A DOG'S PURPOSE | 01.27.17 | Universal | current gross ● 64.25 M

[dudalb]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 6:06 PM, SteveJaros said:

 

Ya think that maybe one wee difference here is that the movie was pitched at dog lovers, and maybe it's not all that surprising that dog lovers would be particularly sensitive about mistreatment of a dog?

 

Bottom line is that you Universal lovers and TMZ haters can wail all you want, but dog lovers didn't like what they saw and this film's box office is going to suffer significantly as a result. 

I am surprised that so many people seem not to get that simple fact.

[Poseidon]

The other side of the story (Which PETA already responded to by opening Round 2):

http://deadline.com/2017/01/a-dogs-purpose-birds-and-animals-unlimited-statement-as-tracking-stalls-1201892568/

 

Seems like PETA is trying to shut down that company and used this movie to get a bigger voice.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Poseidon

[AndyLL]

9 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

The other side of the story:

http://deadline.com/2017/01/a-dogs-purpose-birds-and-animals-unlimited-statement-as-tracking-stalls-1201892568/

 

LOL... 'alternate facts' has already made it's way into general usage.  

 

The people explaining are not giving alternate facts... they are explaining what actually happened and why the video is 'out of context'

 

No one has said that the 20-30 seconds of the handler trying to get the dog into the water when it was obviously scared was the correct why to handle it.  However they did put some context about why it happened and what happened after the video was cut.  They have personally convinced me that what happened in the video was an aberration and not how the dogs were routinely treated.

 

That said...

 

I understand why companies like birds and animals unlimited exist.  You just can't get non-domesticated animals from anywhere.

 

But that is not true of dogs.

 

There are 1000s of dogs owners that have working dogs that could do anything that movies required of them.  Heck... there are 1000s of hunting dogs and dogs that participate in 'Dock Jumping' that would have been ecstatic to jump into that pool of rushing water.

 

If you would have used dogs like that then there would have been no question that the dogs well being would have come first. 

 

[franfar]

3 hours ago, JennaJ said:

 

It's really depressing. It's like people no longer care what the truth is, they just want to be outraged and angry. If an article has a misleading headline, often people will only regard that and not even read the rest. If more facts come in late to shed new light on a situation, it's ignored by most everyone.

 

The most baffling thing here is that the video is honestly so clearly manipulative in its editing. I have a dog which I love dearly and I would never consider that video daming evidence.

 

People have always witch hunted. Fatty Arbuckle, Salem Witch Trials, McCarthyism, etc.

 

It's just that now we have the internet, where misinformation campaigns can reach millions in an instant.

[ban1o]

wish people cared about humans as much as they do about the dog. 

 

i knew that it was probably exaggerated by TMZ 

[Poseidon]

10 minutes ago, ban1o said:

wish people cared about humans as much as they do about the dog. 

 

i knew that it was probably exaggerated by TMZ 

 

I wish people would care about every living individual. This topic is not about animals, it's about utilizing a situation for everyones own goals. 

[DAJK]

4 hours ago, Arlborn said:

I've just read in a local news site that PETA will have activists in front of some movie theaters trying to shame people who wanna buy tickets for this.

 

That's so low.

I would love to be the ass who goes outside and offers them some popcorn when I'm the usher.

[carolwoodpr]

PETA has changed the world. They are not the PETA of 20 years ago that were just making themselves known. PETA nowadays is a huge corporation that actually does have the power to shut a movie down. A Dog's Purpose is on it's hit list and they have manipulated video so they can make everyone boycott the film. It comes down to this: PETA has bee showing us shocking pictures for years. They do that to get our attention. Well, you have to make a choice. Is this real or PETA make believe? Make up your mind and enjoy the movie!

[Jandrew]

Dennis Quaid went on Ellen to talk about the controversy. Good news is women and dog lovers LOVE Ellen. Bad news is, it's Dennis Quaid, star of the movie. He can say whatever he wants, but because he's the star, some people are just going to see his comments as trying to save face since it's his movie.

 

Ellen though did make a good point. She said the video was released in 2015 and if there was any kind of abuse, it should've been released the next day, not two years later. We'll see if her fans agree with her (and I guess Quaid's) sentiments, or if they're still gung ho.

 

EDIT: Wait. It seems that the tide is starting to turn on Facebook. Looks like people are seeing where Quaid and Ellen are coming from, and the PETA bash is starting! "If it was really abuse, it should've been released the next day yada yada" is what people are saying now. This might work folks. Ellen. Her power.

Edited January 24, 2017 by jandrew

[robertman2]

12 minutes ago, jandrew said:

Dennis Quaid went on Ellen to talk about the controversy. Good news is women and dog lovers LOVE Ellen. Bad news is, it's Dennis Quaid, star of the movie. He can say whatever he wants, but because he's the star, some people are just going to see his comments as trying to save face since it's his movie.

 

Ellen though did make a good point. She said the video was released in 2015 and if there was any kind of abuse, it should've been released the next day, not two years later. We'll see if her fans agree with her (and I guess Quaid's) sentiments, or if they're still gung ho.

 

EDIT: Wait. It seems that the tide is starting to turn on Facebook. Looks like people are seeing where Quaid and Ellen are coming from, and the PETA bash is starting! "If it was really abuse, it should've been released the next day yada yada" is what people are saying now. This might work folks. Ellen. Her power.

Too bad her power couldn't get Finding Dory nominated for best animated picture

[Hatebox]

I can't claim to have followed the 'controversy', but is this movie really worth defending anyway? It's got Josh Gad in it, ferchrissake.

[DAJK]

Ellen: the beautiful human being who might end up saving this movie

[Jandrew]

12 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

I can't claim to have followed the 'controversy', but is this movie really worth defending anyway? It's got Josh Gad in it, ferchrissake.

 

To me, it's more about the principle than the movie. I don't care about the movie, but as someone who follows marketing and PR, I'm not a fan of blatant smear campaigns.

[dashrendar44]

10 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

I can't claim to have followed the 'controversy', but is this movie really worth defending anyway? It's got Josh Gad in it, ferchrissake.

Is that the hill people want to die on? A movie starring Josh Gad dubbing a dog...

 

Flint still doesn't have clean water.

[MrPink]

1 hour ago, dashrendar44 said:

Is that the hill people want to die on? A movie starring Josh Gad dubbing a dog...

 

Flint still doesn't have clean water.

 

Nah, no need. Since the investigation is closed down, surely there's no issue in Flint!

[franfar]

I want to see OW tracking for this movie. I think we can get a sense of it when that's released...

[Krissykins]

Why anyone would support this movie is beyond me. Sick, strange people.

 

Yes Peta are an awful company (they don't even agree with having pets), yes it should have been reported instantly.

 

But it's awful how the dog was treated.

 

It's unacceptable. 

 

Anyone who pays to see this should have a think about their morals and values.

[franfar]

While that Birds and Animals company seems sketchy... it doesn't explain the video

2 hours ago, Hatebox said:

I can't claim to have followed the 'controversy', but is this movie really worth defending anyway? It's got Josh Gad in it, ferchrissake.

 

A film is getting slandered based off of misleading evidence. That's an attack on the whole industry IMO. It could happen to any film

 

[RandomCat]

13 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Why anyone would support this movie is beyond me. Sick, strange people.

 

Yes Peta are an awful company (they don't even agree with having pets), yes it should have been reported instantly.

 

But it's awful how the dog was treated.

 

It's unacceptable. 

 

Anyone who pays to see this should have a think about their morals and values.

 

I have, and I'm proud with my values not being toyed with by TMZ and Peta.

[Jandrew]

19 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Why anyone would support this movie is beyond me. Sick, strange people.

 

Yes Peta are an awful company (they don't even agree with having pets), yes it should have been reported instantly.

 

But it's awful how the dog was treated.

 

It's unacceptable. 

 

Anyone who pays to see this should have a think about their morals and values.

 

Or maybe not take everything at face value.