Two teenage step brothers fall for the same girl on a chaotic road trip from Shetland to Glasgow.Two teenage step brothers fall for the same girl on a chaotic road trip from Shetland to Glasgow.Two teenage step brothers fall for the same girl on a chaotic road trip from Shetland to Glasgow.
- Awards
- 6 wins & 4 nominations
Craig Anthony Ralston
- Peerie Joe
- (as Craig Anthony-Ralston)
Geoffrey Austin Newland
- Gerry
- (as Geoffrey Newland)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe first extra acting work for Mark Kennedy.
Featured review
Grim.
Watched this as I'm an admirer of the director Philip John (he's responsible for many episodes of Downton Abbey & Being Human, the latter of which I absolutely loved) so I went in to "Moon Dogs" with an open mind & an expectation that I'd enjoy the movie... So I'm really disappointed to see the low-budget indie project (the filmmaker's first feature debut) contains such a weirdly perverse, voyeuristic depiction of women throughout... And I'm not going to even try & defend such creepy portrayals because they're totally indefensible.
For a film made in 2016, it's shockingly dated & lensed entirely through the perspective of the male gaze; women exist within the narrative solely to further the development of their male counterparts & are devoid of any personality / motivations... Other than to gratify those of the opposite sex. It's a reductive, gross experience, seeing women being objectified & dehumanised... And worse still, none of those at the helm think to question the inappropriate-ness of the two brother's actions? Sure, they're meant to be young boys & juvenile (etc.) but why must that excuse their extremely concerning behaviours? Didn't the writers consider addressing the (& this is putting it mildly) moral ambiguity? I can't say I'm impressed in the slightest. It's careless & sloppy & far below the standard I expected of him.
EDIT: in an interview, the director revealed he clashed with the producers, wasn't paid for this & didn't have control over the final cut. Consequently, an additional 30 minutes of footage (material which he described as "darker") was removed without his consent - so that might explain the tonal inconsistencies / lack of emotional development, if he intended to take the narrative in a direction which was ultimately omitted.
For a film made in 2016, it's shockingly dated & lensed entirely through the perspective of the male gaze; women exist within the narrative solely to further the development of their male counterparts & are devoid of any personality / motivations... Other than to gratify those of the opposite sex. It's a reductive, gross experience, seeing women being objectified & dehumanised... And worse still, none of those at the helm think to question the inappropriate-ness of the two brother's actions? Sure, they're meant to be young boys & juvenile (etc.) but why must that excuse their extremely concerning behaviours? Didn't the writers consider addressing the (& this is putting it mildly) moral ambiguity? I can't say I'm impressed in the slightest. It's careless & sloppy & far below the standard I expected of him.
EDIT: in an interview, the director revealed he clashed with the producers, wasn't paid for this & didn't have control over the final cut. Consequently, an additional 30 minutes of footage (material which he described as "darker") was removed without his consent - so that might explain the tonal inconsistencies / lack of emotional development, if he intended to take the narrative in a direction which was ultimately omitted.
helpful•01
- W011y4m5
- Jun 30, 2022
- How long is Moon Dogs?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $3,616
- Runtime1 hour 33 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content