User reviews

Had this little film been made five or ten years earlier, it might have achieved minor classic status. Unfortunately, it allows us an image of a 1950s style rebel that showed up on screens in 1965, a year after the Beatle invasion and the hippie movement had begun. Bad timing! But not a bad movie, by any means. Celia Kaye, who was briefly hyped for stardom, plays a runaway girl searching for her biological father. On the road, she meets a Jack Kerouac/James Dean drifter, in a black leather jacket of course, played by Michael Parks, who was then being hyped as the new James Dean - unfortunately, Dean style acting had gone out of fashion a few years earlier. Too bad for Parks, because he really had a nice quality to his performances, if something about him seemed to belong to an earlier decade. He had his last big shot at potential stardom four years later playing a biker in Then Came Bronson, sort of TV's watered down answer to Easy Rider, but when it didn't click in the ratings, his career never recovered. Hollywood was looking for a new kind of late sixties/early seventies star; Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, etc. Anyway, back to Wild Seed: the relationship of the two leads, as they experience anecdotal misadventures, is truly touching and quite compelling, as you wait to see if friendship will bloom into romance. One of those films that almost never plays anywhere anymore, not even on Turner Movie Classics. Worth rediscovering, certainly!

The great Conrad Hall (the original Outer Limits) photographed Wild Seed in black & white and his mastery of light and shadow fit the noir mood of this melancholy story. The late Michael Parks is excellent and Celia Kaye in an early role perfectly projected the innocence of am earnest young girl inexperience in life. An experienced actress would have come across as artificial and "Hollywood." Their growing love story is completely believable. The direction by Brian Hutton is effective. Much of the story takes place on freight trains which gets a little tedious but the logistics of shooting these sequences had to have been complex and somewhat dangerous. It was produced by Marlon Brando's production company and it would not have been a stretch to see a 50s era Brando take the Parks role but not in 1964. Parks was more Dean than Brando in demeanor and it's hard to understand why Then Came Bronson hasn't been released on DVD when every piece of junk is. Turner Classics made a bad decision to pair this with Parks' and Ann- Margret's Bus Riley's Back In Town for a 2AM showing Nov. 25, 2017 on TCM Underground instead of giving it an 8PM time slot with a guest when more people would have tuned in to appreciate this little-seen gem. These films are all wrong for Underground which focuses on psychotronic, whacked-out films.

Universal released some odd balls during this period, in a faint attempt at developing new talent and making some higher-brow pix.

They tried to give "Wild Seed" the art house treatment by having the world premiere at the short lived Playboy (yes, that Playboy) theatre in Chicago on May 5, 1965. Some dates were in the midwest that summer, and it was often double billed with "McHale's Navy Joins the Air Force". All in all, this film barely had a release and is VERY obscure today. How did you people even see it?

Back in 1967 Wild Seed received a TV showing on one of the networks' night at the movies. I was so delighted with Michael Parks' performance, I went out of my way to see the film again at a second-run movie house. This is a film which should still be available. It's surely one of Parks' best cinematic appearances and makes one wonder how his career never really took off. (Perhaps he figured after playing Adam in The Bible, he'd given his all to start mankind on its road to perdition.) This would be a great movie to receive the Anchor Bay DVD treatment. In truth I remember the actual details of Wild Seed rather sketchily but the character of the drifter has remained in my memory for four decades. Wild Seed is a realistic depiction of alienation and redemption.

I rarely watch a movie twice, but I have seen this many times. I fell in love with Michael Parks. This film is so moving and I love the slow character development. Yes, Ms. Kaye's acting is a bit stiff, but I think as the movie goes along, you begin to feel her fall in love with him. It was for me, a movie that I hated to end. This movie can be found now on YouTube for free. Enjoy.

This was a better movie than I was expecting; Michael Parks is extremely good as the young drifter (I was astonished that this was his first film) - it makes it that much more disappointing that his career didn't take off at all. He's very effective in showing both the protectiveness and vulnerability of the character, and really shines when the camera holds on him for a long time. On the other hand, Celia Kaye's performance didn't really strike me as anything special. There were moments when it struck me as fairly amateurish (in an unintentional way). The film is well directed and the supporting performances were quite good, although this is essentially a 2-person film. It's also VERY beautifully photographed by Conrad Hall; it's no surprise that his career took off after this debut feature, leading to movies like The Professionals and Cool Hand Luke right afterward. He had an excellent eye for the sweeping outdoor locations, and a lovely, delicate touch in the more intimate scenes. The script and dialogue are very moving as well, and completely believable in all situations; the exchanges between the older and younger characters are very well-written. Although not particularly surprising or unusual in setup or plot, it's altogether a very moving and touching story - a strong 7 of 10, close to an 8.

America must have been asleep at the wheel when this movie came out - Michael Parks was one of the best emerging actors of the time - in the footsteps of James Dean and Marlon Brando - just a bit more sane and unlikely to be self-destructive. Yes, back to the movie - the plot was simple, but the character development, the cross-country journey, spoke to the angst of the American youth in post-World War and pre-Atomic Apocolyptic era. Love began to take on new relationships and new meaning, and the USA class-caste system began to breakdown along the lines of the theme of this movie in that very decade. Good luck trying to see this one - can't find it anywhere - it is just a great black-n-white movie that will forever be in color in my mind.

Saw this movie on TV so many years ago. Loved it! Wish it could be available on DVD- would love to see it again! Something made me think of it, and I decided to search for it on IMDb. Agree with other reviewer that this is a wonderful, forgotten gem. Not at all sure why it did not do better in the theaters, but suspect it wasn't marketed effectively.

An American drama; A story about a drifter who shows a teenage runaway how to hop trains to reach her father in Los Angeles. The film has a theme about how the impulse of the youthful spirit attempts to override a painful past. It is light on melodrama, and the performances are subtle and understated. This is an independent film with studio production values that had something of a Beat Generation feel when released a decade later. Celia Milius and Michael Parks have interesting chemistry, though both appear older than their respective characters' ages, especially in the way they speak. Nevertheless, Parks' youthfulness is appealing and charismatic. Although it is not an original tale and there is not much character development, it does build tension quite well with a tender and quiet tone. By showing anonymous people attacking or impacting them along the way, authenticity was added to the story. Good cinematography accentuated the vulnerability of the two young people travelling across America. Nonetheless, there are some flaws. The character Daffy was a bit uneven and lacked centre at times. Her over-defensiveness hampered some of the sympathy she earned. As a 17-year-old, she seemed sheltered and timid, but her character shifts to being overly paternal when lecturing Fargo, and then she switches back to a naïve persona. Fargo remains an enigma, despite revelations about him.

Daphne (Celia Milius) runs away from home and soon meets up with a drifter, 'Fargo' (Michael Parks). She's headed to Los Angeles and he agrees to tag along with her and show her the ropes....riding the rails, protecting herself and more. At first, their alliance is shaky and eventually it evolves into something more.

Like so many movies, the 17 year-old in the story is way older (23) and having her look way older than 17 took me a bit out of the story. At one point, someone said she looked about 14...which is crazy. But in so many films, especially older ones, rarely were actors teens when they were playing teens. Not a major problem...but she and actor Michael Parks were actually nearly the same age and looked it.

The movie itself worked okay for me...not great but not bad. Daphne seemed a bit too naive (perhaps a bit dim) and that didn't help, but I also never really felt all that drawn to the characters. But the film is reasonably interesting and worth seeing...just not a must-see at all either.

Two kids on the run, a twenty-year-old boy and a seventeen-year-old girl are running away. They meet on the road and at first, the girl is very reluctant to travel with him. But, after a while, she changes her mind. She's on her way to LA while he tells her he's on his way to San Diego. They travel together with him protecting her against tramps, railroad cops, state and county cops, and everyone else in general. As they travel, they begin to fall in love. Will their love continue to grow? Regardless, will they make it to their destinations? Or, will something prevent them from making it? This is an excellent movie and I wish Universal would put it on video.

I call this an "artsy" film because of the type of outdoor photography used throughout this film.

Michael Parks is one of those performers that could of been a contender... for one of cinema's top actors

Unfortunately, Wild Seed is a picture that's overlooked by so many. Parks is simply outstanding. And, it doesn't hurt that ace cinematographer Conrad Hall lights him brilliantly.

Parks career is well documented. He never landed a movie or TV series that catapulted him to stardom. That may be partly his fault as he confessed he was difficult to work with on movie sets.

As for Wild Seed, unfortunately, his co-lead in the picture, Celia Kaye, can't bring the same power-filled performance to the movie.

Actor-director Brian G Hutton's directorial debut is an unrelentingly downbeat tale of a young girl's quest to find her biological father. She runs away from home and hooks up with a drifter who has nothing else to do and nothing in particular on his mind. Despite the title and advertising, there is nothing wild about these two. Celia Kaye and Michael Parks are so low key, they're barely alive and Conrad Hall's (In Cold Blood) moody cinematography envelops them in darkness. The story might have sustained an hour long TV drama, but there's no character development, and the journey from NY to California is uneventful and filled with stock characters of no consequence. Tedium settles in long before the predictable conclusion.

One of my favorite films from the '60's, "Wild Seed" was a touching sensitve view of two lost souls thrown together---a common plot of the times. This however, was in my opinion, one of the best performances by Michael Parks. I recall that the film was completed in about 3 weeks, done on a very low budget, and some of the dialogue was, in fact, ad libbed because of the cost. Parks carries off his role as a drifter with a heart so beautifully. We see that he really wants to reach out to the Celia Kaye character, but is so impacted by his past that he doesn't exactly know how. Eventually, the kindness he seeks from others shines through. I agree that Celia Kaye's acting is the weaker part of the film. She was a newcomer (and what did happen to her?)in this film; but Parks shines as someone aching to connect with someone in a purposeful sensitve way. He does so, sometimes, not with dialogue, but with a look, a shrug, a distanced stare, using the environment as part of his character. His characterization is reminiscent of a low-key James Dean; nuances are Parks' strength. The filming uses the seamier sides if cities as backdrop, yet, with rain-washed streets, there is something hopeful in those scenes. It's must-see for people wanting to see a classic story of the '60's generation and why we wandered and connected with strangers at critical times in our lives.

Daphne Simms is a 17-year-old innocent running away from her adoptive parents. She is on a cross-country journey to find her biological father in L.A. She encounters various dangers along the way. She is taken under the wing of Fargo who at times is cold towards her.

The only false note is the unabashed innocence of Daphne. She's like a little girl professing love and desperate for companionship. There is one great moment after he stole her jacket when she gets angry. It would be interesting if she took that moment and rode with it. I want her character to grow and change. Michael Parks is trying to be James Dean but sometimes, he's directing his anger at her and that's not appealing. The phrase a day late and a dollar short very much fits him. He's not as powerful as Dean and he's a decade late. There is an interesting twist to the reveal. I do like the overall road trip despite its many potholes.

I stumbled upon this film late at night on Youtube. I only watched the first few minutes before having to get to bed, but the next day I realized I had to see more of the actor. I didn't know who he was when I watched the film, but now I know it is Michael Parks. It's hard to ever lose track that you're witnessing the performance of a virtuoso. Yet he was so young! His unmatched timing, underplayed yet deep expression of conflicting emotions, and the striking architecture of his face totally captivated me throughout the film. He does lapse into some Brando-esque speak, especially at the end, but overall he's a grounded and exceptionally masterful actor. The film is solid except perhaps for some lapses in pacing of the plot, but otherwise is richly evocative of America in the 1960s. The music, acting, and cinematography are first rate.

I saw this black and white film on TV when I was twelve and never forgot it. It is one of my favorite films of the sixties, and I saw lots of them. Michael Parks at his best, in my opinion.

The way Michael Park's character developed from opportunistic thug to nurturing friend draws the viewer's attention as the relationship slowly unfolds between the two youths. The contrast of their growing bond with the society they encounter as they travel across the country from east coast to west coast on trains, by hitching, and by motorcycle depicts the alienation of youth during the era, and an even greater sense of loss, dread and emptiness of the society at large. Did Toots Theilemans do the soundtrack to this film as well? It seems like it, even if he didn't, that's the tone and mood of this film.

The cinematography, direction, plot development and general tone was artful, moving and edgy. If anyone has information of how to obtain a DVD or video, please let me know. I agree that it is a fine and original film, and a shame that it is not screened on TCM or anywhere else. Bad timing in the original release, and now cast aside for decades. Someone bring it back, please!

The so called man of the story is a boring thug. The girl is a boring pain in the neck. Do you love me? Don't ask me that. I would tell you the end but it is typical of a Marlon Brando movie. Most people talk like he made all these great movies. I find what he made was sleepers. And if this is what he sees when he looks at people, I feel sad for him. Very Sappy, Boring, Drama. The story line is bad. The acting is bad. The writing is bad. I seen all these high ratings and I thought I was going to see something good. Must be a bunch of sappy love sick women writing these. If your a man and thinking on watching this movie take my word. Run.

Two kids on the run, a twenty-year-old boy and a seventeen-year-old girl are running away. They meet on the road and at first, the girl is very reluctant to travel with him. But, after a while, she changes her mind. She's on her way to LA while he tells her he's on his way to San Diego. They travel together with him protecting her against tramps, railroad cops, state and county cops, and everyone else in general. As they travel, they begin to fall in love. Will their love continue to grow? Regardless, will they make it to their destinations? Or, will something prevent them from making it? This is an excellent movie and I wish Universal would put it on video.

This is what I call an "artsy" film that appears to me like college professors produced it with their students starring in it. In other words, it's almost like a painting. I highly recommend watching it if it ever comes back on TV.

An obscure film set in the mid/late 1950's about a youth running away from her grandparents (NewJersey) to find her father (CA). She is unexpectly rescued and befriended enroute. Trust and friendship blossom as they travel by freight trains to California. The ending begs a sequel. Both genders will enjoy, independently or together. ///---Where can I get a copy ?!?!?!?---/// The "Journey of Natty Gan" is a lightweight, rambling version of this tale.

Wonderful road movie, wonderful Michael Parks ! It might be an update of William Wellman 's "wild boys of the road " a gem from the thirties .Beautiful losers .

At the beginning of the movie one knows almost nothing of both characters : an adopted child,the frail seventeen-year old Daphné heads for Los Angeles ,her promised land where her biological dad should welcome her with open arms; she's a naive unexperimented girl,who does not even know the meaning of "thumbing a ride" ; her longing for her father, her dream of an affectionate reunion, her mom's letters she treasures which makes her think of a romantic love affair of long ago ,win over the viewer.

But it's Fargo (Michael Parks, in an oscar caliber performance) who ,little by little, becomes the main character :when he appears ,he looks like a young bum sure of himself , who shows himself in the buff after swimming , who seems armed for life ,in spite of his poverty :he 's begging for some cents . But further acquaintance shows this: he's an orphan (when you're an orphan , you'll never fit in a society based on family ,I know the score), he's as frail and as love -starving as his runaway/protégée ;even though he could find a steady job (instead of fruit picking here and there) ,he would never opt for a family life , not even for Daphné's love ; he resents the society for their lawful happiness, and this hatred explodes in the father's office .

Fargo and Daphné are in a dead end ; his mom is dead ,his father's in jail ,but it seems that the girl has bleak future too:one knows nothing of her adoptive parents ,maybe "they struggled hard all their life to get by" ,but all in all , facing the bourgeois selfishness of certain adults , she undertands Fargo's rebellion.The superbly filmed last picture is perhaps the road to nowhere .

One of the most beautiful road movies I know, Brian Hutton's first effort and in my book his towering achievement ,topping his war movies ("when eagles dare" ) or his thrillers ("death watch") ,with a very small budget at that.

The more times I watch this film, the closer it moves to brilliance in my opinion. What I think I love most about this movie is the layers: it's a "road trip" film. It's a "coming of age" film for the female protagonist. It's a "morality tale" for the male protagonist. It has action and heart and a haunting sentimentality.

The idea that an adoptee travels across the country to meet her biological father has a timeless feel. Throw in an attractive, outcast drifter only heightens the story. And the denouement propels the story into making a statement.

Everything about this film is solid, although I confess I'm on the fence about the female lead's performance. Either the director wanted her to play an inadequate due to the character's age, or she interpreted it as such. Regardless, it's a minor criticism for an otherwise strangely yet welcomed, uplifting film.