Review of Dog Jack

Dog Jack (2010)
5/10
Good screenplay, bad acting
26 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Having recently watched Ken Burns' Civil War series, I decided to watch a movie based upon the Civil War. Seeing the name "Louis Gossett, Jr" drew me in to Dog Jack. However, he did not actually appear in the movie, but only narrated. The actors for the most part, appeared to have been recruited from a church choir, (although admittedly, this is pure speculation on my part), as many of them could sing very nicely, but were ineffective as actors. I did not recognize a single familiar face, not even a grade C or D actor. It was difficult to emotionally connect with the characters due to the contrived feel of the actors reciting their lines. The choreographed fight scenes were weak as well. On the plus side, the storyline was actually quite interesting. The cinematography was excellent, having been filmed in Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. If you approach this movie as a documentary re-enactment, then you won't be disappointed. Civil War buffs should be able to enjoy this despite its flaws. But it must be said, this could have been *so much better*, had they hired a couple of professional actors, even B-grade actors, for a couple of the lead roles.

The movie also had a "faith/spirituality" message and feel to it, which is fine by me, but is one of the reasons why I suspect that the actors had been recruited from a church group, probably from somewhere in Illinois. (In the closing credits, special thanks were given to a church in the Chicago area.)

This is a decent family movie, with no graphic violence, sex, or cursing, and the children watching will most likely not notice the glaring weaknesses in regards to the acting.

Once I resigned myself to viewing this as a dramatized Civil War "re-enactment", I was able to appreciate the film on a somewhat modest level.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed