1/23: A Dog’s Purpose Update (Statement from Polone, the producer, and BAU, the animal training company)
Please note I’m not trying to tell people how to feel, who to blame, if they should boycott or not (or who they should be boycotting), etc. I’m not trying to tell anyone what to think. This is just me summarizing the latest news on A Dog’s Purpose in regards to the video released by TMZ of Hercules, the german shepherd, being forced into the water. Anyway, we’re finally getting some real details from producer Gavin Polone. I’ve yet again summarized it here, but here is the link for anyone interested in reading the full article. I only quoted what I thought were the key parts.
1. Polone recognizes that Hercules was forced in the water and blames the handler, AHA representative, those on set who did nothing, and himself for not being present.
“As with the TMZ video that you saw, two things were evident: 1) the dog handler tries to force the dog, for 35 to 40 seconds, into the water when, clearly, he didn’t want to go in; and 2) in a separate take filmed sometime later, the dog did go into the water, on his own, and, at the end, his head is submerged for about 4 seconds. These two things are absolutely INEXCUSABLE and should NEVER have happened. The dog trainer should have stopped trying to get the dog to go in the water as soon as the dog seemed uncomfortable, and the trainers should have had support under the dog as soon as he came to the side of the pool and/or had less turbulence in the water so he never would have gone under. The American Humane Association (AHA) representative who is paid by the production to “ensure the safety and humane treatment of animal actors,” as its website states, should have also intervened immediately on both of those parts of the filming. So should have whomever was running the set. Those individuals should be held accountable and never used again by that studio or its affiliates. I also hold myself accountable because, even though I was not present, I knew and had written about how ineffective AHA has been over the years.”
2. Hercules wanted to jump in the water.
“In footage of the rehearsal for the scene, you can see the dog not only unafraid of the water but desperate to jump in. In fact, he had to be held back by the trainer from going in too soon (the dog was trained to retrieve a toy sewed into the hoodie of the stunt woman and give the illusion that he was pulling her to safety).”
3. Polone confirmed the author’s earlier statement that Hercules did not want to jump because he was on the wrong side of the pool.
“The dog did the scene in rehearsal without problem, though it was from the left side of the pool, not the right side, which is where the dog is in the TMZ video.”
“Before the first real take, the handlers were asked to change the start point of the dog from the left side, where he had rehearsed, to the right side. That, evidentially, is what caused him to be spooked.”
4. Polone also confirmed Cameron’s statement about the safety precautions.
“In the rehearsal footage, it’s clear that there is a safety diver and a trainer in the pool to protect the dog in case of a problem, as well as two trainers, a stunt coordinator and a safety officer on the deck, and that there are platforms built into the pool where the dog can swim to and stand, if need be. The pool was heated to between 80 and 85 degrees, causing it to steam.”
5. Polone explained why the video was misleading.
“When the dog didn’t want to do the scene from the new position, they cut, though not soon enough, and then went back to the original position. The dog was comfortable and went in on his own and they shot the scene. The TMZ video only shows the unfinished take of when the dog was on the right side.”
“You can also see, at the end of the scene, the dog going underwater for four seconds, which never should have happened, and then the diver and handlers lifting the dog out of the pool. The dog then shook off and trotted around the pool, unharmed and unfazed. They only did one take of the full scene and then ended for the day. TMZ’s edited version gives the impression that the dog was thrown in and eventually drowned, since the two parts seem to be connected. You never see him pulled out and OK.”
6. Polone prompted people to consider why the video was edited, why it wasn’t released for a year and three months, and PETA’s involvement (it seems to be implied he believes PETA is at fault).
“Why did the person who edited it to seem like the two clips were connected and not let you see the dog was alright and never in mortal danger? Also, why did the person who shot it hold on to the video for a year and three months before releasing it? If he wanted to protect animals, wouldn’t he want whoever did wrong stopped from doing the same on other productions immediately? Of course, waiting until eight days before the movie’s Jan. 27 release date, when the studio was spending money creating awareness of the film, would yield a bigger sale to TMZ, which is known to pay for newsworthy video. I can only believe that desire for personal profit explains why the shooter of the video did as he did.”
“Not only have they been circulating the TMZ video, which portrays an inaccurate picture of what happened, but they have included a clip from our trailer where you see the dog jumping into a treacherous rushing wall of water. But THAT ISN’T A REAL DOG, it is a computer-generated dog leaping into the water. Isn’t that the definition of “fake news”? In another post, they show a German Shepherd in a dismal steel cage, which isn’t our dog. Again, misleading.”
7. Polone explains why the whole movie could not be in CGI because it would be too expensive. Three sceengrabs (two shown here) were also released showing the CGI.
“The idea of making a more contained movie like A Dog’s Purpose with all CGI animals is impossible, as the cost would be astronomical to replace every animal in the movie. For example, the digital dog that I mentioned above cost $41,075. Extrapolate that across the whole movie, where most of the scenes have at least one dog in them and many have more, plus other animals in other scenes in the background. I would estimate that it would balloon the budget by a factor of four or five to more than $110 million, making the project economically unviable.”
8. Polone describes PETA’s faults (which hopefully by now we should all know that PETA is garbage).
“In 2008, PETA sent a letter to Ben & Jerry’s ice cream suggesting that it stop using cow’s milk to make its product and instead use human breast milk. It has protested various video game makers for cruelty toward digital animals in their video games. It has posted articles on its website suggesting that dairy products cause autism. More troubling, PETA has been against the growing “no-kill” movement to spare the lives of unwanted pets in shelters by advocating for and facilitating pet adoption. no-kill has vastly reduced the number of euthanized animals in cities around the country. Conversely, according to The Washington Post, at a shelter in Virginia, owned by PETA, the euthanasia rate was 80 percent and in some years the rate has been as high as 90 percent (the rate in Los Angeles city shelters, thanks in large part to The Best Friends Animal Society’s “No Kill LA” program, has dropped by 66 percent to about 16 percent).”
9. Polone proposes that people use the incident to focus on encouraging the building of “a better method to protecting animals on sets through a better animal-protective service.”
“I say that we build a better method of protecting animals on sets through a better animal-protective service. PETA says the film should be boycotted and no dogs ever be used in movies or TV. I would ask that if a teacher were to hit a student in class, should the whole school be closed and all the children left without an education? This is a movie that is intended to reinforce the idea that animals are sentient and we should love and protect them, just like the movies and TV shows I saw as a kid made me understand. You probably have similar touchstones that relate to your feelings about animals, too. So, isn’t there worth in A Dog’s Purpose, and movies like it, from an animal welfare perspective? Wouldn’t it be better to fix the problems that led to this unfortunate and anomalous event and ignore the manipulated media and half-truths disseminated by those with either financial or extremist agendas?”
—————————————————————————————————-
In other news, Birds & Animals Unlimited (the company that provided Hercules to the production), sent a letter to TMZ. Here is the letter. Here are the key points:
1. Hercules was trained for months and was picked for his love of water.
“ Hercules, a two-year old German Shepherd, had been in training for months to perform the swimming scenes for this film. He was chosen for the film based on his love of the water.”
2. BAU confirmed Hercules was uncomfortable by siding pool sides.
“After many successful takes throughout the day, a request was made to have Hercules perform the same behavior, but changing the point from which he was to enter the pool. As the camera started rolling, the trainer in the water began to call the dog. It quickly became apparent that Hercules did not want to enter the pool from this location.”
3. BAU addresses the voice in the video saying they were not in charge of Hercules’s well-being.
“We cannot identify the voice that appears on the videotape saying “Just gotta throw him in,” but there were many people on the film set and it was not anyone with any authority over Hercules’ welfare as some of the news coverage implied.”
4. BAU described Hercules willingly jumping in the pool where he briefly went under the water before being lifted by a diver.
“In the next shot, Hercules entered the pool from his rehearsed location. While swimming across the pool, the current carried him closer to the wall at end of the pool than it had in previous takes. When the dog reached the wall, he was briefly submerged at which point the diver and trainer immediately pushed him to the surface. Trainers poolside then pulled him out of the water. Hercules shook the water off and wagged his tail.”
—————————————————————————————————-
In my personal opinion, I think this is a great start to figuring out what happened, but we’re not all the way there yet. I’m also glad to hear that the producer has recognized the problem (the handler, AHA rep, people not saying anything, etc.). However, I would still like to see some sort of fitting punishment for the handler and the AHA representative. I would also like to know who edited the video, why they edited it, and why they waited so long to release it. It has not been confirmed to be PETA, despite many stating it, but there are heavy implications and suggestions that it was. Nonetheless, I’m overall more pleased by the article than upset, annoyed, or disgusted by it. I still believe they should release the full, unedited clip so we know exactly what happened. It would be the easiest way to end this mess.
