The Plague Dogs
(1982)
Director: Martin Rosen
Voice Cast: John Hurt, Christopher Benjamin, James Bolam
I've said it
a number of times before on this web site, but I think it's worth
mentioning again - this universe of ours that we live in has a lot of
features that are fascinating to observe and think about. Many of these
things are what Mother Nature has come up with on her own, such as the
fact that life, specifically xenophyophores, have been found at the
bottom of the almost seven mile deep Mariana Trench, the deepest part
of Earth's oceans. But there are also a lot of interesting sights to
consider that Mother Nature didn't have a hand in making. I am talking
about what we, mankind, have managed to achieve. If you look over the
past several thousand years, you will see that mankind has managed to
make an incredible amount of achievements, ranging from Marcel Proust
writing the seven volume long novel Remembrance Of Things Past
to England and France building the over thirty mile long Chunnel that
connects the two countries. But when you take a closer look at all
these achievements that mankind has managed to make, many of them have
the uncomfortable fact that some sort of big price was paid either
while the achievement was being made, or afterwards. I've mentioned in
an earlier review what the Industrial Revolution made happen, but I'll
mention it again if you didn't read the particular review where I
mentioned it. As you probably know, when machines such as the power
loom were invented, it resulted in goods that could be made quickly and
cheaply. However, this meant that many workers who had previously been
making these goods by hand were out of work, which resulted in the
violent anti-technology Luddite movement.
Of course, it could be argued that advanced technology
has in the end created a number of new jobs, so the example that I just
mentioned may not be a very good one. So I will choose some other
examples. One such example can be found in my country, with the
railroad built in the latter half of the nineteenth century that
connected Canada from coast to coast. In my history classes that I took
when I was younger, I read that while the railroad was a great
achievement at the time that helped to unify Canada, terrible prices
were paid to build it, such as the abuse of Chinese immigrants who
contributed to its construction. Then there are achievements that have
been made in the scientific field, including (but not limited to)
medicine. Ethics today may prevent experiments on humans like what Nazi
doctor Joseph Mengele did on concentration camp prisoners during World
War Two (as it turned out, the scientific community after the war
pretty much dismissed all the medical data Mengele and his associates
came up with for various reasons.) What's more accepted nowadays is to
use animals as test subjects. Since animals are not humans, it seems
"okay" to use them as test subjects, and we have certainly made some
great medical achievements with using animals in tests. But every so
often, I hear about some kind of experiment with animals that doesn't
sit well with me. For example, I remember when I was a child reading
somewhere about an experiment done with a chimpanzee. The experiment
got the chimpanzee hooked on cocaine, and the chimpanzee got so
addicted to the drug that it would press a button in its cage hundreds
of times because the chimpanzee knew that pressing the button all those
times would deposit another dose of cocaine in its cage.
Although I don't own any pets, when I do come across an
animal, I often like to look into its eyes. When I do this, I often see
in its eyes sign of some sort of soul. I see that while the animal may
not have the intelligence and reason found in a human, it all the same
is a living and breathing creature
that has wants and feelings. With
this in mind, I am kind of conflicted about scientists using animals as
experiments. On one hand, I am grateful for the scientific experiments
that have helped mankind to live longer and healthier. On the other
hand, I certainly wouldn't want to be experimented on myself, so I
sympathize with animals that go through pain in these experiments. When
I learned about the animated movie The Plague Dogs,
I sensed that it wouldn't be a balanced look at the subject of animal
experimentation. But sometimes one-sided looks at controversial
material can be interesting, and I was willing to consider what the
movie had to say. In the opening of the movie, we are introduced to the
two main characters - not humans, but dogs. The dogs are named Snitter
(voiced by John Hurt, Alien) and Rowf
(voiced by Christopher Benjamin, Ring Of Bright Water),
and
they are two dogs stuck in the confines of a laboratory somewhere in
the English countryside, where they have been put through gruelling and
cruel experiments for an extended period of time. One night while the
laboratory's scientists are away, Snitter and Rowf see an opportunity
to escape, and they leap at the chance. They do end up escaping and
flee into the countryside, but not before making a lot of mess in the
laboratory. When the scientists find out
about the dogs' escape and the damage they made, they eventually think
that the dogs may have been infected by the bubonic plague,
and set out to immediately capture and destroy the two possibly
diseased dogs. Snitter and Rowf not only have that problem on their
hands, but also have to figure out how to survive in the English
countryside away from man.
The
Plague Dogs was based on a novel by Richard Adams, the author of
the classic novel Watership
Down. That novel had been turned into an animated movie four
years before The
Plague Dogs, and by the same filmmakers. If you are familiar
with the movie Watership
Down (or even just the novel), most likely you have guessed that
The
Plague Dogs
is not a typical "fun" or family friendly animated movie, and you would
be right. (Warning: Spoilers ahead.) The very first scene of the movie
shows Rowf stuck swimming in a laboratory water tank until he is so
exhausted that he drowns, and moments later is resuscitated by the
scientists. When Snitter is introduced, we see that he has had brain
surgery that makes him hallucinate, and he can't shake the memory of
seeing the master he had in the past hit and killed by a car. After
Snitter and Rowf barely dodge being incinerated during their escape,
they are forced to hunt sheep in the countryside for food, and we get
to see the blood-soaked sheep. Later, Snitter accidentally causes a
human to have his face blown off by a shotgun. And when a human hunting
the two dogs falls to his death from a cliff, Snitter and Rowf eat the
corpse because they are starving. (At least offscreen - the edited
American version of the movie reportedly had removed, among other
things, a shot of the eaten human corpse.) As you can see from what I
just described, The
Plague Dogs
is definitely not for younger kids. I'm sure that there will be some
older viewers who also may be disturbed and upset by the many bleak
things showcased throughout. But I think even they would admit that the
dark mater is not shown in an exploitive manner. There is honesty to
its presentation, showing that life is not always fair or constantly
sunshine and roses for anything living, animal or human. In fact, I
think it will probably make viewers think a lot during and afterwards,
to get them wondering what they may do to improve this world of ours.
Besides the movie being honest about life - refreshing
in an age of constant happy endings in movies - I think another reason
why The Plague
Dogs
is compelling because of its depiction of its protagonists. For
starters, the two dogs are given the power of speech, which they use
among themselves and other animals they encounter along their journey.
Now, I admit that this often used device is not perfect. Whenever I see
this device used in a movie, it always gets me to wonder, "If these
animals can communicate with each other with such rich language, then
why aren't they smart enough to expertly communicate with or completely
understand humans?" But director Martin Rosen (who also wrote the
screenplay and acted as a producer), does give Snitter and Rowf some
personality that explains why they are not doing this. Rowf, for
instance, is shown to have a side that doesn't understand his
situation. After being drowned and revived multiple times by the
scientists, he wonders as he recovers, "Why do they do it? I'm not a
bad dog." And when the two dogs subsequently escape and are immediately
struck by the immense countryside, Snitter can't understand what
happened to all the roads and houses he was familiar with when in the
past he lived in a town with a human master. Such touches as those make
it easy to understand why the two dogs are not super smart - they are
more realistic animals. But all the same, they feel and think, and they
are completely sympathetic. They also have interesting personalities.
Rowf is shown to be extremely cynical, so much so that he doesn't seem
to want to make many decisions, maybe in the fear he might make things
worse. Snitter is more optimistic, at least at first, and takes charge
more often than not in seemingly the aim that he and Rowf have to do something
to improve their situation... though as time goes on, his attitude is
severely put to the test many times, so much so that even he might lose
hope.
The only other character in The Plague Dogs
that is significantly fleshed out is a fox known only as "The Tod"
(voiced by James Bolam of O Lucky Man!)
that the two dogs encounter and make a somewhat uneasy alliance with. I
did find this character a little hard to understand at times due to
Bolam giving the fox a very thick accent, as well at the script giving
the character some unexplained actions, like why he eventually rejoins
the dogs after splitting with them at one point. There are additional
weaknesses in other parts of the script as well. The long middle
portion of the movie comes across more or less as a series of
vignettes. Although there is always the thread of the dogs trying to
survive, it often doesn't seem all that strong; something with more of
a large goal attached to it throughout would have been better, if you
ask me. Still, all the vignettes are interesting, and as I illustrated
in the previous paragraph, the two dogs are strong enough characters
that you will be on their side rooting them on as they struggle to
survive from start to finish. Also, the weaker portions of The
Plague Dogs
are also compensated by the movie's visual presentation. As I said
earlier, the movie is animated, and it looks great by early 1980s
standards - even also by today's standards. The animation is not at the
ultra "smooth" level of decades past, and some of the background art is
lacking sufficient detail. But the feeling is all the same
professional, giving this world a more realistic feeling than you
usually get in animated movies. There are also some very impressive
touches throughout, from the hundreds of moving bubbles in creeks to
overhead shots of Snitter and Rowf moving zigzag through forests, with
the camera following them at length. People who have an interest in
animation will definitely get a lot out of The Plague Dogs,
though I think even they will agree that this is not a "fun" movie by
any means. But if you are tired of animated movies filled wall to wall
with slapstick and shouting, and can accept something more quiet,
thoughtful, and cynical in nature, then you'll probably find this an
interesting change of pace.
(Posted November 20, 2020)
Check for availability on Amazon (DVD)
-
-
Check
for availability on Amazon (Blu-Ray)
-
-
Check for availability on Amazon (Amazon Prime Video)
-
-
Check for availability of the original Richard
Adams novel
See also: Barefoot Gen, Once Upon A Girl, When
The Wind Blows
|