Animals harmed
-
adam89er2003 — 20 years ago(May 15, 2005 04:03 PM)
I'm sorry to say that it is true. Actually, this movie is the reason that the AHA monitors animal action. They killed a ridiculous number of animals for this movie. If you see a horse fall over in this film, you probably just saw it's death, and a LOT of horses fall over in this film. I've seen horses fall and flip over in recent films, also. But in those films, they faked it without hurting any animals. I can't even tell the difference between faking it and killing horses with trip wires. It is a horrible waste of life.
-
steviez33 — 20 years ago(March 22, 2006 08:22 AM)
"Actually, this movie is the reason that the AHA monitors animal action."
WRONG!!!
You haven't seen the disclaimer on films made before that 1980 mess? Try getting your facts straight before quoting them as gospel. The reason that the AHA came in and started monitoring films is the 1939 version of "Jesse James". http://www.imdb.com/board/10031507/trivia is your link. Crap Son, you'll probably be claiming that the cow accident scene from "O Brother, Where Art Thou" is real and that's why all the cows talk to you and demand that YOU protect them! It's pedantic idiots like you that make me lose faith in humanity. -
movelab — 20 years ago(March 31, 2006 07:24 PM)
stevie wonder, are you blind. EVERYONE knows about the endless chaotic scenes were extras and cast members were injured and some died. you find it hard to believe that horses escaped injury? trip wires WERE used to get the horses to fall. watch as the horses are slobbering and exhausted in far too many scenes.
it's all right there bub. thankfully, there'smuch stricter monotoring these days. but check movies like "gummo" where cats were beaten, hung and killed. korin wasn't even slapped with a fine. -
steviez33 — 19 years ago(April 15, 2006 09:39 AM)
I was just commenting on his comment - "Actually, this movie is the reason that the AHA monitors animal action." - which is false. I'm not claiming that animals aren't hurt or killed in particular scenes, which I do find alarming.
-
krisdl — 13 years ago(November 08, 2012 11:21 PM)
@ Steviez33 Why do you take it so personally? Animals were hurt, the aha were involved, that's enough for anyone with a shred of heart to say this isn't right but you get all up in his junk about a small detail. Seems you have issues.
-
Arthur_2323 — 19 years ago(December 07, 2006 10:33 PM)
Regarding horses being trip-wired, try this scene:
http://www.imdb.com/board/10080855/board/thread/30576690
. Michael Cimino denies it to this day, but there it is in full color, and you can judge for yourself. (You'll need the 220 minute version.)
BTW: It's possible that horse was actually trip-wired in
California
, instead of Montana. I can't confirm that (stumbled across it on the net by accident) and that's
only
a guess, but it would explain a lot of things. -
sailorspysedna — 11 years ago(March 03, 2015 05:43 PM)
I heard that in some biography that that horse in Jessie James actually landed on some platform, but I do not know if it is true or not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_James_(1939_film)#Animal_cruelty
-
rhodescabbin — 13 years ago(November 21, 2012 09:02 PM)
Yeah the ole trip wire was a disgusting idea and easily spotted when used. I have worked many years of my life on cattle ranches and never have seen anything remotely close to that happeningOnly in Hollywood
-
karloluffy — 13 years ago(December 12, 2012 09:32 AM)
What a sick bunch of "film makers" to do this to real horses. I'm glad i've never seen this piece of crap now, and i never will.
So glad they can't get away with this sort of things these days. Pathetic people. -
BigJeffLebowski — 20 years ago(August 17, 2005 07:46 PM)
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. I'm not condoning the actions of the filmmakers, mind you, but Heaven's Gate is an underrated film that is already unfairly maligned enough without people like yourself who have never seen the film speaking poorly of it.
-
kylie-10 — 20 years ago(June 24, 2005 04:41 AM)
Can anyone see the difference between 'Humanely killing an animal for food under sterile conditions' and 'Killing an animal INHUMANELY to appease the inflated ego of a a two bit director intent on sucking up as much studio money as he canfor his art?'
Anyone?