Never Cry Wolf

Never Cry Wolf (1983)

Director: Carroll Ballard

Writers: Farley Mowatt (novel), Curtis Hanson (screenplay), Sam Hamm (screenplay), Richard Kletter (screenplay), Charles Martin Smith (narration), Eugene Corr (narration), Christina Luescher (narration)

Cast: Charles Martin Smith, Brian Dennehy, Zachary Ittimangnaq, Samson Jorah

Synopsis:

Researcher Tyler (Martin Smith) is sent by the government to the Arctic to investigate the possibility that wolves are responsible for the reduction in the caribou population. He hires a local bush pilot, Rosie (Denney), to fly him to the wilderness to study the wolves in their natural habitat. After struggling alone his first few days in the harsh environment, Tyler meets the Inuit, Ootek (Ittimangnaq), who helps him learn about the wolves and himself and his place in the universe.

First Impressions:

I was about seven years old when I saw this movie on VHS for the first time. I thought the movie was neat as I really liked the idea of a man all alone braving the wilderness. I was also quite fond of animals back then, particularly those of the canine persuasion, and I really liked wolves. So, even though I didn't grasp many of the concepts the movie delved into, I still enjoyed it because I liked the outdoors, and I liked wolves. I think this movie is the genesis of my attraction to the "Man vs. Nature" genre. I'm always big on watching a character endure harsh environments to survive. It's probably why I also dig survival video games. I had gone without seeing the film again for a couple of decades when I discovered this at my local Best Buy on DVD around 15 years back. I don't think I've seen it since then, and I'm super excited to watch it again. Who knows, maybe I'll pick up on some stuff that I overlooked when I was a kid.

Story/Direction: 

"In the end, there were no simple answers. No heroes or villains; only silence."

At its core, I believe this movie - like most survival movies - is about the journey of self-discovery. While most films in the genre include protagonists who are unwillingly thrust into their situations, Tyler goes to the Arctic willingly. His premise is simply to learn more about the wolves; however, what ends up happening is the wolves teach him more about himself. Rewatching this film, I am amazed that I took to it at all as a kid. There's not much action, very little comedy and a whole bunch of self-reflection. There really isn't much of a story, shoot; there isn't even a heck of a lot of dialogue either. Most of the speaking done is via voice-over narration. Still, I find this film utterly compelling, and I'm not certain why. 

I relate to Tyler on several different levels. He speaks about how he feels like an outsider not just in the environment he currently finds himself in but also back home. I've always felt like I didn't fit in in most places. Tyler also has to cope with solitude through much of the movie, having only the wolves to occupy his time. I can certainly relate to that, particularly over the last 12 months. Certainly, my connection to the character is part and parcel of my fascination with this film, but there has to be more. Of course, the scenery displayed (more on that later) is breathtaking, and I feel a swell of pride knowing that it was filmed at the top of this beautiful country I call home. I've always felt that a good-looking movie can often overcome weaknesses in a film's story, but I don't think that's it either. 

No, I really think it comes back to Tyler's character and how he discovers his true self during his journey. I don't think many people realize, particularly those who don't live alone, is how continued solitude can bring a person inward towards themselves. How it brings about questions and anxiety about a variety of things. So I think that's why I find this film so compelling is Tyler's journey within himself and how much I can relate to it (even though the worst cold I have to deal with is just scraping my car off in the morning). Seriously, how did I ever find this interesting as a kid? Perhaps I was a deeper child than I thought...

Acting:

I think this is the first movie I've reviewed where there are more writer credits than acting credits. That is to say, there's not a lot of speaking parts in this film—the most prominent, of course, Charles Martin Smith's Tyler. As I mentioned in the previous section, I really related to this character, and that's due in no small part to Martin Smith's efforts. He plays the character with an intense vulnerability but with a hidden strength just waiting to emerge. It's a difficult thing to ask of an actor to basically carry the plot of an entire film by themselves with no one else to bounce off of, and Martin Smith does a great job. 

Brian Dennehy, as always, is terrific as the gamble/pilot Rosie. The character is meant to be a "dark" reflection of Tyler, I think. What he could have become had he not gone through this experience. While Dennehy is often tasked with playing authority figures, I quite liked his turn as a lovable scoundrel. He plays Rosie with equal parts sincerity and impishness, and it works well here.

The other two speaking roles, Ootek and his adoptive son, Mike - played by Zachary Ittimangnaq and Samson Jorah, respectively - do an admirable job considering neither appear to have had any prior experience in film acting. In particular, Ittimangnaq, who doesn't speak a word of English throughout the movie, has to convey much with only his face, and he does a great job. One more thing to note, some more jaded viewers may look at the character of Oootek and think he's merely a personification of the "Native Mentor" trope. I don't think he is because Tyler reaches his self-realization on his own; Ootek is merely there when it happens. That's not to diminish the character's importance at all, quite the contrary. It's almost as if Ootek is Tyler's guardian angel, sent to watch him and make sure he takes the right path.

Visual/Special Effects:

It's pretty common for me to say that a movie doesn't have many special effects; however, it's really uncommon for me to say a movie has no special effects whatsoever. This is the case here. I don't think I spotted any instance where there was a need for special or visual effects, which is...odd. That being said, there is still a visual beauty to this movie that begins and ends with the Arctic backdrop. While many similar movies portray the region as punishingly harsh, almost like an ever-present enemy, this film really shows the environment to be a sanctuary, and Eden almost. Again, it's such a unique portrayal that it helps endear this film to me. 

Score/Soundtrack:

The music in this film, composed by Mark Isham, may have vaulted up a few slots on my favourite movie scores list. It's certainly a product of its time, with its liberal use of an electronic sound, but it's still an almost perfect pairing of sound and sight. The music is very minimalist and has an almost ethereal quality to it, which makes the Arctic seem so much more mysterious and beautiful at the same time. 

Action:

There's not a whole ton of action here. Now that I think about it, there's only one real "action" sequence that I can think of, and that's near the end, where Tyler is caught in a herd of stampeding caribou and must run his way out. But even that sequence isn't terribly action-packed. It goes to show you that you don't need shit blowing up all over the place to make a compelling movie. 

Final Verdict:

Maybe it's that pandemic life that has made me a bit shack-whacky, or maybe I'm just getting older and more reflective about my life but I really dig this movie, probably more than I did when I was a kid. I know it's not a well-known flick, and I won't get many views because of that but seriously, it's worth a watch either by oneself, with a significant other or with the whole family. Check it out.