L'appel de la forêt

This is definitely a European-style film from the period, the 70s. Everything about it speaks loudly with the European influence, the music, the cinematography, the editing. It's much like what you'd see in countless Euro horror films from the time, but this time it's a dramatic and rather realistic take on the old American classic. When seen, it doesn't take much to imagine the shooting conditions, and how did they all, cast and crew, put up with the misery of the terrible cold and snow? Heston isn't miscast here like some say, he's just very much different from what might be expected, but he does an admirable job. Some of his best film work was during this time, not the studio blockbusters he was known for prior to this. It is good that the story doesn't opt for the Hollywood "happy ending" but, without spoiling it for those who haven't seen this, it is a much more realistic ending.

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.

***SPOILERS*** At the beginning of the movie we see this handsome and powerful German Shepherd leading a wolf pack as they run down and kill a caribou for their supper. Later looking under the icy river the dog sees his master frozen to death beneath it; The dog's name is Buck the master is John Thornton, Charlton Heston.

The story of Buck and how he became the leader of a wolf pack in the Yukon territory starts some time back in the sunny climate of Santa Clara Calif. It's 1897 and gold was discovered around the Klondike River in the Yukon and Alaskan territory's up north and dogs like Buck were worth their weight in gold as sled dogs in that country's deep snows and freezing weather. Dognaped by Judge Miller's, Alfredo Mayo, gardener Manuel for a price of $75.00 Buck was well on his way from being a sweet and loving pet to becoming a strong and ferocious wild animal.

Beaten and broken for weeks by a number of different owners of sled-dog teams Buck was almost dead when he was bought and put into the service of John Thorrnton and his partner Pete's, Ralmund Harmstorf, dog team. With John & Pete's kind and tender handling of him Buck became the lead sled dog and the most powerful and at the same time feared dog in the Yukon territory. Buck led the dog team in covering the treacherous 600 mile journey from Skaguay to Dawson as the lead sled-dog for John & Pete in record time when no other dog team and it's owners would dare to try it.

In the movie Buck is stolen a number of times from John, and was once almost shot and killed by the local bootlegger, but Buck always managed to escape and return home to John & Pete. It's later that the dog begins to yarn for his home in the wild. The reason Buck didn't go back to the woods, where he developed a strong friendship with the local Timber Wolves in the area, was his love for and loyalty to the persons who saved his life John & Pete.

Torn between his two kind and caring human masters and his wolf family Buck can't quite bring himself to break away from civilization to live in the wild. Later one night a band of local Indians attack the cabin where both John & Pete were staying in and ended up killing both of them. Buck and his wolf pack tried to come to their rescue but were too late to save them as we saw in the beginning of the movie.

With the two persons who Buck had a mutual bond with now gone Buck can now return to his distant descendants, the wild wolves, in the dark and cold woods of the Klondike. Buck, in th end, ended up answering to something that he understood and that was ingrained in his consciousness from the thousands of generations of canines over millions of years that he eventually evolved from: The Call of the Wild.

Well, this is a typical 1970's-era film, with lots of suspicious animal action which makes you feel glad that films today are shot under the auspices of the ASPCA and the Humane Society. Shot under horrifyingly rough conditions, with Norway standing in for the Yukon, the film takes few liberties with Jack London's classic novel, but the bizarre casting of Charlton Heston as John Thornton makes the viewer want to scratch their head. Jaggedly edited and with a greater budget for snow than special effects, the viewer is implored to suspend belief as animal after animal is torn apart and shown drenched with fake blood, looking bewildered. Obviously, as befitting a movie of this era, the hordes of unwashed gold prospectors are as grungy a bunch as ever filmed, but the few women who surface are as impeccably dressed and made up as any model in a Vanity Fair shoot. Lots of bad sound and snow on the lens, but a nice job at portraying one man and one dog who love one another fiercely. Peculiar film, lots of cute dogs, lots of atrocious acting, and lots and lots and lots of snow.

As the only name we American viewers will recognize in the cast, Charlton Heston does very well in the lead role of John Thornton rugged prospector in the Klondike Gold Rush. There are two leads of course, the other being Buck the lead sled dog that Heston puts more store in than most people.

It's not a misanthropic position by any means. As anyone who lives in the frozen north on any continent, a good sled dog is still the best transportation around. One that is loyal and smart like Buck is worth more than the gold he might carry out of a strike.

The only other version I saw of this story is the one that starred Clark Gable and Loretta Young in the Thirties, That one took considerable liberties with the story. This version is faithful to Jack London's novella which came out when folks were still panning for gold in this area in 1902.

You'll not know any other names from the cast except possibly French actress Michele Mercier who plays a saloon owner in Dawson City and who would like Heston to settle down with her. But The Call Of The Wild is as strong in him as it is in Buck The Dog who discovers his second cousin the wolf and yearns for their open existence. Though the dog develops an affection for his human the same way Heston has for the dog.

Heston is rugged and fine in the lead role. The non-recognition of the other players works out because it lends an air of authenticity to the film. Ken Annakin's direction is on target and the location cinematography done in the Lapland country of Norway and Finland is magnificent.

Heston wasn't crazy about the film, I imagine it was one rugged location shoot for him. Still his fans should like it and I can tell you he's done worse films than The Call Of The Wild.