#callofthewild

[illinoisrbml]

☃️The RBML books were all dressed up in their finest velvet bindings when Uncle Jack (London) decided to crash the party in his best hipster flannel 🌲 So, what's the dress code for your books this holiday season? Season's greetings from the RBML team! #specialcollections #rarebooks #velvetbinding #jacklondon #callofthewild #medievalmanuscript #milton #ptolemy https://www.instagram.com/p/CmZ6MkFJd7M/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[paigebbooks]

I struggled with this classic. Normally I love myself a good Classic Novel but The Call of The Wild I struggled to pick up. There was never a need to read more and to read it physically bored me so I resorted to an audiobook to finish it. I kept telling myself the writing gets better when I knew it didn't. I love books about the Klondike but this one made me wish I never laid eyes on it. I know I am probably pissing many off with my review of saying that this is not a great book. Classic lovers probably squabbling on how I couldn't e joy this artful novel. I just was bored. I did finish but I really was close to making this a Did Not Finish but I pulled myself through painfully.

There is rare times where I say the movie version is 10x better than the book but this is definitely one of those situations. The movie is better.

I found that chapters dragged on in one scene making the reading slow. This is a short book so should be a quick read and all I could find is that it was a struggle to read a sentence. It took me an hour to read 6 pages. How this book is a classic will always boggle my mind because I find other classic books are 20x better than this one is. The writing was poor, the grammar worse, and really, felt like there really wasn't much of a story. Yes Buck yerns for the wild life with freedom. It was most obvious in the first 10 pages but to go on another 100 pages making sure in every sentence the reader understands this......it brings the reader away from the literature.

I definitely suggest never reading this but it is a good pallette cleanser.

[shadowsgalore]

Shikra (Accipiter badius) is a smallish bird of prey found commonly across the Indian subcontinent, Middle-East, South-East Asia and parts of Africa. The name Shikra is derived from the Hindustani word Shikari (Hunter). It is a very intelligent bird, with an amazing capability to hunt and adapt in vastly different environments. It was traditionally used by falconry in was also employed by hunters in the bygone days. We found this Shikra in Ranthambore at a very short distance from us. It refused to be daunted by 5 cameras pointing at it and sat on its perch nonchalantly, doing its stuff. Ranthambore, Jul 2022 Nikon D850, Sigma 150-600 #bird #birdsofprey #birdsofinstagram #shikra #raptor #callofthewild #jungle #wildlifeindia #rajasthan (at Ranthambore National Park) https://www.instagram.com/p/Chhvv9YJpSN/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[mountrainiernps]

Do you remember the first time you experienced wilderness?

Wilderness can mean a lot of things to different folks. Lots of definitions whether they are persona, communal, cultural, legal, etc.

Congress defined wilderness in the 1964 Wilderness Act as “federally owned areas designated by Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness; “

Is that like your own definition of wilderness?

Where have you found wilderness? Nearly 97% of Mount Rainier National Park is designated by Congress as wilderness, so maybe you found it here. Or maybe it was on a trip to Olympic National Par? or North Cascades National Park? Or how about the many wilderness areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service (the Enchantments, Goat Rocks)?

So many to choose from, even if it’s seeing them from your car while at a scenic viewpoint or experiencing virtually on-line. What has been your favorite wilderness memory? ~ams

NPS/NAB Photo. Snowy Mount Rainier from Hessong Rock. October, 1969. NPS Photo. Meadow and trees with fog and sunlight rays. NPS Photo. Paradise River flowing over rocks above Narada Falls. August, 2013.

[wronghands1]

[buzzbookstore]

Very early copies of “The Call of The Wild” by Jack London now available on BuzzBookstore.com. Print dates range from Feb 1905 to Apr 1909. All in the highly desirable Grosset & Dunlap green cover. #callofthewild #jacklondon #rarebooks #vintagebooks #vintagebookstagram #bookcollecting #bibliophile #bookish #boooknerd https://www.instagram.com/p/CIydqV0hn_s/?igshid=iwf5d7j14dt4

[metalgearkong]

The Call of the Wild - Review

2/26/20

Directed by Chris Sanders (20th Century Studios)

The Call of the Wild is based on the novel Call of the Wild by Jack London which was published all the way back in 1903. A few adaptations have been made over the century but this is my first exposure to the title. Buck is the main character, as he transfers hands from one human master to another, until he ultimately spends the most meaningful time with Harrison Ford’s character. The movie surprised me in that Buck is the main character, and not Ford like the marketing made me think. This movie feels like it was made in the 80′s or 90′s, for better or for worse, and I found it to be nostalgic, if flawed in a couple aspects. 

The first thing most people will notice about the film is that Buck is entirely created with CGI. I can understand not wanting to put an animal in harm’s way or to have them do things that would be impossible for a dog to do (nor should they) but I wasn’t 100% a fan of him being CGI 100% of the time. It makes me think how much better it could have been if we were looking at a real dog most of the time. It’s certainly been done in the past so I’m not sure why they wouldn’t do it here, other than it being easier. Buck looks better when he’s in surroundings also created by CGI, or is interacting with the other dogs, who are also entirely computer animated. The animation itself is not bad most of the time, but the emotional connection and tangibility would have been better if the animals were real as often as possible.

We meet Buck somewhere in the American South where he’s owned by an affluent family. Buck shows he’s a little too big and ambitious to fit into his owner’s antique and delicate lifestyle. He is captured by smugglers who are selling dogs to the gold rush efforts all the way up in Alaska, where Buck is transported without food, water, or sleep. Here is when Buck realizes the dark side of humanity, and it wouldn’t be his first in this film alone. I was surprised that Harrison Ford barely makes an appearance for the first half of the movie. Other than narrating certain events and bumping into Buck a couple of times, he really doesn’t appear on screen until the mid point of the film. I liked this twist because it built up his presence and you appreciated him all the more when he and Buck eventually bond and go on their own journey together.

The Call of the Wild has an unnamed villain thrown in halfway through who only makes a few appearances. With the adventure at hand, I thought this character played by Dan Stevens was jarring and took away from the spirit of the film. It doesn’t help that this villain is written extremely one-dimensionally and is a cartoon character more fake than any of the CGI in the film. The other thing that took me out of the film was how personified Buck was. Forget the CGI, there are many things he does and reacts to that a dog obviously wouldn’t do. It reminded me of Balto or a Disney animated movie where the dogs comprehend things around them on the level of their human co-stars. I like most of the physical communication he and the other dogs have, but the humans interact with Buck with no nuance or how people really would train/communicate with canines. 

Most of the first half of the movie is getting Buck to the Yukon and training as a sled dog. He competes for dominance with the pack leader, and faces all sorts of challenges of being in the vast wild such as sleeping in the snow and learning all kinds of harsh lessons very different from his pampered life in the South. I enjoyed seeing Buck face these challenges, but I can’t help but feel this movie was held back by its PG rating. When Buck is beaten by humans, or fights with other dogs, I can’t help but imagine how brutal the book must have been, and how much more effective the film would have been to show a little blood, scaring, and violence. More than once do dogs simply vanish from the film, usually after a conflict. Buck, for example, “defeats” the established alpha dog Spitz, and Spitz simply walks off into the wilderness never to be seen again. I was sure it was setup for Spitz to have a dramatic re-entry to the story and a key moment, but it never happened. There’s another part where a bunch of dogs simply “got away” and are never seen again. 

According to my friend who has read Call of the Wild, these characters die in the novel, and the movie would have benefited dramatically to depict this somehow on screen or in the story. I may sound down on the film, but I enjoyed the majority of it. I particularly liked the black wolf which makes an appearance a few times, which represented Buck’s bravery, and he begins to use his instincts to further become a wild and self sustaining dog. He sees the wolf, and he knows he’s on the right path. This is a family movie, and while it does get dark a couple of times, it also feels neutered from what it could have been. Overall this is a good movie that reminds me of the kids movies I grew up with: a little bit of darkness and peril, but a strong sense of adventure and scope. If you have faith and love for dogs, are a fan of Harrison Ford, or someone who can appreciate a whimsical adventure, The Call of the Wild should be entertaining. 

6.5/10

[adamwatchesmovies]

The Call of the Wild (2020)

To watch The Call of the Wild is to go on a journey. At first, so much of it doesn’t work you’re ready to check out. By the end, something about this classic story becomes unexpectedly emotional and endearing.

In 1897, the Yukon Gold Rush has created a high demand for strong dogs to pull sleds. A 140-pound St. Bernard/Scotch Collie mix named Buck is stolen from his owner in Santa Clara, California and shipped northward. As he passes from one owner to another, Buck learns to survive the harsh environment and gradually reconnects with his feral ancestors.

I don’t like to criticize special effects. I only ask that movies look as good as the norm for the time while considering budgetary limitations. With a price tag of $125-150 million, this movie’s visuals are not good. Landscapes and scenery look great but the dogs look awkward. You don’t see an animal when you look at Buck. You see a cartoon. The pooch’s expressions are too human, and the movements unnatural. While he looks fine in certain scenes, every escape from the uncanny valley is brief. It’s a severe misstep from director Chris Sanders, who is used to helming animated films. This movie desperately wants to be animated. It certainly doesn’t want to be live-action; too many of Buck’s moves would never be doable with a real-life animal.

Despite this obstacle, something about the story resonates with you and wins you over. It’s not that the screenplay by Michael Green sticks closely to the original tome by Jack London - actually, it deviates significantly and for the better. Part of the story’s effectiveness is that you're following a dog. A lot of it also appeals to that primordial part of your soul that yearns for something out there. Like Buck, you can feel the pull of the outdoor, no matter how cold and harsh. Seeing him survive all of these ordeals, collecting the skills he will need to become the animal he was destined to be is very watchable.

The advertisements and posters feature Harrison Ford extensively but the actor isn’t actually in this story that much. His character contributes the most emotion to Buck’s story. While an internal voice from Buck (or something similar to the one in Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron) would've suited the film better, Ford's grizzled narration ads mood and sets the tone effectively. This is the dog's story. The humans, which include a pair of mail deliverers (Omar Sy and Cara Gee) and a cruel man who foolishly takes Buck to look for a fabled treasure (Dan Stevens) are simply passing through.

If the dog in the trailer to The Call of the Wild looked fake to you and you thought you might be watching some unfinished footage or that you'd get used to the effect, you don't really. Despite this, the story's emotions do connect, the action is exciting and overall, it has appeal. (Theatrical version on the big screen, February 26, 2020)