MovieChat Forums > The Mexican (2001) Discussion > Dog in Mexico

Dog in Mexico

posted 18 years ago by marjorie-hillman
5 replies | jump to latest

I've just watched this film again, listening to the director's commentary.

I was astounded when he said that the dog who followed Brad Pitt's character almost everywhere with the seemingly permanently deflated football was in reality a golden retriever! He said that animals used by Hollywood are very valuable as they have to have a lot of time-consuming training to be any good in films. So to use a dog that was really as it appeared would not be possible, as it would hardly ever get any roles and so would not make money for its owners.

Apparently they had to make the dog up to look as dreadful as it did and, amongst other things, used charcoal to try to change its colour and to make it look so dirty.

Surely this has to be one of the best make up jobs ever? I'm wondering as well whether they gave the animal a haircut, as its fur does not seem to be as long as that of a golden retriever usually is.

What do others think?

I shouldn't have done that. I shouldn't have done that. No, you were brilliant. (Notting Hill)

[–] spido507 18 years ago

Yeah, the dog looked really scruffy, but they've got excellent makeup artists. Just think how nice they made Charlize Theron look in most of her films, even though in real life she resembles that Florida trailer-park murderess. If they say the dog was a golden retriever, then I guess it was -- I didn't listen to the commentary, but that dog was one of the few good things in the flick. Now as to the pistol of the title... not so good. I don't know if it was a genuine example or not, but I do know that there is a type of antique revolver (hardly 'ancient' as internet sites keep saying), made in the 1880's by Merwin, Hulbert & Co of Connecticut. Because it was a popular weapon in Mexico, many were sold there, many have returned to the US, and many remain south of the Border. Some have a special shaped hammer, favored by Mexicans for whatever reason, and these are "rare" and are the only "Mexican" revolvers known to the gun-collecting fraternity of the world. Not "priceless" -- today worth maybe $5,000 to collectors, depending on fanciness (like the one in the movie) and condition. As a McGuffin, it's okay, but not up there with "Winchester '73".

[–] Deathray-9 18 years ago

The pistol in the movie was a prop custom made for the movie. Director Gore Verbinski mentions this in the Extra's on the Special Edition DVD.

[–] CBikle 18 years ago

...make-up (the dog) and props (the gun), but more of this should've gone into the script.

If there was one.

[–] greenleafie 18 years ago

The real question is, who played the dog? It's such a pivital role, perhaps the most important in the film, but no credit is given for the actor. It's not fair! Also, is that supposed to be the dog's great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather we see in the first telling of the "legend?" Looks just like him.

[–] psdhart 14 years ago

Agreed about the dog, I noticed the dog in the flashback too, maybe it is the great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather ;)