1.6 The Power of the Dog

This Netflix release is seemingly the next big theatrical release to earn critical acclaim, as yesterday it earned four major awards at the 42nd annual London Critics' Circle Film Awards. With the film adaptation of Thomas Savage's 1967 Novel expected to win big yet again, next Sunday at the BAFTA Awards, for which it has received eight nominations. As Jane Campion's drama The Power of the Dog is one of the most critically acclaimed films of the year, making it a subsequent guarantee for an Academy Award Best Picture nomination as well as rumored nominations for writing, directing and performing.

The 2021 Western psychological drama film is based upon the 1967 novel The Power of the Dog by Thomas Savage. As this iteration is a far cry from its romantic predecessor as it depicts a more brutal state of affairs, whilst temperaments and egos collide to damaging effect. With Jane Campion writing and directing as the film stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock), Kirsten Dunst (Spider-Man), Jesse Plemons (Breaking Bad). With the New Zealand director, screenwriter and producer well known for her work already on films such as the 1993 Romance, drama The Piano. For which she became the second woman to be nominated for the Academy Award for Best Director and first female filmmaker to receive the Palme d'Or. As well as winning the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay, as her work and endless experience has benefitted and only added to her new release.

In terms what fundamentally makes a good film, The Power of the Dog not only achieves this but excels in it. With it foremostly being superbly shot as the films visual astonish early on and through out making it an easy frontrunner to win Best Picture at the 2022 Academy Awards. With it being hard not to adore and develop at least some admiration for the gorgeous cinematography that's has been expertly crafted by cinematographer Ari Wegner. With her portfolio including works such as Lady Macbeth & Zola. As her style best, not only suits the characters, tone and relatable atmosphere of this film but also the setting that constantly surrounds the protagonists and plays a vital role in the storyline. As the setting in particular never seems to take a back seat or is subsequently ignored making for a more stunning and visual enhanced viewing experience.

Along with its stunning visuals the film is brilliantly and expertly crafted, as the acting throughout is seemingly flawless. With Kirsten Dunst who plays Rose Gordon being a particular stand out. With her character who's relatively nervous and tense having a great character arc that some audiences might have ignored as we subtlety see her gradual change into an alcoholic. With it being hard not sympathise but also feel her pain, struggle and concern for her son Peter (Kodi Smit-McPhee). As Benedict Cumberbatch never sees to amaze, as his ability to portray and take the reins of any role continues into this project as he once again has managed to create a deeply driven and motivated performance. One particular reason for this simply outstanding acting is due to the meticulous detail and extraordinary controlled directing that best suits the films narrative, tone and overall pace.

With the story following a domineering rancher, Phil (Benedict Cumberbatch) who responds with mocking cruelty when his brother George (Jesse Plemons) brings home his new wife Rose (Kirsten Dunst) and her son Peter (Kodi Smit-McPhee), until the unexpected comes to pass. Whilst being set against the rural backdrop of 1925 Montana but instead shot in New Zealand. With Phil and his brother George being owners of a cattle ranch, as its clear from the off, that Phil is the more dominant sibling. With his constant and frequent references to the roman mythology of Romulus and Remus only cementing this further as well as the certain power imbalance and subsequent clash of personalities. With George seemingly the second in command and evidently falling behind until he meets and marries a young widowed mother played by Kirsten Dunst, much to the outrage and descent of his brother Phil. After a shortly lived honeymoon, Rose eventually moves into the cattle ranch, whilst her son, Peter, enrolls at a boarding school to study medicine using George's money. Often feeling and being left alone the psychological warfare between Phil and Rose begins, with it taking control of the main narrative and during the second act, introduces some much needed direction into the narrative. As its clear through Phil's disdainful and overall roughness that there is much more to the character that at first meets the eye. With there being a certain visceral misogyny sensed every time time he targets Rose for ridicule, whilst under his brothers nose. Whilst Dunst on the opposite end of the spectrum never fails to earn sympathy for a woman who's seemingly on the edge of a mental and nervous breakdown. As new manipulation devices and additional plot devices help to reduce the tension first established in the first half. With Phil gradually becoming more obsessed and intoxicated in the idea of breaking up their relationship by subsequently driving Rose, Kirsten Dunst's character, through a prolonged cycle of psychological and mental abuse. As the film, at times falls slightly flat and tedious as we wait in anticipation and intrigue for the inevitable events to take place. With the films underlying message being about the insecurity of manhood, class and tradition. As costume designer, Kirsty Cameron, not only brilliantly depicts this but portrays these subsequent levels and differences in class through a vast array of wardrobe styles from decadent suits to plim soles and woolly chaps. With every character superbly set apart further building and strengthening each character in a palpable way.

It must be said that The Power of the Dog, is an extremely power and meaningful film which pays incredible detail and care, however for some it might feel and fall slightly flat on the basis, as it can rely heavily at times on subtextual storytelling. Although many things are shown there not always explained or stated and this is no mistake. Its relying and hoping that audiences will best be engaged enough into the film and its narrative that we'll best to our abilities be able to understand and pay close enough attention to what's happening beneath the surface. As it's more than ever wanting audiences to read between the lines and understand the implied meanings. With one such example falling during the films second act, where its depicted, that Peter, during a walk out in the wilderness comes across a glade which within holds a stash of magazines depicting naked men. As it seems and looks to which to had belonged to Bronco henry, Phil's seemingly abusive and torrid mentor. Whilst Peter later comes across and accidentally spots Phil in a pond, bathing with a handkerchief belonging to Bronco Henry. Implying a possibly sexual relationship between the pair instead of a mentor like relationship, we were first led to believe. With Peter clearly and subsequently putting two and two together regarding Phil's past. With this scene brilliantly depicting the implied meaning audiences are ever so asked to pick up on and spot. Something which to the untrained eye they might not firstly realise or believe. As we get to see Phil's self-preservation and relatable instincts set in as he's kinda forced to take much more notice of Peter from this point forward. With there being a sudden shift in there relationship as Phil treats Peter with more respect and dignity, as well as going to the lengths of teaching Peter to ride a horse. All of this at first seems to look like the possible mentor relationship Phil had with Bronco Henry as if he's decided to take Peter in under his wing. However this is hard to believe and ignore as I was personally left to feel that all this behavior was just some more subsequent mind games to further intimidate Rose. Until Peter spots a shadow in the shape of dog on a nearby mountain, which is something seemingly only Phil and Bronco Henry could ever seem to spot and understand. Further strengthening the special and yet mysterious bond between the pair whilst also confusing Phil in the present as he starts to believe and consider the possibility whether or not him and Peter might share a similar connection. However its unclear whether or not if Peter has any suspicions about Phil's feelings. With Kodi Smit-McPhee's nervous and edgy portrayal leaving more to be desired and understood about Peters intentions and true feelings. Until we start to see the subtle first steps, Peter undertakes to form a larger plan to eventually bring down Phil and set his mother free. With this being yet another implied meaning during the solo ride Peter takes on which he comes across and cuts into the hide of a cow carcass with a scalpel. Knowingly or not this seems unlike Peter and quite abnormal compared to the Peter we've come to know. As at this point its hard to understand if it's just the after effects and causes of being mentored by Phil or if its well and truly apart of something bigger. As Peter notices Phil's deep, lacerated cut, instead he chooses, despite his medical background, to say nothing. Further adding to the uncertain tone whilst instead taking such an opportunity, whilst out on an open job to repair fences, to build and further cement there bond by telling Phil personal details about how his father died. As viewers are left to best understand how there once fractured and torn relationship has dramatically changed and been taken to whole new level. As our concerns are raised as Rose is more than ever concerned about the amount of time Phil has spent with her son. As Rose chooses to instead defiantly sell Hides to a local indigenous trader for a pair of gloves, after learning about Phil's policy of burning any hides that he doesn't need for himself, this might at the time seem a random and desperate act to commit, in order to get one up over Phil. However it ultimately proves to be rather a crucial component in his eventual demise. The subsequent reason for this being that Phil now has no hides left to finish Peter's lasso which seems to a very personal, important and meaningful exercise for Phil. Given it was something he use to do with Bronco Henry, further adding to and strengthening there supposed relationship. With it being something Phil now wishes to do with Peter instead, as if he genuinely wants a similar relationship to form between the pair. As Peter gives Phil a taste of his own medicine and eventually is able to turn and identify this emotional pain and vulnerability by taking advantage and manipulating his trust. By suggesting they instead use the hide from the sick cow to continue making Peter Lasso's. Knowing how much, such an exercise meant to Phil its clear how Peter knew full well that using the sick cows hide could well infect Phil's deep, lacerated hand wound. With there time spent in the cabin crafting such a Lasso allowing Phil to instead open up about the time Bronco Henry saved his life in the mountains by combining their body heat during freezing weather. However he chooses to remain quite when Peter asks if they were clothed or not. With this all but being a confirmation that Phil and Bronco Henry's supposedly mentorship and relationship was not just platonic and instead has a much deeper meaning. With his young age further painting Phil as a potential victim of abuse, which is hard to believe, but could be a relevant cause and explain his overall personality and why he chooses to act out against Rose in particular. As George the next morning finds him sick, unwell and unable to attend breakfast with his heavily infected hand wound seemingly gotten worse. With Phil acting out and seemingly delirious as well as being emotionally invested in Peter at this point. As Phil is taken to the hospital by George before he can ever give the Lasso to Peter. Until in the very next scene we see George picking and choosing out a coffin, while Phil's body is getting prepared for burial. With it being up and until the funeral were George is eventually told that his brother likely died of anthrax, leaving him both startled and puzzled even though Phil was always careful to avoid diseased cattle. As Peter is left at home to read verses from the bible and the subsequent burial service, as he's seen placing the now finished lasso under his bed, all the while wearing gloved hands. As he soon watches his mother and step dad, Rose and George return from the funeral. As they embrace with Rose now eventually being sober again, further implying how she's been set free and that it was in fact Peter's brain child and idea all along. As he intentionally plotted to kill Phil. Some people might choose to question the intricacies of the assassination plot however instead I was left feeling quite disturbed and shocked as a character who I once saw as nervous and timid seems to in fact be quite sinister and rather disturbing instead.

In reason, for more casual viewers due to its intricate plot its easy to see how the film can possibly and entirely go over your head. Therefore putting an extreme amount of trust and pressure into the viewer that we're concentrating and vigilant enough throughout. Its for this reason I best understand and respect this films ambition and intelligence. With it being a very intellectual and possibly for some, challenging cinematic experience with it making audiences themselves put and piece together its narrative. With the films quite open ending and possible decision to leave a lot of the exact details and timeline of the plot open and ambiguous leaves a sense that it was mainly done on purpose. Allowing audiences to better debate on such details and elements of the film and in particular how remaining pieces do all fit together. Such was, what the ending bible quote might well and truly mean in the open context of the films ending and how there are so many likely and possible theories that can be derived from it. Even though it seems and appears that Peter chose to and picked it out in an ironic sense, given that it quite accurately and poetically sums up his assassination plot from Phil's perspective.

IMO - Even though I was entertained and best kept engaged, for my personal taste its the films acting, direction and cinematography in particular that has it going for it the most, with the script and overall story being highly ambitious and undoubtedly clever. However how you personally rate this film, fundamentally depends on your taste and opinions on films. With its ambitious narrative needing viewers to be constantly engaged and concentrated which for some, might be a put off or for others a viewed opportunity rather a masterpiece instead. The Drama I feel, will be a much better watch possibly during a second viewing whilst, beyond its puzzling narrative its easy to understand how and why this very good film has earned its subsequent nominations and plaudits, whilst its also understandable and easy to see why for some they might feel the film can be branded as a bit overrated. For my personal taste, I'm learn towards the latter with it being mainly due to my tastes and personal preferences when its comes to film. Whilst also still being able to admire and respect the films intelligence and well crafted and underlying plot, which at first isn't so visible for all to see. With The Power of the Dog being a story at its heart and core about the cautionary tale of gaslighting, demonstrating the devasting and long-lasting damages it can cause to victims of it. As well as the power it affords and offers to those who choose to sink low enough to use such manipulation. It isn't by any mean a full definitive explanation of The Power of the Dog and the original 1967 novel by Thomas Savage however instead or rather more an informed interpretation. 3.5/5 Stars