Review from Screendaily


Year of the Dog
22 Jan 2007 13:51


Dir/Scr: Mike White. US. 2007. 98mins.

Mike White's outre wit and malicious satirical imagination is shown to sometimes spectacular effect in Year of the Dog. It is an alternately strange, puzzling and highly peculiar directing debut about a woman whose private trauma, coupled with her professional failure and romantic disappointment, violently unsettles her.

In his scripts from Chuck & Buck, The Good Girl and School of Rock, White has displayed an unsentimental, ink black sensibility, using words like knives to vivisect religious intolerance and corporate conformity, or even better, unfurling startlingly direct and intense expressions of sexual longing.

As a writer of one-liners, he is unsurpassed, expertly balancing the funny, outrageous and crude. "Even retarded, crippled people get married," says one marriage obsessed office worker. From the opaque references to his stylized visual design, Year of the Dog is an exceptionally tough sell, a movie that is possibly too smart, strange and unclassifiable to attract a mainstream audience.

The likely target audience is older teenagers and young males, the pop junkies who gravitate around works such as Mike Judge, Rushmore, Napoleon Dynamite, Dilbert, The Simpsons, The Office and intuitively recognize the off-centre humor and anarchic structure. The movie's rude playfulness is certain to both alienate and attract viewers. Secondary home video and cable markets are the likely strongest revenue currents. Internationally the movie is bound to work only in English language markets, where some understanding of language and context is vital.

The movie's deliciously imagined heroine, Peggy (Shannon) is revealed as a font of optimism and good faith, a capable executive assistant and attentive, caring sister and aunt. Her emotional satisfaction resides entirely in the form of Pencil, an alert, obedient beagle.

After the beloved dog dies after being mysteriously exposed to a toxic poison, followed by a succession of striking romantic failures, Peggy undergoes a startling reversal that is either righteous or demented. Turning into a vengeful warrior, she embezzles money to help fund radical animal rights groups that protest scientific and animal experiments.

In a mad act of Christian charity, she takes possession of 15 dogs marked for euthanasia. She also takes violent retribution against her neighbor and failed suitor (Reilly), a hunting enthusiast whom she blames for the death of her dog. White's recurrent problem is form and structure.

Stuffed with incident and detail, moving from class envy to berserk materialism, Year of the Dog is largely hit and miss, buoyant, rude and playfully nasty at its best. It is also sometimes inchoate and jerky in its rhythms and movements. A veteran of Saturday Night Live, Shannon works wonders with the part, her face a constantly changing mask of happiness, satisfaction, rage and impudence.

In the large, very capable supporting cast, Reilly is excellent as a suburban comic foil, though the strongest work comes from King as Debby' office colleague and Pais as her hilariously unsettled boss. Technically, cinematographer Tim Orr's visual design is both bright and oppressive, the fixed camera appearing to constantly undermine or unsettle the characters.

Christophe Beck's music is also disruptive and funky. Dody Dorn's editing feels too often like television, a succession of reaction shots. The movie is genuinely subversive in how it oscillates between madness and the divine, never assigning absolute conviction or certainty to Peggy's actions, never wholly judging or condemning them, presenting them as an elaborate consequence of her aggrieved situation.

It does not betray his talent though it also never quite expands on his considerable gifts.

reply

Great review, but.

I'm sick of women being discounted as a "likely target audience" when a movie contains irony, pop culture references and/or black humor. I'm a late 20's woman, and the directors and films you mention are all among my favorites, and many are my female friends' as well. I can see how "Talladega Nights" or "Beerfest" would target young males (though I found both to be enjoyable)...but "The Simpsons" and "The Office"?? We're not all watching "Sweet Home Alabama" while eating Ben and Jerry's out of the carton. And don't forget that the main character IS Molly Shannon--an older woman at that--so I'd guess even Mike White would disagree with you over the age and gender of his intended audience.

reply

**** Maybe Spoilers in reply below ******


Quote:
"In a mad act of Christian charity, she takes possession of 15 dogs marked for euthanasia"

In the movie it really doesn't state that she is Christian, though there are scenes when she wears a cross necklace.

She rescues the Dogs from the City Pound, because she has become a strict Vegan who is against anything that causes an animal to die. And she is upset because her second dog has been put to sleep - and a romance with the Vegan animal trainer did not happen.

And I don't recall it being suggested in the movie that she rescues the dogs for any religious reason, other than the moral belief that animals should not be put to death.

reply

I just saw the movie in a sneek preview last night, and what sunnysky58 said is accurate. Mike White was at the screening, and pointed out a lot of characters in the film are obsessed with something or another to the point where it is like a religion to them. Maybe that's what was meant to be said, but misworded? There was nothing "actually" religious about the film.

reply

[deleted]

Saving those dogs could easily be described as "an act of Christian charity", though many Christians might prefer that more charity be spent on unfortunate human souls, not amimals.

And Peggy certainly always seemed to have that crucifix necklace on. Someone who intends to see this film twice; please check to see it it's there before Pencil offs himself.

The writer had her wear the crucifix for some reason. Maybe the reason ended up on the cutting room floor. As the film stands, there isn't enough info to turn this film into a statement on religion, I think.

Excuse me... Where are we going? And Why are we in this handbasket?

reply