ShareThis Page
Review: ‘A Dog’s Journey’ offers up an interesting, complex story | TribLIVE.com
Movies/TV

Review: ‘A Dog’s Journey’ offers up an interesting, complex story

Engaging critically with Dog Movies can be a challenge for a critic. Who wants to be the crank who scoffs that the heartwarming animal movie is just too contrived and sentimental? But it can be hard to avoid, with the sickly sweet pandering pabulum of recent films like “A Dog’s Purpose” and “Dog Days.”

Fortunately, “A Dog’s Journey,” the second film adapted from W. Bruce Cameron’s novels and a follow-up to “A Dog’s Purpose,” offers up an interesting, complex story into which we can sink our teeth.

Directed by Emmy-winning TV director Gail Mancuso, written by “Purpose” vets Cameron, Maya Forbes, Cathryn Michon and Wallace Wolodarsky, “A Dog’s Journey” has the emotional bite to match its somewhat hokey bark.

Both “A Dog’s Purpose” and “A Dog’s Journey” are metaphysical and philosophical films that purport the theory that the same dog spirit has been reincarnated again and again into different canine forms over its owner’s lifetime, always trying to make it back home.

Want to believe

It’s a fantastical idea, and all rather Buddhist for a film that traffics in heartland family values nostalgia cheerleading. But, it’s a fantasy dog lovers want to believe. Just look at Barbra Streisand, who has cloned her beloved dogs — wouldn’t it be nice to think all dogs don’t actually go to heaven, but get reincarnated into our next furry friends?

Bailey, the St. Bernard from “A Dog’s Purpose,” reappears as a kindly older dog in “Journey,” the beloved pet of Ethan (Dennis Quaid) and Hannah (Marg Helgenberger).

Bailey bonds with Ethan and Hannah’s toddler granddaughter, CJ (Emma Volk), while their daughter-in-law Gloria (Betty Gilpin) grieves the death of CJ’s father in a car wreck. A selfish and vain woman, she impulsively leaves the family farm with her daughter, denying the grandparents any chance of seeing her again while tossing off vague accusations about CJ’s father’s life insurance policy.

Losing a beloved dog is a part of pet ownership, and as Ethan says goodbye to his friend Bailey for the final time, he implores the dog to find and protect CJ in his next lives, because she’ll need it.

CJ grows up a lonely, sad girl (Abby Ryder Fortson and Kathryn Prescott), but Bailey finds her again and again, as a beagle named Molly, a mastiff named Big Dog and finally, a Yorkie named Max, who has the greatest influence on CJ’s life and helps her to believe in the magic of the animal’s spirit.

Going deeper

It’s about halfway through the film when one realizes how much deeper Mancuso and team are going with this dog’s journey.

This isn’t all romps in the tall grass and stories of puppy heroism or feats of strength — it’s about family trauma, death, domestic abuse, neglectful parenting, addiction and life-threatening illness. It’s about how dogs can fill the hole in your heart that a person might leave.

The whole schtick of these movies is the treat-motivated, not-quite-getting-it doggie voice-over, performed by Josh Gad, and it lightens the film.

But going dark and emotional makes the film work better than the prior two — because even among all the coincidences and twists of fate Molly and Max enact, what hits home the most is that dogs can offer people unconditional love when they need it most, and that has always been a dog’s purpose.


1165114_web1_gtr-mov-journey-051619
Youtube
CJ (Emma Volk) bonds with her grandparents’ elderly St. Bernard Bailey (voiced by Josh Gad) in “A Dog’s Journey.”
Categories: AandE | Movies TV
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.