Film:Has Anybody Seen My Gal? Director: Douglas Sirk Performers: Charles Coburn, Piper Laurie, Rock Hudson, Gigi Perreau Breeds featured: Soft-coated Terrier mix, French Poodle (standard) Production information: Universal Studios, 1952 (USA)
The Blaisdell family is bestowed a small fortune of $100,000 by a mysterious benefactor who has disguised himself as a boarder in their home. This is all part of a wacky plot by millionaire Samuel Fulton to test the mettle of the family to whom he intends to bequeath his fortune. Unfortunately, the money seems to change this formerly humble family for the worse. Mrs. Blaisdell gets the notion that wealth means superiority, and so all traces of their past life, including their “purebred mongrel” Penny, needs to be discarded.
Roberta Blaisdell: Oh Penny, we’re rich! We’re rich! From now on you’re going to eat nothing but steak. Mom: He will not. You’re going to get rid of that mongrel. We’re going to get two pedigreed French poodles. Roberta: But I can’t speak French. I don’t want French poodles. I don’t like French poodles. Mom: Nonsense, Roberta, all the best people have French poodles. Roberta: But I want Penny!!! *bursts out of the room in tears*
They do get the canine upgrade — two staid, boring-looking standard poodles named Mimi and Fifi. Luckily, Penny the mutt manages to find a home with the mysterious boarder, who is now renting elsewhere as he continues to observe the Blaisdell family. This allows Roberta, the youngest daughter, to continue visiting her beloved pet as she maintains her friendship with the eccentric old man who started this all.
It’s a pretty straightforward use of dog as class symbol and domestic value. Is your social worth measured by the unruly, unkempt, unrestrained mongrel or the high-priced, high maintenance purebred dogs you keep in your home? In the end, however, the dogs are more attached to a lifestyle than the family, since the new poodles are left behind when the Blaisdell family fortunes change again. And though we presume that they get Penny back just as everything else returns to normal, we’re never actually shown what happens to any of the dogs… In short, they weren’t important enough characters to be included in the film’s resolution.
Maybe the film should’ve been titled Has Anybody Seen My dog?
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:Barren Lives (Vidas Secas) Director: Nelson Pereira dos Santos Performers: Baleia, Átila Iório, Orlando Macedo, Maria Ribeiro, Jofre Soares Breed featured: Brazilian native dog Production Information: Luiz Carlos Barreto Produções Cinematográficas/Sino Filmes, 1963 (Brazil)
As described by the title, this is an arid, bleakly rendered film full of desperation and deprivation. One beautiful little dog, Baleia, provides much needed glimpses of hope throughout the film. She is a loved family member — traveling with, sleeping amongst, hunting for and working alongside her migrant family. But in the end, even she is unable to survive the harsh conditions of poverty…
I have no idea what breed she is… or what one might call a Brazilian native dog. She looks like a small Podenco type to me, and even a bit Basenji-like at times, with the lean figure, high tuck, long skinny muzzle and exaggerated, alert ears of the sighthound/pariah dog look that I favor. According to an accompanying short film on the DVD extras, she was known as “Piaba” and spotted at a local market by the film crew. They bought her off a vendor who later admitted that he didn’t even own the dog — she had just been a happy lingerer until her life was forever changed by starring in this film.
Warning: Spoilers in slideshow and text beneath the cut! Continue reading »
Film:Just Around the Corner Director: Irving Cummings Performers: Shirley Temple, Joan Davis, Bert Lahr, Bill Robinson Breeds featured: Afghan Hounds, Borzoi, Poodles (standard and toy), Pekingese, Bedlington Terrier (brief), Greyhound (brief), Wire Fox Terrier (brief), Old English Sheepdog (brief) Production Information: 20th Century Fox, 1938 (USA)
In Just Around the Corner, Shirley Temple assists the maintenance crew at a posh Manhattan apartment where the children’s playroom consists of a grand piano, ping-pong, and card tables, and the basement garage level houses a doggy grooming and boarding center. Clients include a rowdy pair of Afghan Hounds, Borzoi, Pekingese, Bedlington Terrier, and a toy poodle that walks on its front paws.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The DVD version I saw has options to watch in black and white or in a colorized restoration, which I thought was nicely done for the most part. Some of the yellows, golds, and fawn colors look off to me, but somehow I associate these softened hues with yesteryear, so it was all appropriate to my eyes.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:Badlands Director: Terrence Malick Performers: Martin Sheen, Sissy Spacek, Warren Oates Breeds featured: Great Dane or Catahoula, German Shepherd, Collie (warning: pictured dead) Production information: Warner Brothers, 1973 (USA)
In Malick’s version of the Starkweather-Fugate murders, the beautiful dog that occupies the opening shot becomes the first victim of love. Seems like the message is that you can’t have love without sacrifice.
Warning: the slideshow after the cut includes still images of a dead dog (not the one pictured above). Continue reading »
Film:The Accidental Tourist Director: Lawrence Kasdan Performers: William Hurt, Kathleen Turner, Geena Davis, Bud (Edward the Dog) Breed featured: Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Wire Fox Terrier (briefly) Production Information: Warner Brothers, 1988 (USA).
The accolades piled upon this crummy film is indicative of just how bad the eighties were for Hollywood drama. I’m not going to bother to summarize it, because you can easily find that info online. Like the marriage between Macon (William Hurt) and Sarah Leary (Kathleen Turner), the film drags on much longer than it needed to. Stiff and slack-jawed performances by a lackluster cast left me feeling woefully underwhelmed. The film’s primary redeeming feature is the adorable Cardigan Welsh Corgi named Edward.
For a non-speaking role, Edward the Corgi is rather versatile, serving as a ballast for some characters, and propeller for others. He’s the most emotionally expressive character in the entire household, straightforward as only a dog can be about his joys, his fears, and his preferences. For Macon, he’s also a haunting reminder of his son, who was killed in a strong-arm robbery gone wrong. Despite his dog’s mounting behavioral issues, Macon just can’t abandon Edward, in part because of his crippling inability to either respond to his own personal tragedies or move on in the present. This dour, withered husk of a man seems an unlikely partner for Muriel Prichett (Geena Davis), a vet tech/animal trainer who inexplicably takes a shine to him and seizes the opportunity to insert herself into his life.
Muriel swoops into Macon’s life by teaching him to control his dog. This could have been a potent way to develop this odd couple’s relationship, but something’s lost in the execution. Instead of appearing skillful, Muriel comes across as a clumsy hack. Instead of revealing a more “nurturing” side that would counterbalance and give depth to her synthetic, flashy exterior, I find her domineering and insensitive, revealing her to be as blind to the dog’s not-so-subtle physical cues as Macon is emotionally passive.
Let’s consider the the initial encounter between Edward the Dog and Muriel. Macon has just informed her that his dog was rejected from his previous boarding place because he bit a caretaker there. So seeing a dog in obvious distress, anxious about being at the animal hospital, and actively trying to avoid eye contact, what does Muriel do?
She bends down and grabs the dog by the face. I’m assuming that even a rank amateur dog trainer, no matter what their background, would have known better than to start off that way with an unfamiliar dog, especially one that supposedly bites. However, Edward just pins his ears back and goes stiff and licks his lips, sparing all audiences the ugly truth. This seems to be his default posture in many of his scenes, from when he’s being lifted off his stubby little feet by choke chain pops (several yanks punctuated by pathetic whimpering added to the soundtrack for deliberate effect), to when he’s left loose and unattended on the sidewalk in an extended sit-stay — all while strangers pass and pet the miserable-looking pup.
Nowadays, if you know your dog has a history of biting and aggression, you’d be incredibly irresponsible to establish this scenario as an immediate training goal. Even if your dog was totally friendly, it’s kind of an odd risk to take… considering this is supposed to be downtown Baltimore!
Times sure have changed. I guess such scenes are a reminder that this was considered by general audiences to be an acceptable standard of training and dog socialization back in the 80s, no matter how implausible a scene it would seem to us now. What further irritates me about Muriel’s character is that her methods are ultimately excused because hey, she’s Geena Davis! Praise for her performance even includes an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress.
short clip from the film uploaded by YouTube user pershingavenue
What could be potentially damaging or even disastrous in real life is presented as awesome and “quirky” here. I find that problematic not because I’m afraid others will emulate her methods (nobody is going to watch this to learn how to train a dog), but because her methods are enfolded into a more complex construction of character that makes it okay to ignore how your dog feels in favor of what you want him to do. And in this film, that certainly has repercussions for how people treat other people.
I realize I’m probably reading this film anachronistically, looking for more “positive” training methods when such distinctions hadn’t even registered as a problem. Even now, these debates have yet to enter the mainstream, though I witness frequent skirmishes over training methods in my dog-centric circles. At any rate, since this is how Hollywood depicted dog trainers on screen, I wonder what was routine on the set!
To offset these more egregious training scenes, at least there are moments where Edward appears genuinely comfortable and at ease, a reminder of the tender domesticity that a dog can provide, especially in the absence of any other kind of familial warmth.
Edward adequately expresses all the charms of his breed, but a cute Corgi alone cannot redeem this movie. Happily, I tick this one off the list… so I won’t have to watch it (or listen to its awful soundtrack) ever again.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:I Was Born, But… [Otona no miru ehon - Umarete wa mita keredo 大人の見る絵本 生れてはみたけれど] Director: OZU Yasujiro 小津 安二郎 Performers: SAITO Tatsuo 斎藤達雄, AOKI Tomio 青木 富夫, SUGAWARA Hideo 菅原秀雄 Breed featured: Jack Russell Terrier Production information: Shochiku, 1932 (Japan)
Ozu riffs off The Little Rascals in this gentle satire on underdog life in suburban Tokyo, told through the misadventures of two brothers, Keiji and Ryoichi. They get quite the lesson in class stratification as they watch their father suck up to his boss, even toadying up to his son, Taro. In one climactic scene, the older brother declares, “I’m stronger than Taro and I get better grades. If I have to work for him when I grow up, I’m not going to school anymore!”
Well, Taro’s family may be wealthier, drive a nice car, and outrank their father at the office. But at least Keiji and Ryoichi have a dog to call their own.
Actually, their dog doesn’t do very much in this movie. He’s chained to his doghouse the entire time, and doesn’t spend any time roughhousing or really hanging out with the boys, in contrast to the pit bull mascot in Little Rascals. They feed him a raw sparrow’s eggs at one point in an attempt to make him stronger so he can fight the local bullies on their behalf. Instead, the dog gets sick, necessitating a visit from the local animal doctor.
I was intrigued by how refined the veterinarian appeared in his slicked back hair and sharp Western suit. His appearance gives the impression that this was an esteemed, modern, semi-urban profession, even if the figure of the household dog wasn’t quite fully integrated into the narrative imagination of pre-war Japanese cinema… at least not in this instance.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:Wendy and Lucy Director: Kelly Reichardt Performers: Michelle Williams, Wally Dalton, Will Oldham, Lucy the Dog Breed featured: Mixed breed/mutt Production information: Field Guide Films, 2008 (USA)
Wendy (Michelle Williams) has been driving across the country with her mutt, Lucy, when her car breaks down somewhere in small town Oregon. With just a few hundred dollars left to get to Alaska, Wendy makes a rash decision to steal a can of dog food. She is caught, and sent to jail as an example (“I’m not from around here sir, I can’t be an example!”) while Lucy is still tied up outside the grocery store. By the time Wendy returns later that day, her dog is gone.
What follows is a detour through the fringes of a dying town as Wendy struggles to find her dog in a place where nobody knows her and nobody really cares… except for an old parking lot security guard (Wally Dalton), who has little to offer but does his best to help anyway.
Even though Lucy the mutt is distressingly absent throughout most of the film, this is one of the best “dog movies” I’ve seen in a while. Despite the disproportionate number of “dog women” I know, I am hard pressed to name many films that give serious consideration to adult women and their canine companions. Yet, this intertwined relationship is evident in the very title — it’s about Wendy and Lucy, conjoined as an augmented identity. Each character has parity and significance and an equal chance at a good life — the question is who has the agency to pursue it on her own terms?
I can’t really say more without giving away the ending, which I don’t like to do for films that aren’t difficult to come by, and which I recommend. For such a quiet, subdued film, I was kept enthralled by my affinity for films about solitary travelers, young adults pushed to personal thresholds, and of course, dogs. And Michelle Williams. This actress consistently impresses me. Something about her subtle eyebrows and chilling, exasperated countenance belies a weariness and depth of experience that far exceeds her slight stature. Her performance carries the film more than adequately.
In short: a beautiful film that will touch anyone who knows that they need to have their dog(s) in their life, yet lacks the words to justify it all the time.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:Stowaway Director: William A. Seiter Performers: Shirley Temple, Robert Young, Alice Faye Breed(s) featured: Pekingese, terrier mix? Production information: 20th Century Fox, 1936 (USA)
When “bandits” invade Sanchow, China, the orphan Barbara — known to her Chinese familiars as Ching-Ching (and played by Shirley Temple) — flees with her dog to Shanghai. She is abandoned there, but luckily she soon befriends a rich playboy, Tommy Randall (Robert Young). Ching-ching accidentally stows onto his luxury cruiser as he sails around the Orient. While hiding from authorities, she also receives help from Susan (Alice Faye). Tommy, a seemingly incurable bachelor, and Susan, previously engaged to a stuffy shipping magnate with mommy issues, are both charmed by the orphaned waif. They come to her rescue by arranging a sham marriage in order to legally adopt her and give her safe passage to the United States. You’d think that would be the end of the story, leading to happily ever after, but some more antics and musical sequences are to be had before Ching-Ching shows the couple how truly in love they are.
Sadly, Ching-Ching’s dog Mr. Woo does not consistently accompany her throughout the story, but his presence certainly adds to her charm. He’s a nice, soft puppy who melts quite agreeably into her arms.
The puppy who plays Mr. Woo doesn’t appear to be a Pekingese (as erroneously reported on several sites), but some kind of terrier mix (looks like a Cairn puppy to me?). J.C. Suares, who compiled Hollywood Dogs (San Francisco: Collins Publishers, 1993) includes a very clear promotional photo of Shirley Temple and Mr. Woo, identifying him as a “curly-topped, tiny mutt” (p. 19) — a visual echo of the starlet herself.
With his discernible snout, pricked ears, normally-proportioned legs and stub of a tail, the dog that plays Mr. Woo is definitely not the Pekingese that was pictured with Shirley Temple in another 1936 photo shoot.
Shirley Temple and Ching-Ching in Palm Springs, California, dated 10 December 1936. Photographer uncredited.
Yet there seems to be a viral bit of misinformation spread all over the Internet that Temple’s long-time affection for Pekes began with the adoption of the dog that played Mr. Woo, whom she renamed Ching-Ching after her own character.
If Temple’s first Pekingese came from Stowaway, then it wasn’t the mutt that played Mr. Woo, but a nameless puppy in a cage that Ching-Ching (the character) spies in a Hong Kong market.
Nothing actually comes of this Pekingese in the plot, so we are never granted a really good shot. But it’s more likely that this was the pup that became Ching-Ching… I still have to dig around to find out what happened between Ching-Ching I (who appears to be black and white with a predominantly black head) and Ching-Ching II (red or gold with a dark mask?). The latter would take the screen with Temple a couple years later in Just Around the Corner (along with a whole nursery of hounds!).
At any rate, some kind of collective wishful thinking willed the dog star into Shirley Temple’s private home after the film’s final wrap. Sadly, the archives are mum about what actually happened to Mr. Woo, who he eventually belonged to, and whether or not he lived a nice life. In the meantime, historical accuracy be damned. The pretend Peke did his part to make this film rub oddly against the fabric of reality, generating a surreal charge that ran through and enlivened the entire film.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
The House of Two Bows keeps a running index of movies blurbed on the site, annotated by breed. If you’re interested in writing a guest blog for a dog film, contact for details.
Film:The Searchers Director: John Ford Performers: John Wayne, Jeffrey Hunter, Henry Brandon, Vera Miles, Natalie Wood Breed featured: Mutt/unknown mix Production information: Warner Brothers, 1956 (USA)
When Civil War veteran Ethan (John Wayne) blows onto his brother’s Texas ranch, a scruffy mutt joins in the welcoming crew. And just before Comanche Indians come to slaughter the family, rape the women and kidnap the youngest daughter Debbie, the dog does try — rather weakly — to protect the girl.
They called him Prince in the movie. He only appears in a few shots in the beginning, and is abandoned when Ethan and his 1/8th Cherokee adopted nephew Martin set off on their journey of vengeance. Somewhat interestingly, when they finally meet the Comanche chief that they’ve been tracking over the course of years, your hear the sound of numerous reservation dogs though you never actually see any. They’ve been deliberately incorporated into the audio track to set a certain dangerous and foreboding mood. But like the numerous Native Americans who were relegated to “background” players, the reservation dogs remain unseen, uncredited, and devoid of personality or significance.
The dogs of The Searchers are barely worth mentioning, so I’ll just cut this short. Despite some beautiful cinematography, gorgeous landscapes, and striking visual compositions that just beg to be closely analyzed — elements which no doubt contributed to the film’s high esteem — much of this was painfully crude. John Wayne is a screen icon I’ve never cared for, as this film reconfirms. I’d have been happier had we followed the dog’s multi-year search for his long-lost girl. But even though John Ford once directed a film that was told from the perspective of a horse, he probably thought that such a narrative twist would have been beneath him at this stage in his directorial career. Too bad. I bet John Ford could’ve made a very fine dog movie, had such a concept been more acceptable in his chosen genre.
Film:Stella Dallas Director: King Vidor Performers: Barbara Stanwyck, Anne Shirley, Barbara O’Neill, John Boles Breed featured: Great Dane Production information: Samuel Goldwyn Mayer, 1937 (USA)
Stella Dallas is a classic maternal melodrama whose title character is a small-town beauty (Barbara Stanwyck) who marries “up” when she captures the attention of high-class factory manager, Stephen. Though their romance quickly cools, Stella discovers new passion and complete fulfillment in raising their daughter, Laurel. Trouble hits in Laurel’s teenage years when the tightly-knit mother-daughter duo is forced to confront the social reality that culture and refinement are not so easily gained, at least not without sacrifice. The stakes become more serious when Stephen reignites a long-dormant affair with a wealthy widow whom he knew from his elite past.
There are all kinds of dramatic tensions at work in this film that I’m not going to lay out here since a great number of notable feminist film scholars have covered it with far more eloquence and depth than I will attempt on this blog. But nobody talks about the dog, since his appearance is so brief that it barely merits a mention unless you’re looking for it. As a deliberate prop in an emotionally wrought film, the Dane is a good example of how the figure of the dog is deployed for full symbolic potency.
When Laurel goes to visit her father and his new lover for the first time, the giant dog is used to mark social class and difference in no uncertain terms. When Michael the Great Dane (as he is called, by name, in the film) gallops down the winding staircase to greet Laurel, his presence instantly confirms this home as THE domestic fantasy that only money can buy.
I literally groaned when I saw the Dane… He was the icing on the cake, the one “excess” that sets this mansion irreversibly apart from the humble, small-town apartment that Laurel shares with her mother. Not only is this family wealthy enough to keep a dog, he is uselessly large (jumping onto the teenaged girl for emphasis), at complete leisure to be friendly (showing no reticence towards this stranger, he doesn’t even need to do any “work” as might befit a dog of his stature), and absorbed into the family as one of its own by dint of having such a humanized name. This is a household that is so ready to provide for others, they’ve even got room for multiple servants and a goofy dog that serves no purpose other than to love and be loved. Surely it’d take no effort to absorb a charming, refined young lady as well?
Knowing, or at least suspecting all the work that would go into raising such a beast, and the virtues and resources that such a task would demand, the Great Dane is an efficacious reminder that Stella Dallas, for all her maternal warmth, could never offer her daughter a home with such luxuries — as the dog is considered in this film.
