Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Dogs ain't a half bad made flick, about a potpourri of dogs, who meet up and go on a killing spree, killing anything animal or human. What is doing it? That's the million dollar question. It leads us to question our our species, as if becoming part of a gang, where we become brainwashed, and commit things we normally wouldn't do, if graduating to murder. But in this open ended, and not too optimistic film, that's pretty gruesome, near it's finale, it's M rating pushing it, we don't find out. Bugger. David McCallum lends a fine performance as the smart hunky professor of Scientology, the real smartie, determined to get to the bottom of the killings, those cattle mutilations early on, aren't for sheep lovers. The violence in Dogs in pretty raw and frank. A younger Linda Gray co-stars before her Dallas days, as Wyner's performance as the new Scientist was strong, and actually likable in a sense. Suspense runs high, some of it electric near the end, and is well executed, the opening music score with our favorite pooches in slo mo, all banding together, my favorite part. They're are some unintentionally funny moments, whether dialogue or acting, but they made 70's movies what they were. This is a well made film, badly dated "Yes", but bad, "No". Warning: Are some scenes are dog murder.

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.

Pheramones are responsible for transforming ordinary domestic pet dogs into a pack of wild beasts, roaming the countryside attacking anyone and anything in their path. Local university professor, alcoholic, playboy and dyed-in-the-wall cynic (McCallum, sporting a beatnik hairstyle and resembling Bill Oddie of "The Goodies") tag teams with new kid on the block Wyner to convince the local authorities that dogs are in fact responsible for the rash of brutal mutilations committed on both livestock, and the locals. Borrowing heavily from "Jaws", the stage is set for a hunt or perish climax where the pack hyper-excite their pheromones to dangerously high levels, and unleash hell on the residents, including sultry Linda Gray (top-billed on the dust cover, but only featuring in two scenes).The only motif missing from McCallum's sage, neo-liberal, academic stereotype is the corduroy jacket with leather elbow patches. Not content to let the dogs do their own rampaging, Wyner's character helps them out, by managing to herd a bunch of students into a facility for safety, only for them to be torn to shreds by the marauding pack once inside. It's almost satirical, but then Wyner is more suited to comedy as his subsequent film career affirmed. After all the postulating, hypothesizing and gesticulating, the final fifteen minutes is a slaughter-fest, as the pack raid and pillage their way from one casualty to the next.Aside from the frequent physics and social science dissertations delivered by the cast, the action sequences stand apart from other films of the ilk (perhaps with the exception of Robert Clouse's "The Pack"), even if the body count is unrealistically abundant; when McCallum and McCabe survey the damage late in the film, almost everyone in town appears to have been slain. And proving that filmmakers have a keen observation for potential in almost any situation, there's even a hint at a sequel. The film fades out on a somewhat docile looking ginger cat, expelling a yawn (audio overlaid by a fearsome growl), not too keen on the sequel idea.

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)