The amount of times Harrison Ford asks the dog if he remembers him, it’s like “yes, old man, I just saw you yesterday; of course, I remember you. Do YOU remember?”
I read the book for The Call of the Wild on a return trip to Sydney a few years ago. I remember my flight home got delayed and I was the only one happy about it because it meant I got to finish this book. It’s an insightful and mature book, dealing with the inner machinations of animistic nature once domestic luxury is stripped away. It struck me back then how hard it would be to put on film – considering first that it’s from a dog’s perspective, which would require non-dialogue driven filming and voice-narration to get the main messages across. And, any movie production would probably be aimed at children, because most dog movies are, even though the story contains some pretty casual brutality and death. I was sceptical when I heard about this movie, and even more sceptical when I saw Harrison Ford’s big head on the poster – how is this movie going to confidently relay the book’s contents if it’s using Ford’s image to sell tickets? Is Ford going to be a large presence in this movie, or is he a ruse? Either answer didn’t seem like fun.
The Call of the Wild is directed by Chris Sanders, and tells the story of Buck – a St. Bernard/Scotch Collie, who gets stolen from his wealthy suburban backyard and transported to the Alaskan artic to be sold as a sled dog. Buck is totally unfamiliar with work of any kind, and has to adapt quickly to the harsh and frozen climate. Buck’s new life finds him working for a few owners, starting with a shaken mail runner and ending alongside John Thornton (Harrison Ford), a weary and regretful townsman. Buck is tested, by indiscriminate nature and adversity, and learns to get in tune with the laws of his wild ancestry.
Just as I feared, the movie dampens down the violence and sanitises the source material. It’s really disappointing to see Buck hunt down a white rabbit whilst hungry, but then let it go. A showdown between Buck and sled-leader Spitz, sees the fallen leader sulk away in sullied defeat rather than a more dramatic fight-to-the-death we see in the book. There’s also a fantastic story point in the book where one of the sled-dogs works himself to death, not knowing how to do anything else but endure old age and die with purpose, that is completely absent. This movie is inspired by the call of the wild, but it’s really preoccupied with being neat and virtuous. It also contains humour that is unremarkable. I read Buck’s second, arrogant owners, Hal, Mercedes and her brother, to be unintuitive and ill-prepared for the harsh frozen conditions of Alaska, rather than the plainly callous and rude characters in this movie – to me, they represent the pitfalls of indulgence over discipline, but become conventional snarling movie villains here – they reminded me so much of Rooster and Lily from Annie that it made me smirk; so cartoonish for 2020. I understand the choice to change the ending of the novel, which deals with a Native American massacre, but the journey with Harrison Ford’s character isn’t going to stay in my mind very long. From the moment we see the vengeful Hal (Dan Stevens) cock his gun to track Thornton, it hangs in the air like a bad smell until the final assault takes place.
Okay, so what do we have with The Call of the Wild – we have a dog that knows that dependency on alcohol can be perilous for some people …how? The first half of this movie tries its best to retell the tales of Buck working through the snow, but then the movie changes into a travel adventure with Thornton, that looks inspired by the gold panning segment from The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. But Harrison Ford’s narration works pretty well, to relay the situations Buck is in, in real time. Even before that, whilst Buck is running through the judge’s house, the movie works very well to have us understand what the dog is thinking, and why he is doing what he’s doing, like a good animation should. I thought it was a worthwhile idea to show the wild ancestry within Buck as a big black wolf that guides Buck when he needs to make a decision – not sure I would have done it that way, and risk confusing Buck’s inner nature with a supernatural presence, but it was a good technique to represent the notion visually nonetheless. Thornton’s emotional letter to his family didn’t hit me as emotionally as I think the movie would have liked, considering the movie completely stops for him to read it. Then, having him throw the gold back… yeah, I get it, he’s a good guy 😊 I liked seeing Buck get along with the white wolf too, and slowly become accepted in the wolf pack.
I wear glasses every day, so I already have the costume to be one of those nerds that can say ‘the book is better’. This movie isn’t very exciting and won’t be memorable for years to come. I understand this is the fifth movie adaptation for the novel, and I can certainly understand the inspiration to keep wanting to map-out this story visually and keep it relevant, but I think you lose the guts of the material by making it family-friendly. Unfortunately, The Call of the Wild is a sanitised call, that turns into a tepid tale of adventure. I like Buck, his motion-capture animation and all, but I think I’d leave the rest out. It’s supposed to be The CALL of the Wild, but I think Buck only gets a notification.
1.5
Leave a Reply