Breakinger A Brilliant Conflict

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Hitchcoc I'm the last person to say, "The movie was OK, but the book was better." The problem here is that other than the title and the name of the dog, there is no connection between the two. While the movie is a decent story involving the Yukon with lots of adventure, the whole plot of the book went by the wayside. Of course, we have two big stars of the early cinema, Clark Gable and Loretta Young, with romance the object, and a big race as the climactic moment. So it has pretty good quality and storytelling. But it is misleading to use the title of the Jack London book. It's like doing a Poe movie called "The Pit and the Pendulum" and having no pit and no pendulum. If I were to evaluate the movie on its own merits, I would say it is about average.

sol1218 ***SPOILERS*** Broke after losing all his money in a crap game Seattle gold prospector Jack Thornton, Clark Gable, is just about to hitch the next train back home until he runs into fellow prospector "Shorty" Holliham, Jack Oakie, at the local Klondike saloon.Having been caught opening the US Mail, that he got six months in the can for, "Shorty" found a letter with a map detailing where the mother of all mother gold loads can be found which he mistakingly ate but became, in that the map went straight into his brain not stomach, part of his permanent memory. With nothing to lose and everything to gain both Jack and "Shorty" went to get all the equipment, mostly on credit, they'd need to find the mother load including a sled dog team. It's when Jack outbid the villainous Smith, Reginald Owens, for lead sled dog Buck, played by himself, that things really started crackin' in the Klondike for him and "Shorty". Buck who in the novel "Call of the Wild" was in fact a husky/wolf mix yet in the movie was a pure bread 120 pound Saint Bernard who was twice as big as any sled dog and five times as strong. This made it far easier for Buck with his heavy fur coat to survive the cold winds and snows in the upper Yukon where the hidden gold mine, with its mother load, was located! It was up around the uncharted Dawson Creek that Jack "Shorty" and Buck found Claire Blake, Loretta Young, alone and being attacked by a wolf pack who they ended up rescuing. As things turned out it was the letter that "Shorty" opened that was mailed to Clair by her husband John Blake, Frank Conroy, which pinpointed where the mother load, or gold mine, was located!Now having Clair on their hands and being the gentlemen that they are in not wanting to cheat her out of what was rightfully her's as well as Clair's now missing husband, in the wilds of the Yukon, gold mine they make Clair a partner in the quest of the mother load of all mother loads. That's until Smith, remember him, and his gang of murderous gold thieves show up and things start really to heat up in the cold cold Klondik.**SPOILERS**** There's also the unexpected appearances of the lost and considered dead and buried in the snow John Blake, Clair's husband, to make things in the movie even more complicated then they already were. The most complicated and confusing thing about Blake's sudden and mysterious appearance is why in hell he would hook up with Smith and his motley gang of cut throats who are out to steal his gold mine! If in fact Blake had any brains in his head he would have known that they would off him as soon as he lead them to his uncharted and fully stocked, with the yellow stuff, gold mine!Despite an all-star cast, Gable Young & Oakie-as well as being packed with beautiful location scenery footage the 1935 version of "Call of the Wild" doesn't come close to the later and far better 1972 version of the movie with Charlton Heston. In fact the real star of the film that was based on the Jack London novel the hybrid husky/wolf Buck was barley in the movie and his attraction to the wild wolves was never fully explained! Unlike in the London novel and the 1972 version of the movie Buck seemed to be, in being a full bread Saint Bernard, fully domesticated with absolutely no wolf characteristics, or blood, in him at all!P.S It came out years later that Clark Gable and his cost-star in the film Loretta Young were more then just acting in the love scenes they had together in the film. This resulted in Loretta Young getting pregnant by Gable and having a child out of wedlock by him which wasn't revealed until she, actress Judy Lewis, was well into her 40's and both her natural parents long deceased.

nnnn45089191 Based very loosely on the Jack London novel,this is a star-vehicle for the rough and likable Clark Gable.Thrown in there's a dog named Buck and Jack Okie as his comic sidekick, for Gable to bond with.Then there's beautiful Loretta Young for him to romance (which he also did in real-life,resulting in an illegitimate child.)Shot on location in Washington State the movie has a rugged outdoor look from which it benefits immensely.The portrait of the rough and tumble gold mining town of Skagway looks almost authentic.The performances are pretty standard.Gable is his rough and likable self,Jack Okie,the likable buffoon ,Loretta Young,a good love-interest and Reginald Owen a despicable villain.All in all an entertaining adventure movie.

Jonathon Dabell Jack London's novel The Call Of The Wild is pretty much ignored in this 1935 adaptation. The title remains the same and there IS a dog named Buck involved in parts of the action, but apart from that the similarities are virtually non-existent. Far greater emphasis is placed on the human characters in the film than in the book. One has to assume that the film was written as a vehicle for Clark Gable, a big outdoor adventure yarn in which the star could get in to and out of a variety of hair-raising escapades in the frozen wilderness. The fact that London's novel is essentially an animal story with a few human characters passing through the narrative is of little significance to scripter Gene Fowler and director William Wellman. That's not to say The Call Of The Wild is a disposable film; the unusual and expensive decision to film on genuinely cold, mountainous locations (Washington state standing in for Yukon) shows that this was envisaged as a serious box office winner.Struggling gold prospector Jack Thornton (Gable) and his goofy sidekick Shorty Hooliham (Jack Oakie) travel around the Yukon in the 19th Century, searching for an elusive gold strike that will make them richer than rich. They are helped in their adventures by a St Bernard dog named Buck. Also busily scouring the land for gold is the sinister English-man Smith (Reginald Owen), a cruel rival who has a mysterious past and even a little history with Thornton's dog. During their wanderings, Jack and Shorty come across a woman called Claire Blake (Loretta Young) whose husband has gone missing in the snowfields and could be dead. Claire teams up with Jack, Shorty and Buck, but it isn't long before she finds herself falling for Thornton's roguish charm, even though she cannot be sure if her husband is dead or alive.The movie is very enjoyable in its old-fashioned way. I'm a believer in the theory that films should try to be faithful to their source material, at least to a reasonable extent, so in some ways I felt dismayed at the lack of respect towards London's original story. However, once I'd got that small irritation out of my system I found The Call Of The Wild a perfectly likable star vehicle. Gable is solid in a role that asks little of him other than to appear rugged and fearless. Owen is very good as the villain of the piece, while Young shares a good chemistry with the hero (in real-life, she and Gable were lovers). Jack Oakie is the least impressive of the key actors, mugging rather embarrassingly as the inevitable comical sidekick. The location work in Washington state adds a sense of authenticity to the film that is very uncommon for a movie made in the studio-bound '30s. On the negative side, though, the film settles for a very convenient ending which ditches plausibility so that the course of true love and personal success can run smoothly (indeed, IMPROBABLY smoothly) for the main protagonists. Of its type and era, however, The Call Of The Wild is watchable and entertaining fare.