GOOD BOY (2025) review

written by: Alex Cannon and Ben Leonberg
produced by: Kari Fischer and Ben Leonberg
directed by: Ben Leonberg
rated: PG-13 (for terror, bloody images, and strong language)
runtime: 73 min.
U.S. release date: October 3, 2025

First of all, the dog doesn’t die in “Good Boy”. I usually wouldn’t start like that, but I know how stressful it is for dog lovers sensitive to the perils of canines in cinema. So, when a horror film revolves around a haunted house from the point of view of a confused loyal dog, concern for the dog’s safety and whether audiences can handle any peril the titular hero is subjected to is understandable. There’s even a website dedicated to warning viewers of dog deaths in movies. I had a hunch going into co-writer/director Ben Leonberg’s supernatural horror feature debut that the titular protagonist would be all good. That left me with many questions, among them how much this dog would endure and how much the audience could tolerate.

Not only did Leonberg write the screenplay with Alex Cannon, but he also produced the micro-budget feature with his wife, Kari Fischer, and used their own dog, Indy, a Nova Scotia Duck Tolling retriever, in the lead role. He shot “Good Boy” over a period of three years, coaching Indy to elicit just the right action and response from the dog. The trick in a film like this is getting everything right around the dog, including location, lighting, editing, and production design. The goal is that when it all comes together, viewers will have to be convinced that this poor pup is being put through the ringer.

To keep it simple, Indy stars as himself, a faithful companion to his human, Todd (Shane Jensen), who’s raised the good boy from a puppy. A montage of personal videos shows that the two have developed an undeniable bond. Todd is currently going through an unspecified illness that often finds him either seeking medical treatment or withdrawing into his own self-isolation. His condition and behavior have his sister, Vera (Arielle Friedman), very concerned about Todd, encouraging him to get the help he needs. Her stance is warranted, considering that early on, she shows up at his apartment to find him bloodied and in a daze. Much to his sister’s disapproval, Todd decides to relocate to their Grandfather’s (horror film veteran Larry Fessenden) cabin in the woods (a place she dubs the “cursed family home” – never a good sign) with Indy, thinking some solitude will do him good. Indy has no choice in the matter, and it doesn’t take long for the dog to start sensing and seeing things that are unknown to Todd. While his human rummages through old home movies of the Grandfather enjoying time with his dogs, Indy is left to explore the mysterious sounds of the location, encountering shadowy visions and creepy figures that keep the canine occupied as his human’s condition worsens.

Once the pair arrives at the remote location, Leonberg establishes the layout by having Indy sniff his way around the interior and exterior of the cabin, looking through the curious dog’s wandering perspective. Indy explores the house’s many dark corners and secret spaces. They also visit a cemetery located in the lot next to theirs, where many of Todd’s ancestors are buried. It’s a remote place, and Indy isn’t sure what to make of his new surroundings, staying close to his human while he works on finding generator power to use, which keeps the pair mostly in the dark.

They also meet the sole neighbor, Mr. Downs (Stuart Rudin), a hunter who warns them about the fox traps he has laid out. Indy’s first encounter with the neighbor is curious and humorous, considering he’s dressed to blend in with the forest. Some of what is introduced upon their arrival comes across as red herrings, but it’s forgivable because we’re seeing it all through Indy’s eyes.

“Good Boy” maintains Indy’s POV throughout the story thanks to the talents of cinematographer Wade Grebnoel. This means much of the story is told using low-angle shots that either follow Indy or focus on his expressive face. Because of this approach, human faces are often obscured, except for Fessenden’s Grandfather character, who is mainly seen on the cabin’s television. Nevertheless, it doesn’t take us long to figure out that something is off with Todd. Does he have cancer? Is he suicidal? It’s never clear, and that’s frustrating. But then again, a dog wouldn’t know the details of their human’s condition anyway. So, maybe such frustration is warranted.

So, for the most part, Leonberg is successful at the general conceit, keeping viewers not only at Indy’s level but also aligning us with his confused understanding of his owner’s condition and the new and strange surroundings that are unfamiliar to the pup. Curiously, there are times when it seems like Indy is either tripping out or experiencing unsettling visions or dreamscapes at the Grandfather’s house. This is when the film reaches its most surreal wavelength, delivering something unexpected. It also coincides with Todd’s increasingly erratic condition, which possibly further solidifies the bond Indy has with his person.

When it comes to compelling animal performances, much of the convincing has to do with the timing of the editing. Leonberg employs savvy editing by Curtis Roberts here, who is quite adept and knowing how and when to cut to what Indy is responding to or running to and from. Obviously, limited lighting plays an essential factor as well, to capture believable characterization from Indy, complete with agitated whining and barking, as well as concerning looks. It’s an undeniably doggone good performance from Indy that doesn’t just feel like clever directing.

It’s worth noting that, due to the limited budget of “Good Boy”, there’s thankfully no obvious use of CGI here. That may also be why it took so long to make, which is fine considering the result is something that feels much more real than one would imagine from the marketing.

Leonberg is presenting a story of companionship and protection with “Good Boy”.  By nature, Indy is indeed a loyal protector, and Leonberg succeeds at helping his dog communicate that effectively. The film isn’t thrilling, nor is it terrifying. The entire endeavor is more artful than intense. I was never scared or concerned for the dog. But it is fascinating to watch simply as a cinematic experiment, and it ultimately reaffirms something I already knew: dogs are the best people.

RATING: ***