Adapted by Fuller and Curtis Hanson from the Romain Gary novel (to whom the picture is dedicated),WHITE DOG was the iconoclastic director's last Hollywood effort – and one of his most remarkable, in my opinion. However, due to accusations of racism, the film was never released to theaters in the U.S.; undaunted, Fuller took it to Europe instead!

Having watched it twice myself (first on Italian TV and now on DivX, both viewings compromised by the full-screen format – since it was originally filmed in Panavision – and the latter even more so by the VHS quality of the source!),I have to say that I really don't see it as a racist picture at all. On the contrary, the film deals extremely tactfully with its delicate subject matter, and nowhere does it condone such views! One perhaps tends to forget that, hand in hand with the racial angle, the film also tackles another very sensitive issue: animal cruelty. This is handled just as effectively, particularly in the scene towards the end where the dog's previous redneck owner appears out of the blue to reclaim it.

Despite the violence it commits, the dog is never portrayed as a 'monster' that should be destroyed like the ones we encounter in conventional horror films. However, it does carry undeniable connotations with the genre – notably Robert Louis Stevenson's perennial "Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde". Like the leading character of that story, the dog seems to register two diverse and entirely opposing personalities – docile, protective and even playful with its mistress (Kristy McNichol),then turning suddenly into an unstoppable beast out for blood whenever a colored person crosses its path!

The 'reconditioning' scenes with Paul Winfield are exceptional, and really give one an idea of what trained animals have to go through before they finally learn to 'perform'. The rather bleak final scene (so typical of Fuller) is especially powerful – and poignant. The film is accompanied by a simple yet tremendously effective score by the great Ennio Morricone. From the cast, both McNichol and Winfield are superb; Burl Ives is admirably cast against type; Jameson Parker (from the SIMON & SIMON TV series) appears as McNichol's boyfriend; and there are nice cameos by the likes of veterans Marshall Thompson and Dick Miller, director Paul Bartel and even Fuller himself (as McNichol's agent).

Twenty-five years after the fact, it seems that Paramount has had enough time to reconsider its position and accommodate this important motion picture with an official release, at long last – which is rumored to be coming via a Criterion DVD, no less! I truly hope that we will soon see this fascinating and thought-provoking film receive the exposure it so well deserves: if anything, it ought to be made available for its valid sociological aspects – which it doesn't exploit for sensationalistic value but rather aims for maximum eloquence with a direct, realistic style that really shouldn't offend anybody...

I was expecting to see an edgy film--after all, WHITE DOG was pulled from circulation because of its racist message. However, I was totally shocked that the film, despite a lot of positive reviews, turned out to be really, really stupid and nothing like the earlier brilliant films of director Sam Fuller. The film is neither edgy nor interesting--it's just a silly plot that is rather poorly written and totally unconvincing. Even if it had been a made for TV movie, it wouldn't have been especially good or compelling.

The film begins with a very young looking Kristy McNichol hitting a white German Shepherd while driving late at night. She takes it to a vet and it survives, so she takes it home until she can locate the owner. However, the owner never shows and so she keeps the dog. Soon, Kristy loves the dog, as it's affectionate and saves her from a mad rapist who breaks in her home. So far, so good--the film interested me mildly.

However, a bit later when the dog turns out to be an insane killer when he sees Black people, the film gets a bit silly. It's not that anyone could train a dog to do this that seemed silly--but that after tearing people to pieces, Kristy STILL wants to keep the dog and re-train it. Silly, but possible--after all, some pet people are nuts (I have dogs and cats am a bit touched myself).

When she finds an animal trainer (Paul Winfield),he agrees to help, though he says it would be tough. Fine. But later after the dog escapes and tears another Black person to pieces (killing him),Winfield STILL wants to work with the dog!!! Now, no municipality in the world would allow such a dangerous dog to live and the place where Winfield works (owned by Burl Ives) would be closed down due to lawsuits--but STILL he takes the dog back to the compound to re-train him. This is dumb, but there's also a BIG plot hole here--what about the dead man?!? You never hear about this poor guy again and you hear about no news stories about the mangling of a Black man in a church!!! This just magically disappears from the plot! To make things worse, Fuller uses awful and very, very sloppy imagery during this scene--showing good St. Francis of Assisi (the patron saint of animals) on the church wall in stained glass above the body of the Black victim is just stupid and way, way too obvious. And, to top it off, about the same time, the dog wanders past a pet store where there is a huge ad in the window featuring a white German Shepherd!!! Sledgehammer symbolism all the way and not the sign of a great film maker!

Finally, in a "surprise ending", the dog has bonded with the Black trainer and now, inexplicably, hates White folks!! Why? Well, because it's a plot device and the dog is eventually shot while turning poor old Burl Ives into Dog Chow! This proved once and for all that the dog was an avowed racist!

The bottom line is that this is a bad and overrated film--especially when you assume that given the director the film will be excellent. I love the films of Sam Fuller and think that his films from the early 1950s are amazing classics and shining examples of brilliant writing and direction combined with low budgets. This film, instead, is poorly written, poorly directed and falls flat. In his prime, Fuller probably would have re-written the poor script but in this one it shows none of his astuteness. Plus, as I mentioned above, his direction was heavy-handed all the way. While it's not a horrible movie, it's not good and isn't even a good time-passer. My advice is see THE BIG RED ONE or an early Fuller classic (such as STEEL HELMET) instead. This one's for the dogs.

By the way, is the cage the same one they used in PLANET OF THE APES? You know, the cage you see in the final shot--it sure looked like it.

That is the question here ... and if you already know the premise, you know that it is imperative ... but is it possible? Have to admit was surprised to hear about this ... I mean everyone knows Cujo, but this seems not to have gotten any buzz at all. Considering the subject matter I am not too surprised. Also it is not as exploitative as some might have liked it I suppose ... it does delve more into the drama aspect of the story rather than exploit the horror element of it (it does that too though, never fear - pun intended).

So while it is shocking and has some quite extreme scenes, some might find it a bit long. Maybe even pointless - now I obviously would disagree with assessments like that ... but I understand if someone would be thinking this way. Good actors and a really good director, who may be better known as a screenwriter (he also co-wrote this apparently) ... I don't think this will sway anyone in their beliefs but it might shock people to see what other humans are capable of ... without having any remorse ...