Dogs (1976) Review

Dogs (1976) Review

 

Even though Cujo is the most recognizable film to feature a killer dog, it was far from the first. An earlier example of canines going berserk is Dogs, which came out only a year after Jaws, and though it bears a few similarities, isn’t really one of the many natural horror films to rip it off.

The first thing we see is the point of view of a dog at a garden party. Someone lets it out of the yard and it runs in slow motion down the street with a bunch of other dogs, then the title comes on screen. It’s in white font and doesn’t even look scary…for a few seconds, then it drains red with blood. A cheesy opening that sets the tone of what’s to come.

The main characters are a bunch of professors at a university in a small town, with the central one being Harlan, a biology professor who drinks too much and has little interest in the politics of social class that his colleagues are so obsessed with. A nearby government facility is carrying out secret tests, which no one thinks much of, at first—I mean, what could possibly go wrong there? Well, in the wake of a lecture on the effects of pheromones in animals (a lecture which goes on way too long) we find out that the town’s domestic dogs have somehow been affected by a pheromone that makes them form packs and attack people. There’s a droning howl sound used to invoke the dog pack’s presence when they aren’t seen. It’s supposed to be scary, but I didn’t get how it was connected to them. At first I thought it was a siren from the testing facility, but I guess it’s supposed to be like a symphony of howls? Whatever the case, it’s still a little creepy, even if it makes no sense.

The dog attacks are surprisingly brutal and bloody. The first one occurs on a ranch at night, and it’s pretty hard to see in detail, though that may have been a result of the poor quality of the copy I had for the film. As the attacks escalate, Harlan and his fellow academics fight back, and it gets a bit uncomfortable watching them shoot at these poor dogs. I mean, even though they’re vicious, they still look like regular domestic dogs, so it’s hard not to feel a little bad. The best scenes are in the last half hour, with Harlan and his distressed damsel trapped in her house. The characters are fine; they aren’t awful, but they aren’t particularly unique or well-rounded, either, just good enough to sustain the paper-thin story.

There’s some comedy relief throughout, but I think only about two-thirds of it was intentional. One example of unintended comedy comes when one of the professors shoots at a dog attacking an innocent bystander, and he accidentally shoots the guy instead of the dog, killing him. An example of intended comedy is when the mayor has a long-winded telephone conversation with the governor, who is clearly a hippy, and the mayor dances around the issue of the attacking dogs, then his wife gets so fed up she takes the phone and tells the governor how it really is, then the mayor takes the phone back and downplays her comments. It’s fairly absurd, and like several earlier scenes, goes on for too long. Even though Dogs has a few scenes like that, the pacing overall isn’t too bad, and it clocks in at the perfect ninety minute mark without overstaying its welcome or failing to deliver what the premise promised.

Dogs doesn’t live up to its full potential, but it’s also not as bad as it could have been. There aren’t enough dog attacks in the first half, and it’s lacking in certain departments like music and direction, but still has enough going for it to make it appeal to fans of the killer animal sub-genre. You know what would be great? If Blumhouse did a modern remake of Dogs, and the music for the credits was “Doginabag” by The Fratellis. Better yet: opening credits has “Doginabag” and end credits has “Dogtown” by The Fratellis also! Let’s make it happen, Mr. Blum!