was so overt in her manipulations she may as well have pulled a gun on the characters. Nevertheless, she was the shining high point of the film. The other main characters (with the exception of Mick's Milfy Mom, who was not terrible) are so indistinct that they may as well have been portrayed by the same actor. Let's see if I missed anything: borderline personality, co-submissive goons with profound feelings of sexual confusion and inadequacy, spurred to fits of puerile rage through the artless orchestrations of a loose-lipped bimbette-suddenly-and-unmasterfully-turned-Caligari. No, I think that about covers it.
Lack of scope was also problematic. How did those involved with the making of this film expect the casual viewer to derive that this was the beginning of the end of the world from this amateurish, unbelievable, poorly-portrayed lust pentagon (well, what would you call it?) that occurred largely in the woods in the middle of nowhere? There were no witnesses to the "atrocities" presented. There were no witnesses anywhere in this film.
The believability problems stemming from this lack of attention to detail were rife even from the point where the plot begins to sicken. Case-in-point: If that guy Bob took that route through the woods to come home from the gym, and here's the key, ****every day****, there's a jolly good chance that someone else would have been around to see something at some point afterwards while the perpetrators argued vociferously about the crime scene. One would think that with the murder of a young man in the woods, said town would have been in an uproar, the characters would have been questioned, etc. But instead, there wasn't a witness in sight (other than Earl, the closet psychopath with no inner monologue). We suggest that there be no witnesses *for* this film, either.
As for the quasi-homosexual meanderings present, I don't have a problem with those either. It's not as if they came as a surprise, considering we had been shouting as to the closet case stati of most of the male characters since the second scene. Again, not problematic in and of itself, but thrown in for the wrong reasons. It was utterly unnecessary, thrown in for pure "shock" and/or "dangerous art" value, and neither shocking nor dangerously artistic from any perspective. What we had instead was an awkward attempt to redeem a boring, clumsy movie with a boring, clumsy plot. The poorly hinted-at sexual tension, which was only hinted at heavy-handedly in anticipation of this flaccid snogging scene, only pushed this film further down the totem pole from "mediocrity warranting criticism" to "film sucking so bad that it lacks the inherent grace to suck enough to properly mock and harangue."
So it is with most of the film, a lot of artistic fumbling, very little meat and a lot of aggravation. It's not that we don't get it. Oh, we got it, alright. We just don't want it. Look, the very fact that we were cheering the bludgeoning in the final scene as the *only* tableau that made sense on its face is an indication that something was terribly wrong with this film. Rather than moving briskly along as its name implies, this movie oozed languidly forward like the sweat trail working it's way down the side of your nose while your hands are full. Argh. That sensation pretty well sums up the gut-wrenching frustration realized while watching this train wreck. There is no breath of fresh air with regard to this movie, only the stale miasma of bad ideas poorly realized, putrefying before coming to fruition.
To start this off, I like low-budget horror flicks. I even like artsy, low-budget horror flicks. I liked "Cold Hearts", "Midnight Mass," "Jugular Wine," etc. Films that were ambitious and daring, even if they were lacking in production value, execution and even acting. Generally, an interesting premise, unusual camera technique or merely just a well done scene or two will save a movie that is running a little rough around the edges. With these provisos in mind, I would like to say conclusively that I hated "The Wind."
The movie was probably most disappointing in the sense that it was incredibly frustrating to watch. From the actions of the main characters, to the flow (?) of the plot, to the big portents hinted at by the opening which ultimately aspired to dust (and did not even attach themselves logically to what transpired in the remainder of the film, and left the viewer, expecting something more, with a sense of much ado about nothing). The dialogue was spotty at best, woodenly delivered and completely unrealistic. By this I mean, no one in any of the situations that the characters were in would have reacted the way the characters did, or said the things that they said in the way that they said them. There was an obvious lack of vision and direction that would have corrected this problem.
Character interaction and development was abysmal. Claire, the "lambent sex goddess," or so the aggravating, passive-aggressive lamesters in the movie thought, was so overt in her manipulations she may as well have pulled a gun on the characters. Nevertheless, she was the shining high point of the film. The other main characters (with the exception of Mick's Milfy Mom, who was not terrible) are so indistinct that they may as well have been portrayed by the same actor. Let's see if I missed anything: borderline personality, co-submissive goons with profound feelings of sexual confusion and inadequacy, spurred to fits of puerile rage through the artless orchestrations of a loose-lipped bimbette-suddenly-and-unmasterfully-turned-Caligari. No, I think that about covers it.
Lack of scope was also problematic. How did those involved with the making of this film expect the casual viewer to derive that this was the beginning of the end of the world from this amateurish, unbelievable, poorly-portrayed lust pentagon (well, what would you call it?) that occurred largely in the woods in the middle of nowhere? There were no witnesses to the "atrocities" presented. There were no witnesses anywhere in this film.
The believability problems stemming from this lack of attention to detail were rife even from the point where the plot begins to sicken. Case-in-point: If that guy Bob took that route through the woods to come home from the gym, and here's the key, ****every day****, there's a jolly good chance that someone else would have been around to see something at some point afterwards while the perpetrators argued vociferously about the crime scene. One would think that with the murder of a young man in the woods, said town would have been in an uproar, the characters would have been questioned, etc. But instead, there wasn't a witness in sight (other than Earl, the closet psychopath with no inner monologue). We suggest that there be no witnesses *for* this film, either.
As for the quasi-homosexual meanderings present, I don't have a problem with those either. It's not as if they came as a surprise, considering we had been shouting as to the closet case stati of most of the male characters since the second scene. Again, not problematic in and of itself, but thrown in for the wrong reasons. It was utterly unnecessary, thrown in for pure "shock" and/or "dangerous art" value, and neither shocking nor dangerously artistic from any perspective. What we had instead was an awkward attempt to redeem a boring, clumsy movie with a boring, clumsy plot. The poorly hinted-at sexual tension, which was only hinted at heavy-handedly in anticipation of this flaccid snogging scene, only pushed this film further down the totem pole from "mediocrity warranting criticism" to "film sucking so bad that it lacks the inherent grace to suck enough to properly mock and harangue."
So it is with most of the film, a lot of artistic fumbling, very little meat and a lot of aggravation. It's not that we don't get it. Oh, we got it, alright. We just don't want it. Look, the very fact that we were cheering the bludgeoning in the final scene as the *only* tableau that made sense on its face is an indication that something was terribly wrong with this film. Rather than moving briskly along as its name implies, this movie oozed languidly forward like the sweat trail working it's way down the side of your nose while your hands are full. Argh. That sensation pretty well sums up the gut-wrenching frustration realized while watching this train wreck. There is no breath of fresh air with regard to this movie, only the stale miasma of bad ideas poorly realized, putrefying before coming to fruition.
A disjointed piece of pretentious fluff
Siwaoracle5 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
In a word, this "movie" was dreck! Beginning with a silly premise about some girl (looks older) who got "annoyed" by a boyfriend's unwanted attention and puts out a "hit" on him via his 3 supposed buddies, this movie descends into a disjointed mishmash. It has absolutely nothing to do with the apocalypse or with wind (except when a wind blowing machine sends some leaves in the direction of the actors). The boy (who looks like a man) is bludgeoned by the three friends who do the girl's bidding. She looks as though she was supposed to be casting a spell over them. The brother of the victim appears on occasion out of the blue as a psycho with brotherly issues; one of the deadly trio has the hots for the killer's mother; it turns out that the girl sent a certain mash letter to herself which started the whole business; the original murderer is repentant but must be dispatched for his misgivings by the remaining duo; except for Philipp Karner (a bit of eye candy who later appeared in KISS THE BRIDE)who is around 20, the other actors are closer to forty and are being passed off as much younger (they act that way in any event). The movie throws in a three-way homo-erotic kiss near the end during a "super bonding" incident for a little titillation and concludes with a near rape of the killer's mother by one of his buddies before that individual and the killer get theirs in a finale that is so off the wall it will leave you with your mouth hanging open - but NOT in a good way. The extra interviews with some of the cast says it all.
Why IMDb does not Offer Zero to Vote?
claudio_carvalho19 February 2007
Somewhere in USA, the young Clair manipulates her friends Mic, Billy and John, showing a letter that would be sent by Bob to her and the group cowardly beats Bob and Mic kills him with a piece of wood in the forest. Mic feels sorrow and decides to tell his mother what he did, but John and Billy threaten him, with tragic consequences.
I believe "The Wind" is the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. The awful screenplay is ridiculous, and it is almost impossible to write a summary, since there is no story or plot, only sequences of disconnected scenes. The amateurish direction and acting are amazingly poor and terrible. It is unbelievable how producers invest money in such garbage, distributors release this crap worldwide and viewers like me buy this DVD. I waited until the very last scene because I was curious to see how bad this film could be and I was impressed, since it is worse than I could imagine in my lowest expectations. In the end, I question why IMDb does not offer zero in the vote system, since the garbage really deserves this vote. My vote is one.
Title (Brazil): "Força Invisível" ("Invisible Force")
I believe "The Wind" is the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. The awful screenplay is ridiculous, and it is almost impossible to write a summary, since there is no story or plot, only sequences of disconnected scenes. The amateurish direction and acting are amazingly poor and terrible. It is unbelievable how producers invest money in such garbage, distributors release this crap worldwide and viewers like me buy this DVD. I waited until the very last scene because I was curious to see how bad this film could be and I was impressed, since it is worse than I could imagine in my lowest expectations. In the end, I question why IMDb does not offer zero in the vote system, since the garbage really deserves this vote. My vote is one.
Title (Brazil): "Força Invisível" ("Invisible Force")
How did this movie win any "best film" awards?
gth_131311 July 2006
This was the most uninteresting horror flick I have seen to date. The premise is glaringly forgotten after about 1 minute. The acting is terrible. The scariest thing about this movie is when the two guys kiss, yuck! What were the film festival judges thinking when they gave this garbage a 'best film' notation? The only reasons I didn't turn this movie off were to see what NOT to do as a filmmaker, and if the paper-thin plot line could really keep going on as is was. I was not disappointed by this latter notion. There wasn't even a single bit of nudity or gore to keep the kiddies interested! Also, I thought it was tacky to use about 3 minutes of "Resident Evil 2" in the movie... Was that supposed to be filler? 'cause it was the goriest and most interesting part of the movie.
The full title should be "Breaks the Wind"
eflynn-123 September 2002
No offense, but having seen this film, it is currently way, way overrated. The premise was cool. However, It was way way too slow in its story progression. In my humble film editor's opinion it could use at least 20 minutes of bad pointless dialog deleted. And if an opening prologue goes past 2 minutes, you know it is covering for a lack of proper script development. What great shots and what little action there was in the film were greatly overshadowed by the large boring bits of celluloid stagnation between them. And what is up with that mini softcore menage a trois in the middle of the film? Unto itself that was almost the best part of the film. Unfortunately it had little to do with anything else in the plot. Much like how the premise of the script had little to do with the script, which had little to do with this movie. If this were edited down to a concise 20 minute short, It would be a kick ass film. However dragged out as long as it is, it just sucks the wind out of you.
It sure does blow.
phillyjc25 May 2004
I found this dvd in the store and figured, why not support some indy film and watch a cool horror flick. Please save your time and money and pass this one by. The acting, the script, practically everything with this film is sub par. There really isn't much of a story, and there is no character development. I found myself not caring what happened to the people in the movie as long as something happened. Everyone is supposed to be college age, but they all look like they are in their mid thirties, except for the woman who plays a mother who looks like she is pushing 40. In fact the worst part of the film is that every single scene is shown in a master shot. There is no editing, no cut ins or close ups. Do yourself a favor and skip it.
WE BECAME FRIENDS
nogodnomasters22 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The first four minutes of the film is narration by Clair (Carolyn Camburn). It is poorly written and boringly read, filled with cliches. It introduces the characters and the wind which cause the apocalypse, except in this one it just drives young men to kill, even though it looks like Clair is the real reason.
Clair claims Bob (Jim Thalman) sent her a card which contained the only nudity in the film. Three guys kill Bob and then turn on each other because of the wind or something. About an hour into the film it becomes near porno with upskirts, MILF and a threesome.
Winner of the Bonehead Award. Part of a DVD horror 10-pack.
Clair claims Bob (Jim Thalman) sent her a card which contained the only nudity in the film. Three guys kill Bob and then turn on each other because of the wind or something. About an hour into the film it becomes near porno with upskirts, MILF and a threesome.
Winner of the Bonehead Award. Part of a DVD horror 10-pack.
If it's still in the wrapper, trust me...take it back.
squire8726 May 2004
The Wind. Easily one of the worst films ever made. The only good that comes from this kind of pointless drivel, is the fact that seeing films like this get distribution makes indy horror filmmakers like me confident that my upcoming feature will make the cut too. I mean, if this represents the market for indy horror, I could make a fortune videotaping myself taking out the garbage for 83 minutes.
A complete list of what this film lacks would take way too long to write out. But, the highlites are: no story, terrible acting, awful cinematography, and virtually no editing. That last one bothered me the most. As an editor myself, this film drove me absolutely crazy because it had almost no editing at all. Every scene was shot in a master. They had absolutely no coverage at all. For anyone who doesn't know..."coverage" is shooting a scene from multiple angles to have cutting options when editing to make for a desirable viewing experience. Yeah, this movie had none of that. I'm talking about even the simplest of scenes. Example: an ordinary conversation scene between two people sitting at a table would typically start out with a master establishing who's in the scene and where they are. Then, as the conversation goes on, you would cut back and forth to over-the-shoulder shots as the conversation continues. You may even throw in a cutaway shot or two of something on the table, or in someone's hand. Anything. This is "Film 101" stuff guys. It seems as though these people had no idea this is how films work. Every shot was a camera lock-down. No movement, no cutting, no nothing. If I was teaching a course in filmmaking, this would be the visual aid for my "What not to do" lesson.
In closing, don't waste your time folks. The only amazing this about this film is that it ever scored distribution at all.
A complete list of what this film lacks would take way too long to write out. But, the highlites are: no story, terrible acting, awful cinematography, and virtually no editing. That last one bothered me the most. As an editor myself, this film drove me absolutely crazy because it had almost no editing at all. Every scene was shot in a master. They had absolutely no coverage at all. For anyone who doesn't know..."coverage" is shooting a scene from multiple angles to have cutting options when editing to make for a desirable viewing experience. Yeah, this movie had none of that. I'm talking about even the simplest of scenes. Example: an ordinary conversation scene between two people sitting at a table would typically start out with a master establishing who's in the scene and where they are. Then, as the conversation goes on, you would cut back and forth to over-the-shoulder shots as the conversation continues. You may even throw in a cutaway shot or two of something on the table, or in someone's hand. Anything. This is "Film 101" stuff guys. It seems as though these people had no idea this is how films work. Every shot was a camera lock-down. No movement, no cutting, no nothing. If I was teaching a course in filmmaking, this would be the visual aid for my "What not to do" lesson.
In closing, don't waste your time folks. The only amazing this about this film is that it ever scored distribution at all.
very scary, very cool
EloiseM17 September 2002
The best independent film of 2001 - I went to see The Wind at the recommendation of friends who caught it at Dances with Films Festival in LA last summer - it's a great, scary, well made film. The score was amazing. Can't wait to see his next movie!
Great directing, satisfactory acting, bad story/script
xml0649230 June 2004
We watched it, all felt the same. It wasn't all that good, but it wasn't terrible. Great directing, cinematography, excellent visual quality, lots of style, audio quality, editing, enjoyable score. Acting was back-and-forth. Some things carried-off very well, very believable. Other things not done so well. No single actor was always great or always bad. They each did some very good stuff and some not so good. But the script was bad. Not horrible, just weak. Story was muddied, sometimes confusing, meandering, dragging. A lot of activities occurred, but the story didn't really progress much. It's as if almost nothing happened at all, just a lot of activity. Some surprises, but no feeling of suspense or expectation. No satisfying build-up, climax, then resolution. You never really cared about any of the characters or what happened in the story, and so it wasn't very disturbing like it could have been. The characters needed to evolve more from the opening to the ending. And no one's going to get that this is the beginning of the end of the world.
This Wind Doth Blow
NoDakTatum25 October 2023
When you make a bad film called "The Wind," you invariably invite viewers to come up with their own jokes describing the offending product. "The Wind" reeks. Clair (Carolyn Camburn) has a trio of college boys wrapped around her finger. There is studly jock John (Scott Parrish), nerdy Billy (Philipp Karner), and brooding Mic (Zeke Rippy). Clair accuses dumb guy Bob (James Thalman) of stalking her, and the boys decide to beat him up in the nearby woods, where Mic delivers a fatal blow to Bob's thick head. Clair is downright delighted about Bob, and wants to see the body. The problem is Bob was not dead, Bob's brother Earl (David Mikaels) wants to be the group's new amigo, and Clair and her boys begin to turn on each other as she begins to receive mysterious phone calls.
With an attractive cast in a cross between "Cruel Intentions" and "I Know What You Did Last Summer," screenwriters James Charbonneau and director Michael Mongillo should have had a tight suspenser on their hands. Instead, the three main male characters muddle together to the point where extra attention must be paid to tell them apart. Clair is easy on the eyes, but the viewer is not given good enough reasons why anyone would kill for her. The characters' ages were hard to pin down. Everyone lives with their parents, so I thought "badly cast high schoolers" until John mentions finishing college. Some of the dialogue sounds like a middle schooler's interpretation of a grown up script as clicheed speech is yelled and hissed by the cast. Couple this with a terrible opening involving a lot of wind metaphors that say little, and this begins sucking from the start. Mongillo's direction is alright, but any style he shows, like a nicely shot stunt jump into a lake, is overshadowed by the script. There are more people wandering around in the woods than at a comic convention, and did the easily identifiable scary voice on the phone just ask Clair if her refrigerator was running? "The Wind" had promise, but eventually dies down to an unmemorable faint breeze- an ill wind indeed.
With an attractive cast in a cross between "Cruel Intentions" and "I Know What You Did Last Summer," screenwriters James Charbonneau and director Michael Mongillo should have had a tight suspenser on their hands. Instead, the three main male characters muddle together to the point where extra attention must be paid to tell them apart. Clair is easy on the eyes, but the viewer is not given good enough reasons why anyone would kill for her. The characters' ages were hard to pin down. Everyone lives with their parents, so I thought "badly cast high schoolers" until John mentions finishing college. Some of the dialogue sounds like a middle schooler's interpretation of a grown up script as clicheed speech is yelled and hissed by the cast. Couple this with a terrible opening involving a lot of wind metaphors that say little, and this begins sucking from the start. Mongillo's direction is alright, but any style he shows, like a nicely shot stunt jump into a lake, is overshadowed by the script. There are more people wandering around in the woods than at a comic convention, and did the easily identifiable scary voice on the phone just ask Clair if her refrigerator was running? "The Wind" had promise, but eventually dies down to an unmemorable faint breeze- an ill wind indeed.
Shoot yourself first before watching this movie
Monicastaggs12 November 2004
I am astonished that someone found this movie a "pleasant surprise". Apparently that person must have worked on the movie, (ie. whoring it out) otherwise there would be no possible way they found this a good movie unless they happen to be the THE biggest idiot on the planet. Among many other problems, there is no premise for the plot of this movie. Some girl, we don't know her age...perhaps she's supposed to be in high school, perhaps in college, although she looks like she's at least thirty...no background...gets a set of her friends ( no background or age given on them either) to kill a dude for sending her a note. In the middle of the woods no less which seems to be a place where all these characters just randomly meet up in all the time. Just have them all in the woods for no reason at all. That is quality film making. This movie is a piece of s*%t!! Anyone like myself that watched it was duped by the box cover. Congratulations to the box cover artist and the B.S. that this movie won some sort of award. Where did they show it? Down time at Special Olympics camp or to the dead, you tell me? It was a lame and utterly stupid movie. I kept thinking to myself..."someone actually wrote this and thought it was good, then they filmed it...f-ing amazing!" Do not see this if it is the last movie on the planet. You'd be better of sticking a hot poker stick in your various orifices. If you don't believe me, rent it and have a night of fun busting out the numerous flaws in this so-called "film".
Not bad at all!
duckman_07922 September 2020
Most of this movie was done right. The acting was believable, music decent, editing and such were professional-looking. I like the way this was put together. I have it a 4 because it just lacked excitement and climax. Another review mentioned the story was dull. I'm not sure if it is that, or just that it could have had a better flow. This movie definitely has the qualities I find entertaining in a movie.
I loved this movie. Plain and simple.
kasmuth19 September 2002
Zeke Rippy (Mic) is great, you totally believe his character. And it's scary as hell, I spent half the movie covering my eyes, the other half on the edge of my seat. It's cool to see something this suspenseful and frightening that isn't all blood and guts - but it did give me bad dreams.
Basically this is a great movie - see it the first chance you get.
Basically this is a great movie - see it the first chance you get.
Strange and oddly compelling...a unique find
hippiedj27 May 2004
First of all, despite the low rating on this site, I saw something quite worthy in this film and will gladly defend it. And no, I'm not connected to the crew in any way...
I came across the DVD of The Wind by accident, and had this strong feeling that it wasn't going to be quite like the video packaging described. So I took a chance, and was pleasantly surprised by this strange, very different drama. I'm assuming the DVD marketing and summary were the work of MTI Home Video to hook a rental or sale (the tag line "Love comes in many forms" was changed to "Terror comes in many forms"). Sure, smaller films' rentals and sales depend strongly on grabbing a person's attention, especially if they've never heard of the film before (a similar case happened with the film THE ITEM). That's probably what is working against this release, as horror fans read the description of an "ancient wind" carrying with it "omens of the apocalypse." It's easy to think that that is what this film is all about, and will turn some college students in the story into crazy savages that go on a killing spree. Thus, at the time this review was submitted, is most likely the reason for the lower rating on IMDb. I can understand people becoming upset and thinking they were fooled by that summary , seeing the apocalyptic intro but then experiencing a dark drama. I can forgive the marketing choice since I enjoyed The Wind and thought it was a refreshing change of pace from major Hollywood offerings, it's just that if the intended audience was given the attention, more might voice a higher rating.
The "wind" in this film is basically just a metaphor for society, and is the story of four friends who make some bad choices and how their lives quickly turn into ones of desperate self-preservation. After going too far in 'teaching a lesson' to one of their own, a death occurs and each person tries to save his/her own standing. Manipulation between them becomes the norm, and by the end we see how self preservation becomes their main motivation over good judgment. Civilized to savage, basically. This is very apparent throughout by noticing that the use of a knife, branches as clubs, fists and kicking are instruments of violence instead of guns. These characters are, in a way, doing all the wrong things for the right reason just to stay on top of the situation since they've already taken things too far. While there are many implied violent images, it's interesting to see that there is an absence of cussing and nudity.
What works in favor of The Wind are the "unknown" actors. Bigger stars were originally intended, but I find it works better when you have lesser known, capable actors. This way you can get into the story without sometimes thinking "oh, that's Tom Cruise" for instance, instead of an actual tormented person dealing with an extraordinary situation. Even unusual conversations (like between Mic and Billy in a field, and Mic confronting Claire in her bedroom) hold up well and feel quite natural in the strange universe of Fairview...which has cozy homes,a forest, and wide open fields. I kept thinking of the calm landscapes concealing darker secrets in The Reflecting Skin, which director Michael Mongillo mentions as an inspiration in his commentary.
The Wind manages to get messages across without being heavy-handed about it.
Sure, if you look carefully you'll see many symbols and dialogue that other directors would just pound you over the head with. I even understood the infamous "kissing scene" between Claire, John, and Billy within the context of the story without being surprised it happened. I am still amazed at how some people (guys, mainly) who complain about two men kissing in a scene would obviously have NO problem if the scene were of two gals kissing instead. All is handled nicely here, and additional viewings will make things more clear without making you groan and say "oh man, how did I miss THAT...." Things sink in gradually and I appreciated that. Or you could listen to the DVD commentary as well for more things revealed!
For those of us that "got" the intentions of this film, The Wind is a breath of fresh air (no pun intended) in a time when most films are made in order to JUST make money and be heard knocking other films out of their "box office competition" standing when mentioned on Entertainment Tonight or CNN.
Years later, it's always the great little discoveries like The Wind that stay in my mind, not processed star-driven blockbusters.
Get past the marketing ploy from MTI Home Video, and you just might find this an engaging story indeed. I strongly recommend it to friends that seek out unusual films like this one.
I came across the DVD of The Wind by accident, and had this strong feeling that it wasn't going to be quite like the video packaging described. So I took a chance, and was pleasantly surprised by this strange, very different drama. I'm assuming the DVD marketing and summary were the work of MTI Home Video to hook a rental or sale (the tag line "Love comes in many forms" was changed to "Terror comes in many forms"). Sure, smaller films' rentals and sales depend strongly on grabbing a person's attention, especially if they've never heard of the film before (a similar case happened with the film THE ITEM). That's probably what is working against this release, as horror fans read the description of an "ancient wind" carrying with it "omens of the apocalypse." It's easy to think that that is what this film is all about, and will turn some college students in the story into crazy savages that go on a killing spree. Thus, at the time this review was submitted, is most likely the reason for the lower rating on IMDb. I can understand people becoming upset and thinking they were fooled by that summary , seeing the apocalyptic intro but then experiencing a dark drama. I can forgive the marketing choice since I enjoyed The Wind and thought it was a refreshing change of pace from major Hollywood offerings, it's just that if the intended audience was given the attention, more might voice a higher rating.
The "wind" in this film is basically just a metaphor for society, and is the story of four friends who make some bad choices and how their lives quickly turn into ones of desperate self-preservation. After going too far in 'teaching a lesson' to one of their own, a death occurs and each person tries to save his/her own standing. Manipulation between them becomes the norm, and by the end we see how self preservation becomes their main motivation over good judgment. Civilized to savage, basically. This is very apparent throughout by noticing that the use of a knife, branches as clubs, fists and kicking are instruments of violence instead of guns. These characters are, in a way, doing all the wrong things for the right reason just to stay on top of the situation since they've already taken things too far. While there are many implied violent images, it's interesting to see that there is an absence of cussing and nudity.
What works in favor of The Wind are the "unknown" actors. Bigger stars were originally intended, but I find it works better when you have lesser known, capable actors. This way you can get into the story without sometimes thinking "oh, that's Tom Cruise" for instance, instead of an actual tormented person dealing with an extraordinary situation. Even unusual conversations (like between Mic and Billy in a field, and Mic confronting Claire in her bedroom) hold up well and feel quite natural in the strange universe of Fairview...which has cozy homes,a forest, and wide open fields. I kept thinking of the calm landscapes concealing darker secrets in The Reflecting Skin, which director Michael Mongillo mentions as an inspiration in his commentary.
The Wind manages to get messages across without being heavy-handed about it.
Sure, if you look carefully you'll see many symbols and dialogue that other directors would just pound you over the head with. I even understood the infamous "kissing scene" between Claire, John, and Billy within the context of the story without being surprised it happened. I am still amazed at how some people (guys, mainly) who complain about two men kissing in a scene would obviously have NO problem if the scene were of two gals kissing instead. All is handled nicely here, and additional viewings will make things more clear without making you groan and say "oh man, how did I miss THAT...." Things sink in gradually and I appreciated that. Or you could listen to the DVD commentary as well for more things revealed!
For those of us that "got" the intentions of this film, The Wind is a breath of fresh air (no pun intended) in a time when most films are made in order to JUST make money and be heard knocking other films out of their "box office competition" standing when mentioned on Entertainment Tonight or CNN.
Years later, it's always the great little discoveries like The Wind that stay in my mind, not processed star-driven blockbusters.
Get past the marketing ploy from MTI Home Video, and you just might find this an engaging story indeed. I strongly recommend it to friends that seek out unusual films like this one.
Great film!
jeannie62619 April 2004
I've had the opportunity to see this film on the big screen, but plan on buying the DVD to add to my collection. A great example of what a truly independent film-maker can achieve. Mongillo creates a stunning atmosphere of suspense and I found myself engrossed from start to finish. Without relying on excessive gore or over the top violence, Mongillo gets his point across in a tightly packed film. A fine cast of players, good script and a memorable visual style add to its credits. It's also a nice break to see someone craft a picture like this, in an era of fully studio backed "independent" projects. Cool movie, see it when you get the chance!
This is a decent movie with some very good stuff going on in it
UltimateFlimFlam29 August 2005
Someone definitely has it in for The Wind and I cannot believe that what I saw on the screen has much to do with it. This is a better and more solid movie than most of the independents I watch all year long. The cinematography displays a genuine love and mastery of the craft and the casting was just fine. I would love to see more of these folks, especially Zeke Rippy.
As far as the story and script, I'm not so sure that the negative comments preceding this post were written with the intent of informing anybody else about the movie. The long drawn out nit-picky bashing posts that must have taken hours to compose and are the only comments ever left for any movie on this site by the reviewer, are obvious slander directed at the producers of the film. I don't know the inside story, but it would probably make a good movie. What I do know from being around this biz, is, productions that try to make everybody happy usually end up being awful and when the filmmaker has the guts, drive and common sense to "kill the babies", someone always ends up with hurt feelings. That's part of the biz too, and one of the finest learning tools available to those truly dedicated to making it in the movie business. Of course, the failures have nothing better to do than to sit at home and write false reviews on the internet as a form of vendetta against those that snubbed them (read: were honest and truthful with them). And that is my best guess to explain the nasty, nasty reviews. In as much as there is a grain of truth behind everything, there is a point to be made, but these exaggerations of the grains are so over the top that they become obviously fictitious.
It's not a slasher blood bath if that's what you're looking for, it's more the psychological suspense thriller, which typically is not appreciated by the lowest common denominators out there. The best way to see this movie is to try to expunge any pre-conceived notions, pop it in and let it unfold - seriously, characters are defined by their actions and words and when you see what these people do and what they say, I don't think you can come away with the conclusion that these characters were poorly developed. Poorly understood perhaps.
Overall, I do agree that this is a nicely done, compelling movie. Perhaps I would not have given it a 9 under normal circumstances, but the severe negative comments actually attracted me to the picture (I have a secret love for really bad cinema). To me, the ratings below 5 should be reserved for the shlocky, inept, poorly acted and stupidly written movies. None of that applies here - it is quality movie making with some real talent in there. I gave it the nine to to tip the scales back in the correct direction. Watch the movie and tell me I am wrong.
As far as the story and script, I'm not so sure that the negative comments preceding this post were written with the intent of informing anybody else about the movie. The long drawn out nit-picky bashing posts that must have taken hours to compose and are the only comments ever left for any movie on this site by the reviewer, are obvious slander directed at the producers of the film. I don't know the inside story, but it would probably make a good movie. What I do know from being around this biz, is, productions that try to make everybody happy usually end up being awful and when the filmmaker has the guts, drive and common sense to "kill the babies", someone always ends up with hurt feelings. That's part of the biz too, and one of the finest learning tools available to those truly dedicated to making it in the movie business. Of course, the failures have nothing better to do than to sit at home and write false reviews on the internet as a form of vendetta against those that snubbed them (read: were honest and truthful with them). And that is my best guess to explain the nasty, nasty reviews. In as much as there is a grain of truth behind everything, there is a point to be made, but these exaggerations of the grains are so over the top that they become obviously fictitious.
It's not a slasher blood bath if that's what you're looking for, it's more the psychological suspense thriller, which typically is not appreciated by the lowest common denominators out there. The best way to see this movie is to try to expunge any pre-conceived notions, pop it in and let it unfold - seriously, characters are defined by their actions and words and when you see what these people do and what they say, I don't think you can come away with the conclusion that these characters were poorly developed. Poorly understood perhaps.
Overall, I do agree that this is a nicely done, compelling movie. Perhaps I would not have given it a 9 under normal circumstances, but the severe negative comments actually attracted me to the picture (I have a secret love for really bad cinema). To me, the ratings below 5 should be reserved for the shlocky, inept, poorly acted and stupidly written movies. None of that applies here - it is quality movie making with some real talent in there. I gave it the nine to to tip the scales back in the correct direction. Watch the movie and tell me I am wrong.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
