gridoon2018 Good (not great) wildlife footage is weighed down by a flat, uninteresting story and perfunctory human scenes (Martin Sheen collects a paycheck). The leopard cubs are cute, Brooke Shields is gorgeous (she has my favorite female body type), but the film as a whole is a bit of a well-intentioned bore. **1/2 out of 4.

rooprect This film's strong point is its wildlife photography. With actual footage of the true events it's loosely based on, it has a very authentic feel. However, the story itself and its themes left me somewhat unsatisfied.Not as entertaining as, say, "Free Willy" and not as powerful as "Gorillas in the Mist", this movie missed some great opportunities to be more than it is. Only in the last 5 minutes do we get a glimpse of Varty's philosophical thoughts on conservationism. I really enjoyed that part, and if Varty is to do another film I would hope he includes a lot more of it. But most of the movie consists of nice leopard footage without much deeper commentary.The story itself doesn't really focus on the global problems of conservation but instead focuses on the specific efforts to save 2 cubs, and without much drama in that respect, that's why the film loses strength. There are 2 villains in the movie: 1) a sleazy corporate suit who is trying to destroy the film project; and 2) a corrupt game warden who's trying to spoil Varty's plans to rehabilitate the cubs. Neither of these antagonists really relates to the global problem, thereby making the story a bit mundane. Like I said, only at the end does Varty offer some deep thoughts.Another missed opportunity is that the movie fails to address the theme of interfering with nature (here in a productive way) which the DVD description led me to expect. A wildlife documentarian is supposed to be truly objective, not interfering in any of the scenes no matter how disturbing they may be. Varty crosses the line, which I found very interesting. But the film doesn't really address that. Crikey, that theme could've been powerful enough to carry the whole film.So in the end we get a lot of pretty footage but not much else. Oh one more warning: leopards are predators of course, so while they look extremely fuzzy & cute, they do kill their food. I don't recall much footage of actual kills, mostly just bloody wildebeest carcasses afterwards, but either way it kinda kills the "awww" feeling.I'm glad this film is out there because there aren't many conservation films in the world, and even worse, many of them make conservationists look like maladjusted freakshows (like Herzog's "Grizzly Man"). But I would sooner recommend "Gorillas in the Mist" or, for kids, "Sandy the Seal". Another film that comes to mind is the Vietnamese movie "Buffalo Boy" which is more about human nature than animals, but the story is about a guy who leads a pair of caribous for days in search of food & water. Great photography there.

ccthemovieman-1 This wasn't much of a story and Martin Sheen did probably the worst job of acting I've ever seen him do, but it doesn't really matter because the essence of the movie is the wildlife photography.John Varty, a British conservationist living in Africa, plays himself in this story of him raising two baby leopards and finding a home for them. Brooke Shields is an American writer looking to write about a story about it. She's just in the movie to show her pretty face and say, "Aww, aren't they cute?" That's about all she does, which gets a little annoying after awhile.Some of the photography is spectacular, with beautiful scenery and a disturbing scene or two (i.e. a crocodile trying to eat a water buffalo.) The language is very mild, with only three swear words, probably put in to get a "PG" rating.

SanDiego Excellent animal adventure film in the tradition of Born Free and Living Free about an African conservationist who lives in a tree house and follows a family of Leopards for 12 years, and a Los Angeles filmographer who seeks to make his story known.