• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

A Dog’s Purpose (film) accused of animal cruelty after disturbing footage emerges

Status
Not open for further replies.

jambo

Member
http://consequenceofsound.net/2017/...nt-water-during-a-dogs-purpose-filming-watch/

TMZ posted footage taken November 2015 at a filming location outside Winnipeg, Manitoba. The scene involved a German Shepherd swimming through rough waters, an effect achieved by placing eight outboard motors into a pool, according to TMZ’s sources. The dog is extremely resistant to going into the churning water. After a trainer attempts twice to force the animal in — once holding him by the collar as he’s dipped into the pool — the dog does eventually end up swimming, though the video cuts out the part showing him actually entering the pool.

At the end of the clip, the pup is seen pushed down to the end of the pool by the turbulent water as he struggles to swim across. A trainer in the pool attempts to call him towards her, but the scrambling dog ends up submerged. You can hear panic set in as people yell, “Cut it,” and two handlers rush to help the animal.

TMZ reports that director Lasse Hallström was present during the particular scene, and that at least one crew member felt “extremely disturbed” by how the German Shepard was being treated. Amblin Partners and Universal Pictures sent TMZ a statement saying they’ve seen the footage and are investigating.

(DISTURBING FOOTAGE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csLiYr5OGbg


Poor thing, hope it survived. Hopefully Universal works out who the trainer was.
 

Moofers

Member
Well shit, I was looking forward to seeing this. How awful.

*Watched the video*

Very clear to me that they were somehow not expecting the dog to get submerged. There was panic and people rushing in so it isn't really the callous scene I was imagining. However, the fact that we put an unwilling animal in danger for a stupid movie is too bad. I love movies but I don't need "the perfect scene!" badly enough to give some poor dog trauma. I wish using animals in movies like this was a thing of the past. CG is good enough now they could have just faked it and nobody would care.
 

Nydius

Member
Just wondering where the Humane Society overseer was during all this. They're supposed to be there to prevent this kind of thing from happening. Were they elsewhere at the time?

Whatever the case, forcing the dog into a situation it clearly was too scared to be in is simply inexcusable.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
I hate the sound of this story, this is just the icing on the cake.
 

Kai Dracon

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Yeah the entire idea of filming that scene by actually throwing a real dog into rushing water seems completely inappropriate. Like why would they even plan it that way in the first place.
 
Started watching it, but i booked out when I see this asshole holding a dog that is OBVIOUSLY not interested in getting submerged in churning water, and the video camera person going 'at least it's warm water' or some other horseshit. What the fuck were they thinking? Would they have done the same thing with a child?
 
Let's have the dog swim in normal water, and composite it into rushing water.

Nah let's throw him into rushing waters to begin with and fucking scar the poor creature.
 
Normally I complain about the overuse of CGI in modern movies, but I think that scenes where animals are doing stunts should be 100% animated. There are so many confirmed horror stories like Milo and Otis, or Flipper, and so many more movies and tv shows where the animals look visibly terrified.
 
I watched Homeward Bound for the first time in over 20 years with my son the other day and I was wondering how they shot the cat in the river scene.

Probably like this =[
 

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
Just wondering where the Humane Society overseer was during all this. They're supposed to be there to prevent this kind of thing from happening. Were they elsewhere at the time?
Here's a better question.

Do Humane Society overseers actually do anything on a movie set? Do they have any authority whatsoever?
 
Gonna ask family and friends to not spend their money & time on this film, and instead take the time to write the studio and tear a fucking strip off of them for this shit. This is actually the first time I've seen video of, and heard verified claims of what is obviously cruel treatment of an animal (whether it 'meets the standards' of animal cruelty charges, I really don't give a shit.) I'm fucking pissed over here.
 

PSqueak

Banned
If the film comes out, would they have to put a disclaimer like "One animal was harmed in the production of this film"?

No, they just aren't legally allowed to put the "no animals were harmed" one.

Just like Speed Racer wasn't allowed after a trainer beat up one of the monkeys after he attacked an actor, or something along those lines.

Also, isn't the movie supposed to celebrate the existance of dogs? yeah, after this shit, everyone involved should take the moral decision to can the movie entirely.
 

Spinoff90

Member
Hard to fully judge without seeing how the dog got in the water. It is bad that the dog was clearly distressed but more than anything in the initial part the trainer seemed to just be trying to not get the dog to run away and not forcing it in the water. He could have even been doing that because he was worried if the dog did run off it might have fallen in. The times the dog did end up over the edge he pulled it back up which might show a sign that they were not going to let the dog in if it wasn't ready. The fact that we conveniently don't see how the dog got in despite the fact that multiple people were clearly filming from multiple locations makes me think in the end the dog did jump in by itself and wasn't forcefully tossed in or anything. Which really changes the story TMZ are trying to push. But if they did toss the dog in it is obviously terrible and the guy commentating from the first angle was an asshole laughing about it and trying to encourage throwing the dog in.
 

PSqueak

Banned
Apparently a dogs purpose is to entertain us even when they are extremely uncomfortable doing it. Great message.

image.php


Sorry, couldn't resist...
 
Amblin Entertainment is given first production credit on IMDB for this film. There are like five producers. Not sure which one to direct my vitriol at.
 

Aurongel

Member
Without footage of the dog entering the water it's really difficult to pin down where actual cruel treatment begins. It makes me question TMZ's intentions but at the same time I don't exactly want to give that trainer the benefit of the doubt. As someone who's worked with dog trainers, it did seem like he was trying to coax the dog into the water on his own terms instead of by direct force.
 
I watched Homeward Bound for the first time in over 20 years with my son the other day and I was wondering how they shot the cat in the river scene.

Probably like this =[


The last one that got me was George Miller's Babe Pig in the City. I've never heard any controversy about that movie, but even just what is on the screen made me uncomfortable.
 

Nydius

Member
Here's a better question.

Do Humane Society overseers actually do anything on a movie set? Do they have any authority whatsoever?

True enough. And even further: Does their authority, whatever it may be, differ between animal types? In other words, can filmmakers get away with more actions on, say, a dog versus a horse?

This entire thing has opened up a lot of questions to ponder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom