Such low rating disturbed me. This is no by means "trash".

Well made, decent acting and least I liked the whole thing all the way to the end. Yes. It is another "hunting trip gone wrong" movie, but I liked its tone and did not feel bored. Recommended.

Well, that is one way to dispose of an unwanted puppy. Just toss it out the window of your vehicle while you are driving down the highway. If the impact on the road surface didn't kill it the vehicles coming along behind would surely put it out of it's misery by crushing it under their tires. Gunner really knows how to care for those wounded birds too. His medical application resulted in a pain free outcome for that bird. And then his brother Gaylen Walsham jacking off the horse? Wow, who does stuff like that? The rest of the movie was an interesting hunting adventure focusing on the dysfunctional movie star with the final 20 minutes being exciting and action packed.

Sometimes a movie is so efficient in informing us of its value that we can begin to form an impression within even, say, the first 10 minutes. When this happens, there's no grey area - it either has us sitting upright and paying rapt attention, or it has us wondering just what we've committed to, and hoping it will yet prove itself. Despite wishy-washy reception, I tried to enter 'Wild game' with an open mind, ready for what may come. I don't think this is bad - I do enjoy it, truthfully - yet there are very plainly issues here that diminish the entertainment.

At times the performances border on overacting, or seem perhaps forced into pointed artificiality by director Brock Harris' guidance. More than not, though, I appreciate the cast's contributions. Matthew Daddario gleefully chews scenery as exuberant, overzealous, unlikable "method actor" Donnie Deluca, reveling in the bombast of the character - and honestly, so it is too for Harris' writing partner, Jared Bonner, as excitable game warden Gaylen. Creed Garnick gives an admirable show as put-upon protagonist Clay, a man in an unenviable position and trying his hardest, and though second fiddle, Charlie Barnett provides a similar but more jovial companion as Banjo. And Allison Paige - the only actor here I'm specifically familiar with - is duly charming and earnest as troubled Annie; would that her role were larger. Where the assembled players aren't coerced into ham-handedness, I think (mostly) all put in worthwhile displays of range, nuance, and personality.

In the broad strokes, I think there are some solid ideas here. The plot sets up a clash between the hard-working, down on his luck Every Man, the upper class Know-Nothing from whom he accepts a proposition, and those figures of varying ethics and disposition, representing The Law, that they butt up against. This rather falls within the (neo-) western genre, especially in the third act as everything goes awry, and there is some deserving content to be found. The chief problem, however, lies in what Harris and Bonner weave into their screenplay to embellish that center. There's domestic drama that would fit neatly into a Lifetime original movie - forefront in the first act, then dropped. There's deadpan humor (especially in the relationship between game warden Gaylen and his stone-faced brother Gunner, portrayed by Harris himself) that for its frequency feels a bit out of place. There's light banter and levity, and passing character interactions, that feel emphatically staged - literally staged, as though the dialogue could have been pulled from the script for a stage play. There's stark violence that could handily belong to a larger production, and which in its execution is reasonably worthy of the same. Regrettably, overall these many different elements struggle to find balance, and 'Wild game' can't quite find the proper tone that it wants to strike, especially as it labors through stilted pacing and plot development early on.

I did say "overall," though. Notably, the final third of the length - and above all the climax and ending - is pretty strong, I think. I get the sense that from every angle the greatest energy was poured into this final stretch, and it shows as the movie delivers some low-key thrills and excitement, a minor sense of dread, and a certain urgency. The final minutes make me want to reconsider my evaluation of the whole - and, again, with the strength of character she demonstrates, makes me wish that Paige's part were more prominent. But for whatever enjoyment we get out of the first 50-60 minutes, it remains a bit of a slog by comparison, not least of all for the disparate notions that are broached, then left behind. To some degree it's rather like the greatest substance of 'Wild game' is trapped, hidden somewhere within the screenplay and the underlying concept; the final result can't quite dig deep enough to access that treasure, and so tries to cover its tracks with a smattering of superficially appetizing yet unfocused beats.

Is 'Wild game' worth 85 minutes of your time? Honestly, you could do a lot worse. This is enjoyable, I like what Harris and Bonner were trying to achieve, and I commend the work put in by all involved. Ah, but if only the writing were a bit tighter - this would have benefited from a more snugly concentrated narrative. For all its faults, I want to like it more than I do. I don't think you need to go out of your way to watch 'Wild game,' but if you happen to come across it, it's a fairly satisfying movie experience.

Most recommendable for viewers who can't get enough of westerns.