Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Controversy around the movie A Dog's Purpose
#1
The movie A Dog's Purpose has not even been released. It probably is a good movie, one that we would all love. However a video has been leaked that calls into question the way animals (dogs actually) were used during the making of the film.

I have seen the video, but I don't know the context of it. Was it part of the making of the movie.
I would say I am not happy with the trainer of the dog. If he wanted the dog in the water, he should have jumped in first.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...t=2&at=dt0


I understand the actor who does the dogs voice is upset about this and wants an explanation.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...t=2&at=dt0

This article has the trailer. It looks like a wonderful movie.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...t=2&at=dt0

Clearly people involved in the making of the film had no part in any animal abuse.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...t=2&at=dt0

This may be a matter of a trainer who acted badly.
It would be sad if a wonderful movie was lost in a controversy because of the actions of one person on the set.

It does make me question how well the SPCA (or who ever does this) kept track of animals on the set. Shouldn't they have been there and stopped it? What about the guy filming the incident.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]
Catherine

Reply
#2
(01-20-2017, 04:37 PM)Catherine Wrote: This may be a matter of a trainer who acted badly.
It would be sad if a wonderful movie was lost in a controversy because of the actions of one person on the set.
Yes, I quite agree - although not just the trainer is at fault, but also the person calling out, "Just throw him in!". Who was that person?

I knew about this film coming out soon and was looking forward to it. Our DAHS Facebook page even "liked" it some while ago.

This latest piece of news is disturbing and the incident should never have been allowed to take place. However, personally I think PETA is over-reacting in calling for a complete boycott. I can see how others might disagree, but I don't want to see a film which is so positive about the close relationships between humans and dogs to be ignored.

Most of the actors, the director, etc. seem shocked themselves and are clearly animal lovers. So the correct course would be for those directly involved in plunging the dog into a pool of rapidly flowing water to be investigated - as is going to happen.

It seems that the video shown has been edited into two parts: the first, where the dog refused to go in (who can blame him?!) and after some pushing the trainer gave up; and the second, where the dog is already in the water and collides with the end of the pool, goes under and has to be saved by actors. These incidents were, apparently, on different days. So the dog may have willingly gone in on the second occasion, only to hit the end of the pool because of the strong current. Clearly this was a risky manoevre, even if the dog did go in willingly the last time. So the argument of the producers that animal welfare was paramount is "thin" at best.

Despite the controversy, I do not intend to withdraw the "like" of the film. I look foward to watching it. Its message is important. Others may take a different stance, but that is their privilege.

The issue of the dog's welfare is, nevertheless, an important issue. Judging by the edited video clip, it would seem that on the first occasion the trainer was reluctant to force the dog in the water. But he was egged on by someone calling out, "Just push him in!" Who was that person? It must be possible for others on the set to identify the voice. He needs to be identified urgently.

Further, who was the person filming the crew? The video was taken from behind the "real" cameras. Why did that person film the incident and do nothing....for over a year? Why has s/he released the video now, just before the film comes out? Is there some ulterior motive in this timing? If s/he was genunely concerned about the incident, why was it not raised at the time? Why did s/he not protest immediately?

There are a lot of questions. Let us hope that the investigation finds out the answers and that those responsible are dealt with appropriately.

But I am still looking forward to watching the film.....
Reply
#3
I am actually quite shocked that the 100% welfare of the dogs was not upheld during the making of this movie. I know someone who had dogs once who starred in movies/adverts etc, some years ago. She told me that the "health and safety" rules were so tight that often the director would get frustrated with how long it was taking to shoot something! There was at least one vet always on stand-by, and who would shout that the dogs needed rest/water etc, even when it was clear to her that they were fine. (She knew her dogs well!)

So for anything like this to happen does sound unusual....

However, if a dog is unused to water or swimming, it is a very bad idea to just throw them in. I also know someone else who did that with their dog, and said she was fine after the initial shock.
But I have a different experience. Misty liked water only to a certain pont and was very scared when she started to feel her legs lift. I knew she'd probably be able to swim instinctively, but never put that to the test as she was obviously scared of it.

One day we were all playing by the river. She used to like running along the bank, to get a stick out of Jet's jaws (which he had swum out to retrieve) She fell in a deep part of the water. I saw her swim. I also saw the sheer terror on her face. I leaned out and hauled her up the bank.

She ran off the adrenalin, playing frisbee, and she dried off okay. I made sure she did that, and she seemed fine. But for two days afterwards she was unwell. I am sure the shock of that sudden plunge into the river really upset her whole system.

So no, I don't think a water-scared dog should just be thrown in.
Reply
#4
The film makers are taking this seriously. They are postponing screenings of the film until this is fully investigated.

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&...DCFhg-G49w

The big question is why didn't they take the video immediately to the films directors/producers. They are making a film that is pro animals and they clearly care about them. They would have reacted immediately. Why wait until the film is about to be released.
It is right time for the video to get the best publicity and the most views. The movie is providing publicity for the video for free because of its timing. Why make the video public before you show it to the directors/producers. Why wait until the movie is done and nothing can be done to change the way animals were treated in it.

This might be a good time to look at how well animals are monitored on film sets. There is supposed to be someone there at all times. If there was someone there, they failed to do their job. If their wasn't anyone there, where were they?

I am glad they are going to investigate this properly. However I don't want to see this film boycotted. I think a lot of good can come from a movie that shows life from the dog's perspective.

The use of animals in movies is a controversy. Many people are against it on principle. I don't agree. I am sure dogs usually enjoy their experience. I have only been involved in the filming/photographing  of reptiles. They are fine with it. We filmed a big lizard being carried on someone's shoulder and then she was filmed walking along the sidewalk(something she does in summer anyhow). Then she had a good dinner and took a nap. She had fun. We all had fun.

Actual stunt performances are a little trickier. That might need a little more monitoring. The video is edited and only shows a small amount of what went on during the making of the movie. They will need to interview people and find out what really happened. And the guy who yelled "just throw him in" , there are lots of lakes in Manitoba, just throw him in!
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]
Catherine

Reply
#5
There is quite a controversy raging. I am not sure who to believe.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sr=1&ct2=...ue&insrc=1

It is going to take some time to sort this out.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]
Catherine

Reply
#6
Thanks for the update. Let us hope the complete truth will come out. Yes, it is difficult to know whom to believe or not believe.
Reply
#7
There is a petition about the treatment of that dog, a German Shepherd, who was forced into turbulent water, while clearly terrified.

https://e-activist.com/page/5379/petitio...arded=true

It appears to be only signable by those across the 'pond'. However, I signed with my name and my nearest town, and added "UK"....Alberta came up and I didn't delete it because there were no options. Fingers crossed my signature went through....

The story and the movie is probably a very good one, but nevertheless, no-one has the right to bully any animal for the sake of a movie. They should be reminded -the world is watching.

In my opinion, waiting 15 months before reporting an incident is no evidence of that incident being untrue. I can understand that their explanation of Hercules' unwillingness to go into the water from that position could happen, as he had become accusomed to a different routine. But nevertheless, the video evidence shows he was forced into the water -no matter WHAT happened earlier, or how happy he was to leap into the pool earlier!
Dogs have complex emotional systems and we should respect them and never be impatient with them, or make them do things for our convenience or because we only have "x" minutes to catch a shot....etc.

I would like to see this film though....
Reply
#8
I think this situation will be a wake up call about the monitoring of film shoots. Clearly the animals used in movies are not being  watched closely enough. I thought there was someone on the set at all times watching the animals and how they are being treated.

If they do not have the money to pay someone to be present for the making of a whole movie, I bet they could find volunteers to who attend film shoots and just observe the treatment of animals.

They need to find out what happened, who knew about it and why nothing was said until now. A number of people were present for the filming that day. Why did they say nothing. I realize a producer can't be present for every single moment  of the film shoot, but maybe there needs to be an assistant to monitors things.

We can't undo the incident, but we can check on the dog now and make sure he is okay. Things can be put in place to ensure no other animal is mistreated in the making of a movie.

I think the movie was made in good faith and no one intended any level of animal abuse and the people who made the movie or starred in it were unaware that any abuse had taken place. The movie was made to spread a positive message about dogs. I would hate to see that lost in this controversy.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]
Catherine

Reply
#9
Whatever really did happen, it probably wasn't even seen as "abuse" of any kind by those involved. They probably were going off how eager Hercules had been just earlier, to do a shoot from the other side of the pool, and thought it no harm to put him into the water from a different place. But still, they should be mindful that forcing an animal against its will, for whatever reason, is frightening to it, and they needed to be more patient and accommodating.
That is what I understand from what I have seen and read.
Reply
#10
Clearly some of the people involved in the filming did not have an understanding of dogs and how sensitive they are. I think some people saw the dogs as a type of props to be used in the movie.
There need to be people on the set who care about the animals who monitor how they are treated.

During the making of "Snakes on a Plane" no one was allowed on the special set(there was a special snake secure set) who didn't like reptiles, on the days the reptiles were present. They made a video about the making of the movie and all the reptiles were treated well.

Surely we can do as much for dogs. More people like dogs than reptiles(I can't imagine why this is) so how could they let even one incident of mistreatment take place.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]
Catherine

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Created by Zyggy's Web Design