In Breaking with Original Novel, “Call of the Wild” Creates Lackluster Hero

(Photo Credit: 20th Century Studios)

By Melissa Tejada

"Call of the Wild" is a family-friendly remake of Jack London's 1903 novel that might be too friendly for its own good. Released on Feb. 21 and starring Harrison Ford as John Thornton, the film perfectly displays graphic scenes of the violence that dogs are subjected to without actual dogs being harmed, thanks to Director Chris Sanders’s clever use of CGI technology. Those who prefer action films may not be completely attracted to the plot because all action-packed scenes are usually cheesier than they are exciting. Still, some moments have an urgent, emotional quality that leaves viewers on the edge of their seats.

With a price tag of $150 million, the film is set in the 1890's Klondike Gold Rush. The canine protagonist, Buck, who was previously living lavishly, is now transported from his California home to businessmen who use him for financial gain in Yukon, Alaska. As a newcomer, he quickly gains the trust of the other dogs in his new pack. The leader of the pack, a jealous, temperamental husky named Spitz, becomes threatened by Buck’s ability to gain the other dogs’ trust, and a confrontation between the two leads Buck to become the pack leader, as Spitz runs off into the woods in defeat.

Buck's luck comes to an end when the abuse returns, and he is transferred into the hands of Hal (Dan Stevens) and his sister, Mercedes (Karen Gillan). However, John quickly saves Buck from a beating by Hal and eventually becomes his new owner, while Buck turns into a version of John’s Alcoholics Anonymous sponsor.  

Sanders does an excellent job in showing the abuse off-screen, instead of direct and graphic scenes, but Hal's abusive manner is fearful enough for many audiences, especially children.

Buck also encounters a spiritual guide in the form of a wolf with captivating eyes that saves his life multiple times, giving the movie a new level of spirituality. This character, symbolic of his previous ancestors, represents Buck’s call of the wild. It seems that every step further in his journey, even in following Thornton to the gold mines, he is one step closer to the wilderness.

Harrison Ford and his CGI co-star in “Call of the Wild”. (Photo Credit: 20th Century Studios)

Throughout the film, Buck's big brown eyes, intelligent facial expressions and towering demeanor make him lovable and endearing.

"The theme that stood out to me was kindness. Buck begins as a terrifically reckless dog who is tricked into a wagon trap to be sold as a sled dog, while spending his time out after ruining his owner's party," said Sadly Wiser, who attended the film with her grandson in Westchester County at the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema.

However, the film falters in making a distinct break from realism in its erasure of indigenous people. The movie is set in the Alaskan Yukon, but the only indigenous character is Françoise. Originally portrayed in the novel as a man, Françoise is played by actress Cara Gee in the film. This gender-switched character is vital in Buck's character development.

There is a possibility that Sanders left out the Yeehats, the indigenous people from the 1904 novel, in order to keep Buck in a family-friendly lens. In the original novel, Buck's primitive nature is shown when upon finding half-starved dogs as well as their Yeehat owners attacking the camp, he searches them out and kills many by biting into their throats.

Taking away a scene with so much action from a movie that has been unusually passive also does not seem in the best interest of the film, but it would not fit the family-friendly lens. Buck’s attack in the novel, as well as losing so many people close to him, seem to be his final farewell to the life of domestication in the novel, which would not bode well with viewers.

Given these qualities, it’s no surprise that this movie oozes ownership by the Walt Disney Corporation. What is also not shocking is how this movie flopped because it was not one of the more requested films in the book to film categories, making only $79.8 million at the box office, despite its use of expensive technologies such as CGI. It is weakened by how greatly it differs from the original novel, although its creators may have wanted to eliminate the novel’s many disturbing aspects.

Sander’s amazing efforts to filter out animal abuse and create an excess of emotional connections in order to deliver a more family-friendly plot did not satisfy the audience's craving for more action. I give it only three out of five stars, especially if viewed by those who have read the book.