While the American Humane Association certified that no animals were harmed during the making of the film, it doesn't literally mean that no animals were harmed. It just means that the filmmakers followed AHA guidelines. Two horses died during the making of "Flicka," but the film still earned the "No Animals Were Harmed" certification. AHA explains its certification:
Safety Representatives were on set to ensure the safety of the animals throughout production. After screening the finished product and cross-checking all animal action, we determined the film met or exceeded our PA-FILM-guidelines and is awarded the end credit disclaimer "No Animals Were Harmed".
In the case of "Water for Elephants", it's possible that no animals were beaten or shocked with electric prods during the making of the film, while the abuse took place earlier, during the training process. There's a six year gap between ADI's video and "Water for Elephants."
Regardless, as with any form of animal exploitation, abuse is a separate issue from whether we have the right to use animals. Just about anyone would say that elephants shouldn't be shocked with electric prods, calves shouldn't be kept in tiny veal crates, and carriage horses shouldn't be overworked. But animal rights is not about how well the animals are treated; it's about whether we have a right to use animals for our purposes. If Tai were never beaten or shocked with electric prods, she would still be a victim - imprisoned by the people who profit from her exploitation, forced to perform tricks instead of roaming and foraging for miles each day in the wild. It doesn't matter whether she was born in captivity or captured in the wild. Breeding an animal doesn't mean that that animal doesn't suffer in captivity.
I would really love to see the movie, because I enjoy watching any Robert Pattinson movie, but because of the reasons stated above, I will be skipping this one, and I am urging you to do the same. Please boycott Water For Elephants.
No comments:
Post a Comment