Eric Stevenson We're used to movies having attack of the killer whatever. I guess at this time dogs was a pretty original idea. That's basically the premise and all you need to know. I really hated how so much of this was filmed in the dark. I was wondering if this was because they didn't have to budget to depict a lot of the gore. The early parts of the movie talk about pheromones and exoskeletons. Does this have anything to do with the movie? Nope! In fact, the entire reason the dogs are killing people is never explained at all! The movie ends by showing a cat and there WAS in fact going to be a sequel about killer cats! Fortunately, this did poorly at the box office so a sequel was never made. That would have been even goofier. *1/2

videorama-759-859391 Dogs ain't a half bad made flick, about a potpourri of dogs, who meet up and go on a killing spree, killing anything animal or human. What is doing it? That's the million dollar question. It leads us to question our our species, as if becoming part of a gang, where we become brainwashed, and commit things we normally wouldn't do, if graduating to murder. But in this open ended, and not too optimistic film, that's pretty gruesome, near it's finale, it's M rating pushing it, we don't find out. Bugger. David McCallum lends a fine performance as the smart hunky professor of Scientology, the real smartie, determined to get to the bottom of the killings, those cattle mutilations early on, aren't for sheep lovers. The violence in Dogs in pretty raw and frank. A younger Linda Gray co-stars before her Dallas days, as Wyner's performance as the new Scientist was strong, and actually likable in a sense. Suspense runs high, some of it electric near the end, and is well executed, the opening music score with our favorite pooches in slo mo, all banding together, my favorite part. They're are some unintentionally funny moments, whether dialogue or acting, but they made 70's movies what they were. This is a well made film, badly dated "Yes", but bad, "No". Warning: Are some scenes are dog murder.

Chase_Witherspoon Pheramones are responsible for transforming ordinary domestic pet dogs into a pack of wild beasts, roaming the countryside attacking anyone and anything in their path. Local university professor, alcoholic, playboy and dyed-in-the-wall cynic (McCallum, sporting a beatnik hairstyle and resembling Bill Oddie of "The Goodies") tag teams with new kid on the block Wyner to convince the local authorities that dogs are in fact responsible for the rash of brutal mutilations committed on both livestock, and the locals. Borrowing heavily from "Jaws", the stage is set for a hunt or perish climax where the pack hyper-excite their pheromones to dangerously high levels, and unleash hell on the residents, including sultry Linda Gray (top-billed on the dust cover, but only featuring in two scenes).The only motif missing from McCallum's sage, neo-liberal, academic stereotype is the corduroy jacket with leather elbow patches. Not content to let the dogs do their own rampaging, Wyner's character helps them out, by managing to herd a bunch of students into a facility for safety, only for them to be torn to shreds by the marauding pack once inside. It's almost satirical, but then Wyner is more suited to comedy as his subsequent film career affirmed. After all the postulating, hypothesizing and gesticulating, the final fifteen minutes is a slaughter-fest, as the pack raid and pillage their way from one casualty to the next.Aside from the frequent physics and social science dissertations delivered by the cast, the action sequences stand apart from other films of the ilk (perhaps with the exception of Robert Clouse's "The Pack"), even if the body count is unrealistically abundant; when McCallum and McCabe survey the damage late in the film, almost everyone in town appears to have been slain. And proving that filmmakers have a keen observation for potential in almost any situation, there's even a hint at a sequel. The film fades out on a somewhat docile looking ginger cat, expelling a yawn (audio overlaid by a fearsome growl), not too keen on the sequel idea.

EyeAskance The "nature attacks" subgenre of horror had pretty much reached its apogee in '76 when this minor entry hit the drive-in screens, and for what it is, it's not entirely valueless. The story, which is actually rather plausible, denotes a sleepy college town where the pet pooches of local denizens have taken to packing in the night. Initially, cattle are the prey of these abruptly aggressive mongrels, but it's not long before people are attacked, at first alone, then in groups. Science teachers from the college provide the usual explanatory double-talk, and do their best to alert the community to the mounting danger against cliché Mayoral resistance.For a quickie this low on the totem, DOGS/SLAUGHTER has a few effective moments, and stands as a par example of its type. I'd say they could have used MORE of the canines(as there seems to be around a dozen passing off for many more), and a bit more fang-bearing and growling might have added greater threat to the situation at hand(generally, these dogs just scamper about playfully as folks run screaming...only a single oft-shown Doberman is really physically imposing and scary). Still, I found myself taking an unexpected liking to this supplicatory little film, despite its poverty-row provisions and customary B-movie shortcomings. Gotta love the retarded "shocker" ending...*groan*... 4/10