It's obvious that the dog is completely CGI. I personally would have liked to see a real dog in some of the scenes in the trailer.
Will the film be diminished by this CGI creation? I mean the film is not Paddington (obvious CGI character that works), it's a semi-realistic mountain story.
It's beyond obvious - it's cartoonish. They may as well have made him Scooby Doo. He mugs for the camera several times in the trailer alone. Goddamn.
I'm so upset by this because this movie is based on one of favorite books as a kid.
I, too, would like to have seen real dogs used but I guess it's just too hard nowadays to train real dogs and do take after take after take to get them to do what you want when CGI will work right every time... it just looks awful.
They used real dogs (with a bit of CGI enhancement) for Lady and the Tramp, so it can be done. Hell, Lady herself came from an animal shelter.
I wouldn't let it run the movie for you though.
It has no relevance, whether the whole film is animated, or just partially, what matters is how emotional it makes me, and that's what I care about. Their imagination and my spirited state of being can make this a wonderful film for me, I'll do my best to make it so for myself. Chris Sanders is a great talent, and a favorite filmmaker, and him being a pisces, it can be a wild ride indeed, perfect story for him to film.
shareI like your attitude. I also still want to see the movie and think the trailer has a lot to like in it.
But since you're talking emotion, I would always get more emotional with a real dog than with a CGI creation.
The CGI dog is very disappointing. They really should've gone with White Fang route and used a real dog. Or at least done the Lady and the Tramp thing and used real dogs with subtle CGI enhancements when necessary.
Will the film be diminished by this? Yes. Does that mean the film is a write off, though? No. I still think it looks good. I am a sucker for old fashioned adventure stories like this and still want to see the film. Harrison is always worthwhile in any case.
I just saw the trailer and I'm not thrilled with the CGI either. I know that it's easier than working with real animals, but it really just takes something away for me. I don't want to knock it until I see the finished product, but as of this moment I'm disappointed.
shareCGI animals and airplanes look like toys. They belong in video games and cartoons. But this way they won't have to put up with PETA making idiotic accusations.
shareCGI dog: Thumbs down. I'm not the least bit interested.
shareAn actual line from the trailer:
"I never saw him believe in anything as much as he believes in you."
...am...not...sure...if we are being trolled by the film makers or not.
Anyway, the goofy and obvious cartoon expressions in the trailer turned me off. I'm kinda surprised Harrison Ford signed on for this. Seems beneath him.
I don't understand why they used a St. Bernard. The dog in the original story was a sled dog of some sort, like a husky or Alaskan Malamute.
shareWait... Buck is portrayed in this adaptation by a CGI St. Bernard??
So much wrong with that sentence... one to avoid I think, I don't even want to watch the trailer now.
They have adapted the book before into movies. You could try watching one of those :).
shareThe only one I have seen is the 1935 movie with Clark Gable. An enjoyable film, but - to say the least - a loose adaptation of the book.
shareI could swear I saw some more recent ones available to watch.
Here's a list of movie adaptations:
https://www.imdb.com/find?q=CALL%20OF%20%20the%20wild&ref_=nv_sr_srsg_9
Thanks!
There’s also a ‘70s version with Charlton Heston which rings a bell. More titles show up if you omit ‘The’ from your search, which doesn’t seem very intuitive!
Um no. This is actually the first movie adaptation to get Buck's breed correct: a St. Bernard–Scotch Collie mix.
I was confused at first too, as even some of the book covers I saw growing up showed more of a Husky type dog. But the dog in this movie actually matches the description in the book.