HEART OF THE BEAST: A Review Of The New Brad Pitt Survival Thriller!

Introduuction

One of the stories people like to see played out is man versus nature. This can be seen in both reality television shows like Alone and fictional films like Jeremiah Johnson (1972) and The Revenant (2015). The newest film in that genre is David Ayer’s Heart of the Beast. Unfortunately, this film lacks the believability of the two previously mentioned.

Synopsis

Heart of the Beast follows retired Special Forces veteran James Belmont (Brad Pitt) and his combat German Shepherd, Odin (Uber). After a brief overnight meeting with a fellow naturist, Watkins (J.K. Simmons), Belmont and Odin are traveling home when He has a medical emergency that causes him to crash his plane. After the crash, Belmont and Odin begin a 58-mile trek to safety, battling harsh elements, severe injuries, and wildlife; basically anything nature can throw at them. Spoiler Alert: the producers made it clear before the film premiered that Odin does not die, but the viewer will have to let the story unfold.

Discussion

Unfortunately, Heart of the Beast does not work because the whole story is unbelievable. Little of what happens to the main characters is plausible. It does not matter whether the obstacles were health or nature; nothing that happens is realistic or plausible. Instead, the audience is treated to several near-death adventures combined with bonding between a man and his dog. The only question the film needs to answer is whether they will live through each event and reach safety.

The story is interspersed with flashback scenes featuring Belmont and his dog, Odin, which appear to take place during their deployment in a war zone, presumably Iraq or Afghanistan. These flashbacks aim to illustrate the deep bond between man and dog. However, the scenes are poorly filmed and have a dreamlike quality that detracts from their emotional impact, failing to enhance the overall narrative. They mainly serve as exposition to explain some of the challenges Odin faces, including having a titanium leg and teeth, as well as suffering from PTSD.

The story is not only hard to believe, but the film is poorly executed, making it difficult for the audience to engage with what they see and hear. The sound design and sound effects do little to enhance the narrative, and some choices are questionable. For instance, the sound places more emphasis on Belmont chewing on aspirin than on more significant sounds of the environment around them. Another example is when Belmont meets Watkins; the sound of beer clinking against the bottle takes priority over their conversation. It makes no sense.

Conclusion

Not only was the sound design of Heart of the Beast poor, but the special effects also seemed too cartoony and were as unbelievable as the story. In one scene, the audience looks down over a tree trunk that crosses over a cliff above the river. The shot below the trunk looks so fake that it was difficult to believe the danger Belmont and Odin were facing. Even the CGI bears and wolves looked so bad that it was difficult to believe any of the situations the duo was trapped in.

Ayers’s numerous poor choices lead to a film that feels as unbelievable as its storyline. If viewers can manage to suspend their disbelief, they might overlook the flaws and engage with a narrative that is melodramatic and clichéd enough to provide some entertainment. However, if they cannot do so, Heart of the Beast misses the mark and is a film to avoid.

More from Cinema Scholars

AMERICAN PSYCHO: A 25th Anniversary Oral History

WAKE UP DEAD MAN Review: Everyone Has A Motive. No One Has An Alibi

Keep up with Cinema Scholars on social media. Like us on Facebook, subscribe on YouTube, and follow us on Twitter, Threads, Instagram, and Bluesky