Filthy little hobbitses

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2

21 Replies - 2478 Views - Last Post: 26 November 2012 - 04:43 PM

#1 BenignDesign  Icon User is offline

  • holy shitin shishkebobs
  • member icon




Reputation: 6190
  • View blog
  • Posts: 10,705
  • Joined: 28-September 07

Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:25 PM

This morning, the AP ran a story about how 27 animals died due to mistreatment during the shooting of The Hobbit.

The deaths included a horse found with it's head submerged in water, a miniature pony that broke its back, chickens left out of their enclosures and mauled by dogs, and several goats... among others.

Now ol' Petey Jackson is denying it happened.

I don't know how the rest of you feel about this, but it bothers me. It's actually soiled my excitement for the movies... you know, "Oh, look at that beautiful horse!" "Yeah, he died of bloated infected intestines before the filming was completed...". It just disturbs me.

Jackson claims to have spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars" to renovate the stables for the horses... but if the problem was in the feed or sinkholes and other issues with the land, what good was done by renovating the stables?

It's just disgusting and if the story is true, I think Jackson and company need to own up to it. What are your thoughts? Has this sullied your Hobbit experience? Do you think Jackson, et al, are at fault? Are the farmhands just looking to make some bank in hush money by telling tall tales?

Is This A Good Question/Topic? 0
  • +

Replies To: Filthy little hobbitses

#2 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7898
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,434
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:30 PM

*
POPULAR

It gets worse... fifteen extras were sold to a dwarf-tossing league after shooting was finished.
"What the hell" said director Jackson. "We always sell off the set dressing when we're done with it. What, the midgets are people too? Who knew?"
Was This Post Helpful? 5
  • +
  • -

#3 Choscura  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover


Reputation: 466
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,227
  • Joined: 18-October 08

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:32 PM

I'm surprised nobody's asked about the giant gorilla he used in one of his previous movies. Apparently it used to be a successful comedian, and it's parents are NASA scientists- they've been using the Hubble Telescope after hours to try and find Jack Black.
Was This Post Helpful? 2
  • +
  • -

#4 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7898
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,434
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:37 PM

But of course the Black body problem is known to be a tough one.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#5 modi123_1  Icon User is offline

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 9427
  • View blog
  • Posts: 35,423
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:37 PM

No, not really.

Edit: response to "Has this sullied your Hobbit experience?"

This post has been edited by modi123_1: 19 November 2012 - 01:42 PM

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#6 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7898
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,434
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:38 PM

If the Black body problem was an easy one, do you think he'd still have the one he's wearing now?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#7 no2pencil  Icon User is offline

  • Admiral Fancy Pants
  • member icon

Reputation: 5365
  • View blog
  • Posts: 27,329
  • Joined: 10-May 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:39 PM

Peter Jackson should have stuck to doing low-budget movies such as Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles, & Dead Alive.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#8 modi123_1  Icon User is offline

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 9427
  • View blog
  • Posts: 35,423
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:49 PM

Why don't the sheep or chickens have names? Odd.

Quote

The first horse to die, he said, was a miniature named Rainbow.

"When I arrived at work in the morning, the pony was still alive but his back was broken. He'd come off a bank at speed and crash-landed," Langridge said. "He was in a bad state."

Rainbow, who had been slated for use as a hobbit horse, was euthanized. A week later, a horse named Doofus got caught in some fencing and sliced open its leg. That horse survived, but Langridge said he'd had enough.
...
Wrangler Johnny Smythe said that soon after Langridge left, a horse named Claire was found dead, its head submerged in a stream after it fell over a bluff. After that, he said, the horses were put in stables, where a third horse died.

Smythe said no autopsy was performed on the horse, which was named Zeppelin. Veterinary records say the horse died of natural causes, from a burst blood vessel, but Smythe said the horse was bloated and its intestines were full of a yellow liquid; he believes it died of digestive problems caused by new feed.
...
another horse, Molly, got caught in a fence and ripped her leg open, suffering permanent injuries.
cite


The three pigs were invited to a luau.

Quote

He said the company no longer leases the farm and has no animals left on the property. He said he didn't know if animals will be needed for future filming in the trilogy, but added that Jackson himself adopted three of the pigs used.
cite
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#9 BenignDesign  Icon User is offline

  • holy shitin shishkebobs
  • member icon




Reputation: 6190
  • View blog
  • Posts: 10,705
  • Joined: 28-September 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:59 PM

View Postmodi123_1, on 19 November 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

Quote

Jackson himself adopted three of the pigs used.
cite


Posted Image
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#10 h4nnib4l  Icon User is offline

  • The Noid
  • member icon

Reputation: 1182
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,677
  • Joined: 24-August 11

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 04:27 PM

It won't damage my enjoyment of the movie. But it would be nice to see somebody take responsibility for something, occasionally. However, the American lawsuit system has pretty much killed the chances of anybody from here admitting to/apologizing for anything, ever.

"So, by apologizing, you're admitting that you're complicit? BAMCIS! $20 million!" Yeah, fuck admitting and apologizing. Simple economics.

This post has been edited by h4nnib4l: 19 November 2012 - 04:28 PM

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#11 supersloth  Icon User is offline

  • serial frotteur - RUDEST MEMBER ON D.I.C.
  • member icon


Reputation: 4508
  • View blog
  • Posts: 28,413
  • Joined: 21-March 01

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:27 PM

*
POPULAR

pretty wack that a company set to rack in hundreds of millions of dollars on this movie (not even counting the subsequent ones) couldn't throw down a couple hundo thousand to make sure they aren't in this kind of position in the first place. just dumb.
Was This Post Helpful? 7
  • +
  • -

#12 baavgai  Icon User is offline

  • Dreaming Coder
  • member icon

Reputation: 5884
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,769
  • Joined: 16-October 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:09 AM

*
POPULAR

If this story had come out during production, it might have some validity. That a bunch of "wranglers" now make accusations before the premiers sounds fishy. Perhaps they didn't like their final paychecks? Looking for a little more in the ole coffers from a big production company?

Horses are sad. A dozen sheep and goats buy it, dying of what sheep and goats often die of in captivity? That's just a missed menu opportunity, which is also sad but expected.

Should the big movie monolith be responsible for animal treatment when they're not actually being used in the movie? Sure. But, they pay people for that. I believe they're called wranglers. The same people complaining? Months after the fact? Yeah, that sounds kosher.
Was This Post Helpful? 6
  • +
  • -

#13 scalt  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular
  • member icon

Reputation: 63
  • View blog
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 22-November 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 25 November 2012 - 09:04 PM

View PostBenignDesign, on 20 November 2012 - 08:25 AM, said:

This morning, the AP ran a story about how 27 animals died due to mistreatment during the shooting of The Hobbit.

The deaths included a horse found with it's head submerged in water, a miniature pony that broke its back, chickens left out of their enclosures and mauled by dogs, and several goats... among others.

Now ol' Petey Jackson is denying it happened.


If you actually read the news article you linked you will notice that Peter Jackson never denied the deaths, he denied mistreating the animals (big difference). The deaths themselves were investigated by the SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) and there was no evidence of animal cruelty found. There is a big difference between beating a horse til it dies and allowing it to run free in paddock where it accidentally and with out human intervention runs off a cliff (something that many animals somehow manage to avoid on a daily basis).
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#14 BenignDesign  Icon User is offline

  • holy shitin shishkebobs
  • member icon




Reputation: 6190
  • View blog
  • Posts: 10,705
  • Joined: 28-September 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 25 November 2012 - 09:41 PM

So you're saying it was 27 random, purely coincidental, accidental deaths... all at the same farm... for the same reason... sounds legit.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#15 scalt  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular
  • member icon

Reputation: 63
  • View blog
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 22-November 07

Re: Filthy little hobbitses

Posted 25 November 2012 - 11:41 PM

No, there you go exaggerating and putting words in other people's mouths again (by the way random and coincidental are redundant terms in this context so you only needed to use one of them). Nowhere did anyone mention that all the animals died for the same reason. In fact nowhere did I even say the deaths were legitimate, just that the SPCA investigated and found no evidence of cruelty. In fact I never even mentioned anything about 27 animals, so no, I did not 'say that' (and if you really want to get picky I am happy to debate you about the figure of 27 as well).

What many people appear to have done in this story is to cherry pick parts of stories and throw emotionally charged and blatantly incorrect words around. The definition of the word 'mistreat' states that abuse was intentional which is does not appear to be the case so no wonder Jackson denied it. If anything the production company is possibly guilty of not being rigorous enough with their investigations into the animal housing (and from the sound of it they were pretty rigorous to start with).

I'm not here to defend these guys, the only reason I replied to your post was because it contained emotionally charged inaccuracies with no basis in fact and seeing that kind of stuff posted anywhere pisses me off. I suggest you go back and re-read the news articles (preferably some others from different sources as well) and objectively look at what is actually being said, and by whom.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2