Heart of a Dog
Heart of a Dog
| 11 November 1988 (USA)
Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream thousands of hit movies and TV shows

Start 30-day Free Trial
Heart of a Dog Trailers

Old Prof. Preobrazhensky and his young colleague Dr. Bormental inserted the human's hypophysis into a dog's brain. A couple of weeks later, the dog became "human looking". The main question is "Is anybody who is looking like a man, A REAL MAN?"

Reviews
ChicDragon

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

View More
Married Baby

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

View More
Scotty Burke

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

View More
Lela

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

View More
iconians

(the review contains no spoilers to the actual plot, but I am discussing a few lines from the movie, which while have 0 impact on the plot, but may not be appreciated by everyone).I think other reviewers have captured the sense of this movie. Amazing story (obviously), amazing acting and dialogue. Great sets and atmosphere, but I wanted to mention something else...After living in the USA for 20+ years, something made me wonder. The main point of the movie is to critique ussr/communism and the movie done so with implacable detail. One thing that made me wonder is that professor was very serious when he mentioned how they removed rug from main entrance, stole galoshes and such. It's either such veiled acting or the professor is truly ignorant (in this case, it was either done with the sarcasm or not, I think the result in the same). I completely agree with the communism flaws and such (not to go off tangent), but one thing stands out. When 90% of the country is hungry and can't afford to feed/clothes or keep themselves warm, and he comments how he has light goes out twice a day now versus twice before in 20 years, somehow his problems are just not as important to me.Nevertheless, movie is brilliant in every way.

View More
rgulakov

Fantastic actors deliver perfect performance under perfect directorship. This important film was impossible in Soviet Union, right until end of eighties. Even book was banned and distributed in illegal, handwritten copies. Even though Soviet Union died, questions in relationships between classes as sharp as ever. Patronising upper and ignorant, lazy, temporary empowered lower class in perpetual conflict worldwide with no answer in light. 10 out of 10...

View More
rivkin-542-767508

It does not come to me a surprise that all positive reviews on this site come from Russian ex-pats, while the single negative one comes from somebody outside.This movie is based on a classic work by a leading Russian monarchist intellectual. As such, it offers us a rare opportunity to look at the world from point of view of educated, wealthy aristocrat - a being much despised by most today, as he confronts an underprivileged, undereducated and underachieving antagonist, together with multitude of civil rights activists, acting as the latter's allies.The movie's philosophy can be horrifying (and can be argued to be biased and one sided), but definitely deserves a consideration, offering a refreshingly new (or rediscovered old) prospective on eternal problems of social justice and intellectual hierarchy.

View More
Oleg Sidorenko

Having first watched the movie at 14, I remember being struck by hearing the word 'govno' (sh*t) for the first time ever on the then-still-Soviet TV (I bet it really was *the* first time in history — anyone wants to add this to trivia section?:)... What an open boldness and freedom, I thought! As years passed, I was more and more impressed with the movie and the incredible acting, but my feelings turned to a kind of mixture of enjoyment from a genuine piece of cinematographic art and a bitter realization of a concept diametrically opposite to my 14-y.o. impression: helplessness. There's an air of inevitable catastrophe looming throughout the movie, of primitive degenerate tide (embodied by Sharikov) sweeping the lives of the finest minds advancing humanity in their areas... It's a great metaphor of Russian revolution in general, inspired by intellectuals ashamed of their superiority and hoping to 'upgrade' the lower classes, only to unleash the power of mediocrity and get swallowed by it... An extremely fine and talented piece, wrapping a truly sad idea in a brilliantly satiric and elegant form. Symbolically enough, the movie itself marked the end of the Soviet movie traditions era before the Hollywood tsunami had knocked them over — for good, it seems, judging by most current Russian movies (most of them labeled 'blockbusters' in prerelease!!! trailers and posters:).Funnily, that 'govno' episode is in no contradiction to Efenstor's comment above re rude language of current generation... From what I've already said it could seem that this might be the movie that showed the way for this, but it was not. A mild word by current standards, it was way too rude back then, and just rude enough to show the true nature of all Sharikovs... BTW, re Efenstor's lament, it is sooo naive to juxtapose being intellectual and using rude lexicon, especially for Russian speakers, where a single cussword could have meanings that take sentences in translation! But I join in regret that ALL the meaning in today's teenager's talk may be expressed by cusswords. I feel that this is the bigger problem than their choice of the medium that's most efficient for the task:) Well, this movie and the book are great food for thought that might change them, or anyone who might have a luxury of watching it.

View More