Wild Women (1970)

Sadly Over-hyped

Memorable, crazy movie

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Basic Plot: The US Army wants to move some guns into the disputed Texas Territory. They decide to disguise the guns in a wagon train taking settlers west. To make things look truly authentic, though, they need women. The Army recruits five women from a local stockade to act as wives for the men. Overall, Wild Women is harmless enough, but it's not very good. It's all horribly predictable and there's not much to get excited about. The title, Wild Women, is misleading. Sure, all of the women were in prison, but these are hardly hardened criminals. But "Wild Women" sounds more enticing than "Moderately Fun Women" or "Mildly Amusing Women". I suppose the "Wild" part had to be toned down as this was made for television. Also, being made-for-TV means that you know everything's going to be okay in the end. Any hardship they might face – Indian attack, lack of water, or the Mexican Army – is going to be resolved fairly quickly and in our heroes' favor. This isn't Peckinpah. The cast is actually better than it had any right to be. I always enjoy seeing Marie Windsor. She's been a favorite of mine since I first watched Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy about 45 years ago. Wild Women also features the talents of Anne Francis, Huge (yes, I typed it that way on purpose) O'Brian, and Marilyn Maxwell. Not a bad cast for a fairly lame movie.

"Wild Women" is a film shown originally as part of the "ABC Movie of the Week" series. I never saw it when it first aired but found it and many other "ABC Movie" installments on YouTube. They seem to have about half of the films that aired on ABC over these years.Hugh O'Brian plays Killian, a guy who is trying to smuggle guns into Texas during the time of the Texas Revolution of 1835-1836. However, he cannot do this alone and needs help, so he goes to a local women's prison and gets the warden to parole a group of these 'ladies' to his care. Naturally, being a group of misfits, they have some hard times here and there but ultimately pull it all together...which is EXACTLY what you'd expect in such a film.If you like this sort of plot, you'd love the later "ABC Movie", "The Daughters of Joshua Cabe" which also used this idea...and a bit better. The acting is fine and I have no major complaints EXCEPT for the complete lack of historical accuracy. Like so many films about this time period, they show folks with repeating pistols...something that really weren't available in any number until the Civil War and post- Civil War period...decades later. So, you see a battle near the end where hundreds and hundreds of shots ring out...though nothing like this could have happened with just a couple dozen folks fighting.

With the exception of the first (an attention-grabbing catfight) and the last (a bloodless but nonetheless corpse-spewing shootout) five minutes, a more accurate title for "Wild Women" would be "Mild Women". The journey this movie takes them - and us - is a pretty uneventful one; even the Apaches are basically friendly. The film has a good cast (Hugh O'Brian is an agreeable taciturn male lead; Marie Windsor is still a firecracker even at age 50) and is technically well made, but it's one of those films that you will have probably forgotten within a week or so; the title may suggest something revolutionary, but you won't find it here. ** out of 4.

From the sound of the premise of "Wild Women" - five women prisoners promised freedom if they join the military on a mission - one might think that this made-for-TV movie is ripping off "The Dirty Dozen". To its credit, the movie doesn't really come across as a rip-off. The women characters are considered equals and manage to prove themselves at the end. However, there's not much else of interest to be found in the movie. The women are likable, but there's very little development of their characters - they are pretty interchangeable. The movie is a compact 74 minutes long, but still manages to feel mostly slow and largely devoid of action (though there is an okay hand-to-hand combat sequence halfway through.) The movie has a flat and unspectacular look, no doubt to the limited television budget. And there is the glaring fault that a mysterious rider trailing the party is eventually forgotten about and never brought up again! The 1970s had a lot of good made-for-TV movies made, but this effort isn't one of them.