White Fang

Based on the Jack London story, White Fang was well done. The main drawback is its violence. Lots of fighting and killing, including graphic scenes of shooting, stabbing and animals fighting. My young children (5 and 7) were upset by this. It is surprising that the video had a PG rating.

Otherwise, acting was good, cinematography was excellent. English-language dubbing was a bit slipshod and noticeable.

White Fang (1973)

*** (out of 4)

Jack London's classic story is brought to the screen in a rather good adaptation from director Lucio Fulci. Most people know Fulci for his graphic horror films starting with ZOMBIE and continuing throughout the 1980s. A lot of people seem to forget that he also directed comedies, action films, Westerns, giallos and even family movies.

WHITE FANG is certainly a family movie, although there are enough dark spots to where even the adults are going to be entertained. We have Franco Nero playing the good guy who befriends White Fang and an orphan Indian boy. John Steiner plays the villain who also wants the dog but for a different set of reasons. Then there's Fernando Rey as Father Oatley and Vima Lisi plays Sister Evangelina.

I was actually surprised at how much I enjoyed this film. The cinematography is quite good and there's no question that you really do feel as if you're in the Alaskian wilderness, although the opening scenes with White Fang in the trap were obviously filmed on a set. The performances are very good and we're also given a good amount of action throughout the picture. There are some dog fights that are pretty violent but they're also quite intense and well-done.

Fulci proves here that he was able to do more than just throw graphic violence and gore at the screen. The film certainly contains some flaws but for the most part it's a very entertaining movie.

I watched this movie since i figured out it was directed by one of my favorite directors, Lucio Fulci. And i know there are people who call this a family or kids flick, i can assure you that it's non of the above. It's filled with mean spirited characters and actual animal cruelty, they could've easily rated it R because of the visceous animal fights. An dog obvisousily appears to be "dead" after it fought a bear, i just say what i saw myself. And a dog gets poked at with sticks while it's locked up in a cage, yeah real family entertainment. The story itself looks like an adventure movie because of the relation between an american native child and his dog, but i'm pretty sure the dog had to be replaced a few times if you know what i mean. The story is placed in a western like background, probably in the 1800's, and yes the actors do a great job and some of them are likable. And if they kept it like that the movie could have receive a PG rating which it did get, how idiotic do you have to be to rate a movie filled with cruelty PG. I do understand those were different times, but still, judge for yourself.

This movie makes an adult go back to childhood. Honesty, love or respect for animals, and justice of course is what Lucio Fulci wants to emphasize in this great movie. Yes, it contains some violent scenes but unfortunately, violence is part of our lives and children must know it to try and avoid it in the future.

Great performances from all the actors. John Steiner performs perfectly the bloody villain. Franco Nero is wonderful as always and White Fang is adorable, the dog that everybody would like to have.

After seeing Lizard in a woman's skin, and Don't torture a duckling,two earlier efforts I had high hopes for this film. This picture seems amateurish for an experienced director. The story is decent, although for the first twenty min, it feels like two separate films. It builds suspense at all the right moments, keeping your interest. The acting in this film is mostly ok, Steiner playing the usual villainous creep, The best characters were the Trapper, the native boy, and the best was from the dog. Not exactly a kids movie, but it is tame compared to most Fulci pictures. 6/10.