The Call Of The Wild: Not Enough of A Main Character to Drive a Movie

The Call Of The Wild was based on a book of the same name written in 1905. It stars a dog named buck and an outdoorsman played by Harrison Ford. The book is a short adventure novel of about 223 pages. So does is have enough to make a two hour movie when the main character is a dog?

I’ve had issues with movies about dogs because there is very little plot because a dog is involved. I feel the writers aren’t trying as hard because they think since people love dogs they won’t care about the plot. This book has been adapted many times before but the problem is the main character is a dog doing dog things. Harrison Ford’s character takes a backseat to Buck which isn’t good because the main character should be relatable. If Buck could talk or if the movie was animated it would be better. Plus Harrison Ford is sleepwalking through this performance.

The reason animated movie characters and motion capture characters are so effective and relatable is because a human is doing the performance and you can see the heart and soul the actor is putting in it. When the main character doesn’t have any of that it’s ineffective.

Kids will have trouble paying attention especially because about half the movie doesn’t have dialogue. For adults there just isn’t enough to drive the movie. Since Buck isn’t even a real dog the audience doesn’t feel a connection. Even if they had trained real dogs it would have been more effective. Since the movie takes place during the gold rush there’s some side plot about a guy who knew buck and was also after Harrison Ford’s gold location. But it feels very out of left field. The Call Of The Wild could have been better if they had a more relatable main character and a more developed story but the writers took the easy way out and it cost them. 🍔