User Reviews

This adventure movie is set in 1896 , on the Klondike region of Yukon, Canada . It has the wolf-dog named White Fang befriends an Indian boy and his father (Daniel Martin , A fistful of dollars) . Later on , the dog teams up a journalist (Franco Nero, Djanjo) along with an adventurer (Raimond Harmstorf) who arrive in the small gold town named Dawson City . There they find a priest (Fernando Rey, French Connection) , his daughter , a gorgeous saloon-girl (Carole Andre, Sandokan) and the nun Sister Evengelina (Virna Lisi, How to murder your wife) . The reporter and his faithful mate , the wolf-dog , attempt to stop the evildoer , an ambitious , snarling businessman (John Steiner, Tepepa) and hoodlum (Rik Battaglia) . They're deceiving by faking manner to the prospectors who are working in the Alaskan gold mines and to profit from them .

It's a tepid and light-hearted adventure about known and classic novel by Jack London . Lumpy blend of adventures , action , villainy , though needlessly violent and aimed to young people . The talent of diverse and wasting casting is redeemed in part for the spectacular outdoors filmed on Austrian landscapes . Weak screenplay written by Peter Werbeck or Harry Allan Towers who produced in similar premise : 'Jack London's Call of the wild (directed by Ken Annakin and starred by Charlton Heston) . Atmospheric and evocative musical score by Carlo Rustichelli . The film is rated PG-13 (Parents guide) , because containing some violent scenes about killing , a cruel fighting between bear and dog and brutal biting . The motion picture is regularly directed by Lucio Fulci , a famous expert in gore and splatter (N.Y ripper , House outside cemetery , City of the Living dead) . Followed by an inferior sequel ¨The return of White Fang¨ (Fulci , 1974) with similar characters and actors . Other adaptations about Jack London's classic are : ¨White Fang(1991¨ by Randal Kleiser with Ethan Kawke as young prospector and Klaus Maria Brandauer and ¨The return of White Fang(1994¨ by Ken Olin with Scott Bairstow and once again Ethan Hawke .

The words 'Lucio Fulci' and 'children's film' aren't what you would regularly see very often, and when you add 'animals' to that, alarms bells start ringing. Now, Fulci doesn't really register on the old Italian Film Directors Who Kill Animals For Their Films List, unlike Umberto Lenzi, Ruggero Deodato, Sergio Martino and Antonio Margherriti, but these White Fang films, of which he made two, sail close to the wind. However, I'm also of the opinion that, judging by the above examples, if an Italian director did go out of their way to film an animal being hurt, they would include that in the film, and that does not happen here.

That's a long way of saying that you could probably watch these films guilt free, although this supposedly family-orientated film does start with a bunch of dogs eating a deer carcass. Thus begins Fulci's take on the classic Jack London novel about a dog who is a wolf/dog or something who never stops barking. It takes place in the Klondike in Canada during the gold rush, where a bunch of prospectors live in the mining town of Dawson, run by villain Beauty Smith (John Steiner, the best thing in the film). These unheeding miners are being ripped off by Beauty, who also runs the local bar, and keeps the alcoholic priest (Fernando Rey) in place so that no fully functioning minister can expose his nefarious actions.

Beauty therefore is miffed when a government man turns up to set up a mining commission, who also brings along writer Scot (Franco Nero), a man with principles who immediately finds himself up against Beauty, as well as giving a few of Beauty's men a sock on the jaw. A nun also arrives in town to set up a hospital, and add to that the Inuit fella who not only brings his sick son into town, but also seems to have a very protective dog, White Fang, who takes an instant dislike to Beauty's dog Satan.

There's a lot of characters to follow and a lot of plot threads, but most of it revolves around either Beauty or White Fang, so that's not too bad. Basically, a group of folk start to gather against Beauty and usually White Fang steps in to sort things out. This being a children's film, naturally this involves characters being stabbed in the gut, or White Fang either fighting a dog, or being forced to fight a bear! This film is PG, apparently! I think he killed someone as well, come to think of it.

The set design is rather outstanding for this one, so there must have been a bit of money behind the scenes for a change, as Fulci uses every chance he has to sweep the camera across the town of Dawson and the various crowds. It gives the film an epic feel and really helps bring the cold atmosphere of Canada to life.

The main attraction here is John Steiner as Beauty Smith. He's so evil he even has a pencil-moustache, although he doesn't twirl it. He's snidey, snobby, sneery, hates everything, makes passes at women, double-crosses everybody he encounters and only shows the barest of humanity when he accidentally kills someone. It's a hard call to outdo Franco Nero onscreen but Steiner does it effortlessly. Although Nero kind of gets sidelined with all the sub plots to be honest.

My son watched about two minutes of it (and of course he walked in on White Fang fighting Satan) and was disturbed by it. The two animal fights are bad enough (although it's obvious in the bear fight that someone in a bear suit was involved to a certain extent), but the knifing of someone in the guts would be too much to handle for most kids. If Fulci complained so much about being pigeonholed as a horror director, why do so many of his non-horror films end up in that category anyway? So, to sum up, I have no idea whether I liked this or not. Therefore I give it a seven, just like every other film I review.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Virna Lisi, not very young and beautiful like in the '50 and '60s, 37 years old here, in the role of a nun, looking even older, Franco Nero as a good guy, a journalist, friend of Raimund Harmstorf, another good guy, John Steiner villain as usual, Rik Battaglia right hand of the villain, and Fernando Rey as a drunk coward priest, who becomes brave in the end. The best "actor", the one who is actually the whole movie, is the dog.

The story has little to do with Jack London's original novel. I thought the acting was very unnatural, the dubbing was done very sloppily and the story itself contains a fairly large number of inconsistencies and loose ends. Apart from that, the pace of the movie was horrendously slow at some parts.

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.

Yeah, this was the Early 70's. People in the film industry used what means they had to make a box office success. This movie is evidence that praised horror-, giallo- and western-director was no better than his collegues Umberto Lenzi, Ruggero Deodato and Tonino Ricci. This movie is full of animal cruelty, real animal cruelty mainly towards german sheperds but also a bear. All this to make a film that was aimed to a wide audience but probably mostly younger people. That actors such as Franco Nero and Fernando Rey were on set and accepted this is to me disturbing. Franco Nero even starred in a sequel (!). Lucio Fulci sure did some great movies, but with this movie he dropped in rank on many levels.

My mother took me to this movie at the drive-in when i was around seven years old, which is thirty years ago. She had no idea a family movie would be so violent. My clearest memory was of the boy's father's face of pain as he was stabbed in the stomach and killed. This image haunted me for weeks. I had learned that I lived in a world where a person might stab my father at anytime. How could I stop them? How could my father protect himself? You must realise that this stabbing is not fantasy to a seven-year old. It is as real as witnessing an actual event, and has no place in a child's innocent mind. It is sad that we still do not understand the impact that bringing violence into the lives of our children has both on our children and our society. If only parents would protect their children from images of violence with the same vigor that they protect them from images of nudity and sex.

This is a follow-up to "The Call of the Wild" the year before with Charlton Heston, but there is no Charlton Heston here and also very little left of Jack London. "Beauty Smith" of the novel is a base, vulgar ooh rough hoodlum who turns Indians into alcoholics making money of it, while here he is transformed into a grotesque parody of a sophisticated gentleman inhumanly profiting on ordinary people's credulousness and greed for gold, not hesitating to deliberately ruin them all to then walk on to infest another town with corruption. The greatest scene here is the final conversion of the priest Fernando Rey, while of course the star of the film is the dog. Virna Lisi and the Indian boy are two other characters that Jack London never could have dreamed of including in an exaggerated melodrama like this, and on the whole, Italians should not meddle with Jack London. You recognize Raimund Harmstorf from "The Call of the Wild" as Charlton Heston's best friend and companion, while here he is resurrected (which Charlton Heston is not) to make another glorious partner to Franco Nero instead. It's too rough for a family entertainment, there is too little left of Jack London, the script is almost loaded with only clichés, the direction is awkward and almost pathetic, and not even Carlo Rustichelli's music is enough to save the film, although his melody theme is what you might remember from this film.