Theo Robertson After reviewing a film where dogs disguised as rats kill people I thought a nice antidote might be seeing a film where dogs playing dogs go on a rampage and kill people . Variety is the spice of life and these type of movies are as spicy as a glass of cold water but the premise seems to have a relatively cheesy and predictable storyline and expectations are definitely not high so there's probably not much chance of being bitterly disappointed by it's quality . I mean we are talking about a film that stars David McCallum McCallum is a Glasgow born actor with a very international background . That's one of the problems with a film starring McCallum - his accent is grating and distracting and comes closest to sounding Australian while never actually sounding Australian . At least his accent if not his performance does have an impact even if it's not in a positive way because everyone else is extremely bland . Dogs are being driven wild by pheromones via medical experiments . Don't ask if this is scientifically plausible because you're not supposed to examine the science in any great depth . You will be able to examine the rather poor acting as people are attacked by dogs including a biker who is savaged and gives the impression he's being molested to death judging by the rather sexual sounds he's emitting surrounded by a couple of mutts . An old lady comes to his rescue then just as she realises what's happening she gets jumped by a dog and turns in to a stuntman wearing a white wig and she too starts moaning " oh oh oh God " almost as though she's getting rogered by a mammal that has a fetish for older woman . . Biker boy staggers away while there's a jump cut to the next day with Aussie Scotsman getting told a biker has been mauled to death by some wild dogs . This scene doesn't make much sense since it's highly unlike the injuries sustained by the biker would be fatal . And what happened to little old lady/stuntman ? Did the dogs hide her body or consume her so completely nothing remained of her ? As the film continues we're treated to more and more outlandish plot turns that are highly unlikely such dog victims being found in cupboards . There is a deranged quality to all this which means DOGS has an entertainment value even if that value is totally unintentional

Brian T. Whitlock (GOWBTW) When they say, gone to the dogs, they really mean it. In "Dogs",man's best friend maybe man's worst enemy. In a California valley, there are some sightings of attack. The cattle and livestock are being killed off. By what? Wolf? Coyote? Mountain lion? Well, the mountain lion was not it, so it has to be canine. Well it was neither wolf, nor coyote but the the domestic cousin, the dog. In the daytime, they are docile. But when the nighttime comes, they become instant killing machines. Each night, when the moon is full, the dogs gather in packs. And breed of it is no big deal. These canine menaces kill without mercy. They slaughter the livestock, but one time in the day, they barked and attacked the people at the dog show they set up. What is going on? Well, two college professors have studied the pheromones earlier, and they are suggesting that it's a factor. But one night, they get the shock of their lives for the first time. Whatever it is, the answer is inconclusive. Why would man's best friend would ever turn on you? I would not advise finding a new pet, or banning dogs out of your life because of this movie? Instead of popcorn, I advise dog biscuits, bones, and plenty of dog food. You'll need it! 2 out of 5 stars.

Coventry I have a giant weakness for those typical "animals-on-a-rampage movies", especially if they were released in the 70's and even more so when the title simply exists of the animal species, like "Grizzly", "The Bees", "Shark!" or – like in this case - "Dogs". That's like saying: this is the type of animal we're dealing with here and you already know it's serious even without adding juicy prefixes like "Wild", "Ravenous" or "Savage". This unjustly obscure and neglected mid-70's gem deserves a little more attention from genre fanatics, if it were only for its absurdly grotesque plot and – especially – for its exhilarating climax. There are numerous creature-features with dogs out there, most are bad ("Mongrel", "Play Dead", "Dogs of Hell") and some are good ("White Dog", "The Pack"), but one thing they all have in common is that they simply featured dogs that were either physically abused or trained to be killers. The fun part about "Dogs" is that the animals' murderous behavior is a result of genetic experiments and therefore mankind's own damn fault! The events take place on a quite and remote university campus, where people's loyal and harmless dogs suddenly turn into aggressive animals and form deadly packs at night. A duo of professors discovers that the government secretly experiments with dogs in the school's laboratory. Based on the group spirit and communication skills of ants through the pheromone chemical, the experiments are intended to accomplish a similar reaction between dogs so that they can be used as effective weapons. The tests are a little too successful, as all dogs in the area are affected and go on a relentless killing spree. "Dogs" starts off slow and boring with too much wannabe intellectual gibberish nobody really cares about and overly extended character drawings of protagonists nobody is really interested in. I began to worry even more when the first couple of dog-attacks were shot in the dark and you could only a bit of groaning and barking. Yet, just when you start to accept the fact "Dogs" is nothing more than a forgettable and lackluster low-budgeter, the script throws all tediousness overboard and goes for sheer entertainment. The last half hour is good cheesy fun with an enormous death toll, grainy make-up effects and unintentionally hilarious situations. One of the professors tries to rescue his love interest while the other desperately attempts to evacuate the campus. Eventually the dogs break into the library – courtesy of the fat nerd who found it necessary to separate from the group in search for snacks – and massacre the entire campus! The climatic bloodbath, together with the tacky freeze-frame ending, made "Dogs" a viewing experience I personally can't be too harsh on. And then I haven't even mentioned Linda Grey shower-sequence! Seek out this bad puppy (pun intended)

Michele Martelossi (dejavu73) What if one day, your cute puppy dog starts taking a run at you and biting your hand or feet? You'd probably think "it's time I get it to its veterinary". But what if a pack of dogs starts assaulting people with wild abandon in a little town in California? DOGS tries to teach us how it could be. After having repeatedly witnessed to all kind of animals attacking humanity between '60s and '70s flicks, here it comes this movie. I pretty like it and it was given to me by chance while I was purchasing a video recorder, about twenty years ago. Very hard to catch I'm afraid, not even on DVD 'till now. From the beginning, I was intrigued by David McCallum and Linda Gray, this one starring as Mrs. Engle before jumping into the Sue Ellen's odyssey on the TV drama DALLAS. And I found interesting the movie was mostly shot closing to the floor at the characters' foot, while they're stroking the pets. Just there, I spotted a reference to a fortunate dog movie series in the '70s: BENJI. But Hitchcock's devices, you know, insinuate all over this era. So what if THE BIRDS over cross the set, taking a little trip from Bodega Bay to Chula Vista, San Diego? Therefore a dogs' parade could become a children and ladies' flight with dogs acting in the way Hitchcock would have directed them and angrily barking and running after innocent, unarmed children and populace. Therefore a man could try to protect his refuge and loves from attacks by covering doors with boards and planks. And differently from the other ones, a dog could resemble the pacific couple of Melania Daniels' caged lovebirds. But what about PSYCHO and its unforgettable scene under the shower? Guess! Anyway, I really appreciate the way the director devised his inspirer sources: he surely set up an original tale with a good location in Southwestern University. Not to mention other influences on it - as SQUIRM on the same year or BUG one year before - this movie really charms due to its scientific and biological explanation: an high energy accelerator near campus maybe drives the dogs crazy. It makes all more realistic than ever, even if political reasons and hidden researches spoil the plot as those in Joe Dante's PIRANHA do. ***Possible SPOILER ahead***Considering also THE STRAWBERRY STATEMENT movie (1970), You could compare its ending to the one in DOGS. Centering the attention on campus, both of the films turn fatefully to a final massacre between young students living there. The canine mass acts as the police does in the other movie, making us believe society must pay an heavy price because of its political and scientific strategies. This last and the scene about the pets' exposition are my favorite ones. 6/10