Wild is the Wind

Wild is the Wind

Wild Is the Wind represents a (perhaps deliberate) reversal of the situation in The Rose Tattoo (1955). Whereas in Tattoo, Anna Magnani played a widow who could never find a man to measure up to her late husband, in Wind her character, Giola, marries widowed rancher Gino (Anthony Quinn), who is haunted by the memory of his first spouse. The situation is dicier in Wind, since Italian immigrant Gino's deceased wife was Giola's sister. Eventually tiring of her husband's mood swings, Giola turns to his son, Bene (Anthony Franciosa), for emotional and sexual gratification. A Hollywood approximation of the Italian neorealist school of filmmaking, Wild Is the Wind was based on Furia, a story by Vittorio Nino Novarese. ~ Hal Erickson, Rovi

The movie tells the story of an immigrant Nevada rancher who marries his Italian sister-in-law after the death of his wife and brings her to the States, but she falls in love with his trusted young ranch hand. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Wild is the Wind torrent reviews

Anna N (nl) wrote: Not interested. I generally avoid horror movies.

Sirena P (mx) wrote: Why so many? These kids are lame.

Cameron J (kr) wrote: I suppose the brother of the "Lord of War" will show up when the pilots of this war film get closer to be 30 seconds to mar. ...Die-hard Jared Leto fans ought to get all of that, and for everyone else interested enough in what I'm talking about to read that, it shouldn't be entirely over your head if you know enough about film to remember this film. Yeah, for you moviegoers who are all about war film tension, get ready for 30 seconds over Tokyo... and 137.5 minutes of build-up, y'all! Say what you will about "Tora! Tora! Tora!", especially considering that it's even longer, but it was heavy on the action, whereas this film is heavy on training exercise nonsense and what have you. Well, this film is still more exciting than "Tora! Tora! Tora!", and honestly, that might be because of the length of the Doolittle Raid, because where it took those Japs, like, four hours, or however long "Tora! Tora! Tora!" is, to put some dents in us, we came in and got our job done in thirty seconds. ...Mind you, the Doolittle Raid didn't do much again the Japanese military, but still, it boosted morale, so you Japs can go on and on with your, "Tora! Tora! Tora!", and we'll be over here with, "U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!". Yeah, I doubt those jerks who exclaim that have the attention span for a film like this, not necessarily because this film is of great quality, but because this film is just so bloated, and doesn't even drag its feet along refreshing ground. Not much is unique with this film, which could perhaps been refreshing for the time, yet ends up shamelessly collapsing into clichd plotlines, dialogue and characterization, in addition to the worst kind of tropes of all: Hollywood ones at the time. By that, I mean that much of the film's dramatic meat succumbs to overtly '40s Hollywood superficialities, which draw thin characters and tap dance around a sense of intensity and conflict, typically for the sake of too much comic relief which has only so much tension to relieve, due to other superficialities, as well as a certain aspect that is actually consistent in this near-inconsequential fluff piece: cheese. Ostensibly trying to make up for the safeness in genuine tensions, Hollywood manages to manufacture some cloyingly histrionic subplots and trite characters, all backed by an almost profound cheese to cornball dialogue, maybe even fall-flat performances (John R. Reilly does virtually everything perfectly wrong as the colorful filler character). The film gets to be aggravating in its getting so cheesy and dated, at the very least because all of the overbearing corn is particularly reflective of the final product's being lazy, taking on worthy subject matter that it handles with an adequate deal of color, but in such a 1940s Hollywood fashion that would be easier to forgive if the final product wasn't also so blasted overlong. I've joked about how this film's subject matter dealing simply with the build towards and execution of the Doolittle Raid shouldn't be interpreted into a pseudo-epic, but at just shy of 140 minutes, this film's runtime is hardly reasonable, bloated with all of that filler I was alluding to earlier, if not material and plot elements which aren't realized enough for the eventual shifts in focus to feel organic. Overblown, yet still superficial in so many ways, this film has by no means aged gracefully, but even for its time, it's kind of lacking, taking on an ambitious project, and ultimately fumbling just enough with its dramatics and structure to fall as underwhelming, perhaps even as yet another forgettable Hollywood affair of the '40s. Needless to say, this film is overrated, but it's still not a total misfire, being plenty entertaining in its fluffy interpretation of a story that is pretty interesting in concept, at the very least. Maybe this subject matter was a little more interesting at the time, seeing as how the Doolittle Raid had occurred only three years before the release of this interpretation of it, but no matter what, with its extensive study on those involved in and the overall conceiving of the Doolittle Raid, this story concept has a certain intrigue to it on a dramatic and historical level, done something of an injustice by a flimsy scripted interpretation, but only up to a point. Dalton Trumbo's script is way too blasted Hollywood with its superficialities, fluff and clichs, so much so that it, alone, does a lot to hold the final product so far back, and yet, it has its respectable elements, at least in its sheer audacity to be extensive with so much of its actually historically accurate material, which gets to be excessive, sure, but keeps up just enough dynamicity and comprehensiveness to sustain a degree of intrigue. Of course, it's not as though the developmental attributes which are carried away, rather reasonably realized, fail to endear, for although the characterization is rather thin in its subtlety and depth, there are plenty of colorful roles drawn here to keep forgettability at bay, with the help of colorful performances. Granted, most all performances are dated just enough to fail to be all that endearing, with some being pretty faulty (Ahh, John R. Reilly!), but on the whole, whether it be the underused Robert Mitchum, or the lovely, if often hammy Phyllis Thaxter, or Tim Murdock, or Robert Walker, or the surprisingly effective lead Van Johnson, there's plenty of charisma to bring some life to the human heart of this fluffy flick. Well, honestly, neither the acting nor the highlights in writing are particularly commendable, but they do enough to neutralize the messy elements with color that helps guide an entertainment value that wouldn't be so firmly established if it wasn't for Mervyn LeRoy's direction. LeRoy's direction is largely held back by Trumbo's writing missteps, and should also earn some scorn for its own missteps, as well as its neglect to do much in a number of areas, but on the whole, through subtle style and tight scene structuring, LeRoy keeps entertainment value consistent, occasionally punctuated by some dramatic realization that is arguably more than this film deserves, and provides to truly memorable highlights. Alas, these highlights are few and far between, but between them in indeed plenty of entertainment value, which may not compensate for near-aggravating issues, but endears adequately as a fluffy war flick. When the seconds are up, the film falls as underwhelming, maybe even forgettable, under the weight of conventions, Hollywood superficiality and cheese, and an overlong, sometimes even uneven structure, but through colorful highlights in writing, acting and direction, intriguing subject matter is done enough justice for "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" to stand as a fair, if flimsy interpretation of America's first response to Japan's proposition of war. 2.5/5 - Fair

Steve H (fr) wrote: My favourite Carry On film. It won't win any awards, but it's great fun.