It would go something like this:
“Stilted … clunky … manipulative” … The Hollywood Reporter
“Heavy handed… spottier than a kennel full of caged Dalmatians” …The Los Angeles Times
“Wow, why was this made and for whom and what the hell?” … RogerEbert.com
All of those disparaging comments — and very few superlatives — have been directed at the new movie “The Dog Lover.”
It’s a tricky little movie that starts out appearing as if it is going to be an expose of the unsavory practices of dog breeders.
What it actually is is a defense of breeders, financed by Forrest Lucas, oil tycoon and founder of Protect the Harvest — a pro-hunter organization and a staunch opponent of animal protection groups.
In other words, it is pretty close to propaganda — or maybe out and out propaganda — and, judging from the reviews, it’s not particularly artistic or creative propaganda.
Lucas is president and CEO of Lucas Oil Products. He campaigned against Missouri’s Proposition B, which was aimed at preventing cruelty to dogs in puppy mills.
And he makes no bones about what he thinks of some animal protection groups.
Protect The Harvest’s mission statement is as follows: “The animal rights movement in America, led by the HSUS, has evolved into a wealthy and successful attack group determined to end the consumption of meat, threaten consumer access to affordable food, eliminate hunting, outlaw rodeos and circuses, and even ban animal ownership"
If you look at their online postings, they claim that ANY story of a puppy mill being raided is an example of corruption, that the raids are done merely to give product to the local shelters to "sell". Unless the animal looks like a skeleton, they refuse to believe that the animal was living in horrendous conditions. And even when they look like a skeleton, they complain that authorities should have left the animal with the owner and "offered help" instead.
Lucas says he produced the movie to discourage people from supporting and donating to large animal rights organizations.
“They’re collecting money in the name of dog welfare, but there’s no welfare about them at all. They’re out there to make money,” Lucas said.
That, remember, comes from the CEO of a big oil company. (And if you can’t trust big oil companies, who can you trust?)
Of the movie, Lucas said, “I guarantee you everyone will have a tear. But they’ll walk out of here feeling good, saying ‘I get it now.'”
In the movie, idealistic college student Sara Gold (played by Allison Paige), becomes an undercover operative of the United Animal Protection Society, a fictional PETA-like organization.
Her assignment is to work undercover at a rural dog breeding operation run by the Holloway family, consisting of the handsome but gruff father Daniel (James Remar); true blue wife Liz (Lea Thompson); and hunky son Will (Jayson Blair), who, of course, becomes Sara’s romantic interest.
Sara starts off suspicious of the operation. What, for instance, is going on in that locked shed she’s not allowed to enter?
With her cell phone camera, she begins documenting what’s transpiring at the breeding operation — including the killing of a vicious dog that wandered onto the property and threatened Holloway’s daughter.
When Sara’s video footage of that event is passed on to the animal welfare agency, they manipulate it, and broadcast it, and all hell breaks loose.
 |
| This is the attitude of Protect the Harvest supporters: Jerry Feiseler's comment nails it. They don't think it is anyone's business what they do with animals (property) - they can abuse, neglect and kill them because they believe that's their right. And they believe ALL rescue groups and shelters merely do what they do for money - not because animals are being abused/neglected. |
The ruthless ones, it turns out, are those with the animal welfare agency, who will go to any means to achieve their goal.
Sara, as a result, finds herself turning against the overzealous animal protection group she works for and trying to prove the family’s innocence.
At the movie’s premier in downtown Springfield, Missouri — a state long considered a haven for puppy mills — there were some protesters, according to KSPR.
Of particular concern was the fact that, as part of the movie’s publicity campaign, an Australian shepherd puppy was being auctioned.
“The fact that we’re auctioning off this puppy, there’s nothing bad about that at all,” Lucas said. “So if that’s the best they can find, then we’re in pretty good shape.”
Clearly, he hasn’t read the reviews.
(Omidog - July 12, 2016)
