Milo and Otis- What a HORRIBLE movie!!!!

[luckies4me]

OMG I am watching this movie with Dylan right now and I can't tell you how appalled I am at the creaters of this movie! So many animals are put in harms way and the poor animals keep getting tortured by the others. Milo just went down a waterfall. Why would they do this to an animal? And they had Otis fighting with a bear. :( :mad: :mad: :mad: I used to like this movie, until now. :mad:

[luckies4me]

Now Otis is in the middle of the ocean and being rescued by a sea turle. :rolleyes: I also just noticed that Otis has a cataract in one eye, and none of the animals in this movie are neutered.

[wolfie]

I haven't seen that movie since I was very little, so I don't remember it much... I don't like the idea of putting animals in danger though! :( Do you think it's just special effects, or are animals really put in harms way?

[Corinna]

I never liked it when it came out charters just din't seem to hit me right.

[amoore]

I have not seen that movie. I'm glad I haven't if it has animals getting hurt.

:(

[Kfamr]

I LOVE that movie.

I don't understand what your issue is with it, eh...

It's adorable.


It's just a movie, I highly doubt animals were actually in harms way.

[ChiRen]

Like Kay said, I don't think people would actually put the animals in danger...especially if its just a kids' movie.

I love that movie! :)

[luckies4me]

Well you need to watch it again KayAnn. It's absolutely horrible! There is NO eason what so ever to have a cat soaking wet and scared to death in a river with a bear attacking it. It was not special effects. I doubt they had special effects that great back when this movie was made. Not to mention the cat is also shown being tossed around in the ocean, the animals are all unkept etc. Then the cat and dog have puppies at the end and they show the kittens and puppies being born in dirt and everything else. There are so many times in that movie when the poor cat is scared senseless and meowing and meowing, hissing, growling etc.

It really bugged me too that in the beginning of the movie they just let the cat swat at those baby birds so hard, many of times. That's NOT cute!

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by ChiRen
Like Kay said, I don't think people would actually put the animals in danger...especially if its just a kids' movie.

I love that movie! :)

When was the last time you saw it? I don't agree with anything they do to those poor animals in that movie. And yes people always harmed animals in movies, which is why now they have to have the Humane Society and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on set in all films filmed in the United States. They didn't have that back then.

If you think the things they show in that movie are "cute", I really don't know what to say.

[Kfamr]

I've watched it many, many, many times. sometimes over and over in the same night.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. I'm sure it's not real.

It's weird because I was talking about this movie today in class with my friend Stephanie how it's my other friend's favorite movie and he named his Pug after Otis. :D

[luckies4me]

Yes it IS real. Prove to me HOW in the world, it is special effects, specially since they show how they make the movie in the DVD I just bought. Absolutely HORRIBLE and anyone who thinks it's "cute" has problems. There is absolutely NO excuse to throw an animal in the river soaking wet while he's meowing and crying the whole time. You think those are speical effects? I know what special effects are, that's what Dan went to school to do. :rolleyes:


Do you think it's right to let a kitten repeatedly smack a baby bird in the face? Or have a bear smack a raccon in the face? I don't think so. It's cruel!

[Kfamr]

Um, thanks!


Prove to me it's real.

[luckies4me]

Your VERY welcome. ANYONE who says the things they do to those animals is "cute" has a very vaque sense of animal cruelty. Plus, it's my opinion, so don't worry about it. I am not likely to change my mind UNTIL someone here proves to me all this was done with special effects. I think a lot of people out there have foggy eyes. :rolleyes:

[Moose]

Um...settle down there Cass. ;)

And you know for a fact they actually do hurt the animals? It seems to me that if they honestly were putting the animals in serious danger, they wouldn't put the making of it on the DVD...especially in this day and age. :confused:

[Kfamr]

Wow... Calm down Cass.
You've been really rude to me lately and I really don't understand why. Have I done something to you personally without my knowledge that I should be aware of?




I think it's cute because I don't think it's real. Animal Cruelty is not cute, but Milo and Otis are.

[luckies4me]

And you know for a fact they actually do hurt the animals? It seems to me that if they honestly were putting the animals in serious danger, they wouldn't put the making of it on the DVD...especially in this day and age.

Obviously, I just watch the whole movie. And obviously they don't care and it WAS put on a DVD, which is why it's here in my living room.

[Moose]

Alright...here we go.

1. Settle down
2. Back off

No one is saying they think animal cruelty is cute...I would've thought you knew better than that....

[Karen]

luckies4me, the movie was not made in the dark ages before animal cruelty laws were passed. It was made in 1989. I am sure the cat WAS wet, but not put in the middle of an actual river. I am sure the bear was a trained actor bear ( there are such things), and the cat was acting, and was never in danger. I am sure those are not real chicks the cat swats at.

Forward to the end of the movie, I'll be $10 there's a "no animals were harmed in the making of this movie" statement.

It's just a story, honey. It's not real life.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by Karen
luckies4me, the movie was not made in the dark ages before animal cruelty laws were passed. It was made in 1989. I am sure the cat WAS wet, but not put in the middle of an actual river. I am sure the bear was a trained actor bear ( there are such things), and the cat was acting, and was never in danger. I am sure those are not real chicks the cat swats at.

Forward to the end of the movie, I'll be $10 there's a "no animals were harmed in the making of this movie" statement.



Do those birds look fake to you? Don't think so. I am going to take screenshots now of the movie. They can't fake birds that real, no one can.

Even IF the bear was trained, there's NO reason for it to be smacking a cat who is obviously freightened.

[luckies4me]

And of course I know there are trained animals. gee.

[ramanth]

I haven't seen Milo and Otis in a long time.

Here is the info on the International Movie Database.

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0097050/

One. this movie was made in Japan. Two, it was made in 1986. Special Effects in movies were well in place since at least 1977 when Star Wars came out. (George Lucas started ILM just to make Star Wars).

To me, it's an earlier version of Homeward Bound. In that movie, a dog gets a face full of porcupine quills. Sure looks real, but I doubt the dog was actually injured.

Here is a great website if there is ever any doubt if an animal has been injured or not:

http://www.ahafilm.org/

(Couldn't find Milo and Otis in the list... must be because it's a Japanese film)

Everyone take a deep breath and calm down. :)

[Kfamr]

I read somewhere that Otis and the bear grew up with each other.

[Moose]

Originally posted by luckies4me
Even IF the bear was trained, there's NO reason for it to be smacking a cat who is obviously freightened.

I hate repeating myself and everyone else, buuut...once again...

It's just a movie!!

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by Moose
I hate repeating myself and everyone else, buuut...once again...

It's just a movie!!


Your point?

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by ramanth
I haven't seen Milo and Otis in a long time.

Here is the info on the International Movie Database.

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0097050/

One. this movie was made in Japan. Two, it was made in 1986. Special Effects in movies were well in place since at least 1977 when Star Wars came out. (George Lucas started ILM just to make Star Wars).



Just because they were well in place then doesn't mean that all these scenes I see are done with special effects. And to clarify it took four years to make this movie.

[2kitties]

You should call the producers of the movie. Or write your Congressman. Or PETA. If there actually was anything going one, I am certain PETA is all over it.
Personally, I loved that movie. Thought it was sweet and touching.

[K9soul]

Well I have not seen Milo and Otis, but I think both sides of the argument are getting more intense than need be :(. I'd understand if it looked bad that you would feel upset, but maybe the best way to go about it is to really research more into the making of that movie? I don't really know how possible that is.

On another note, I have seen how they can take like a cat batting at a kitty toy on like a blue background, then somehow blend it in with another animal and background and in the end, it looks amazingly real and like the cat is batting at the other animal.

I don't say this because I want to prove you're wrong, but because I hate seeing you so upset. It could be it really isn't what it appears like, but if you really feel strongly that it is, perhaps you could try doing more research or questioning about how those scenes were done?

Again, I haven't seen the movie, so I'm just going off of conjecture here, but I have seen a lot of animal movies that really looked questionable and later some special will come on like on Animal planet and they will show how they really did some of those things.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by 2kitties
You should call the producers of the movie. Or write your Congressman. Or PETA. If there actually was anything going one, I am certain PETA is all over it.
Personally, I loved that movie. Thought it was sweet and touching.

Oh OK. What a splendid idead....*picks up phone and calls PETA* :rolleyes:


Look, these are MY opinions, so whatever, don't worry about it. I will think what I want to think until I am proving wrong, so there is no need to argue about it. But I will never watch the movie again, and it's going in the trash.

[tikeyas_mom]

I dont want to get in a fight with anyone here, but I think that the animals were being neglected in that movie, people shouldent have a kitten romping around a bear and then falling down a river. it is rediculas, and then at the end when the females have puppies and kittens, thats just sickening.. I wanted to barf, I cant believe they would breed these pugs, and then tape them giving birth in dirt. It is just wrong. The cats look like kittens that bred and birthed kittens :eek:.. I didnt like the movie at all. It really bothered me.

[wolfsoul]

Altghough I always thought the film was cute, I agree with Cass that there are some cruel and neglegant acts in this film. I've done research on this movie before, and there are no special effects. The animals do their own stunts. The director apparently took very good care of the animals, and there is even a note at the end of the film saying that no animals were injured, they were under supervision, etc. However, I also believe I remember hearing of some things that 'went wrong' in the movie (if you know what I mean) and so it had to be edited down quite a bit. It was such a long time ago that I don't know if we'll ever know the truth.

[Corinna]

Thanks Jessica I was just going to explain about movie making too.
Please we are all strong opinions here. It can be disconcerting if you don't know how they do things in the movies.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by K9soul
Well I have not seen Milo and Otis, but I think both sides of the argument are getting more intense than need be :(. I'd understand if it looked bad that you would feel upset, but maybe the best way to go about it is to really research more into the making of that movie? I don't really know how possible that is.

On another note, I have seen how they can take like a cat batting at a kitty toy on like a blue background, then somehow blend it in with another animal and background and in the end, it looks amazingly real and like the cat is batting at the other animal.

I don't say this because I want to prove you're wrong, but because I hate seeing you so upset. It could be it really isn't what it appears like, but if you really feel strongly that it is, perhaps you could try doing more research or questioning about how those scenes were done?

Again, I haven't seen the movie, so I'm just going off of conjecture here, but I have seen a lot of animal movies that really looked questionable and later some special will come on like on Animal planet and they will show how they really did some of those things.


You know I would have NO problem with you proving me wrong, in fact I would love it, because then I would love to know they weren't hurt. Even IF some of the scenes were done with special effects, I still do not believe in some of things that were done, as in the animals giving birth, the animals not being neutered and sniffing eachothers private when the female cat is obviously in heat etc. Those are all things I don't agree with and would rather not see in a movie, especially when we are trying to teach our children not to bring more animals into this world.

And Karen, JFYI, it does not say none of the animals in film were harmed. Here is what it states:

"The animals used were filmed under strict supervision with the utmost concern for their handling."

Doesn't mention anything about none of them being harmed, and we all know that even with the most watchful eyes there is always a chance of something going wrong, and until their movie states none of the animals were harmed, I won't watch it again, period.

[K9soul]

I think the best way is to do what Jordan did, if you have questions on how something was done, look into it, research it. You could probably tell somewhat by even the budget of the movie for that day and age how much effects might have been used. If you find out there weren't, then you have every right to dislike it if you find what was done seems unnecessary or cruel or negligent.

Having not done research or even seen the movie, I can't make any judgement on it. I do hate to think of animals being frightened or having bad experiences. I also hate seeing folks on here upset and arguing and getting sharp with each other. We just have to try to respect others' opinions, on both sides.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by tikeyas_mom
I dont want to get in a fight with anyone here, but I think that the animals were being neglected in that movie, people shouldent have a kitten romping around a bear and then falling down a river. it is rediculas, and then at the end when the females have puppies and kittens, thats just sickening.. I wanted to barf, I cant believe they would breed these pugs, and then tape them giving birth in dirt. It is just wrong. The cats look like kittens that bred and birthed kittens :eek:.. I didnt like the movie at all. It really bothered me.

That's one of the things that bugged me the most, was the birthing part. Especially now in this age when some stupid person might see that part and go, "Oh, I want to breed my orange and white tabby cat too!" Ta da! There you go, nine more kittens added to the world.

Not to mention them showing the cats sniffing eachother's vaginas etc. That is not something I want to see in a movie. All the cats were just regular mixed breed kittens. Otis, if you all didn't notice also has a cataract in his eye. I sure hope he wasn't used as a breeder, considering he's obviously not neutered.

[K9soul]

On another note, now that I think about it, a lot of children's movies with animals, both animated and regular, show the dogs/cats having babies at the end. It kind of does give the message to kids that it's normal and a cool thing to happen.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by K9soul
I think the best way is to do what Jordan did, if you have questions on how something was done, look into it, research it. You could probably tell somewhat by even the budget of the movie for that day and age how much effects might have been used. If you find out there weren't, then you have every right to dislike it if you find what was done seems unnecessary or cruel or negligent.

Having not done research or even seen the movie, I can't make any judgement on it. I do hate to think of animals being frightened or having bad experiences. I also hate seeing folks on here upset and arguing and getting sharp with each other. We just have to try to respect others' opinions, on both sides.

Thanks K9Soul. I am sorry if I became snippy, but this is something I do not tolerate, at all. I don't like animals in pain, being neglected, freightened etc. For the record, there are special effects in this movie, but there are still some things I dislike about this movie, the most being the animal breeding. It trulty disgusts me. Of course, I have no idea what their values over there are at all.

But I apologize if I became snippy.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by Corinna
Thanks Jessica I was just going to explain about movie making too.
Please we are all strong opinions here. It can be disconcerting if you don't know how they do things in the movies.

I believed I mentioned Dan went to film school for four years learning how to make movies, so I know how they are done. In fact, one of the things I want to do when I go back to school is take a special effects class. :)

[slleipnir]

I loved this movie. I haven't seen it since I was a child, but I doubt this movie would have been so popular if they abused the animals. You should watch the end credits and at the end they put a 'No animals were harmed in the making of this film' thingie. I saw a movie once and I could have sworn what the did to this horse was real cause it looks amazingly real. So I waited till the end of the credits to see it was one of those stuffed things..can't remember the name of them..I don't believe that they hurt any animals in it.

[ramanth]

Originally posted by luckies4me
That's one of the things that bugged me the most, was the birthing part. Especially now in this age when some stupid person might see that part and go, "Oh, I want to breed my orange and white tabby cat too!" Ta da! There you go, nine more kittens added to the world.
Lots of movies do that... ie Beethoven's 2nd and Snow Dogs. :)

Not saying it's right, but that's where a parent should step in and say that's not right and not the norm. No way would an intact St. Bernard wait till he finds the perfect female St. Bernard to have puppies with. Still, the movie is cute.

I'm sure the animals did do their own stunts. Were any hurt? I don't know. So I'm not going to judge. You can contact the American Humane Association (http://www.ahafilm.org/) and tell them your concerns. I'm sure they'd investigate and put out their review.

:)

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by slleipnir
I loved this movie. I haven't seen it since I was a child, but I doubt this movie would have been so popular if they abused the animals. You should watch the end credits and at the end they put a 'No animals were harmed in the making of this film' thingie. I saw a movie once and I could have sworn what the did to this horse was real cause it looks amazingly real. So I waited till the end of the credits to see it was one of those stuffed things..can't remember the name of them..I don't believe that they hurt any animals in it.


Sorry, your wrong about the end of the film. This is what it says at the end, NOTHING is mentioned about none of the animals being harmed:

"The animals used were filmed under strict supervision with the utmost concern for their handling."

[slleipnir]

I never said it was, I said you should look to see...

[luckies4me]

Go here and scroll down to Milo and Otis:

http://www.luftworld.com/Satellite/THBBM/981207.htm

Seems, I'm not the only one who thinks this way.....

[carole]

I saw this movie when it first came out as well, and to be honest I thought it was good, as I assumed none of the animals were hurt in this film and were trained actors, but I did not give it a lot of thought, I understand what you are saying cass, and to a point I agree with you, no animal should be put in danger or hurt just to make a film and satisfy human beings for entertainment,, I would be the first one to be up in arms if that were the case.

Researching it fully is probably a good idea, I would be interested to see just how all the scenes were made, I often wonder about that, and again assume half of it is not real etc etc, but who really knows except those in the movie at the time.

There is nothing wrong with showing your emotions concerning the care and welfare of animals cass, it is people like you who get things done and changed so our animals can live good lives without abuse, so if you feel strongly enough about it, stand up and say so.

I certainly hope you are proved wrong, and these animals did not suffer in any way during the making of this film, if they did I too would be throwing it in the trash, as a protest if nothing else.

Now calm down cass and take a deep breath count to ten and smile,:) and thanks for bringing this to our attention, gives one something to think about doesn't it?;)

[luckies4me]

Well the movie has already proved my thoughts to be correct, as it states at the end of the movie.

[Desert Arabian]

Come on now, stop and think: :rolleyes:

Do you think a movie company would actually allow a movie to be made where animals are put in danger where they can get really hurt and die!? Um...yeah...if they want lawsuits up the wazoo. Common sense.

(It's just like the stupid Quizno's commerical with the FAKE dead bird- obviously they wouldn't use a real dead bird because they would be slaughtered with lawsuits.)

Have you ever watched Black Beauty!? Did you see the part when Black Beauty is starved and rail thin!? Do you really think the movie company starved the horse to play that part!? :confused: Also, the part when the carrige hitch breaks and Black Beauty gets cut really bad, do you think the actual horse got cut? When Black Beauty fell and skinned his knees, do you really think that the horse skinned its knees!? :confused:

Personally, I don't have a problem with the movie- it's a movie- it's fake and none of that stuff really happened.....

[tikeyas_mom]

Um...yeah...if they want lawsuits up the wazoo. Common sense.


hahaha sorry that commant made me Laugh!! lol

[wolfsoul]

Originally posted by YellowLabLover
Come on now, stop and think: :rolleyes:

Do you think a movie company would actually allow a movie to be made where animals are put in danger where they can get really hurt and die!? Um...yeah...if they want lawsuits up the wazoo. Common sense.

That's why the movie was made in Japan. Apparently the director was going to produce the movie in the US but there were laws that forbidded it, so he decided to do it in his homeland of Japan where there were no such laws.

[K9soul]

It was pointed out though that this one in particular was made in another country. I have zero idea what other countries' laws are regarding this type of thing, but I do know that the US is the most lawsuit-happy country out there.

I once read a statistic, that 50% of the WORLD'S lawyers are in the USA. :eek:

Sorta off topic, but something to think about. :p

Edit: *shakes fist at Jordan* Got your post in before me about that point! ;)

[luckies4me]

http://www.4sarasota.com/shopping.cgi?input_item=0767835026&input_search_type=AsinSearch


From All Movie Guide
Milo is a kitten, Otis is a dog. When Milo gets into a small box with the intention of taking a trip down a river, Otis follows. En route, the stars encounter bad weather, life-threatening situations, and even potential mates. Original made for Japanese TV under the title Koneko Monogatari, The Adventures of Milo and Otis contained some intense scenes that were edited out for Western audiences. For American consumption, the film was pared down to a G-rated 75 minutes, with a new comic narration added, written by Mark Saltzman and delivered by Dudley Moore. Hal Erickson

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by wolfsoul
That's why the movie was made in Japan. Apparently the director was going to produce the movie in the US but there were laws that forbidded it, so he decided to do it in his homeland of Japan where there were no such laws.


Turns out some of it was filmed on his own private island, I would really like to know what the edited scenes were that were not fit for our audience in the US.

[wolfsoul]

Originally posted by K9soul


Edit: *shakes fist at Jordan* Got your post in before me about that point! ;)
Hehe, I'm faster! :p

[Pam]

Originally posted by Kfamr
I LOVE that movie.

I don't understand what your issue is with it, eh...

It's adorable.




I haven't read through all of the responses beyond KayAnn's but I just have to say that this movie is my all time favorite animal movie. In fact I bought it after seeing it on cable and have watched it 5 or 6 times. I imagine from the length of this thread there is some serious discussion going on, but personally I don't care to read through it all. I loved the movie and that's all I have to say.

[carole]

Well Cass a very interesting point raised here, that this film was actually filmed in Japan and had scenes edited that were not to Americans liking, hmm that in itself is very suspicious, sounds bad to me, does that mean the Japanese people are not concerned with animals welfare or what? if this were the case then I too am horrified that this film was allowed at all, yeah sure I enjoyed the movie too, but then I assumed it was not real, but now I know different I STAND with you on this one cass.

Ya know we can all bury our heads in the sand, and not want to know these things, but to have them brought out in the open, is what helps to make changes, ones hopefully for the better, so that it does not happen again!!!!

[K9soul]

does that mean the Japanese people are not concerned with animals welfare or what?

I don't think it would be fair to make that generalization though :(
I wouldn't want to make any wrong assumptions but I don't believe in Japan you can just protest and write to your senator and get laws made that way.

[Dogz]

Originally posted by Pam
I haven't read through all of the responses beyond KayAnn's but I just have to say that this movie is my all time favorite animal movie. In fact I bought it after seeing it on cable and have watched it 5 or 6 times. I imagine from the length of this thread there is some serious discussion going on, but personally I don't care to read through it all. I loved the movie and that's all I have to say.

I totally agree.
I did not read through this whole thread, but I just wanted to make a short comment.

I love the movie, and I think it is adorable. I have read some of the thread, and I think that the birds could have been fake. It IS possible.

You probably already know that I love this movie, I named my pug Otis.:)

[carole]

Dogz I loved the movie too, watched it with my young daughter, who also loved it, but I was under the impression it was all fake, but if it were not, then I feel somewhat different regarding the movie now, would you not as well? knowing that these animals may have endured things that were not pleasant to them, just so we can enjoy the movie?

[Dogz]

Originally posted by carole
Dogz I loved the movie too, watched it with my young daughter, who also loved it, but I was under the impression it was all fake, but if it were not, then I feel somewhat different regarding the movie now, would you not as well? knowing that these animals may have endured things that were not pleasant to them, just so we can enjoy the movie?

Carole- You have made a great point here. I really have not seen the movie in a while. Maybe I will watch the movie tonight to refresh my memory.

Until then, I won't say how I feel about how the animals were treated. It is bad if any of the animals were harmed during the process of making this movie just for our enjoyment, but I am going to watch it again.

I must bring up another point.

Since you noticed so many bad things in this movie, have you noticed bad things in other movies, too? Just to bring up an example, how about Homeward Bound? The dogs have to swim in a river with rushing water. Chance had to have porcupine quills in his face. Would you say that you hate this movie also?

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by Dogz
The dogs have to swim in a river with rushing water. Chance had to have porcupine quills in his face. Would you say that you hate this movie also?

Yes, but those dogs were also a lot bigger, and can withstand more than a tiney kitten could. Not to mention that is was made in the United States, NOT Japan, and at the end credits it specifically states that no animals were harmed in the making of the film, whereas Milo and Otis does not.

[Amber]

I do like the movie, BUT there were some seens that were a bit disrupted. Like when the cat jumps OFF the cliff , and into the ocean. and I didnt like seeing the dog and cats having puppys. (yes they were cute) but still. and I didnt like when the cat gets attacked by seagulls....OUCH!

[Tweety_Pie]

Originally posted by Amber
I do like the movie, BUT there were some seens that were a bit disrupted. Like when the cat jumps OFF the cliff , and into the ocean. and I didnt like seeing the dog and cats having puppys. (yes they were cute) but still. and I didnt like when the cat gets attacked by seagulls....OUCH!

I agree..I also like the movie.. the animals in it are so adorable, but I was bit disturbed to in some parts..

[CamCamPup33]

I *love* that movie! It is my all time favorite movie.. When i got my hampster otis, that is why i named him otis ( i didnt have a dog at the time ;)) I highly doubt that they would make a cat jump off a cliff, :rolleyes: , or have a dog being attacked by a bear, reality guys.. Even then, im sure they have some kind of law, maybe not as bluntly here in the US, but im sure there is one in japan restricting harm to animals.. It looks like special effects to me.. I have it on video, so im going to watch it now..

Milo and Otis are so cute though!! :D

[Cataholic]

I haven't watched the movie...I can't handle watching animal movies, as I can't separate the 'real' from the fiction. I can't watch scary movies, I couldn't watch the Holocaust, nor will I see the Blood of the Christ (or whatever the Mel Gibson movie is titled). I just can't separate fact from fiction- in movies (lest any of you think I am completely impaired).

I don't know if the issue here is so much, "is this real or fake"...as it **should** be "is the image or images portrayed sending the right message".

I know there are horror films with people being shot/beat up/killed, etc. Now, I **know** these aren't real...but, is the image one to portray? Will it give someone an idea? Will it make it more 'normal' if we de-sensitive it?

That is how I see it with this film....one I have never watched. Real or fake, animals even appearing in danger, harms way, or mistreated, is NOT an image I want in my mind, or in the mind of people anywhere. Why? Cause it might give some one out there an idea that this is acceptable.

[Twisterdog]

I've never seen the movie. I don't usually watch animal movies. I find most of them either disturbing or infuriating at some point, so it's just not worth it to me to watch them.

However, I will say, do NOT assume the laws are the same in Japan as they are here. It may be that they are, and the animals weren't hurt or stressed. However, it may be that they are NOT the same, and then you have no idea what actually went on filming this movie. I have no idea, nor do I wish to know, frankly. But assuming everything is sweet and rosy with an independent film made in a foreign country, which had to have scenes cut out to be shown in the US, seems a bit naive to me.

[amoore]

I don't like to watch animals be hurt even if it is fake. I don't like to watch chainsaw massacre movies, even if it is fake. I don't like to watch HBO show sex going on, even if it is fake.

I feel sick or have nightmares if I watch these bloody horror movies. I think they are fake.

I watched a Twight Zone when I was little that made me have nightmares. A cat a woman hated was served to her neighbors. I was 8 years old when that I saw that!

I think it is up to the individual what they want to watch at the movies or on their TV. You have to be your own judge what you let your kids watch or what you like to watch.

[popcornbird]

Originally posted by Cataholic
nor will I see the Blood of the Christ (or whatever the Mel Gibson movie is titled).

The Passion of Christ? I wanted to see that so bad, but now that everyone is saying its going to have violence, and be scary, I'm thinking against it. I'll let my dad watch it and tell me about it instead. Scary movies scare me no matter how good they are. :p

I haven't watched Milo and Otis, so I can't comment on that.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by CamCamPup33
I *love* that movie! It is my all time favorite movie.. When i got my hampster otis, that is why i named him otis ( i didnt have a dog at the time ;)) I highly doubt that they would make a cat jump off a cliff, :rolleyes: , or have a dog being attacked by a bear, reality guys.. Even then, im sure they have some kind of law, maybe not as bluntly here in the US, but im sure there is one in japan restricting harm to animals.. It looks like special effects to me.. I have it on video, so im going to watch it now..

Milo and Otis are so cute though!! :D

I am not saying they throw the cat off the bridge, although it's fairly obvious he is swimming in the ocean. Also the bear never "attacked" the animals, but it's the point that the animals were scared and freightened.

In the part where the seagulls attack the cat, explain to me how a bunch of seagulls were trained to attack a cat, and even IF the cat was edited in, there was SOMETHING that made that kitten extremely scared! You cannot fake an animal running for his life, no matter how hard you try.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by Twisterdog
But assuming everything is sweet and rosy with an independent film made in a foreign country, which had to have scenes cut out to be shown in the US, seems a bit naive to me.

Exactly. There was a reason scenes were edited out in order to be shown here in the US, because obviously they know us Americans would have disproved of some of the footage.

[Shelteez2]

Originally posted by YellowLabLover
Come on now, stop and think: :rolleyes:

Do you think a movie company would actually allow a movie to be made where animals are put in danger where they can get really hurt and die!? Um...yeah...if they want lawsuits up the wazoo. Common sense.


It wasn't that long ago when westerns were made and they used trip wires to make the horses fall when they were "shot".
A lot of those horses didn't make it out un-injured.

Laws have changed now, but perhaps back then they were different, especially in a different country.

[trayi52]

I haven't seen that movie since my kids were small, and I guess that was only once or twice.

I would say if that movie had to be edited for our benefit, then there was obivously something wrong with it.

It does appear to give our smaller children ideas that there are things perfectly acceptable to them.

I hate to watch anything that has animals being hurt. I used to watch TV as a child and think in the westerns that they were really shooting the horses in the head after running them near to death. That always upset me as a child, and they didn't have people on the set watching out for the animals.

Now I wonder about movies like Milo and Otis, especially reading some of the articles that was posted here by Cass.

I have to completely agree with Johanna, I feel the same way.

I don't blame you at all Cass for not wanting your child to watch, children don't read whats at the end of a movie. I know Dylan does not read yet. Does he?

[carole]

As Dogz suggested there are probably many other movies like Milo and Otis that also display animals in danger and doing things that would be scarey to the animal,any movie that exploits animals, children or human beings in any way is offensive to me, and from now on I shall be taking a lot more notice, so thanks Cass for opening my eyes.

Just off topic a bit, but I remember when I was 16 (yes I can still remember that far back he he) one of the girls I was nurse aiding with who lived in the nurses home with me went and saw the EXORCIST, she was really freaked by it and at night when patients rang their bells for assistance, a red light would show up in the dark and she was totally freaked out, for some reason it reminded her of this film,(I never saw if myself) everyone is different, and what affects one might not another.

As long as we donot become complacent and just accept these things that go on, that is what matters to me.

I think Cass has opened up a really good topic for conversation here, and made people think(well certainly has made me think) and that only positive things can come out of that.

[trayi52]

They are not making movies just to amuse us. They are making movies to make big bucks! Think about it!

Of course they want us, as a people to want to see the movies. They are going to do what they can to make us want to see it. The more people going to watch, the more money they make.

Think about how the movies has changed in the past years, more explicit language, more sexual content and more violence. They are going to make movies to attract more veiwers!

[ILoveMyAbbyGirl]

It makes me cry every time, but I LOVE that movie.

[kevinrats]

Chill. It's a movie, and I'm sure they had some type of Animal Cruelty Laws in movies back then. Otherwise, what's stopping people from killing animals and stuff in movies? Some sicko probably would if there were'nt any laws.

How do you know its real? Do you have actual proof? They did have special effects back then you know. It was made in the 70's or close to there I think? Maybe not. It's in color though.

I love Otis'! I've always thought Pugs look like they've been chasing parked cars. LOL!

[guster girl]

And, actually, you can train a cat to look like it's "running for it's life". I'm not saying no animals were hurt in the film. Heck, people get hurt all the time, and, I'm sure animals were injured making many films. I haven't seen "Milo and Otis" in a long time, I'll probably check it out tonight, though. I think I have it on VHS. But, they can train an animal to look scared, to cry loudly, to hiss, to run for it's life, to gasp for air, etc. My friend trained her dog to cry and whimper like he was injured. And, these animals are professionally trained. And, again, I'm not saying I agree with the movie or the movie making industry in every way, but, I AM saying that they can totally train an animal to look miserable. Interesting debate, though. I've just read all the posts, so, i thought i'd make a comment.

[wolfsoul]

Originally posted by kevinrats
I'm sure they had some type of Animal Cruelty Laws in movies back then.
Actually, even nowadays, there are very little animal cruelty laws in Japan. It's the worst place for animal cruelty when compared to other developed countries.

Edit: Here is a site that explains that Japan doesn't have good laws when it comes to animals. People are virtually allowed to do what they want with them, and I'm assuming that included videos.
http://www.alive-net.net/english/en-law/Oliver.html

[slleipnir]

I was just about ot post that link wolfsoul lol

[Desert Arabian]

Originally posted by Shelteez2
It wasn't that long ago when westerns were made and they used trip wires to make the horses fall when they were "shot".
A lot of those horses didn't make it out un-injured.


HUH!? :confused: How long ago was this!? I have never heard about "trip wires" for horses. They are trained to fall when there are shooting scenes. I have seen how it is done with my own eyes. It is a special reining and leg technique the rider does to make the horse buckle up and fall on it's side, while the rider quickly dismounts in a fashion where they (and the horse) are not injured, yet makes it appear that the rider was thrown from the horse.

I am going to browse around for this "trip wire" technique...never heard of it before, I want to know about it, *crosses fingers that is never existed*....


ALSO...

I did not know that Milo & Otis was filmed in Japan and parts were edited out of the movie. :eek: :( So Cass, I can see why you are so concerned. The movie does sound fishy now. :( Let's just hope that the animals were just really good actors, it's too sad to think that animals could be harmed like that in a movie...you'd think that they'd be smart enough not to do that....:( Sorry Cass (and anyone else) if I upset you at all about this! Good thing I got rid of that movie a loooooooooong time ago.

[Shelteez2]

Originally posted by YellowLabLover
HUH!? :confused: How long ago was this!? I have never heard about "trip wires" for horses. They are trained to fall when there are shooting scenes. I have seen how it is done with my own eyes. It is a special reining and leg technique the rider does to make the horse buckle up and fall on it's side, while the rider quickly dismounts in a fashion where they (and the horse) are not injured, yet makes it appear that the rider was thrown from the horse.

I am going to browse around for this "trip wire" technique...never heard of it before, I want to know about it, *crosses fingers that is never existed*....


It was back in the early days of making movies. I heard about it on an episode of The World of Horses (a TV show). They were showing how horses are trained to fall now, and told about how they were made to fall then.

I have seen it done too. But it wasn't always the way. It was before there were laws for the way animals were treated on movie sets.

[boscibo]

I have heard or read somewhere that there were some questionable shots (most notably the kitten being thrown off a cliff, and the kitten in the river scene) in the Milo and Otis movie, so I wouldn't assume it was all shot humanely. I haven't seen this movie, the stories I heard about it totally turned me off to it.

Trip wires were very common in westerns and other movies, and it really hasn't been that long since they were outlawed. In the movie The Man From Snowy River (1982), a pregnant mare was run off a cliff and killed. One clue as to whether or not trip wires were used: If you see the horse getting to its feet after a fall, it was trained. If you don't see the horse get up onscreen, a trip wire was probably used. Many, many horses were killed or permanently injured using this technique in movies.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by kevinrats
Chill. It's a movie, and I'm sure they had some type of Animal Cruelty Laws in movies back then. Otherwise, what's stopping people from killing animals and stuff in movies? Some sicko probably would if there were'nt any laws.

How do you know its real? Do you have actual proof? They did have special effects back then you know. It was made in the 70's or close to there I think? Maybe not. It's in color though.


I never said they didn't have special effects, in fact I mentioned that the film DID use special effects. :rolleyes:

If you read the link WolfSoul posted you will find that in Japan not much is done to protect animals. Here let me repost the link in case you didn't see that:

http://www.alive-net.net/english/en-law/Oliver.html

[kevinrats]

Huh? You'd think Japan would have this really ahead of us! That's pretty bad...

But I was just thinking, would they show a movie like that in the U.S. if there was Animal Cruelty? Maybe, I'm not sure. Do you know?

[K9soul]

Apparently scenes were cut out before showing the movie in the US because they were thought to be "too dramatic" for western viewers.

I had no idea about that mare incident in the Man from Snowy River. I remember being awed by the scenery in that movie.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by kevinrats
Huh? You'd think Japan would have this really ahead of us! That's pretty bad...

But I was just thinking, would they show a movie like that in the U.S. if there was Animal Cruelty? Maybe, I'm not sure. Do you know?

That's why they edited out certain portions of the movie.

[Dogz]

I didn't get a chance to watch it.

Eh, it's still adorable.:)

[Twisterdog]

Originally posted by Shelteez2
It wasn't that long ago when westerns were made and they used trip wires to make the horses fall when they were "shot".
A lot of those horses didn't make it out un-injured.

Laws have changed now, but perhaps back then they were different, especially in a different country.

That's true, trip wires were very common. And, I don't know how they do it now, but I don't see how they can train horses to run in a group at full speed and suddenly fall, one after the other. It looks like very painful falling, too! I saw a movie a couple months ago, "The Missing", and I was cringing at what some of those poor horses appeared to go through.

[Crikit]

All right everyone just needs to chill out about this okay...it's a movie okay. I personally have never seen it but that's because I don't find movies that just show scenes of animals with cheesy naration all that enjoyable...so kill me.

Unless you were there, you have no idea how the animals were treated...and don't go quoting the stuff about how the Japanese not having animal laws, because you know what? Just because they have lax rules regarding animals doesn't mean that there aren't still people who care about animals as much as or more then we do.

For all you know the crew for the movie could have been crawling with animal lovers, but like I said you don't know that, you can't know that...unless of course you somehow manage to build a time machine ala back to the future and go back in time to see them film the movie, but really that wouldn't be all that useful unless of course you can speak Japanese.

But honestly just take a chill pill people, there are more important things to worry about then how the animals were treated in a movie that was made in the early 80's and who have all most likely passed on to the RB.

Now if you'll excuse me I must now go and spend time in my happy place.

[carole]

I have to say Crickit I find your attitude very complacent, yes this movie was made some years ago,however if the facts are that the animals were indeed mis-treated, and I AGREE with you that we should be stating facts/not maybe's, then indeed telling everyone just to take a chill pill,and that it's only a movie, kinda rubs me up the wrong way, because if everyone took that attitude, nothing would ever chance in our society, burying our head in the sand , does not change anything, it's people like Cass, who really can make a difference, by kicking up a stink about this particular movie may mean no more are made like that.
YES it maybe too late for this movie, but not for those to come.

Would be nice to know the complete facts for sure, but I think the fact that people on PT are getting a tad emotional and upset that maybe this movie did include abuse of animals is a positive step in the right direction, it has made me think ,next time I watch an animal story ,and not necessarily sit on my butt and do nothing about what I see if it expoilts animals in anyway.

It reminds me of the time a local circus was visiting and the dogs were in cages out in the hot sun, I did not just sit there and do nothing, I picked up the phone and reported it.

Well enough said, this is purely my opinion.
P.S I have to add I find this a very happy place to be, sorry you don't, this is not an argument, merely a debate with varied opinions.

[Crikit]

Originally posted by carole
I have to say Crickit I find your attitude very complacent, yes this movie was made some years ago,however if the facts are that the animals were indeed mis-treated, and I AGREE with you that we should be stating facts/not maybe's, then indeed telling everyone just to take a chill pill,and that it's only a movie, kinda rubs me up the wrong way, because if everyone took that attitude, nothing would ever chance in our society, burying our head in the sand , does not change anything, it's people like Cass, who really can make a difference, by kicking up a stink about this particular movie may mean no more are made like that.
YES it maybe too late for this movie, but not for those to come.

Would be nice to know the complete facts for sure, but I think the fact that people on PT are getting a tad emotional and upset that maybe this movie did include abuse of animals is a positive step in the right direction, it has made me think ,next time I watch an animal story ,and not necessarily sit on my butt and do nothing about what I see if it expoilts animals in anyway.

It reminds me of the time a local circus was visiting and the dogs were in cages out in the hot sun, I did not just sit there and do nothing, I picked up the phone and reported it.

Well enough said, this is purely my opinion.
P.S I have to add I find this a very happy place to be, sorry you don't, this is not an argument, merely a debate with varied opinions.

Carole, it's okay that you find my post to be complacent, because some of it was. I'm not telling people to roll over and ignore stuff that they see in movies or real life that might harm animals. I was just pointing out that it's to late to do anything about this particular movie due to the fact that it's over 20 years old, and was made in a foreign country, so it would be a good idea for people to just relax before someone says something that they don't mean.

The reason I did my post was NOT to tell people to just totally forget what could have happened. It was more to get people to stop making assumptions about how the animals were treated in a country they've never been to that has different cultural values. And a decade where things like this were still looked on differently then they are today.

Did anyone stop to think that maybe the parts that were edited out of the American version of the movie weren't parts that they would find to gruesome but maybe parts that an american audience wouldn't understand from a cultural aspect? I personally have seen plenty of Japanese and movies from other Asian countries and the things that they have in their movies can be very confusing for one who doesn't understand how the country functions or the different customs that they use. True a couple of the movies I've seen have been banned in North America due to the violence in them but those were movies that were considered to be contraversial there as well.

Oh and before I forget I do find the board to be a happy place. My comment was more of a joke...that's my type of sense of humor, those who know me can probably relate to that. :D ;)

[zippy-kat]

Originally posted by Crikit
Did anyone stop to think that maybe the parts that were edited out of the American version ...[were] parts that an american audience wouldn't understand from a cultural aspect?

Good point!! and...


Originally posted by Crikit
those who know me can probably relate to that.
I have no smurfin' idea what your talkin' about! ;) :D


I have not seen the movie in quite a few years but at the time enjoyed it.

[K9soul]

You know what I think one of the problems is, is that some people who really enjoyed the movie might be feeling a bit accused of enjoying animal cruelty. I know that if a movie I had always loved was suddenly pointed out to have cruel things in the making or unethical, I would probably feel really torn and bummed out. I might feel attacked too if I still liked the movie, and wonder if others are passing judgement on me as a person because I do like it.

I'm just trying to look at things from the other side of the fence here. That's why I feel it is very important to be sure and not denounce anyone for liking the movie. Often when I sit down to a movie I trust the makers were ethical in the making of it and I try to just enjoy it and not worry about such things. Some people when they watch a film are more noticing of things and more questioning as to how that was achieved. I don't think either way is bad!

I think it's best when bringing something like this to light, if one tries to keep it factual and try not to 'attack' others for liking it because then it's most likely what you are presenting will be brushed off as overemotionalism.

These are my opinions and are not meant to be aimed at anyone at all :)

[luckies4me]

Well geez, everyone here knows I am overemotional anyway LOL! :p Truly, I calmed down a long time ago so I don't think bringing up fighting over and over is doing any good.

My stepfather is Japanese. His last name is Yoshitake, kinda like the mushrooms. Turns out he has the original film of this in his dad's (not alive anymore) collection or whatever. His father was the run who ran the Japanese Heritage Club in Southern California. According to my stepfather laws in Japan towards animals are pretty much zilch, and according to him, the parts of this movie that were edited were not because it was something us Americans could not understand, it was because certain portions of the movie would be upsetting to us Americans. My family is moving here this Summer. They are coming here for Spring break to search for a house. Once they get here I will make sure to watch this "original" movie and then I will come to my decision on it. As of now, I won't pass judgement on anyone until I learn a little more from my stepfather. His whole family is from Japan, so I can learn a lot. Funny, him being Japanese and he can barely speak it! :p

And as far as it being "just a movie", you're wrong. It wasn't just a movie, there were live animals in that movie that had a *chance* of being abused. Now, of course I have no proof but through what I hear from my father. Even if this movie was made a long time ago, and if I had proof of it being abusive towards animals during filming, there IS something I could do. I could start a petition for people to boycott this movie, and have people stop selling it. There's always something you can do.

Now again, we are all calm, so no need to bring it up furthur.

[wolfsoul]

Originally posted by luckies4me
According to my stepfather laws in Japan towards animals are pretty much zilch
I have a friend from Japan, and she says this as well. I don't think I said anything about the Japanese not liking animals --- I simply stated that they don't have strong laws when it comes to animals. I never said they weren't people either. It just bothers me that someone might think I'm suddenly racist just because I said Japan doesn't have good animal laws. I know a few laws in Canada that I'm not happy with, including some animal laws. It doesn't mean I think all Canadians hate animals.

[luckies4me]

Originally posted by wolfsoul
I have a friend from Japan, and she says this as well. I don't think I said anything about the Japanese not liking animals --- I simply stated that they don't have strong laws when it comes to animals. I never said they weren't people either. It just bothers me that someone might think I'm suddenly racist just because I said Japan doesn't have good animal laws. I know a few laws in Canada that I'm not happy with, including some animal laws. It doesn't mean I think all Canadians hate animals.

Exactly. No one here said we were against the Japanese or that no Japanese person cared for animals. I know that to not be true, since I have many Japanese people in my family. Denny, my dad, LOVES animals! I mean, gee, they have three cats, a fire bellied toad (which my brother has had for ten years!!! can you believe it?:eek: ), plus the tiels and budgie etc. He grew up with dogs and used to have two Golden Retrievers. He is an animal lover just like us Americans. :)

[K9soul]

Hehe, if I claimed I wasn't oversensitive or overemotional sometimes, it sure would be turning a blind eye to a big part of my personality. I'm so strongly affected by things, and I too have to stay away from certain kinds of movies even if it's obviously fiction, because it just affects me too much. I really get into a book when I'm reading it, and I really get into a movie too.

The worst type of movie for me, is the psychotic killer type movies. I get so disturbed by those that if I watch one I can be affected long after the fact, just in my dreams, and it invading my thoughts and the visuals stuck in my head. I just try to steer clear of those types of shows.

So I would most definitely nominate myself first for the oversensitive award :D

[wolf_Q]

Just because of all the controversy going on here I borrowed my friend's copy of the movie and watched it tonight.

I hadn't seen it in many years, and I remember I loved that show as a child.

After watching it, many of the scenes did seem cruel to me. Both of the animals (especially Milo) seem scared to death almost the entire movie. I'm sure some of the things were fake, but most of them looked real and the animals looked miserable and possibly placed in danger.

It also promotes irresponsible breeding of animals.

However, I must agree it's really not worth getting all worked up about considering the movie was made such a long time ago; there's not much you can do now. ;)

[carole]

Crikit thank you for explaining your post to me, I understand what you are saying.:)

It will be interesting what Cass has to say after seeing the un-edited version, and I agree with you Cass, just because the movie is old does not mean nothing can be done about it, if it is indeed too late for milo and Otis, then we can be more aware for future movies coming up, I for one will be taking much more notice from now on, other stories like 101 dalmations, stuart little all featured animals, maybe we should look at these as well, I have seen both, but cannot remember if there were any suspect scenes in either can you?

I thank Cass for bringing this to my attention, and will be much more aware of this type of thing from now on.:)

And that in MO can only be a good thing.

[luckies4me]

Carol, it seems like Spring break is forever from now. That's how long I have to wait to see the movie! Hopefully I can convince them to maybe send it to me or something. I am really curious to see it!

[carole]

Oh well,but yes I will be interested to read your review in the future.:)