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

[That One Girl]

1 hour 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.

 

You clearly haven't read the full story.  Bye.

[rjones1325]

Who knew a January movie about dogs would be one of the first most controversial films of the year. You know the story. You saw the articles and let me say, I find this all to be nothing more than a sack of crap. Seriously people? You have a heavily edited video from no other than TMZ (who I have no idea why would they be at the production site of A Dog’s Purpose) 

 

If you are a dog person, this movie will have you at “aww” from the first frame to the last. As a guy who prefers dogs more than any other pet, it was hard to refrain from easy heartwarming moments and outbursts of “aww.” The film is cute yet manipulative and cheesy without a doubt. But it’s a cute kind of manipulative cheese that just easily cuddles up to your heart no matter how tough you try to be. Similar to owning an actual dog.

What is weird about these family films centered on dogs is that you could have it be about anything and it’ll still classify as a PG rated film. Like films such as Shiloh or Max, the film features pretty dark elements revolving around the adults more so than the dog at times. It’s weird too because Bailey’s first owner, Ethan got him by committing a crime. His mom saves this dog from death by breaking into someone's car in broad daylight. You have scenes of crime, death, spousal abuse, death, OH and more DEATH which is conceptually uncomfortable to sit through. One of the lives of Bailey has a tragic ending that you makes you go “damn,” but yet the film plays it so lightly. It just flash cuts to a fluorescent blue stream that leads you to Bailey’s next life while you know that he just died. It has dark elements but plays it with a light tone. It has good intentions introducing Bailey as a different breed of dog with a different owner, but you also want to know what happened to the previous owner after Bailey dies. But then again you probably wouldn’t want to see the depression of a man after a dog’s death. God forbid they show a funeral scene for one of many deaths of Bailey. The theater floor would’ve been flooded with tears if they did. Especially when this, A Dog's Purpose is a family film.

 

FULL REVIEW HERE

[DeeCee]

There was probably never any chance of me seeing this movie. Now I might because of PETA. 

 

 

[carolwoodpr]

I don't think it is a sick mind who watches this movie, I think it will be people who like dogs and @Krissykinsit seems you are being a bit harsh.  Peta has caused this mess, there was no abuse.

[Blankments]

Updated predcits:

 

OW: 19M

DOM: 55M

WW: 104M

[misafeco]

TOMATOMETER 

32%

Average Rating: 4.7/10

Reviews Counted: 44

Fresh: 14

Rotten: 30

 

Critics Consensus: A Dog's Purpose offers an awkward blend of sugary sentiment and canine suffering that tugs at animal-loving audiences' heartstrings with shameless abandon.

AUDIENCE SCORE 

 

57%

liked it

Average Rating: 3.1/5

User Ratings: 9,859

[Krissykins]

The word "shameless" is in the consensus. Glad RT fit that in there.

Edited January 27, 2017 by Krissykins

[That One Girl]

1 hour ago, Krissykins said:

The word "shameless" is in the consensus. Glad RT fit that in there.

 

And what are you implying when you say that?

[Hatebox]

Well, PR war aside, movie that looks shit turns out to be shit. The world keeps on spinning.

[stripe]

I never expected this to be a critics praised movie. In fact, it's getting slightly better RT score than I thought.

 

Question is: will DP succeed with its target audience? Will they be satisfied?

[AndyLL]

I haven't read the reviews in detail however it looks like the video is taken a toll on them.

 

I did read a post from one reviewer that stated that he dumped the positive review he had originally written and replaced it with a negative one because of the video.

 

He also claimed the dog was 'thrown into the water'.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RandomCat]

This movie was never going to get good reviews, sadly.

[carolwoodpr]

Going to see this movie tomorrow night.  It will be interesting to see how many people will be in the theater with us.  And I will bring a ton of tissues.

[carolwoodpr]

Just got back from seeing this movie.  Great for Dog lovers everywhere.  I am a cat person who loves our dogs and loved this movie.  Yes, I cried a lot both sad and happy tears, it was really well done.  The theater was about 60% full and they clapped when the movie ended.  That's how good it was.

[Blankments]

Final predicts:

 

DOM: 50M

WW: 95M

[franfar]

An investigation has found that the A Dog’s Purpose viral video was faked

 

Quote

In January, TMZ published a video taken on the set of A Dog’s Purpose that appeared to show the film’s handlers forcing a distressed dog into a pool of water. The video quickly went viral and prompted the cancelation of the film’s premiere while sparking protests at theaterswhere the film was being released. Now, an independent, third-party investigation found that the video had been edited to mischaracterize what actually happened.

 

The American Humane Association, the organization that supervised the treatment of the dogs on the film’s set, issued a statementthis 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.

The statement also explained that the dog, a German Shepherd named Hercules, had been “trained and conditioned” for his scenes, and that while he did show signs of distress, filming had stopped and that he “was not forced to swim in the water at any time.” American Humane agreed that the “handling of the dog in the first scene in the video should have been gentler and signs of stress recognized earlier,” but explained that the production was adjusted and proceeded without incident.

American Humane used the statement to blast animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the video’s creators for stoking the controversy, noting that the release appears to have been timed in conjunction with the film’s release. According to Deadline, it’s not entirely clear if the video had any effect on the film’s box office totals, which pulled in around $20 million during its opening weekend.

Even if the effect of the video was minimal, the video going viral certainly stoked outrage on social media, which put the film’s creators in a position where they had to spend weeks defending their production, rather than the film itself. After a year where the spread of fake news reports percolated through social media, it’s worth remembering that fabricated and planted stories aren’t limited to the realm of political discourse.

I want to see the naysayers deny this. This is why you don't jump to conclusions. 

 

And now the film bombed. Good grief

Edited February 5, 2017 by franfar

[robertman2]

8 minutes ago, franfar said:

An investigation has found that the A Dog’s Purpose viral video was faked

 

I want to see the naysayers deny this. This is why you don't jump to conclusions. 

 

And now the film bombed. Good grief

This bombed? What was the budget on it?

[franfar]

9 minutes ago, robertman2 said:

This bombed? What was the budget on it?

22m

 

I just thought the film was gonna do much better BO and review wise

[JennaJ]

The controversy clearly had a negative impact on some of the reviews as well.

for instance:

 

A manipulative script about dog reincarnation that whacks your emotions like a piñata - that's forgivable. But no mercy for a film charged with canine abuse behind the scenes. It shouldn't happen to a dog. 

January 27, 2017 | Rating: 1.5/4 | Full Review…

Peter Travers

Rolling Stone

 Top Critic

[franfar]

6 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

The controversy clearly had a negative impact on some of the reviews as well.

for instance:

 

A manipulative script about dog reincarnation that whacks your emotions like a piñata - that's forgivable. But no mercy for a film charged with canine abuse behind the scenes. It shouldn't happen to a dog. 

January 27, 2017 | Rating: 1.5/4 | Full Review…

Peter Travers

Rolling Stone

 Top Critic

And he's one of the more prominent national critics...

 

I really expected this movie to do better than 35% on RT