Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Matho The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

gridoon2018 Do you see that DVD cover on the IMDb page for "Wilder"? You know, the one with a police car being blown up, Rutger Hauer carrying a gun and Pam Grier carrying TWO guns? Well, it's pretty misleading: there are no car chases or explosions in this movie, Pam fires only one shot, and Hauer none at all. This is much more of a conspiracy thriller than an action picture, which may be a source of disappointment for some. But even if you can live with that, the story is pretty muddled, the direction lacks style, and the supporting cast (with the exception of Eugene Clark) is mediocre. Rutger Hauer is OK, but it's really Pam Grier who provides the main reason to see this movie. She's still beautiful at 51, and the fleeting glimpses of her past ass-kicking glory are great. Too bad they're just that: fleeting. (**)

RResende What bothers me in films like this is not the things that don't work in it. It's the thing that could have been done. It's not so much the visual lack of power and effectiveness of it, but the total mental poverty that surrounds it.They picked up two mildly interesting actors, with credits on their hands and assigned them to this total mess, relying that the fact that they're in makes the whole think work on the financial side.This is a total mess, a weak story, about some honest people fighting pharmaceutical interests, against all odds, the 'Fugitive' type. Pam Grier is assigned the extra role of being her past roles, associated with racial concerns and feminism. Both she and Hauer are cashing their checks. They could be doing better things.Trying to get away with such a film is as much a deceit as it is the radioactive tests in the film.My opinion: 1/5 http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

Andy Considering the cast, and the big corporation against the people story line, the makings of a decent movie were all there. Pam Grier is investigating a series of murder's and links Rutger Huauers character to them, as he's connected to one of them by way of a jilted and bitter romance.He also happened to give her professional advice (He's a Dr) that turned out to be less than life saving. His best friend also works for a big chemical company edging for promotion working within 'the womens medical' dept. All this coupled with the fact that a man resembling Hauer was seen leaving the crime scene.Pam visits the good Dr to see if she can jog his memory and the two end up getting along very well. Its at this point everything starts to fall apart, the film tries to be too complicated, and Griers script requires her to spell everything out for the viewer, but instead of helping coast the story line along, her role in fact stilts the films proceedings, making everything seem slow and boring.Hauer as usual, plays his part perfectly well, but doesn't have the necessary bulk to his role to really do anything other than plod along with the whole dull affair. Basically, the script strives too far into what really should have been quite a simple, enjoyable film. If your the kind of person intent on seeing this because your obsessed by seeing everything ever filmed by Grier or Hauer (and you know who you are)then you'll be mildly disappointed, everyone else steer well clear of 'Wilder'.

Infofreak As soon as I picked this one of off the shelf warnings were going off in my head ("Bad movie alert! Danger! Danger!). Call me ridiculously optimistic, or just plain dumb, but I still rented it just the same. Seventies blaxploitation icon Pam Grier ('Coffy', 'The Big Doll House', 'Jackie Brown',etc.) is a favourite of mine, as is Rutger Hauer ('Blade Runner', 'Flesh & Blood', 'Salute Of The Jugger'), and the prospect of seeing them act together was just too much for me to ignore. The packaging made this look like another tired serial killer "thriller", the kind that should star Michael Madsen or Eric Roberts or James Russo or Chris Penn and go straight to video. But it is in fact even less interesting than that. The movie quickly degenerates into a lame conspiracy mystery, and smells very much like a failed TV pilot. Grier plays a one dimensional sassy cop, Hauer a very dull Doctor who is initially her leading suspect. The chemistry between the two is zilch, and my goodwill towards both performers is still not enough to forgive this absolutely awful waste of time. I'm straining myself trying to think of anything it all about it to recommend viewing it, but coming up with a big fat zero. Avoid this one at all costs.