Lassie

Directed by Charles Sturridge

Most people think of Lassie as an American pop culture icon, but Charles Sturridge is quick to point out that the heroic collie’s story originated in Britain with Eric Knight’s Lassie Come Home, the tale of an impoverished family that sells its beautiful, beloved dog for money to buy food. But the faithful pet, using clever stunts and amazing agility, keeps escaping from her new aristocratic owner’s estate to return home.

“I grew up watching the American television series and, until I read the novel two years ago, thought Lassie was an American black and white television character, a farm dog,” says Sturridge, who wrote, directed and produced the current big screen version.

“This story’s an epic. I was thrilled to have found the perfect vehicle for making an epic film in our rather small country—it’s only 350 miles between Yorkshire and Scotland, where we shot. But, that seems an epic journey when you’ve got a small dog cutting a swath through the landscape, heroically trying to get home.”

MERIN: Before Lassie, you made a TV
movie about Ernest Shackleton. Do heroes fascinate you? In an abstract way, are Lassie and Shackleton the same character?

STURRIDGE: Yes, in a way they are. But our definition of hero changes to fit our times and needs. We’re fickle with them.

Shackleton wasn’t thought of as a hero in his day, when Scott was considered to be the greater explorer (because he died for his art, if you can call exploring an art) and that was meaningful during World War I, when soldiers who were called up would probably be killed. Now, we’re more impressed by those who survive. Shackleton survived and saved his crew—that image fits today’s needs.

Lassie’s a survivor, too. With her, we have an enormously powerful, lasting iconic image—because of our relationship with dogs, the first non-human creatures we bonded with. It’s hooked into our DNA; we associate dogs with heroic qualities of faithfulness, bravery, endurance and friendship.

So, Lassie and Shackleton are both heroic characters and yes, I’m fascinated by heroes. We need them to give us encouragement in troubled times.

Why’d you set Lassie pre-World War II, instead of today? 

My films are based on books I like—and that’s what happened with Lassie. The book was written in 1940, and I liked what I found in it. However, I added some elements—like the opening hunting scene, which immediately establishes social issues and economic class differences that permeate the story and were part of English history at that time: Yorkshire coal mines shutting down, children evacuated from London to the countryside, preparations for war.

How’d you get Peter O’Toole, Samantha Morton, Peter Dinklage to play smaller roles, second to kids and animals?

It wasn’t the money, I assure you. We were on a modest budget, and most of it was spent on the animals—the Lassies, other dogs and Thumper, the fox. I’d have to say, I was amazed by the actors who signed on—because they liked the script, they said. Most of the cast worked with us between other, higher-paying projects and had only a small window of availability—so scheduling was unusually difficult.

The animals—especially the Lassies—were amazingly expressive. I don’t think I’ve ever asked a director this before, but how do you direct a dog?

Actually, dogs have very little expression—their facial musculature is quite immobile. The audience really plays out the animal’s emotions—projecting whatever they’re feeling on to the animal. You teach dogs behavior, then get them willing to repeat it on cue by making it into a game. Chasing them down a hall would scare them and they won’t repeat that action, so you get them to run down the hall to fetch a ball that’s around a corner. That’s a game; they’ll repeat it on cue. You also must devel-op good relationships between animals and human actors. Fortunately, the Lassies and young Jonathan Mason and Hester Odgers, the lead children in the film, became great friends, although the children were terrified of dogs when we began rehearsals. Now, Jonathan wants his own dog, saying he’ll name the dog Laddie.

Shackleton was little screen, Lassie’s big. What’s the difference in directing each?

Technically, they’re very similar. But, when you direct for television, you haven’t as much physical control over your audience; there’s always the risk they’ll switch away to check sports scores.  You must structure the story to keep them guessing at all times about what will happen next. That’s why television mystery shows are so successful. 

But, in the cinema, unless you’ve made a very bad film, you have the audience’s attention until the end, and you can more easily hold their curiosity while giving them time to develop a relationship with the characters and discover bits of information about their circumstances and emotional life—that gives the story greater depth and richer texture. So, really, you must just be aware of what you’re reaching for when you direct each medium. I like both, and I’m very grateful I’ve been able to switch back and forth between them.