I can't believe it! THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH! It means a lot that so much traffic has come around these parts! And it also makes me feel bad that I haven't been posting!
Finals week was... awful. Just awful. But then, that's to be expected, right? I only JUST emerged today from post-semester hibernation. I'm pretty sure I did well in my classes, but I'll find that out sometime tonight.
What all has happened since I last posted? For one, despite the animal mishandling controversy surrounding the movie "The Hobbit" I went to see it (I got to see it free, so it's not like they got my money, which is how I justified it.)
I don't know if any of you heard, but 27 animals died stupidly and avoidably on the set of the Hobbit (Source, Source). Chickens were left unattended and to the mercy of dogs, sheep and pigs broke legs in pens riddled with potholes, horses broke their necks falling off of cliffs. Crew members reported the conditions and deaths to their superiors, and nothing was done. Ridiculous, avoidable, senseless deaths, all for a movie.
Now, upon first hearing about the incident(s), I got nervous about "PETA freaks" getting angry about nothing and tried really hard to adopt an "accidents happen" mentality. But upon reading more, especially director Peter Jackson's reaction, I began to share in the outrage. Jackson, in a tone that suggested he was offended at being bothered with the question, brushed off the issue by saying that no animals were used in action sequences. Well that's nice I guess. Except, it's not answering the question, and it's doing nothing to try to right the situation.
No, it's not exclusively Jackson's fault. Actually, it's not his fault at all - as the director he really isn't in charge of animals on set. What is his fault is how he's handling it. No, it isn't fair to bully him for the deeds of others, but he's a known name that's largely involved in the film, so people are inevitably going to turn to him for answers. And that's how he chose to respond. Despicable.
I still ended up seeing the movie, like I said. I justified it for a lot of reasons: a) boycotting is a stupid way to make a point b) we used a gift card, so I didn't ACTUALLY give them my money c) more than just the crew and Jackson are punished by poor box office sales d) I wanted to give Jackson a chance to right the situation by replacing the crew for the next film e) I was morbidly curious about whether there would still be the "no animals were harmed" spiel in the end credits.
It was there. However, instead of the usual "No animals were harmed in the making of this film" that we've all seen before, it was altered to say "No animals were harmed in the filming of this movie." More honest, but still deliberately misleading and attempting to sweep under the rug vile and unacceptable cases of animal mistreatment and cruelty.
I tried really hard to give the movie the benefit of the doubt. And it is an entertaining film. But I regret giving it my business. The situation itself is awful, but the reaction of those who have the power to right the situation is even worse. You're not a bad person for going to see the movie, but please be aware of the situation to be sure that we can avoid it in the future. You can be sure if action isn't taken to replace the animal handling crew, this blogger will be boycotting, writing letters, and blogging up a storm.
I'm on break, recovering from my finals coma from last week. I'll inevitably post about more happenings in my absence, and chronicle my hectic holiday. Until next time!
<3, Ali
No comments:
Post a Comment