It did to me and it should've won a Golden Globe...a cat could never have pulled it off...plus they couldn't have named it Fanny aka Assie...or butt.
shareI'm pretty sure it was not a real dog at all. It looked real because it was intended to look real, because it was a realistic film. But the fact remains it was most likely a prop, and a really good one. There is no way the filmmakers would kill a dog and then tell Mads to carry it.
shareI would beg to differ. Foreign filmmakers often don't have the same sensibilities about animals in film that Americans do, where every action is monitored by the Humane Society. I was trying to read the Danish at the end to see if there was a disclaimer, but I couldn't tell, not being able to read Danish. :)
I'm really worried that they might have really killed the dog for the film. They need to publicize it if they didn't.
I bet you never been to Scandinavia or Northern Europe. I'm sorry to burst your bubble with this but we are much more humane to our animals than North America. I've been to the States a lot and traveled around in quite a bit of states and i can assure you that your country looks like a third world country next to Scandinavia when it comes to the well-being of animals.
I would advice you to leave your bubble of a country and experience the evil foreign countries that are so inhumane.
Have a nice day.
Well that's a load of bule sheiete what about the annual whaling in the Faroe Islands?
http://www.itchfilm.com/animation_whale.html
I'm pretty sure i said Scandinavia when i wrote my post but i guess you missed that?
Faroe Island is its own country and not a part of Scandinavia (Denmark, Norway, Sweden) It's north of Scotland and there is a population of about 50 thousand people, which i suppose would be a small town in your country. Faroe Islands are under danish Sovereignty and the whale killing is seen as barbaric thing in Denmark.
What about the whaling? Do you actually KNOW anything about it? or did you just hear what other people ranted of; cause they heard Paul Watson say some things on Animal Planet?
What is it that you think you know?
Andres Jacobsen
Producer at Polar Films Entertainment
-
https://vimeo.com/polarfilms/videos
[deleted]
I would advice you to leave your bubble of a country and experience the evil foreign countries that are so inhumane.
Really, humane to your animals? The little giraffe would say otherwise. Or the whole lion family... Or Copenhagen was an exception from you claiming? Just asking. Cause in that light, I can see how they wouldn't have a problem with killing a dog.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
"Thanks for your sound advice to that person"
That wasn't "sound advice." That was part of the rhetoric in an insulting rant by someone who got angry over the suggestion that Europeans weren't sensitive to the welfare of animals.
LOL, north america is the devil's favourite place on earth, responsible for most of the things that are wrong today, but you still think you're humane ? How someone can live in such a dream and not realize is something I'll never understand.
shareThe wars started by the Europeans say you're totally full of *beep*
shareOh here we go again...they dont even have kill shelters in Europe! Just in the States! And better animals' rights laws and btw...the Humane Society kills strays just like the ASPCA and Peta.
shareI'll step in for a moment about no-kill shelters and say that not all kill-free animal shelters are good. I live in a town (in the USA) that has a no-kill shelter and they're in a horrible state. The animals keep piling up whilst there's not enough food and cleaning, and they can barely keep up with vet treatment, so diseased dogs and cats are adopted out. It's off-topic, but, just saying... perhaps a state or even national issue?
--
It's like death eatin' a cracker.
It says in the end credits that no dog were harmed. My guess (a guess only) is that it must have been drugged down in order to appear dead (which may still be ethically questionble of course as it may be stressful for the dog and also because drugging down inherently is risky ...)
It is also said in the credits that the deer were killed by professional hunters keeping the population of deer at bay. Basically what that means is that in scandinavia (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) they usually kill a given number of deer every year (in some areas) to keep them from overpopulating the area. So while they indeed killed one deer during the production of the movie basically a deer would have been killed at some point anyway to keep the population down.
Do I say that this is morally right? Not necessarily. It is still a fact that that deer was killed at that moment in order to make the film. It could have been easily faked instead of killing a real deer IMO.
It says in the end credits that no dog were harmed
Oh thank the lord, my nerves are shattered after watching this and not know if these filmmakers would indeed kill a dog, say who was going to be euthanized anywway!! Thank you
I never drink, wine
The disclaimer in Danish says :
"Hjorte blev skudt af professionelle jægere, der fastholder bestanden.
Hunden led ikke over last under optagelserne"
My translation as a humble Norwegian is:
"The deer was shot by professional hunters, the upholds standards.
The dog did not suffer at all during the recording"
So that would imply to me that it was a real dog was probably sedated or that it was a prop. I'm leaning towards the former.
I hate this whole thing about European filmmakers not "having the same standards" as the infallible american film industry. Generalising in that fashion never helped anything and the few cases that seem to warrant full ostracisation (ironic because of the message the film had) of European film industries are controversial and liked down upon in general by us "uncivilised" europeans.
hunters who keep the population down*
shareI cant believe that nobody until now even mentioned the possibility that the dog was sedated. Everybody would rather start to find flaws and make a pissing contest about who's country is better or more civilized and humane. Logical and cool thinking is the last thing on everybody's mind. As for the dog... I can assure everyone that there are sedatives approved by all vet-med committees that wear off with no damage at all especially for that one 10-20 seconds of shooting for the scene.
shareThe filmmakers not only killed the dog, but raped it too - unfortunately the Humane Society wasn't around to stop these uncontrollable "foreign filmmakers", but don't worry because I think the US are to invade Denmark and deliver justice for mankind. We're so lucky to have you, give yourself a pat on the back.
shareCheers.
shareONG, you just made ny day, lol :-D
shareI would beg to differ. Foreign filmmakers often don't have the same sensibilities about animals in film that Americans do, where every action is monitored by the Humane Society.
You're an idiot.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Lol. Americans sensible? Please. Tell that to the million native americans you *beep* slaughtered to steal their land.
shareI think you should shove your american *beep* up your ass, and go bombing some middle-east country for oil.
VIVA LA VINYL
You're "...really worried" ?
omg. Get over it.
I suppose you don't care about them?
b l u e
g r e e n
Are you effing dumb? Have you ever been to europe or are you just balbbering cliches out of your mouth? No filmmaker here would kill a dog for a scene. It never happened and it never will.
Thats like me saying all americans are dumb because of comments like yours. Hopefully, thats not the case.
I'm Danish, and it says at the end.
"The deer was killed by professional hunters, to keep the quantity.
The dog was not harmed."
https://imgur.com/a/RyE2o
The simpe explanation would be to sedate the dog temporarily so it looks like dead when just really asleep.
shareYES ! THANK YOU ! FINALLY !
i was gonna skip all the madness saying the dog had to be dead and post what you said, and then my eye caught the only other logical person here. Its like the movie all over again, nobody thinks the obvious and everybody's mind goes to the worst thing.
that's not right either, and I can understand about the deer, but it really didn't HAVE to be done in the movie.
I never drink, wine
Extremely hard to watch and wish the filmmakers hadn't gone down that road, it felt like a typical American film that way.
:( Oh well... but that leads to the question of the dear at the top of the film, also looked like a real kill. Pray it was not. Anyone have the real answer here?
You dog people are so damn sensitive.
shareDamn right we are. Dogs cannot speak for themselves, so they need someone to speak up for them. And we will continue to do so, and live in the hope that unfeeling, insensitive people like you soon become a thing of the past. I harbor the same hope for racists and homophobes, and all the evilness in the world. It may be a useless thing to hope for, but I hope and work for it every single day anyway.
shareListen, that's fine and all, and your agenda is somewhat admirable. But I find that pro dog people do not share the same concern for most other forms of life. Insects, rodents, etc all do not have voices either and area generally far more neglected and/or mistreated than dogs.
shareCould it be you put a dog's life before a human's life ? If this is true, you're one of this sociopaths who don't get along well with people and prefer dogs, because "they cannot speak for themselves" and always obey.
sharedamn right !
I never drink, wine
The dog could be sedated, it could be taxidermied, it naturally wasn't killed for a movie. That would be a thing.
The deer? Not a thing at all.
Those are killed all the time, to keep the population in check. If not, it would cause issues for the other animals in the area. Hunters are officially hired to keep the population in check, and I suppose the filmmakers could manage to get a shot of that while it was happening anyway.
I wondered that, as well.
I'm just sick and tired of something happening to the dog in every damn movie I watch anymore. It's getting ridiculous...just leave the pets alone for gosh sakes!!
I always know if I see an animal at the beginning of a film surely we will soon see it's demise. It's never good.
shareLOL - I'm with you, Karen! I watched the first ten minutes of Seven Psychopaths, and turned it off immediately after seeing the dog before watching anymore. After checking with a friend to see if anything happens to the dog, and getting the green light, I was able to watch it in peace. Good Film!
shareI'm going to be honest, I find your other comments quite insulting, and generally ignorant, however regarding your above post if it helps then try searching for a film you may be about to watch on :
doesthedogdie . com
to see if the dog dies, obviously.
What exactly does a stunt dog look like? Lee Majors?
shareWhile I don't like comfortable lies and wild theories for something that's probably just a dead dog:
When he buries it, the way the body bends in his hands is far too elastic. In no way would canine rigor mortis leave a body that soft.
It could have easily been a prop or a live dog.
Just to clear some stuff up:
In the end credits, the following is stated regarding the deer and the dog (translation from the original Danish):
"Deer were shot by professional hunters in order to keep the population in check.
The dog was not harmed in any way during the making of this film."
It's a real dog alright but it was apparently sedated.
I know US is bigger and there has to be room for mostly everyone in a society but jeez... people in america are so oversensitive O.o
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR FACT CHECKING!
I'm gonna stop here and not comment on anything else in this thread