BY BOB STRAUSS >FILM CRITIC

Should we or shouldn't we refer to "Red" as "Doggie Death Wish"?

It's certainly a better-made movie than the old Charles Bronson vigilante potboiler, performance-

based and presented in a relatively sober, thoughtful manner.

But it's also a movie that's completely out of its tree, and only acknowledges that once - at the very end - long after matters of ethical responsibility have succumbed to bloody-minded lunacy.

And all because they killed a man's dog.

The fine Scottish actor Brian Cox obviously had a field day playing decent, soft-spoken Avery Ludlow, a widowed Korean War vet living in rural Northern California. One Sunday while fishing with his beloved old dog, Red, he's hassled by three gun-toting teenagers. Upshot: Red's shot. When Avery can't politely convince the killer's rich daddy (Tom Sizemore) to make his denying son apologize, a war of nerves begins and, naturally, grows increasingly physical.

Cox's old gent with deadly skills doesn't just turn into an avenging moralist, though. About halfway through the film, he recounts a horrendous personal tragedy to a sympathetic TV reporter (Kim Dickens) that lends him a whole other dimension of psychological motivation. It's kind of a "where did that come from?" moment, and also the point at which the film runs off the rails and toward overemphasizing cuckoo land.

Adapted from Jack Ketchum's novel, "Red's" initial director, Lucky McKee ("May"), was replaced at some point by Norwegian Trygve Allister Diesen. I don't know why, nor who was responsible for what's in the film. It's fairly consistently and nicely staged. Nothing uncertain about the movie's message, either: It's guns suck, basically.

RED

R: violence, language, children in peril.

Starring: Brian Cox, Tom Sizemore.

Director: Lucky McKee and Trygve Allister Diesen.

Running time: 1 hr. 40 min.

Playing: Music Hall, Beverly Hills.

In a nutshell: Performance-based revenge film.