IYWD is another bomb from Feature film for Families. Like their other movies, this is trite and annoying. The story centers around a boy who accidentally gets a large sum of money and can now live out his wildest dreams.But wait, he must decide if the right thing to do is more important and return the money. What do you think he's going to do? They just pour on the melodrama at times which becomes very irritating.The cast is comprised of a group of unknowns and the story is pretty predictable.The movie's antagonist seems to be enjoying his role of the villain and delivers a somewhat decent performance. The same cannot be said about the protagonist. He is extremely annoying and his forced delivery of lines during the 'serious' parts makes them even worse. He's a hypocrite too, since he goes around telling people to always do the right thing and then he wants to keep the money because "I got it and it's mine." On a technical level its not much better,as the direction is barely competent, the music REALLY sucks, the dialogue is terrible. Maybe I'm just biased since stuff like this doesn't interest me. People are always complaining why more good, clean, family movies aren't made. The answer is that either nobody will see or they'll turn out like this.One positive thing I can say about this movie is that its good to show to impressionable young children who are easily entertained.
7 Reviews
it's a decent family movie for anyone with a sense of patients
adam-135426 January 2007
I would like to say; first of all.. if you don't like Christian movies don't watch them..
secondly, this movie is on the "right track" it's cast wasn't the greatest but it was a decent movie... could have done for a bit more, other than that.. if you are looking for a good moral movie for a family, it's not half bad. It was a low budget film though, sorta like an IFC short flick... Again if you don't think this type of stuff.. don't watch it, it will bore you out of your mind. I like my share of violence just like the next person, my favorite TV series happens to be DBZ(unrated edition aka editors choice).. i'm an anime fanatic.. If I haven't seen an anime.. I will see it!
But I also value a movie that captures the main idea of a family.. "strong loving bond" just like Goku shows to Gohan. (though Goku's standard IQ is a bit low.. he's a fighting genius. You can't expect a ton of love from a warrior)
secondly, this movie is on the "right track" it's cast wasn't the greatest but it was a decent movie... could have done for a bit more, other than that.. if you are looking for a good moral movie for a family, it's not half bad. It was a low budget film though, sorta like an IFC short flick... Again if you don't think this type of stuff.. don't watch it, it will bore you out of your mind. I like my share of violence just like the next person, my favorite TV series happens to be DBZ(unrated edition aka editors choice).. i'm an anime fanatic.. If I haven't seen an anime.. I will see it!
But I also value a movie that captures the main idea of a family.. "strong loving bond" just like Goku shows to Gohan. (though Goku's standard IQ is a bit low.. he's a fighting genius. You can't expect a ton of love from a warrior)
Low-budget, but I couldn't stop watching.
pdhunter21 November 2001
This is not a big budget Hollywood feature film. "In Your Wildest Dreams" was never intended to be released theatrically. It is a direct- to-video production made by a relatively small production company which, at that time, had not made very many films.
Aside from this being a low-budget independent film, it is also intended as a family-friendly, quasi-educational film. It is intended to teach positive values, a fact which has always been a prominent feature of its marketing.
As with other Feature Films for Families productions, this film avoids offensive content such as graphic violence, racism, profanity, etc. This is one of the reasons families and conscientious film viewers choose this company's films.
These factors shouldn't cause anybody to avoid this film. Although it intentionally conveys positive values, this is a story-driven film and not just an educational video. "In Your Wildest Dreams" is a drama, and doesn't come off as propaganda or didacticism. In fact, it is far less prone to hitting the viewer over the head with a "lesson" than many of the supposedly purely "artistic" or commercial films made by Hollywood.
I wasn't sure what to expect when I began watching this movie, but I was soon drawn into an interesting story featuring very engaging characters.
One can't help but care about the characters and desire to find out what happens to them. I found the film not only watchable, but compelling. So while I enjoyed "In Your Wildest Dreams," I should point out that it is a deeply flawed movie. Perhaps the biggest problem is the sound. After a few minutes of listening to the poorly made audio track I became mostly accustomed to it and rarely thought about it during the rest of the film. But with its high levels of ambient noise and low-contrast levels, the audio track is pretty bad. The movie's sound editor is a real pro who recently worked as a sound designer on "Star Trek: Insurrection" (1998). I'm assuming that the problem with the sound on "In Your Wildest Dreams" must be attributed to a lack of proper budget or equipment, or to poor mastering. The people who made this film did an impressive job with very little money, but they may have skimped too much in this area.
My other major complaint is with the terrible music. Some kind of ugly techno sound going on. There are a few okay songs, but for the most part the music on this film really drags it down.
Fortunately, the film looks great! The photography is a delight to watch, yet serves the story and atmosphere without drawing undue attention to itself. A range of difficult settings, lighting conditions, and subjects are handled with aplomb, including the imaginative ultra- low budget filming of an artificial intelligence at work.
The acting is a bit of a mixed bag. There are many talented actors in the cast, but also some amateurs who should have received better direction or not been cast. Lead actress Lise Wilburn as Holly really lights up the screen. She's attractive and watchable. She delivers a very natural performance, seeming like a real person more than a highly- coached actress. This is a good thing. There are a few wrong notes, but she is on screen a lot, and the part is a difficult one without many actor-friendly "hooks" to hide behind.
Trevor Black, the star, is good, but not great. His performance was never distracting, and he let me get into the story. But he didn't seem to bring extra depth to the character the way a much more talented performer might have done with this so-so script. Some of the smaller roles went to some really amazing actors, including Steve Anderson as a company insider, Jeff Olson as Mark's father, and Robert Nelson as Holly's father.
There's nothing offensive about the film. Not a great film by any means, but except for the sound and music, it's nothing to be ashamed of.
Overall I enjoyed watching "In Your Wildest Dreams." I wouldn't mind watching it again. Plot-wise, it's fairly original and unusual for such a small-budget film. I even learned a little about the stock market, insider trading, and trade commission investigators. (Countless movies and TV shows have homicide investigators. How many films can you name that feature trade commission investigators?) The story pulled me in and kept me involved with some interesting "what if?" situations. What would I do if I were in a similar situation? It's meant to
Aside from this being a low-budget independent film, it is also intended as a family-friendly, quasi-educational film. It is intended to teach positive values, a fact which has always been a prominent feature of its marketing.
As with other Feature Films for Families productions, this film avoids offensive content such as graphic violence, racism, profanity, etc. This is one of the reasons families and conscientious film viewers choose this company's films.
These factors shouldn't cause anybody to avoid this film. Although it intentionally conveys positive values, this is a story-driven film and not just an educational video. "In Your Wildest Dreams" is a drama, and doesn't come off as propaganda or didacticism. In fact, it is far less prone to hitting the viewer over the head with a "lesson" than many of the supposedly purely "artistic" or commercial films made by Hollywood.
I wasn't sure what to expect when I began watching this movie, but I was soon drawn into an interesting story featuring very engaging characters.
One can't help but care about the characters and desire to find out what happens to them. I found the film not only watchable, but compelling. So while I enjoyed "In Your Wildest Dreams," I should point out that it is a deeply flawed movie. Perhaps the biggest problem is the sound. After a few minutes of listening to the poorly made audio track I became mostly accustomed to it and rarely thought about it during the rest of the film. But with its high levels of ambient noise and low-contrast levels, the audio track is pretty bad. The movie's sound editor is a real pro who recently worked as a sound designer on "Star Trek: Insurrection" (1998). I'm assuming that the problem with the sound on "In Your Wildest Dreams" must be attributed to a lack of proper budget or equipment, or to poor mastering. The people who made this film did an impressive job with very little money, but they may have skimped too much in this area.
My other major complaint is with the terrible music. Some kind of ugly techno sound going on. There are a few okay songs, but for the most part the music on this film really drags it down.
Fortunately, the film looks great! The photography is a delight to watch, yet serves the story and atmosphere without drawing undue attention to itself. A range of difficult settings, lighting conditions, and subjects are handled with aplomb, including the imaginative ultra- low budget filming of an artificial intelligence at work.
The acting is a bit of a mixed bag. There are many talented actors in the cast, but also some amateurs who should have received better direction or not been cast. Lead actress Lise Wilburn as Holly really lights up the screen. She's attractive and watchable. She delivers a very natural performance, seeming like a real person more than a highly- coached actress. This is a good thing. There are a few wrong notes, but she is on screen a lot, and the part is a difficult one without many actor-friendly "hooks" to hide behind.
Trevor Black, the star, is good, but not great. His performance was never distracting, and he let me get into the story. But he didn't seem to bring extra depth to the character the way a much more talented performer might have done with this so-so script. Some of the smaller roles went to some really amazing actors, including Steve Anderson as a company insider, Jeff Olson as Mark's father, and Robert Nelson as Holly's father.
There's nothing offensive about the film. Not a great film by any means, but except for the sound and music, it's nothing to be ashamed of.
Overall I enjoyed watching "In Your Wildest Dreams." I wouldn't mind watching it again. Plot-wise, it's fairly original and unusual for such a small-budget film. I even learned a little about the stock market, insider trading, and trade commission investigators. (Countless movies and TV shows have homicide investigators. How many films can you name that feature trade commission investigators?) The story pulled me in and kept me involved with some interesting "what if?" situations. What would I do if I were in a similar situation? It's meant to
Morality tale that is just plain wrong.
pmsent26 February 2005
This movie was definitely on the boring side. The acting was decent and the film looks pretty nice, the soundtrack is definitely for fans of Kenny G and Michael Bolton. Speaking of the soundtrack, I found it very ironic that a film about telling the truth and not stealing decided to use a song in it's titles that was a BLATANT RIPOFF of Paul Simon's "You Can Call Me Al" - except that they don't acknowledge it at all. Isn't there something a little hypocritical there? The scene that the main kid was in where he was mimicking a game show host was my favorite. 10 lines? I have to write ten lines about this movie to be included? What a ripoff, I don't think it's too fair to FORCE people to write more than they would just to get it included!
This movie is just so mediocre
ryuzakie7 May 2011
I had to watch this movie in class and I have to say its characters rate up there with 9 as the most boring. They are what I call Pop-Tart characters. Put them in the microwave for two seconds and you can already smell what flavour they are. This movie doesn't try to give you rime to think about it's moral instead it shoves it down your throat. And I know it's supposed to be a family film but that doesn't excuse it from not trying to make you think at all (besides what kid is going to sit through a movie about stock trading?) It blatantly smacks you around with its moral (that no-one really cares about in the first place.) by having the characters spell it out for you not once but multiple times. This movie seems like it really doesn't try.
acting=MEDIOCRE, story=Mediocre, soundtrack=MEDIOCRE
overall=EXTREMELY MEDIOCRE!!!!!!!
acting=MEDIOCRE, story=Mediocre, soundtrack=MEDIOCRE
overall=EXTREMELY MEDIOCRE!!!!!!!
Gets better and better with each watch
GeneralPeters00420 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is a film that has all those flaws that are talked about in the reviews here, but it sucks you in with the cheese. Like the family dancing in circles to "March to Victory" and then ALL of them wearing Princeton SWEATERS. The scene at the park when they pick up the spiky-haired boyfriend is probably the most unnecessary part in the whole film. The main actress is believable, as mentioned in another review, but I also want to highlight that guy Steve Anderson. He is natural when second-guessing his decision to do something illegal while talking to Maddox in the warehouse. He shows true fear. I like how nervous he gets when Maddox is accusing him of buying the stock while on the phone..."Justin? JUSTIN?" lol And last but not least, Justin Maddox himself played by Brett Palmer. Wow. Palmer should have gotten more roles like this in the big time. He goes for it HARD with this character and has so many awesome moments. For example, "how's your sandwich?" and "No, you see you are only allowed yes or no answers here" and multiple times when he adjusts his tie with a smarmy look on his face. I love the wallet-sized pictures of his car he shows to Holly. He's right- it was her loss not to go for a drive. He's clearly the star of this movie and is worth watching it for alone.
Good Work from Feature Films For Families
iloveavonlea13 January 2001
This is a really good movie, I enjoyed watching it. Yes, it is a bit unrealistic but this is a movie, not a novel from the seventeenth century. The dilemma that the character Mark deals with are some that require a lot of thinking. And the acting that each actor did was marvelous. I would reccomend that anyone watch this movie. :)
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
