SnoopyStyle Tom (Luke Ford) arrives at a remote bar to find a bunch of men trying to euthanize a dog. They can't and Jack Collins (Noah Taylor) recounts the story of the dog. In 1971, Jack picks up the dog in the middle of the road. His bad-smelling farts force them to put the dog in the open trailer. By the time they arrive in the mining town of Dampier, the dog is covered with red dust gaining the name Red Dog. He has no owner and hitches rides by simply sitting in the middle of the road. He is more a member of the community of brash miners. New bus driver John Grant (Josh Lucas) is intrigued and becomes his friend. New secretary Nancy Grey (Rachael Taylor) pushes her way to sit in his seat on the bus. John and Nancy become a couple. When John dies riding his bike, Red Dog travels the world looking for his friend.This is one of those doggy movies. It could have been better to fully embrace the genre. It certainly has some wacky comedy fun. I care a lot less about Josh Lucas. The movie should follow only Red Dog and his various adventures. Jack keeps going back to the animal hospital and that sequence is pretty fun. Red Dog looking for John is really touching. This movie should be Benji with some dirtier jokes. I also don't like starting the movie in the future with the euthanasia. It's an awkward attempt at a joke and that happens a few times in this movie.

pmalexmckenny Directed by Kriv Stenders, Red Dog is about a small desolate community of miners who bond and unite under the local stray known to them as Red Dog. When Red Dog loses his master, he sets out to find him on a legendary journey that inspires those around him.Red Dog could have been a truly meaningful movie, but too many attempts at international and family appeal resulted in an endless array of childish clichés. I could imagine future viewers rolling their eyes every time the characters scold Red Dog for farting or some other awkward bodily function. The biggest cliché offender was a fight scene between Red Dog and "Red Cat" that seemed to be plucked straight out of 'Looney Tunes' when the two animals clashed in a literal tornado of dust and paws. Physical comedy and clichés subtracted immensely from the overall quality of the movie.What could have been an arsenal of authentic characters, instead diminished into racial stereotypes, with quirky backstories, thrown in to keep the movie from becoming tedious. Like the Italian, named Vanno, who had nothing going for him but his borderline racist rants about his hometown, or Peeto whose single purpose seems to be to act like an Australian stereotype. What was disappointing was how intriguing characters (like the Russian men, the harmonica player, the local policeman, Vanno's love interest, and even the sun-burned man who spoke Chinese all seemed like potentially entertaining characters), instead were given 15 seconds of fame and then vanished into background extras. The main character John Grant (Josh Lucas) was just as dull as the secondary characters, except he wasn't a complete stereotype. Sadly, the other main character Nancy (Rachel Taylor) seemed to be thrown in to serve the purpose as a love interest for John. Fortunately, Rachel Taylor's great acting allowed Nancy to develop into one of the movie's main characters. Everything aside, the movie had an excellent cast, but the characters needed more attention.The one thing that stood out in the movie was the cinematography and camera work, each shot from landscape to close-up was done elegantly. Unfortunately, the director got too carried away and began bombarding the screen with montages. It became apparent that this excessive use of montages was almost like the director was trying to rush through the story. It seemed like the film script was: side character meets Red Dog, side character spends montage with Red Dog, something significant happens to character, rinse and repeat. I felt compelled to check to see if I hadn't sat on my remote and triggered the fast forward button. I felt that the director could have spent less time on montages and more time developing the characters and plot.Due to sponsorship from large mining industries like Rio Tinto, Red Dog was packed with mining advertisements. Scene after scene, trailers full of minerals are seen crawling across the landscape. There is absolutely no mining in the actual movie, the producers would rather have the 'miners' sit around and do nothing than put the horrendous sight of an open-cut mine on camera and risk their sponsor's disapproval. In the 1970's miners were paid little and worked in dangerous conditions. The miners in the movie seem oblivious to this as they are constantly going to the pub and betting. They should be rioting, not having hoedowns! In the movie they claim to be multicultural miners, yet they are all white Europeans, despite records of Asian migrants mining in Australia as far back as the gold rush. Even though this was an Australian movie, there were no indigenous Australians. In the real mining industry in the 1970's there were disputes over land between the mining companies and the tribes who lived there, this is not mentioned in the movie. The writer, producers, and director could have used the true nature of the mining industry to their advantage. This could have been a movie about a small community of poor miners trying to make a living under the demanding regime of the mining industry, who turn to the stray - Red Dog for comfort. As Vanno said " he is a dog for everybody, but no one in particular". Addressing things like the treatment of miners, the mining industry's disrespect for the indigenous people, hope and friendship could have created increased interest in the movie.What looked to be an esteemed Australian classic, turned out to be a cheesy Australian combination of Lassie and Grown-ups 2 with a mining theme. Red Dog was just another Aussie movie to bite the dust.

Tim Johnson Diane and I saw this gem last night on TV because, unfortunately, we missed it when it was on the big screen some months ago. I adore Australian films; they are everything that Hollywood isn't: warm, believable, non-violent, real, heart-warming, under-the-top.The "critics" seemed to dislike the film for all these reasons: these were absent from this true story. I have read their critic comments and they have thrown in those word-gems that any person commenting about a film can always pulls out; that action in itself is the cliché' that they fulminate against. These critics and commentators have a folder filled with words and phrases that they use if the film is actually a believable, human film that is something to which a person can relate.The film itself takes place in an area of this state in which I live; an area that is hugely rich in iron ore but an area that is extremely hot, isolated and difficult in which to live. This area is home to people of a calibre that I could never hope to be: strong, resilient and stoic. Therefore, for people (mainly guys because of the nature of the work) with these personality traits to show such respect and love to a stray dog says something positive about them. Yes, they do fall into personality types; the core of the film, humans bonding with animals, has been seen many times before but who wrote the rules for script writing. Screen coldness is out of date, its old hat; it has been seen in all its forms and it comes up wanting more times than not.Red Dog is a story from which many, many elements can be wrung. Rent it, you will not be sorry!

Daniil Petrov After seeing the movie, I questioned myself why I even watched it. It is a dull story of a stray dog which people adore for no reason. S what if the dog was searching for its owner? It was just following it's instincts, it was not from true heart. An instinct is like a looping program. Dogs are programmed to stay near their owner. It just followed its program! Whereas a dog is always happy to see its owner, you need to work to get your cat's respect. That is the difference between a cat and a dog. There is no such thing as animal loyalty. Only people are capable of that. Do not think that animals are equal to humans in emotions, because animals will always stay beasts and they must never replace a human. That is that. Since there is no 0 rating, I give 1/10+1 for beautiful landscapes which distract you from the movie.