There have been at least three film versions of the classic Jack London story, "The Call of the Wild". The 1972 version isn't particularly famous and much of it could be because the leading man himself, Charlton Heston, though it was an incredibly disorganized production and he actually encouraged folks NOT to see it! But is it really that bad?
Buck is a German Shepherd in this film, though in the story he was half Shepherd and half St. Bernard...making him a much more massive dog than the one shown in the movie.
The story begins with Buck being stolen and abused horribly by a jerk wanting to make him a sled dog to be used in the Yukon gold rush at the end of the 19th century. Thornton (Charlton Heston) buys the dog and uses him on his sled team and soon Buck proves his worth and Buck becomes devoted to him because he's one of the few who treated the dog well. What sort of adventures occur from then until the end of the story...you'll have to see for yourself.
As I watched the film, I was a big concerned as several times it appeared that the filmmakers MIGHT have abused animals to make the film. While the scenes where Buck is being abused clearly aren't abusive, they look real enough. But the dead, frozen horses and the scene where the sled dogs try to tear an Arctic fox to pieces are more worrisome and hard to see. I am sure this would turn off some viewers.
So in spite of this, is the film any good? And, was Heston perhaps too harsh about this movie? Overall I'd say the film is okay...not as bad as Heston said but also not as good as it should have been.
Buck is a German Shepherd in this film, though in the story he was half Shepherd and half St. Bernard...making him a much more massive dog than the one shown in the movie.
The story begins with Buck being stolen and abused horribly by a jerk wanting to make him a sled dog to be used in the Yukon gold rush at the end of the 19th century. Thornton (Charlton Heston) buys the dog and uses him on his sled team and soon Buck proves his worth and Buck becomes devoted to him because he's one of the few who treated the dog well. What sort of adventures occur from then until the end of the story...you'll have to see for yourself.
As I watched the film, I was a big concerned as several times it appeared that the filmmakers MIGHT have abused animals to make the film. While the scenes where Buck is being abused clearly aren't abusive, they look real enough. But the dead, frozen horses and the scene where the sled dogs try to tear an Arctic fox to pieces are more worrisome and hard to see. I am sure this would turn off some viewers.
So in spite of this, is the film any good? And, was Heston perhaps too harsh about this movie? Overall I'd say the film is okay...not as bad as Heston said but also not as good as it should have been.