Protest the hobbit!!! | Page 4 | Forum

Gaia Forums » MISC Forums » Hot Topics Archive » The Hobbit

Report ad

Chibi Nerd

(?)Community Member

Dapper Lunatic

9,250 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_46 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:31:03 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:31:03 +0000

I call bullcrap about this whole thing.

chatta366

(?)Community Member

Shoujo Krampus

38,000 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_47 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:55:52 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:55:52 +0000

Green_crayon42

chatta365

Nafretiti

As a person who sorta knows Peter Jackson personally (my aunt is friends with his wife so I have met several times) he is NOT to blame for any animals being hurt, if they died they died due to other reasons NOT NOT by the crew who were there to take care of them and also who is to say they didn't die of illness? Illness that WASN'T man caused? There are MANY reasons an animal can die and poor handling/neglect is just one of MANY ways. Also, having grown up on a farm (up till I turned 19) incidents happen where you can NOT save an animal, take fencing, a horse of ours got its head caught in the fence and by the time we saw it it was too late and the horse had to be put down, that was NOT out fault it is just something that happens, same with dogs and chickens, if a dog wants a chicken bad enough it WILL find a way to get it no matter how much you try and tell it not to, is that the farmers fault? No, it is just something that happens, some things are UNPREVENTABLE! This could easily be one of those cases which, like I said, CAN happen, neglect etc does NOT have to be the reason the animals died.

OP you sound like a total ignorant person especially if you are using PETA, a organization that KILLS far more animals then it saves, as a reliable source.

Right on. Besides I'm sure that the end credits will say that no animals were harmed. reading rules.

i am going to sit through the credits and wait for that to come up. I love watching credits anyway. -shrugs-

Me too.

chatta366

(?)Community Member

Shoujo Krampus

38,000 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_48 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:00:12 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:00:12 +0000

miella scarlett

ilikeropedesu

They killed lots of animals guys! Don't see it! If you do then you hate horses!!!!

umm... thats irrelevant..

Yeah, I love animals including horses, I just hate the s**t out of PETA for wasting money on irrelevant things they, are starting to sound like a tyrannical organization, it's like they're saying agree with us and be in our organization or you're a bad person who hates animals.

SnowFlowerxo

(?)Community Member

seemoreglass4077's Wife

Magnetic Friend

11,875 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_49 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:15:25 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:15:25 +0000

Think about it. If that actually happened, the movie wouldn't be out and the directors career went down the drain. And if only one article said it, it's definitely a movie. We'd be seeing this on the front page of msn.

The Duke of Id

(?)Community Member

Interstellar Pirate

13,200 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_50 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:27:02 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:27:02 +0000

lol

PETA.

I love it when they protest. They get pwned so hard. Go ahead, protest the Hobbit. People will literally just walk over you.

tiddlekinz

(?)Community Member

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_51 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:23:59 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:23:59 +0000

chatta365

Green_crayon42

chatta365

Nafretiti

Right on. Besides I'm sure that the end credits will say that no animals were harmed. reading rules.

i am going to sit through the credits and wait for that to come up. I love watching credits anyway. -shrugs-

Me too.

It actually does say no animals were harmed in the credits. I think it was right near the end sweatdrop

Teaquinox

(?)Community Member

Versatile Flatterer

7,550 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_52 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:28:20 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:28:20 +0000

Informal Gentlemen

ilikeropedesu

Informal Gentlemen

ilikeropedesu

They killed lots of animals guys! Don't see it! If you do then you hate horses!!!!

Uhhmm, that happens in the book, maám. And you can't really guilt people like that into not seeing it. The Hobbit is one of the ultimate classics and has a cult following; the Trilogy withi itself has a following. If you didn't like it, that's your opinion but don't try shoving this mild guilt onto others. "You hate horses!!!!!" That's ridiculous to say. In Game of Thrones a horse is beheaded at one point. I don't like that part because I love horses, but I continue to watch it still.

http://www.peta.org/features/the-hobbit-unexpected-cruelty-infographic.aspx

Sweety, don't trust Peta. They are a bunch of lying ... yeah. Whenever there is any sense of animal harm in ANYTHING they feel the need to attack it. PLUS! If there was actual killing of animals in this film, do you truly think that it would,
A. actually into cinemas
B. Not have a law suit
C. Not be all over the google, Yahoo, Bing homepages and not be in the news.

Peta has done a plenty of nasty things. The game Kitchen Mama, or how ever it is said, has a part where you make chicken for dinner. Harmless, correct. Peta comes a long and makes Killing Mama, where you actually kill the chicken and behead it yourself, skin it and such. A Mario game that game out not too long ago, earlier this year, there is a part where Mario catches a leaf and he obtains the famous raccoon flying abilty. There is no reference to harming animals in that game, never has there ever been. Now, once again, Peta comes along and makes a game about a skinned Raccoon trying to kill Mario for taking it's skin away. The raccoon is bleeding and you can see the bone structure of it's tail. All because of Mario getting an ability to fly by catching a leaf, Peta assumes the worse of it all.

PETA=People Eating Tasty Animals. yum_sausage

Teaquinox

(?)Community Member

Versatile Flatterer

7,550 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_53 created on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:33:55 +0000
Posted: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:33:55 +0000

BECAUSE LOGIC. emotion_yatta

Psychedelic_Rebel

(?)Community Member

5,650 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_54 created on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:03:47 +0000
Posted: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:03:47 +0000

Yeah, I read about it to. I came to this forum to see if anyone else would mention it. It's really sad. I was disappointed because I was really looking forward to seeing it, but now there is no way I can go and feel ok about it. But, y'know, if you want to inform people, you should probably post your source and info upfront instead of making people guess. It better supports your argument.

And also, even if it was the fault of the animal wranglers that the animals were kept in less than suitable conditions, there would not have been any issues if the animals used in the film had been generated digitally instead of using live animals. I have a hard time with animal experimentation to better the lives of humans, let alone the use of animals for human entertainment. People can say all they want about PETA, and they may be right, but it would be foolish to completely dismiss the information as irrelevant before evaluating it first.

S H E R L O C K E D

(?)Community Member

Dapper Codger

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_55 created on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:07:17 +0000
Posted: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:07:17 +0000

ilikeropedesu

Informal Gentlemen

ilikeropedesu

They killed lots of animals guys! Don't see it! If you do then you hate horses!!!!

http://www.peta.org/features/the-hobbit-unexpected-cruelty-infographic.aspx

Just the fact that you got this information from PETA pretty much explains everything. PETA is a terrible source.

Psychedelic_Rebel

(?)Community Member

5,650 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_56 created on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:21:04 +0000
Posted: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:21:04 +0000

If not fully satisfied with information from PETA, here are a few more sources:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hobbit-animal-deaths-what-they-394826

http://www.deadline.com/2012/11/peter-jackson-again-denies-the-hobbit-animal-cruelty-claims-before-premiere/

http://www.eonline.com/news/366567/the-hobbit-controversy-animal-cruelty-allegations-cast-shadow-over-premiere-as-peter-jackson-again-denies-claims

Might I add: What better way to avoid unwanted controversy then to undermine the organization making these allegations? Play off the bad press generated by PETA by saying "Oh, it's just PETA up to what PETA does best".
Who knows for sure exactly what happened? PETA by nature will fight for animal rights as fiercely as ever, and Peter Jackson is going to defend this movie, because it is a source of billions of dollars to him.
So far, it seems as if one of these has glaringly obvious corrupt motives.

Hoshiko Yakimura

(?)Community Member

Lily-livered Loiterer

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_57 created on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:23:07 +0000
Posted: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 05:23:07 +0000

Yeah, no, I don't believe that for a second.

Barmy

(?)Community Member

Benevolent Bibliophile

16,100 Points

Offline

Report Post
Post: 83745159_58 created on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:33:33 +0000
Posted: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:33:33 +0000

Psychedelic_Rebel

You are right that it is a logical fallacy to say that the claims of cruelty are wrong because people distrust what PETA has to say. Even untrustworthy sources (and I'm not saying that PETA is unreliable, I'm just making a point) may make valid points. But for the same reason, we cannot simply disregard Peter Jackson's (again, I'm not making any judgements here about PJ's reliability) statement because he stands to profit from the movie. Even though he has a vested interest, his claims may be accurate.
I think you make your best point saying, "Who knows for sure exactly what happened?"

Still, I find it incomprehensible to believe that anyone would intentionally harm animals in the production of a movie. Some animal injuries may have occurred, and clearly the AHA (American Humane Association) felt that any animal injuries were routine and accidental, otherwise they would not have signed off on the notice at the end of the movie that no animals were harmed.