Heart of the Beast (2026)
Screenshot 2026-10-03 160132.png
This is a movie that made me wonder: How does Hollywood know when a movie is a blockbuster and when it isnt?
"Heart of the Beast" at its core is similar to "Cast Away," except replacing Wilson the volleyball with a military support dog named Odin. The movie is, for my money, just as good as "Cast Away," and maybe even a little more believeable. And it has a major star in the lead role, Brad Pitt. So why did Paramount dump it in mid-September among the sea of crap that comes out this time of year? How do they know?? Why did they think this movie couldn't have been just as big as "Top Gun" or something like that? It's just as interesting, and maybe more, in some ways.
The plot is simple. We follow a retired war veteran named James Belmont, who has obviously had his fill of "people," and his support animal, as they live a life of solitude, tramping around the wilderness of Alaska in a small airplane that's equipped to land on water. Belmont flies the plane to a remote lake of his choice, he and the dog make camp, and life is good, until they fall asleep, at which point both of them are tormented by nightmares about the various horrors they've been through in their military careers.
Only problem is, Belmont has heart issues, and deals with them by eating aspirin like candy, until the inevitable happens -- he has a heart attack while piloting his plane through a storm, causing a horrific crash, and the rest of the movie follows him and Odin as they try to make their way out of the wilderness. I won't reveal exactly what happens to them, but it's a pretty long, intense list, I can tell you that. There are plenty of hold-your-breath moments. I was expecting a lot of bits where I would go "Yeah, right..." but the movie is surprisingly free of those for the most part -- except in a couple of fairly obvious CGI scenes that people will undoubtedly pick up on.
The production is top notch. Brad Pitt turns in a stellar performance, mostly wordless. The filming of this movie (in New Zealand) had to be a major challenge. There are a few continuity goofs regarding the weather, but it's not a big issue overall.
I would be remiss if I didn't call out the performance of the dog, Odin. Actually he's played by four dogs, none of which are named Odin. But most of the work seems to be done by real live dogs, from what I can tell. I'm sure there are some CGI dogs working too, but if so, they are well concealed. CGI bears and wolved, alluded to above, are less convincing.
The cinematography is spectacular, as expected, and the music score is really good. This is one of those movies that will lose about 80% of its impact if you see it on a small TV screen at home. It needs a big picture and big sound to deliver the full punch.
The movie ends with a title card mentioning the many support dogs that are deployed with soldiers in the military, and how they are credited with saving thousands of lives. While the story in the movie is fictitious, I get the feeling the writer got at least some of his ideas from stories related by real-life soldiers. We've all heard stories about dogs doing amazing things, and this movie celebrates those accomplishments.
We're getting pretty good crowds for it, and everyone is loving it, so the CGI gripes I mentioned above may not be bugging people too much. Word of mouth has been great. Best of all, it's an economical 101 minutes, so it doesn't waste any time. I liked it a whole lot. Not bad for a movie I wasn't even aware of three months ago.
4 out of 5 stars from me.
This is a movie that made me wonder: How does Hollywood know when a movie is a blockbuster and when it isnt?
"Heart of the Beast" at its core is similar to "Cast Away," except replacing Wilson the volleyball with a military support dog named Odin. The movie is, for my money, just as good as "Cast Away," and maybe even a little more believeable. And it has a major star in the lead role, Brad Pitt. So why did Paramount dump it in mid-September among the sea of crap that comes out this time of year? How do they know?? Why did they think this movie couldn't have been just as big as "Top Gun" or something like that? It's just as interesting, and maybe more, in some ways.
The plot is simple. We follow a retired war veteran named James Belmont, who has obviously had his fill of "people," and his support animal, as they live a life of solitude, tramping around the wilderness of Alaska in a small airplane that's equipped to land on water. Belmont flies the plane to a remote lake of his choice, he and the dog make camp, and life is good, until they fall asleep, at which point both of them are tormented by nightmares about the various horrors they've been through in their military careers.
Only problem is, Belmont has heart issues, and deals with them by eating aspirin like candy, until the inevitable happens -- he has a heart attack while piloting his plane through a storm, causing a horrific crash, and the rest of the movie follows him and Odin as they try to make their way out of the wilderness. I won't reveal exactly what happens to them, but it's a pretty long, intense list, I can tell you that. There are plenty of hold-your-breath moments. I was expecting a lot of bits where I would go "Yeah, right..." but the movie is surprisingly free of those for the most part -- except in a couple of fairly obvious CGI scenes that people will undoubtedly pick up on.
The production is top notch. Brad Pitt turns in a stellar performance, mostly wordless. The filming of this movie (in New Zealand) had to be a major challenge. There are a few continuity goofs regarding the weather, but it's not a big issue overall.
I would be remiss if I didn't call out the performance of the dog, Odin. Actually he's played by four dogs, none of which are named Odin. But most of the work seems to be done by real live dogs, from what I can tell. I'm sure there are some CGI dogs working too, but if so, they are well concealed. CGI bears and wolved, alluded to above, are less convincing.
The cinematography is spectacular, as expected, and the music score is really good. This is one of those movies that will lose about 80% of its impact if you see it on a small TV screen at home. It needs a big picture and big sound to deliver the full punch.
The movie ends with a title card mentioning the many support dogs that are deployed with soldiers in the military, and how they are credited with saving thousands of lives. While the story in the movie is fictitious, I get the feeling the writer got at least some of his ideas from stories related by real-life soldiers. We've all heard stories about dogs doing amazing things, and this movie celebrates those accomplishments.
We're getting pretty good crowds for it, and everyone is loving it, so the CGI gripes I mentioned above may not be bugging people too much. Word of mouth has been great. Best of all, it's an economical 101 minutes, so it doesn't waste any time. I liked it a whole lot. Not bad for a movie I wasn't even aware of three months ago.
4 out of 5 stars from me.
Comment