Animals and Pets have been in movies since the rise of the film industry began. In 1917, “Your Obedient Servant” was released, with a horse the main protagonist of the silent film. Who could forget the classic Lassie films, or even tear-jerkers like “Old Yeller,” “Free Willy,” or “Babe?”
There have even been animal films designed to scare us, like “Cujo.” And it worked.
Because animals are a part of everyday life, it makes sense to see them in movies. But at what cost? Is it really a good idea to have real animals on film? Some would argue for it, while others would suggest an alternative.
With that in mind, let’s look at some of the pros and cons of pets in movies.
Pro: They Can Raise Awareness
Many times, the animals in films are facing some kind of hardship and need to reach down deep to find their heroic side. Many movies about pets tend to give animals more humanistic thoughts and qualities. Sometimes those pets are “abused” in the movie or treated poorly, only to end up on top, with a better family and better life.
When the film industry showcases animals in that kind of light, it can draw awareness to animal cruelty and make people think twice about how they treat animals. Some movies can even inspire people to adopt a new pet. Movies that show a deep connection between an animal and a human character, like “Because of Winn Dixie” can inspire people to seek out their new best friend. The human connection to animals is nothing new on the big screen, showcased in everything from Turner and Hooch to 2020’s remake of “The Call of the Wild,” which focuses the entire film on the relationship between a man and his dog.
There are also hundreds of documentaries that go beyond telling a feel-good story and focus on animal rights throughout the world. Even the idea of cloning a dog has been brought up in film, like “The 6th Day.” While no actual pets were cloned during that film, it touched on a subject that has caused some controversy in the domesticated animal world. Even celebrities like Barbara Streisand have famously come under fire for wanting to clone their dog. Movies that bring attention to these issues can be impactful for the future of animals in ‘Hollywood.’ When you look past the entertainment factor of a movie with animals, you can start to see some of the bigger lessons being taught.
Con: They Can Be Difficult to Work With
A scene from “Because of Winn-Dixie” (Twentieth Century Fox, 2005).
One potential con about animals on film is actually getting them to cooperate. This can be especially true when you involve young animals like puppies or animals that haven’t been properly trained. Most movie companies invest in top-quality animal trainers to have on set, in order to make sure the animals they’re working with are cooperating through each scene.
Animal trainers do more than just make sure the pet on set is obeying; they are responsible for:
- Providing food, water, and necessary medications
- Transporting the animal(s) around set
- Keeping the animals happy
- Keeping records of the animals’ behavior and health
In addition to having trainers on hand, studios can invest in pet insurance to protect the animals they work with and ensure their wellbeing and safety.
Animals and people don’t always go hand-in-hand, which is why not every type of animal should be on a movie set. Having puppies and pets around is one thing. Having wild animals around is quite another, as was demonstrated in the 1981 movie “Roar,” which is sometimes touted as the most dangerous movie ever made. Though no one died during production, over 70 members of the cast and crew were injured by the wild animals they were dealing with, including lions and cheetahs.
Con: Safety Can Be an Issue
A scene from “Life of Pi” (Fox 2000 Pictures, 2012).
Animal cruelty is no laughing matter. Unfortunately, there have been claims of animal abuse in the film industry for years. The definition of “cruelty” to animals, in this case, refers to either causing unnecessary pain and suffering or causing injury to the animal—or even death.
The American Humane organization monitors 70% of films that work with animals, making sure the cats, dogs, and wildlife are all being treated properly. When they note that animals were treated humanely throughout the shoot, they are able to give films a stamp of approval with their “No Animals Were Harmed” certification.
Unfortunately, not every film gets such a certification. Some films were tainted before they were even released due to claims of animal abuse on set, including:
- “A Dog’s Purpose” (2017)
- “The Adventures of Milo and Otis” (1986)
- “Ben-Hur” (1959)
- “Life of Pi” (2012)
- “Speed Racer” (2008)
Animal abuse on movie sets typically goes on behind the scenes. It’s not something that’s released into the final movie, and rarely something movie-goers see. Unfortunately, it’s a big problem and one of the major drawbacks of having real animals in movies.
So, should animals continue to be in movies? With ever-advancing technology, would it be easier for everyone and healthier for the animals to make the switch to CGI? For now, animals will still likely be considered a part of the cast, but that may change in the future if technology can make them look realistic enough.
– by Frankie Wallace
