Dogs (1976)

We're used to movies having attack of the killer whatever. I guess at this time dogs was a pretty original idea. That's basically the premise and all you need to know. I really hated how so much of this was filmed in the dark. I was wondering if this was because they didn't have to budget to depict a lot of the gore. The early parts of the movie talk about pheromones and exoskeletons. Does this have anything to do with the movie? Nope! In fact, the entire reason the dogs are killing people is never explained at all! The movie ends by showing a cat and there WAS in fact going to be a sequel about killer cats! Fortunately, this did poorly at the box office so a sequel was never made. That would have been even goofier. *1/2

Dogs ain't a half bad made flick, about a potpourri of dogs, who meet up and go on a killing spree, killing anything animal or human. What is doing it? That's the million dollar question. It leads us to question our our species, as if becoming part of a gang, where we become brainwashed, and commit things we normally wouldn't do, if graduating to murder. But in this open ended, and not too optimistic film, that's pretty gruesome, near it's finale, it's M rating pushing it, we don't find out. Bugger. David McCallum lends a fine performance as the smart hunky professor of Scientology, the real smartie, determined to get to the bottom of the killings, those cattle mutilations early on, aren't for sheep lovers. The violence in Dogs in pretty raw and frank. A younger Linda Gray co-stars before her Dallas days, as Wyner's performance as the new Scientist was strong, and actually likable in a sense. Suspense runs high, some of it electric near the end, and is well executed, the opening music score with our favorite pooches in slo mo, all banding together, my favorite part. They're are some unintentionally funny moments, whether dialogue or acting, but they made 70's movies what they were. This is a well made film, badly dated "Yes", but bad, "No". Warning: Are some scenes are dog murder.

Here we have a so-so entry into the popular "nature strikes back" genre of the 1970s, in which general ineptitude, substandard attack scenes, some unintentional hilarity, sincere but bland acting, and canine aggressors that never come across as *that* scary combine to make a passable B level thriller. TV veteran Burt Brinckerhoff fails to ever generate very much tension, but it's still basically amusing to see the damage that these dogs do. They sure create a fair amount of gore before this is over. There's some very mild titillation: a pre- 'Dallas' Linda Gray gets into the shower, and is attacked, in yet another nod to "Psycho". The music, by Alan Oldfield, has that very 70s feel to it, and isn't always effective.In addition to Ms. Gray, a couple of familiar faces turn up in this tale of ordinary domesticated dogs forming a pack and turning savage in a sleepy college community. Could it have something to do with secret government experiments involving an accelerator? Who knows. What it amounts to is a big problem for people such as beer guzzling biology professor Harlan Thompson (played by David McCallum of 'The Man from U.N.C.L.E.' fame) and his new associate Michael Fitzgerald (George Wyner of "Spaceballs"). In an obvious nod to "Jaws", they have a tough time convincing their boss of the danger until it's too late.If one really wants to see mans' best friend kick some human ass, the movie "The Pack" from the following year is technically the better effort. But "Dogs" isn't without its delights, such as the aforementioned shower attack scene and the climactic action on the campus when the dogs crash through glass. There are more laughs than thrills to be had here, but that should count for something. McCallum is an underwhelming hero; you're not likely to care whether or not he makes it. And Wyner doesn't fare much better. Also among the cast are Eric Server ('B.J. and the Bear'), Sterling Swanson ('Don't Be Afraid of the Dark'), Russ Grieve (Big Bob Carter in Wes Cravens' "The Hills Have Eyes"), and future producer Lance Hool ("10 to Midnight").When all is said and done, "Dogs" doesn't add up to much, but it's worth it just for that priceless final shot that sets up a sequel that never got made.Five out of 10.

I have a giant weakness for those typical "animals-on-a-rampage movies", especially if they were released in the 70's and even more so when the title simply exists of the animal species, like "Grizzly", "The Bees", "Shark!" or – like in this case - "Dogs". That's like saying: this is the type of animal we're dealing with here and you already know it's serious even without adding juicy prefixes like "Wild", "Ravenous" or "Savage". This unjustly obscure and neglected mid-70's gem deserves a little more attention from genre fanatics, if it were only for its absurdly grotesque plot and – especially – for its exhilarating climax. There are numerous creature-features with dogs out there, most are bad ("Mongrel", "Play Dead", "Dogs of Hell") and some are good ("White Dog", "The Pack"), but one thing they all have in common is that they simply featured dogs that were either physically abused or trained to be killers. The fun part about "Dogs" is that the animals' murderous behavior is a result of genetic experiments and therefore mankind's own damn fault! The events take place on a quite and remote university campus, where people's loyal and harmless dogs suddenly turn into aggressive animals and form deadly packs at night. A duo of professors discovers that the government secretly experiments with dogs in the school's laboratory. Based on the group spirit and communication skills of ants through the pheromone chemical, the experiments are intended to accomplish a similar reaction between dogs so that they can be used as effective weapons. The tests are a little too successful, as all dogs in the area are affected and go on a relentless killing spree. "Dogs" starts off slow and boring with too much wannabe intellectual gibberish nobody really cares about and overly extended character drawings of protagonists nobody is really interested in. I began to worry even more when the first couple of dog-attacks were shot in the dark and you could only a bit of groaning and barking. Yet, just when you start to accept the fact "Dogs" is nothing more than a forgettable and lackluster low-budgeter, the script throws all tediousness overboard and goes for sheer entertainment. The last half hour is good cheesy fun with an enormous death toll, grainy make-up effects and unintentionally hilarious situations. One of the professors tries to rescue his love interest while the other desperately attempts to evacuate the campus. Eventually the dogs break into the library – courtesy of the fat nerd who found it necessary to separate from the group in search for snacks – and massacre the entire campus! The climatic bloodbath, together with the tacky freeze-frame ending, made "Dogs" a viewing experience I personally can't be too harsh on. And then I haven't even mentioned Linda Grey shower-sequence! Seek out this bad puppy (pun intended)