Red Dog: True Blue (2016)

**The Blue's tale, a true free spirit.** The return of the Red Dog. It has been five years since the first film. Who knew it, I never expected a film like that could get a sequel. That was inspired by a true event, but not this one. It was actually a prequel that tells the story of Red's earlier life, where did he come from, his owner et cetera. No one knows the real story, but after the 'Red Dog's success, seems they were desperate for the one more shot, hence this fictional account was born. Not as good as the first. In fact, no way anywhere near to that. All they did was to add all the possible ingredients to it to make it appeal everybody. So basically it looks like another 'Free Willy: Escape from Pirate's Cove'. With enough comedies, adventures, one Chinese guy, aboriginal legend, storm and obviously the sentiments that strike at the right time. From the same director and the writer, but not the dog. The original award winning dog, Koko, for the role Red had died after a year later the film got released. After hearing that, I got emotional as same as the film he had starred in. That was one of the best dog films ever and one of the best tearjerker as well. Then I wanted to see this one too, but I had knew it won't surpass the original. So I had to keep my expectations low for it. This new guy called Phoenix was as good as Koko, but his role had a lesser scope. The effort/dedication/performance was the same, which is highly appreciable. Besides, he was very adorable. In fact, I felt hurt whenever he run alongside the motorbike. It might be natural, but I thought it was inhumane. I believe it was the multiple shots, not a single run. Coming to the story, it was told from a boy's perspective, his relation with the Red, but the original name was Blue. > ❝True blackness has a power all of its own. It doesn't just swallow light. It's like it swallows your soul.❞ I did not like the opening scene. I thought it was very ordinary. So I guessed it's going to be a terrible film. But it did not take long to get back to the point. Once the flashback had started, it looked a different film. The entire narration was a recall. More a bedtime story. A father reveals to his son about the dog he'd lived with when he was at his age in the rural Australia in his grandfather's place. How he had found the dog and grew together, their friendship, mischiefs and other adventures. Then what happened later between them, all his life events with the Blue was told. As I said, the screenplay was average, but the performances saved the film. The boy, the dog and all the co-stars were very good. The locations were even better. Just like the previous film, it was an ideal setting. The overall film was enjoyable, but the ending was very emotional. Having seen the first, anybody would have an idea what might come at the end, but not knowing how. I thought the same, but was not expecting the sentiments. The film ended with high. It also closed at where the original film had started, to make a perfect flow. One thing I did not get was the unnecessary supernatural events. Yeah, I know the story sets in the Pilbara region, hence borrowed some local legend to stretch the storyline. But with the wildfire scene, it leans too much on that concept, making to slip away from the actual focus of the film. More than that, the film never clearly explained that segment. Now the real question is the story of Red/Blue ends here or can be expected more drag with a prequel and a sequel. First of all, I am not very happy with the fictional account. For that reason alone, it is not a must see. Because it could mislead the original film's die hard fans. So they should have given the statement at the opening that it was not based on the real. Other than that, it is a decent film in the 'Red Dog' series. Finally, I would say, it is a good film, but not the best. _7/10_