Commentary &Independent Animation 16 Oct 2010 07:40 am
Plague Dogs
- I’ve been watching some older animated features lately. Plague Dogs, I thought, deserved another chance, so I rented the DVD. I was right. The film is a very odd one.
Surprisingly, despite the depressing subject, I found myself unattached to the story’s emotions. I would guess it has to do with the direction of he work.
The film starts with one of our two lead characters
in deep trouble in the laboratory.
The story is essentially the story of two dogs who escape a laboratory that experiments on animals, and they make their way across the British countryside while teams of people search for them. One of the dogs has been inflicted with a plague bacteria and could spread the disease outside of the lab.
The story is told through a sort-of narration done in a very clever way. Disconnected human voices talking about the situation are used as voice over. We don’t often see who’s talking but we hear their voices. There are times where the voices start and we join the speakers in their conversations. The two dogs communicate with each other and a fox, who helps them in their escape.
The dogs escape and travel the back roads in the mountains.
The animation throughout is just about serivceable. No scenes really shine even though there are a couple of standout names in the credits – including Brad Bird, Tony Guy and Retta Scott – as animators.
The film was a follow-up project for producer/director, Martin Rosen. He was the original producer of Watership Down, and his ego allowed him to think he could direct that film better than John Hubley, who was fired within the first sixth months.
There’s the constant play between the travelling dogs
and the humans who talk about them roaming the countryside.
It’s no surprise that Plague Dogs includes no poetic scenes such as the introduction and the “Bright Eyes” sequences of Watership Down. It’s all down and heavy, done with a lack of grace. Yet, despite this there are several very clever devices for keeping the story moving forward. It would have been nice to see what better animation and a better director might have brought to it.
However, the film’s tough subject matter was sure to bring back poor business, and there’s no surprise in its low grosses at the box office. However, as I’ve said, the film deserves another look.
The film gasps for air with the heavy approach, though it deserves
praise for trying to be different and take animation seriously.
on 16 Oct 2010 at 8:41 am 1.richard o'connor said …
I appreciate the non-anthropomorphic approach to animals. It may not be great, but its preferable to me than turning them into wise guys in dog suits.
Even so compare to Ed Smith or Paul Fierlinger’s canines and you can something lacking in Plague Dogs.
Screen this with When The Wind Blows for the most depressing double feature animation can offer. The cinematic reponse to Thatcherism.
on 16 Oct 2010 at 10:00 am 2.Pierre Fontaine said …
I hadn’t even realized that Plague Dogs ever saw release. I remember reading about it as being in prodution as a followup to Watership Down but that production had actually stopped at one point. Apparently, the film was finished but clearly it had a limited release. Both films were based on novels written by Richard Adams.
Your comments about Plaque Dogs resonate with my recollection of Watership Down as well. There was an emotional distance to the characters though as you mentioned, there were some stand-out sequences that were beautifully realized, likely handled by John Hubley before his removal from the project.
Ultimately, I really liked the adult story line and the handling of the rabbit’s mythology and culture in Watership Down. My hopes were high that with Plague Dogs feature animation would begin a trend to deal with more adult emotions and relationships. Sadly, that was not to be the case.
Pierre
on 16 Oct 2010 at 10:57 am 3.Elliot Cowan said …
You know, I watched this myself only very recently.
Although it’s not a very engaging film, there are things to admire in it.
I liked the end a lot.
I wonder if someone will remake it one day…
on 16 Oct 2010 at 12:22 pm 4.Steven Hartley said …
I’ve heard of the film, it was the same director of Watership Down (Martin Rosen) – but looking at it makes me not want to watch the film because I just find these stories of rabbits or dogs being killed sad and depressing and I don’t like these – I’m a real dog person and just thinking about dogs suffering makes me sad.
Although, I’m afraid that’s just life.
on 16 Oct 2010 at 8:10 pm 5.The Gee said …
I have heard of it and if it is a downer then I probably won’t seek it out. Though I would watch it if it aired sometime.
I don’t think it should be remade. Books that aren’t so great are not re-written. This movie, like any film, should just be left alone unless the director wishes to re-edit/cut it. That probably isn’t too likely given it is a animated feature. Not to be glib, but let sleeping dogs lie.
As for Watership Down, am I wrong in remembering that CBS aired it during the early 80s? I’ve seen it and saw it when I was young. That venue–broadcast TV– was likely the only place where I could have seen it back then.
For what it is worth, I liked it. I was awestruck by it. And, yet, I haven’t seen it since.
on 18 Oct 2010 at 9:54 pm 6.Michael J. Ruocco said …
I’ve seen the film twice (the last being fairly recently), and I have to say both viewings were very somber, depressing experiences. The film is a little too serious and emotionally draining for my tastes. Watership Down is definitely the better watch out of the two.
But I do admire some of the production work though. The animators handled the animals pretty well, and the background design is pretty solid. It’s great from an artistic standpoint, but the subject matter definitely drags the rest of it down.
I suggest checking it out at least once just to see it for yourself, but I don’t think it warrants multiple viewings (unless you like getting depressed).
As for When the Wind Blows, Howard Beckerman showed that in our History of Animation class a few years back. 95% percent of us could barely get through the rest of the day afterwards.