Outrage over dog’s treatment may be premature

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 20/01/2017 (3200 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

By now, you’ve heard about or seen the now-viral TMZ video in which Hercules, the German shepherd star of A Dog’s Purpose, is seen resisting a stunt involving turbulent water. 

The video is uncomfortable to watch, to be sure. Most reasonable people don’t like seeing an animal in any kind of distress, including fear. And as an unapologetic dog mom — you know, the kind who calls herself a dog mom — I will admit to also having an emotional knee-jerk reaction to the video the first time I saw it. 

But let’s all take a big, deep breath and a big step back and acknowledge we don’t actually know very much about this situation.

First of all, this is an edited video from TMZ. Is TMZ considered a credible media outlet now? Where did this video come from? Why is it edited? Are the two pieces of video from the same attempt, or different attempts? Why are we only just now seeing a video allegedly from November 2015? Could it be because the movie opens next Friday?

Outraged dog lovers are appalled because it appears, from the video, that these trainers are intentionally putting a terrified dog in a dangerous situation. 

But was it dangerous? Or did it just look dangerous? Remember, these people were making a movie.

Other things to consider: it’s possible Hercules had executed the same stunt multiple times before and just had a bad day. In the video in question, Hercules was not yelled at, shamed or struck. He was not held underwater. He was not thrown into the water or forced to complete the scene, despite a jump-cut making it look like he was. It’s possible this scene was shot by the book and Hercules still went under at the end. 

It’s also just as possible everyone involved completely botched this scene and put the dog in danger. The point is, we can’t say definitively based on this video. The American Humane Association — the organization that makes sure “no animals were harmed in the making of this film” — is investigating the incident.

The Internet is blowing up about this. PETA is calling for a boycott. Everyone has picked up this story, including the Free Press as the movie was shot in and around town. And the language being used is telling. Most pieces are peppered with “possibly,” “allegedly,” and “appears to be.” Some media outlets have called the video “disturbing”; others went for the slightly more moderate “troubling.” TMZ’s original 216-word post, which doesn’t have a byline, was short on details but long on hyperbole. “One of the dogs in the upcoming film A Dog’s Purpose desperately resisted shooting a risky scene, but chilling footage shows filmmakers apparently forcing the animal into rushing water.” 

Yes, that sounds very bad, especially when paired with the accompanying visuals. But is it what happened?

Without context or information, the video is wide open to interpretation. Some might watch this clip and see a distressed dog and, at the end, panicked trainers rushing to rescue it. Some might watch the same clip and see a regular day on a movie set. Others still might see a dog who just absolutely does not want to get wet. The truth is somewhere in there. 

You may recall a viral Internet video that made the morning-show circuit in 2015 featuring Peaches, a cockatoo that mimicked her previous owners’ fights. Some thought this video was hilarious. Others were horrified by it, claiming that Peaches was clearly suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. It’s all in how you interpret the scene. 

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Jen Zoratti | Next

Wednesdays

What's next in arts, life and pop culture.

Sign up for Jen Zoratti | Next

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

In this black-and-white, all-or-nothing age of Internet outrage, there’s no time to investigate or discuss or allow a story to evolve. Many people have firmly made up their minds and have decided they are boycotting this film. Those daring to go against the angry mob and question whether this is actually an example of animal cruelty are being labelled disgusting supporters of animal abuse. 

An argument I keep encountering online is real dogs should never be used in films and be completely replaced by computer-generated imagery. That strikes me as an over-correction. Anyone who has looked into a dog’s eyes knows you can’t recreate that with computers. If dogs are an important part of our lives, and any dog person will tell you they are, then of course we should make films about them and tell stories about them. And there’s no reason to believe this can’t be, or isn’t already, done safely.

Besides, if we want to talk about a dog’s purpose, many dogs derive a lot of purpose from having jobs — whether they are roles in K9 units, on search-and-rescue teams, as therapy and seeing dogs, or yes, as actors. Hercules had a job to do, and his humans are responsible to make sure he’s safe and successful. 

Now, if the investigations reveal Hercules was, indeed, mistreated and/or did not receive proper training on the set of A Dog’s Purpose, then yes, that’s disturbing. But let’s hold off on condemning the trainers, handlers and filmmakers until we know more than we do now. Which, at this point, isn’t much.  

jen.zoratti@freepress.mb.ca

Jen Zoratti
Columnist

Jen Zoratti is a columnist and feature writer working in the Arts & Life department, as well as the author of the weekly newsletter NEXT. A National Newspaper Award finalist for arts and entertainment writing, Jen is a graduate of the Creative Communications program at RRC Polytech and was a music writer before joining the Free Press in 2013. Read more about Jen.

Every piece of reporting Jen produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print – part of the Free Press‘s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.