From the makers of...and the actor of...and the actress of...Born Free, it's a movie about another animal in another part of the world. Instead of lions in Africa, it's an otter in England. Seriously, you did some happy ass movie about lions in Africa and then follow it up with some happy ass movie about an otter in England? The only thing that could make that more annoying would be if the main actor and the main actress were married. Oh..wait.
Actually, once you get over the sappiness of the married couple making another animal movie, you realize that it's not that bad of a movie. I'm still not sure why anyone would go see this in a movie theatre, but it was made in a time without cable television and you couldn't see anything like this on the TV. I guess it makes some sense.
What doesn't make sense to me is how the main relationship of the movie got started, the main relationshi[p being the one between the man and his otter. You see, the man works in some office in London and isn't happy with his empty desk job. One day he walks by a nearby pet store and is mesmerized by the otter in the window. Over time he decides to purchase the otter as a pet....hold on, let's go back. Did I just say he saw an otter in the window of a pet store in London? Are you kidding me? Was it common to find non-domesticated animals for sale in pet shops in one of the largest cities in Europe? Am I completely off base to think that this situation seems a little out of whack here? It's an OTTER, and it's in a PET SHOP, and it's in the middle of LONDON, ENGLAND!!!! And the way he acts around it is kind of odd too. Trying to take a look at it without the otter knowing he's looking. The begining of this movie didn't sit well with me because I thought the guy was an idiot. Luckily he buys a cabin somewhere in the Highlands or something.
Once we get into the hills, the movie gets okay and we get the usual man/animal relationship movie. Not a Turner & Hooch kind of a relationship, but an Old Yeller kind of relationship. Apparently this movie was based on a book that I can only imagine is in the same vein as a Where the Red Fern Grows kind of book is. In other words, lots of adventures based around someone and their best buddy animal. I don't know, it's not that it's bad, it's just not too terribly exciting. We arent talking about My Side of the Mountain kind of boring, but it's along those lines...just no stupid kid. Oh, and the otter gets whacked, but in these kinds of movies the animal always dies. So I didn't ruin anything.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
What was crazy about this movie is that they didn't have that "no animals were harmed in the making of this film" claim in the credits... poor otter...
The American Humane Association's "no animals were harmed" disclaimer is only a fairly recent addition to movie credits, used first in 1989. This film is from 1969, so it would not be on there.
However, most American films since the 40's have been monitored by animal rights groups (except, strangely, in the 1970's). This film was made outside of the US, so I can't vouch for it in this department. I haven't seen it since I was a kid, but as I recall, the otter's death takes place offscreen. I sincerely doubt that a film made by animal lovers would stoop to murder an otter for a single shot of it lying dead.
No, you don't see it at all and then afterwards, the dead otter is clearly a stuffed otter or something resembling a stuffed otter. I still wanna know what the deal with an otter in a pet store in London is all about.
Post a Comment