Are animals harmed in this film? - Mouchette (1970) Discussion

[–] amandatwisp 17 years ago

Yes, animals are harmed in this film. I am an animal lover and supporter of animal rights, and two scenes in this film disturbed me quite a bit.

reply

[–] clunkygirl 17 years ago

Thank you so much for replying.

http://www.myspace.com/clunkygirl

reply

[–] benami7777 17 years ago

I thought it was cool i always wondered how a wounded animal twitched

reply

[–] lindy-p 17 years ago

I'd like to see you twitch after I wound you! That would be REALLY cool!

reply

[–] Stukach 17 years ago

Lindy-P you have mental problems.

____________________________
disappear here

reply

[–] screamflickchick-1 17 years ago

Oh, but the previous poster who likes to see animals twitch doesn't have mental problems, I guess.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sidneywhitaker-1 15 years ago

It was not a real question, but a pseudo-naive claim to superior "St.Francis-like" purity. Lindy-p's wish--presumably ironic--is couched in such sick terms that it contributes nothing wholesome, and certainly no relevance to the beautifully sad and genuinely humane film.

reply

[–] cd_boy_33 17 years ago

this is not gory is it? any nudity?

reply

[–] ercin_senturk_1 17 years ago

Yes, a couple of rabits. so what? Face the truth we eat them." a baby"????
if you compare animals this way, I think you make a mistake.

reply

[–] Rurik_Snorri 16 years ago

Yes, there was indeed a rabbit that was shot & killed in this film. I believe the crew had it for dinner. If I were you, I would focus your attention and join me in the campaign for receiving monetary reparations for all the rabbits and hares that died in Majdanek, Sobibor, Dachau, Buechenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Oswiecim, Treblinka and Theresienstadt, not to mention the Siberian Gulags.

Never forget the millions of rabbits that are served on the dinner plates of French, Belgians, Spaniards, Greeks, Portugueses and Italians each evening.

Are you on CRACK?

What on EARTH does this have to do with the film?

reply

[–] clunkygirl 16 years ago

I'm sorry to see so many rude and bitter responses: their content and unkind tone betray *their* authors.

reply

[–] Alectreveiyan006 15 years ago

hahaha

reply

[–] TheManInOil 17 years ago

In a movie in which a young girl is raped and destroyed you are concerned about some rabbits being hunted. It reveals more about you than I suspect you planned to expose.

reply

[–] clunkygirl 17 years ago

It is my understanding that it is a portrayal of rape and murder not an actual rape and murder. I'm not sure of your point.

http://www.myspace.com/clunkygirl

reply

[–] squeemu 16 years ago

So they hunted some rabbits, filmed it, and then ate the rabbits. What's the big deal? Unless you're a vegetarian...

reply

[–] dawnestella 11 years ago

Well stated and smart. I totally agree with you. If I watch this film, I am not anticipating watching real harm to the actress. Because I am a kind and sensitive person, I would prefer not to watch an innocent animal die or be harmed. And people find this wrong?

reply

[–] clunkygirl 11 years ago

I haven't revisited this post in quite a while but I'm glad I did. Some of the usual nasty posts have been made over time but other, more caring thoughts have been expressed as well. It saddens me when I hear cruel people speak, I only hope that they are truly unaware of the meaning and consequences of their words.

For the record of potential viewers, there is no actual rape in the scene referred to earlier; the actress did not receive medical treatment, etc. this comment was obviously for effect.

I really don't know when people began to find avoiding unnecessary harm morally wrong - this should bring us pause rather than an immediate, visceral defense of how reprehensible it is to be concerned about such things, or that there is a dichotomy of choices to care for either animals or people, or of animals in films and animals in natural disasters, etc.

Thanks Dawnestella for drawing me back.

Michele

reply

[–] dawnestella 11 years ago

Again....well said. I have never understood the violent and/or harsh reactions from people toward the gentle folks that express concern about animals? It is not just apathy but a general hostile "reaction"! Where does that come from?

reply

[–] ryankent1984 15 years ago

TheManInOil is an idiot.

Killing a rabbit is not the same as acting out a rape. I'll repeat the key word considering you can't grasp reality from fiction - the word is 'act'.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CatrionaM 10 years ago

TheManInOil, shut up you worthless *beep*

reply

[–] Trouter2000 17 years ago

Just rabbits? Who cares, I've shot my share of them, and chance are they'd be eaten anyway.

Haven't seen the film yet, but glad to know its only a couple of measly rabbits.

Last film seen: The Yakuza Papers vol. 5 Final Episode 7/10

reply

[–] mianda72 16 years ago

...and said rabbits were immortalized on celluloid by Bresson, lucky critters indeed. Considering the fastidious care in which Bresson chose his "models" I'm sure the rabbits were of the highest calibre and approached their roles with the gravitas expected of them.

reply

[–] davidgoesboating 15 years ago

Bloody PETA. Worse than people who bomb abortion clinics.

reply

[–] A_Fistful_of_Pennies 15 years ago

Lots of really heartless responses here. Very disappointing.

Cruelty to animals should never be tolerated, and never should be tolerated for the sake of art either. I will not say I dislike a movie for featuring animal cruelty, but I find it very disturbing and hard to watch. It's very unfortunate animals were ever allowed to be killed or tortured on film.

This film shows cruelty to rabbits and to a bird. It's a good movie, so I enjoyed it despite these scenes, but if any animal cruelty ruins a movie for you, I'd recommend skipping this one.

reply

[–] salman_ahmed2 10 years ago

in a world where humans are slaughtered by other humans like ants .this is nothing

reply

[–] CatrionaM 10 years ago

Shut up you *beep* There's always something worse going on, it doesn't make other stuff less important. Stupid idiot.

reply

[–] Alectreveiyan006 14 years ago

I thought people who bomb abortion clinics are our nation's heros? According to the NRA and GOP...

reply

[–] paintedbird 13 years ago

i hope all the sociopaths ratifying animal cruelty in this thread face cruelty themselves, like a slow agonising death. they don't deserve the compassion they would withhold from others. worthless egotistical SCUM.

reply

[–] AssetsonFire 12 years ago

Of course, there's nothing sociopathic at all about willing slow agonising death on strangers. *shudder*

Oh whisky, leave me alone.

reply

[–] AssetsonFire 12 years ago

And you weren't just being flippant, either:

*beep* hunters and all carnist scum. they should all get shot or killed by animals. it'd be poetic justice.

Oh whisky, leave me alone.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Alectreveiyan006 15 years ago

I sure hope so.

reply

[–] rudykawa 13 years ago

@ TheManInOil

I agree with you.
It was very disturbing to see the scene of a 15yo being explicit raped by a 18inch penis right in her a**. Very explicit, gory, bloody, all the way in and out. The actress said she had to pass through surgery, had hemorroids till she was 26yo and never really recovered from the trauma.
It creeps me out till today.

reply

[–] PoppyTransfusion 9 years ago

We see birds being trapped and dying in their traps and rabbits being shot. One rabbit is mortally wounded and we watch its death struggles.

I didn't find the scenes of animal killing in this film gratuitous and presumed they were actual hunters being filmed. The animal killing served a point about the humanity on display. The most upsetting and depraved scenes of animal killing on film that I've seen were in Wake in Fright.

I never understand why people think that killing animals for food and killing them for film are the same thing such that protests against the latter is undermined if the protester eats animals for food. I think the degree by which some people wish to make all animals as 'just animals' and objects for food or film is disturbing.

A bird sings and the mountain's silence deepens.

reply

[–] MewWave 9 years ago

Animals were harmed, but for good purpose.

Huge amounts of rabbits die daily in order to end up on the market for our consumption, and people buy them without thinking of it twice. They do shoot a rabbit for a certain scene, yes, but in the context of a masterful, emotional movie that shows what's wrong with the world. If the scene in question has made even one person think twice about eating as much meat as they do (which, I believe, is what the scene was made for, and I'm sure it has succeeded in that to a MUCH bigger degree), it was well worth it.

If you don't want to see a film where animals are harmed and the film glorifies it, I understand. But if you still don't want to see Mouchette knowing it tries to do the opposite, you're a hypocrite, whether you eat meat or not. There's tens of rabbits being killed as you read this, and not watching this film won't prevent that.

reply