User reviews

Good black and white matinée kids film about a family that moves house but doesn't take their son's dog with them. Somehow the dog (a big Alsatian) walks across America to find them. The 60 minutes or so are the adventures that dog has in rural America, made more poignant now-days because it possibly showed small towns that would have never appeared on film. My memory of THE SILENT CALL is from exactly the above matinée at ago long closed local cinema. The time and place has now formed a lovely mental postcard as I believe the film was particularly emotional for us kids. I assume the title refers to the insistent determination of the dog to find his 12 year old boy owner. Disney made many variations of the same story. It is probably more interesting now to 50 year olds than to 12 year olds, mainly because of the evocative period it was made. Still, as a kids film it was a good one. May I also thank many readers who contact me on this comment.... and good news... if I can place this info here: recently I found a 1970 University film course magazine that has a 3 page piece on Gail Russell with a full list of her films. I have never really followed the career of Gail Russell but after the many contacts thru the IMDb who wanted to know how I saw the film I can only share this unusual information. I hope this is OK. thanks... Paul Brennan, Sydney Australia.

... but it was OK if you consider that it was probably made as a children's film 50 years ago. A family moves from Nevada to L.A. due to the man changing jobs. The son's dog Pete will stay behind with a neighbor until the family gets settled, then they will send for him. The dog decides to run away and find his family on his own. The son is crushed when he gets the news, although somehow he knows that Pete is looking for him. This isn't that outlandish if you consider there have been well documented cases of dogs and cats traveling long distances to places they've never been and actually finding the human family to which they belong.

The scenes cut back and forth between the family where the son cannot forgive his dad for leaving Pete behind, to Pete as he travels over mountainous territory to get to L.A. The scenes of the family have a dynamic that is reminiscent of old episodes of Lassie. The two men of the house don't like each other for awhile, and mom is wise in that she nudges rather than shoves the two towards an eventual reconciliation. The scenes with the dog could have been made better if they had not largely consisted of the dog just walking across country. The humans he meets are all friendly and helpful and rather two-dimensional save one, and that scene is very short.

I guess filmmakers of 50 years ago didn't think children could handle anything the least bit tense or suspenseful. Plus I've been spoiled by the Disney live-action films of animals in the wild dating back to the 60's and Disney's TV show. I'd say this is largely of historical interest, that being Gail Russell's last role as the mother of the family - she does a very good job with the material she's given.

It sounds as though this isn't a terrifically high-grade film, but for early-sixties kids the sympathetic longing to see the boy and his dog reunited keeps up interest, and of course the ending has a nice payoff. Since the vote comes from a little kid who enjoyed it, the kid is giving it top marks; probably the grown-up me would be more critical! I either saw this at my school's 16mm Saturday matinées in the auditorium or on TV... hard to remember, and maybe I have it confused with "The Littlest Hobo". All those stories with pets conquering vast distances to find their humans worked for me; we were a family with plenty of pets and like most kids I liked pretty much anything with animals. It may have been this film that had a scene with the dog traveling through the snow, and I was so absorbed in the story that I remember being surprised that I couldn't see my breath. Remember how real movies were when you were little? I think that the real-life instances of similar animal odysseys actually involved displaced pets returning to their original homes rather than sensing the new location of departed human family members. The homing instinct is a very strong one, after all. But you never know...

That's the first thing SCARY about this movie. No wonder everyone is cranky; moving long-distance in a rear-engine, 55 hp Renault Dauphine; two adults, one cranky kid (I'd be, too, if Mom and Dad made me leave the dog behind with a drunkard-like neighbor).

One thing that sort of amazes me is this movie seems to touch also upon racial intermarriage; Is Mom a blend of white/Asian-American while Dad's a white guy? Or did Mom get a fairly severe eyebrow trimming (like with a Weed-Wacker)?

And Dad's an ass to his wife! Seems like the wife-beater type (oh, yeah, I forgot -- it's the movies... and 1961).

And the music soundtrack is revolting. Even in sad or almost tragic scenes, the goofy happy soundtrack wears me down. Maybe for kids, it won't.

WHY EVER VIEW THIS MOVIE? Oh, yeah... it's for kids. Then no wonder they later rebelled a few years' later. This movie was the cause of the hippie movement, and every other problem that happened later on in the late '60s (sort-of kidding... sort of).

I'd recommend "The Incredible Journey" (the original one, even with the slightly-nagging narration). if one's going for an early- 60s story of similar "moving away, leaving the animals" nature, go with the Disney classic!

This kid's gonna be a thug, but at least he's got "long hair" before the Beatles hit our shores!"

The title of this review refers to the dog star who I instantly recognized. Not even he did a good job in this film. Very poorly written storyline with nothing of great interest so I gave it a five only because I like dog pictures. Also of note is the dad who went on to play the Marlboro Man.