"The Dog Stars" REVIEW

Published on 9/7/2026 

Written by: Braylon Mitchell 

Directed by: Ridley Scott 

Cast: Jacob Elordi, Josh Brolin, Margaret Qualley, Guy Pearce, Allison Janney, Benedict Wong, etc. 

Plot: In a post-apocalyptic world, a virus wipes out humanity. Survivors face roaming scavengers called Reapers. Protagonist Hig, a pilot, survived the flu but lost his wife. 

REVIEW 

Oh, Ridley Scott. Scott is one of the most well-known American directors of the past fifty years; director of critically adored and box office hits such as "Alien", "Thelma and Louise", "Gladiator", and "The Martian". Also, the director of critically disliked and box office duds such as "The Counselor", "G.I. Jane", "House of Gucci", and "1492: Conquest of Paradise". The grand total of his filmography is made up of more good than bad but, especially as of the past ten years or so, the release of a new Ridley Scott film likely either means it'll be good but forgotten or ranging from mediocre to bad and forgotten. "The Dog Stars" falls more towards the latter. Dystopian/apocalypse stories on film have been so consistently popular over the past fifteen years or so that when we're introduced to yet another big-budget "end of the world"—yet another adapted from a popular young adult novel as well—if it doesn't immediately pack a punch, it's passed by the cultural zeitgeist. I'm a sucker for the atmosphere and world building of post-apocalyptic stories, and I can't argue that I wasn't entertained by this film's world and characters, but ultimately the main reason this film hasn't appeared to have made any impact outside of being lightly discussed for a weekend or two at the end of the summer blockbuster season is because it simply can't distinguish itself as something fresh. People have seen this type of story, these types of characters/relationships, and these "loner needs other people to survive and live life to the fullest" themes so many times over the past couple years that when a new meal comes along offering the same contents, people don't want to consume the same ol' same ol'—even if the meal is for the most part well done, especially on a technical level. I enjoyed this film, its craft, and the performances from this relatively stacked ensemble of talent. However, even days after watching the film as I find the time and gusto to write this review, I struggle to write around the sentiment of "it's fine". To me, that's indisputably what the film is: fine. Not so much a bad film, not so much a good film. Ridley Scott has delivered another fine film that, given a few more days of separation once this review is published, will likely fade from my memory.  

THREE BEST ELEMENTS

• Jacob Elordi's performance. I really like Elordi, I think he's given some very interesting performances in the past, and I'm excited to see how the future of his career will shape out. With this film, he turns in a good performance as this somber masculine protagonist. 

• Guy Pearce's performance. I love Guy Pearce, I love his presence in films. Does that cloud my judgement of his performance in this film? Probably, yeah. Still, his performance is strong even with an underdeveloped role and he's overall quite lovable in the film. 

• The cinematography. Shot by Oscar winning DP Erik Messerschmidt, this film looks beautiful. There are many aerial shots that looked breathtaking. Maybe not the most styliszed or memorable photography, but it's strong work. 

WORST ELEMENT 

• The film feels all too familiar, and doesn't manage to single itself out as fresh or interesting. 

RATING

6/10

You can skip it if you want to, buddy!