Movie Review of "A DOG's PURPOSE" and the controversy surrounding it (theater, disturbing)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am going to get myself another dog from the animal shelter.
-----------------------------------------------
I threw my dog in the swimming pool once, he was a pretty good swimmer. He hated bath, but loved to swim. Maybe the PITA people would lecture me if they caught me. ANIMAL ABUSER! Well, I made mistakes but sheesh, I loved my dogs, all of them.
I will never put a silly pink dress on my dog, that is for sure. To each her own. :P
They should of gotten a Golden Retriever to do the scene our family's dog would watch over all the kids in the pool like a mother hen and if she thought one was under the water for too long she would dive in to get them!
This is insulting towards the dog. German shepherds are brave, good swimmers and generally enjoy being in the water. Presenting one as a cowardly scaredy-cat is offensive to the breed in general and would probably seem offensive to the dog in question if it could read. These dogs are braver than many an animal-rights nut.
Your post is absurd.
I am defending the German shepherd's right as an animal. He was forced into the water by the trainer against his will. Many others besides myself find this wrong and even the director found it to be unacceptable. If an animal doesn't feel comfortable to do a scene he/she should have the right to walk away and sit down and allow another animal who does feel more comfortable.
No where do I mention the abilities and strengths of German shepherds in general or their swimming capability.
Exactly! Why can't others understand this??? If you see the tape anyone with compassion towards animal's would understand -------those who don't care are in denial.
Why is it every time a conservative is confronted with an unpleasant truth you immediately call that truth "fake"?
Is it because you like to follow your leader and do as he does, sorta like a wind up toy?
Well why don't we start with who my supposed leader is?
If you are speaking of Trump, I didn't vote for him in the primary. However left with the choice of Trump or the career corrupt choice in the person of Hillary, rest assured I voted for Trump. I'd have voted for Sanders before I voted for Hillary. At least he is honest and has some integrity.
Second, there are plenty of stories out there explaining how the video was selectively edited to make is seem much worse than what actually happened.
The American Humane Association, the organization that supervised the treatment of the dogs on the film’s set, issued a statement this morning that the investigation had concluded and that the video “was deliberately edited for the purpose of misleading the public and stoking outrage,” noting that the two scenes in the video had been edited together. The report backs up statements from the film’s crew that the video was misleading, though it has not been made available for review, and a request to the American Humane Association weren’t returned by publication time.
The organization explained that the investigation had been carried out by “conducted by a respected animal cruelty expert.” It found that experts were present, that the proper safety precautions were taken during the film’s production, and that the dog in question was healthy.
One wonders if you will have something productive to say when "confronted with this unpleasant truth".
And how is that working out? The feedlots in Iowa and Southern Minnesota are expanding.
It's all politics. You have congressmen like Mr. King in Iowa who support farmers and are supported by farmers and are not about to let any legislation pass that would protect animals.
PETA and other animal rights groups are concerned about these feedlots, but until people stop seeing animal rights groups as "fringe," nothing is going to change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny
Why is it every time a conservative is confronted with an unpleasant truth you immediately call that truth "fake"?
Is it because you like to follow your leader and do as he does, sorta like a wind up toy?
I'm a conservative, and I'm against the abuse of animals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
Second, there are plenty of stories out there explaining how the video was selectively edited to make is seem much worse than what actually happened.
The American Humane Association, the organization that supervised the treatment of the dogs on the film’s set, issued a statement this morning that the investigation had concluded and that the video “was deliberately edited for the purpose of misleading the public and stoking outrage,” noting that the two scenes in the video had been edited together. The report backs up statements from the film’s crew that the video was misleading, though it has not been made available for review, and a request to the American Humane Association weren’t returned by publication time.
The organization explained that the investigation had been carried out by “conducted by a respected animal cruelty expert.” It found that experts were present, that the proper safety precautions were taken during the film’s production, and that the dog in question was healthy.
One wonders if you will have something productive to say when "confronted with this unpleasant truth".
It sounds like the American Humane Association is trying to cover up its own mistakes.
The video shown in this thread clearly was not edited. It speaks for itself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.