Good Boy (2025)

as usual, the trailer is better than the movie))

Like it. The plot is incomplete, the ending is merged, but I liked it. Personally, it kept me on edge. I was especially encouraged by the fact that my dog also sometimes sticks in one spot...

It was an interesting move that almost no faces were shown. At some point, it seemed to me that this was no longer his master, but a ghost that had rushed into him.

The play of light and shadow perfectly maintained the tension.
Playing with foreground and background was also creepy. When you look at a dog and you don't immediately notice a figure creeping up. And when you notice it, it's not scary, but it's uncomfortable. And long timelaps in complete silence are creepy, because you don't know where to expect some kind of horror.

And I also liked that they focused on different details and the viewer should finish and understand for himself. After all, dogs don't and can't tell us, we have to figure it out ourselves.

In general, I'm sure I'll be in the minority, but anyway, a normal movie for the evening.

It's a complete mess. Nothing happens for half the movie, then the footage is cut with a shit demon. End.

Well, as for me, it turned out to be fun. To let a person understand what is going on in a dog's head, depriving them of any context at all. Like, we're going somewhere, some kind of fast—paced house, incomprehensible crap, babayki. At the same time, a much more banal story can be summed up under what is happening — it's just that the owner is dying of an incurable disease, and the dog simply cannot understand it. She notices various events around her, sees that the owner has changed, but cannot figure out what it is at all. He tries to connect them with each other — this kind of pareidolia is peculiar. The best way to "translate" into human would be to substitute something supernatural. They say — ghosts, riddles. But, everything is much simpler. Pesel just doesn't know what to do, how to behave, or where to run. And it's best to convey this to the audience with these images. Therefore, complaints about the topic: "it's not fucking clear and some kind of demon is strange at the end" — that was the idea. To try to show how the dog sees his master's problem, and that there is nothing he can do about it except try to do something.... for example, to rush somewhere, not understanding why and where. Just to do something. Or like grandpa's dog, to die where the owner died.

The plot is so-so, the dog sees and hears something, or it just seems to her that the owner is getting worse every time. But all this pales in comparison with a dog, the whole range of canine emotions at once. How did the trainer and the film crew achieve such an acting performance from the dog? Here you have fear, worries and concern for the owner, and all this in the eyes and behavior of the dog. Bravo to the filmmakers.

I was really looking forward to the movie. I was impressed by the idea of a horror film from Sobani's perspective. recently it was from the face of a ghost, and now this.

Well, what can I say. having a seemingly cool idea, it turned out a little weak. Yes, it's original. Yes, it's budgetary. but it's bad in terms of plot. The film is an hour long, but has drawn-out moments that seem like an eternity.

+ for the idea and + for the sobani game.

An idea that would feel good in a short film for 30-40 minutes, for some reason they were stuffed into a film for an hour with no more. Of course, Pesel is great and the idea itself is nothing, but as a film, for me personally, it is delayed and boring at some points. In general, you can take a look (maybe you'd rather go in than me), but if you skip it, you won't lose much.

They like to use all kinds of deer and foxes in the States to make things worse ("The Antichrist", "The Cure for Health", etc.). Due to the stinginess of the dialogues, it resembles "A Quiet Place" - the whole film is also in suspense simply from the fact that no one says a word (almost) in the frame. By the way, it's interesting that Indie dreams most of the time, and you occasionally get confused about whether the dog is already awake or not. In short, this is not a standard fact. And the cartoon is also reminiscent of "Courage is a cowardly dog." Take a look if anyone hasn't seen it.

The idea is interesting, but the feed itself is under-pressed

In short, if your dog often looks into an empty hallway, you should know that your ghost from the future is there...
the film keeps you in suspense. The negative is that the plot has not been completed, the question remains whether there are actually ghosts in the house - and what kind of cave in the basement (and does it exist, or is it an image of the entrance to the underground kingdom through the eyes of a dog) - but it's not for an ordinary dog to solve supernatural mysteries ...
Plus for the atmosphere and a couple more advantages for the acting the skill of the main character.
I personally liked it.

It's a great movie, I don't know what most people say.

An interesting idea, very original. Good acting. The film kept me in suspense well. What can I find fault with? The role of a caveman was completely meaningless and unnecessary. The ending was weird–you're waiting for something, but you're not really sure what it is, and it's not really happening. The "disappearance" of the dog whose body was found in the basement was also absurd.

An indie movie. The dog is really good at playing

Indy is a movie about Indy the dog.
I liked it, despite the modest timing, the film went in. I got a new experience, I experienced new emotions. I rarely give high marks, but here's my respect.

Indy is a good boy. He fought so hard for his master, I am very glad that nothing happened to him, and his sister found him in time. For dogs, we are the whole world, treat them the same way.

I usually don't expect impressive horror films from "Shudder", but here we were able to please with the originality of the look from the dog's face). Our team chose the name "Through the Eyes of a Dog" for rental, but it would be better to keep the original. The concept of the plot really looks like a "Presence", as already noted above. However, it was interesting to watch, and pes performed just fine in terms of acting))). In general, for a budget horror movie, all the flaws are quite excusable, so for once I will rate the product of this office at 4/5. It's very good for this level, few people do better.

Pesel did well. A good actor. A sweet and lovely boy!
But the film is frankly weak.

The dog saw a black mold that no one had ever seen before.

Mold was glad to be noticed.

The moral? Pay attention to the mold before it pays attention to you.

White Beam, black slurry

Todd, a young man recently discharged from the hospital and suffering from lung disease, moves from the metropolis to the country house of his deceased grandfather. Todd takes his beloved dog Indy with him, whose nose quickly begins to sense something is wrong, and his eye begins to see the otherworldly inside and outside the house.

Debutant director Ben Leonberg (also a screenwriter, producer, cinematographer and editor of the film "Through the Eyes of a Dog") I took a well-worn movie about a haunted house and decided to show it from a new angle. Literally. The localizers even put it in the title without thinking twice. If anything, the original movie is called "The Good Boy."

If you want to be intimidated from the bottom of your heart or want to see some kind of complicated story, then you will definitely be disappointed. However, despite the seemingly low rating from me, which you will see at the end, I still strongly recommend watching this movie. And here's why.

Usually, directors/producers push their mistresses, wives, and children into the main roles. But I don't remember a dog getting into the frame as the main character due to fraud. Leonberg started writing the script back in 2017, inspired by Hooper/Spielberg's Poltergeist. When the script was finished, Leonberg realized that if he was behind the scenes, it would be easier to shoot a picture with his own Nova Scotia retriever Indy in the frame. Yes, if you noticed, the dog's nickname, for obvious reasons, coincides not only in life and in the film, but also quite well describes the character of the dog as the hero of the picture. In general, the plan was as reliable as a Swiss watch from a movie about Lebowski - the shooting took some 3 years (and a clean 400 shooting days). It was mostly just Leonberg himself, his wife, and his dog Indy on the set. In this regard, the film has a major advantage and a reason to watch it at all. It's Indie, of course. I don't know how a "professional" "actor" would have "played" there, but Indie deserves all the awards (even those invented specifically for him) that he received during the screenings of the film at various festivals. Leonberg came up with and used a variety of clever tricks to get Indy to react differently to paranormal dangers, and how good Indy is. In the film, computer graphics specialists did not conjure over the dog, and the voiceover/inner voice of the dog was not used (as is customary, for example, in children's films or adult comedies like "Wild Mongrels"), but Indie (with Leonberg's help) manages to convey absolutely all emotions and even thoughts without "dishonest" ones techniques. That's for the sake of the dog and his game (honestly, without quotes) I recommend watching Through the Eyes of a Dog.

As for the rest, there are both pros and cons.

The film is short, it doesn't even last up to twenty hours (and that's with the credits). He doesn't have time to get bored, although - to be honest - he sometimes tries his best to do it. The very slow development of events without events shaking up the narrative does not help him. It goes from a standard beginning to a predictable ending along the rails. However, it is not surprising that Leonberg did not take out in terms of the script. A lot of things had to be changed during filming, depending on how the dog behaves and reacts to what. And, yes, I didn't get the impression that the movie host was very attached to the dog. Why he has such an attitude in the middle of the movie is understandable. But in the beginning, as far as I'm concerned, he's not exactly the boss of the year. The director tried to rectify this situation in the opening credits with the help of the chronicle, but these scenes had no effect on me.

By the way, I thought it was strange that "Through the Eyes of a Dog" wasn't based on another Stephen King novel. Although the distributors tried (perhaps purely by accident) to translate the title to the film "Cat's Eye". Although, of course, a stronger literary foundation would not hurt.

The movie is slow. I liked his viscous atmosphere in general. I really liked the tricks that the director uses to justify the trick of the story, conveyed on behalf of the dog. First of all, there is literally a dog's dream! And not even one. And they are executed with the clearly tangible spirit of David Lynch. Secondly, although there are scenes in the film with a view from the dog's eyes, there are not so many of them, which is for the best - otherwise how can you admire Indie?! Thirdly, Leonberg, even without this, constantly keeps the viewer in the dog's mind, managing to convey his perception in various cool ways: a low-placed camera (sometimes it behaves like an escaped from the set of Sam Raimi's "The Evil Dead") at the dog's withers, as well as almost constantly unfocused or completely absent from the frame. human faces. Which works both from the point of view of the "dog movie" and from the point of view of the not-so-complicated metaphor/main idea of the film about a progressive fatal disease that slowly but surely devours a person.

Actually, this movie is not about horror stories, but I don't see anything seditious in it. Now this is a trend among the directors of the new generation of horror films, who shoot horror films more about "thinking" than about "being afraid." Well, remember, "Tools" or "One whole" from the latter.

"Through the Eyes of a Dog" is quite a good movie. It was shot for a penny, but it is beautiful and atmospheric. And definitely original in terms of presentation. Well, the Indie dog makes it a must-see. I think it's unlikely that anyone will decide on this kind of time-consuming experiment in the near future, but in another way, without the connection "the real owner is his animal", it may not work so naturally. It didn't work out before.

Rating: 6 brave, cowardly dogs, out of 10

I was so worried about the dog throughout the movie.
I'm glad he's okay in the end. ☺️

I roared for half the movie - I was afraid for the baby. How sweet I can't! The movie is just amazing!

I was hoping for something interesting, but I wasn't impressed in the end. 3/5

I was only worried about Indie

I felt sorry for the dogs from the whole movie, especially the retriever, who was never found, and then we saw his skeleton 😑

maybe I didn't quite understand all the ideas of this movie. these are ghosts, or as it was said that dogs see human diseases and there was such a presentation in the plot.
It wasn't scary, it was more scary for Pesel himself. By the way, he played it perfectly.

The dog played well! Really the main character of Indie!

I was surprised that Indie is not a product of CGI, it's too cute and cinematic. 😁
As for the mysticism in the film, it seems to me that it is clear at least by the second half that this is a visualization of death following on the heels of the owner (how the animal probably feels), because he was seriously ill even before moving into this house

It's a shame that the director decided to write a love letter to such a charming dog in the form of such a mediocre film. Perhaps by inviting a more experienced director and screenwriter to help, a better movie would have turned out.
All the stars for this movie are exclusively for the ears, paws and tail of Indie

Although the film is short, it keeps you in suspense so much that it seems prolonged. Dog owners watch carefully - at some point, the owner has something to condemn. But, probably, it is also worth paying attention to two views on the problem (any one) - male and female.