There is a scene in Mel Brook’s History of the World Part I when the Roman emperor (hilariously portrayed by Dom DeLuise) is being showered by gifts from all over the empire. One of the gifts turns out to be a bathing basin to which the emperor remarks in an unimpressed manner, “Nice. Not thrilling, but nice.”
I cannot think of a more apt description for The Dog Stars. The film is nice.
Not thrilling, but nice.
Like an empty bathing basin, The Dog Stars in itself is a perfectly fine film, but, sadly, it has no substance. It is an empty, hollow shell of a film that says nothing new about the post-apocalyptic genre. The film does its best to make the viewer feel like you are watching a post apocalyptic film by combining different aspects of the genre and tosses them altogether in an unappetizing way. The Dog Stars merely takes the ingredients of the genre and shuffles those ingredients like a pack of cards and then deals them out in a random order. The hand that is dealt is unsatisfying and underwhelming.
The Dog Stars follows Hig (Jacob Elordi) as he navigates living in a world decimated by a global pandemic. A former mechanic turned pilot, he follows a routine of scouting around his airfield, flying into Denver looking for supplies, visiting his old home, debating his gruff survival partner Bangley (Josh Brolin), and hanging out with his dog, Jasper. When his routine abruptly changes, the film then plays the hand that it dealt for the audience.
The film plays its hand without saying anything new. It displays the cliché of old versus young survival perspectives. The older characters are focused on survival against all odds and distrusting everyone while the younger generation wants to believe that everyone should come together and re-form society. The seemingly hopeful and idealistic community that the main characters are trying to reach turns out to actually be hell. The peaceful community living right in front of them is where they should’ve just gone the entire time.
Nice. Not thrilling, but nice.
The film has absolutely nothing new to say about surviving after a fallen society, survivors guilt, or anything about grief and trying to find meaning in a meaningless world. Male and female characters are essentially the same and they fall in love purely because of common circumstances and shared trauma. There is no actual love that is present. Each character is essentially the same. Bangley and Pops (Guy Pearce) represent the older survival at all costs perspective while Hig and Cima (Margaret Qualley) represent the younger survivalist perspective. Both pairs of these characters are exactly the same outside of having slightly different living circumstances which makes for a boring and uninspired story.
The writing is awful and the script is abrasive as is the dialogue. Characters would randomly start talking without any context which made no sense within the context of the scene. Character motivations were either not overly explained or not explained at all. I think this film is made for fans of the book, not the casual moviegoer. If you read the book and you enjoyed the book you would then enjoy the movie. Reading the novel would provide essential context and continuity that clarify certain character choices and motivations. However, good film adaptations provide context for all viewers whether or not you read the original material.
There are some positives to the film: the cinematography was really good. The shots of Hig’s plane flying through the Rockies and various wide shots of characters walking through nature were really beautiful. The quiet “show not tell” moments paired with Harry Gregson-Williams’ score (Shrek, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, The Martian) combine for a pleasant viewing experience. Unfortunately, these moments are few and are not enough to carry the film through its two hour run time.
I do not understand why Ridley Scott made this movie. I do not know if he was a big fan of the book or if he was tired of making bad historical epics. I think that he must have found something profound in the story which justified its adaptation. Sadly, he does not convey his motivation through the actual film. The Dog Stars is further proof that he is no longer able to make good films that have any impact on cinema. If you are an average moviegoer, this is a perfectly acceptable film to skip.
100 Movies Every Catholic Should See #61: Gladiator (2000)
Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations have perhaps, in these modern times, become a bit of a cliche, but there’s an eternal wisdom to those words penned thousands of years ago that has appealed to the curiosity of many a man over the centuries. While Aurelius’ idea of Stoicism is not completely in line with some of the tenets we hold in the Church, his emphasis …
