the dog owner would have been charged and the dog put down - Tyrannosaur (2011) Discussion

[–] demon-xp 12 years ago

Can't believe this d!imwit kicked his dog do death...
Schizophrenic

reply

hey demon-xp what the *beep* has schizophrenia got to do with kicking a dog to death? can you quote me one incident of someone with schizophrenia kicking a dog to death? ignore this if you live in America where people are diagnosed with schizophrenia for farting in church...

"What's your name?"
*beep* you. That's my name."

reply

[–] JackyBryant 12 years ago

Yes there are tons of inconsistencies in the film. It's as if the film's characters exist in their own little universe where no one outside of a small circle of people interacts. No cops investigating how the boy got those scars? No cops ever responding to beatings and assaults? Or even noise complaints? Not a single person alerts authorities when that woman is walking around looking like she just went fifteen rounds with Iron Mike Tyson?

Men get away with domestic abuse when there aren't obvious signs for people to see. But a woman with black eyes and bruises and no explanation for them is painfully obvious a sign of domestic abuse. And the main character, a bum, figures it out in one second. But no one else does, no other customer, like a woman perhaps, can figure it out.

Dead Man's Shoes is one of my favorite films of all time but I was quite let down by Tyrannosaur. I can't believe that that woman would even go to jail for killing her husband after he raped her and then put shards of glass inside of her. In the US she would have had a justifiable homicide open and shut case. I guess the laws need to be changed or else this film just ran with its own premise.

reply

[–] brent8577 12 years ago

i was kidnapped by someone i knew and some people he knew, beaten until they thought i was dead, then dumped in the street in the middle of the night. i woke up in hospital. i never saw one police officer. nobody contacted me. i carry a gun now. i'm sure he and i will meet again one day. i don't know what places people think police protect and serve, but it's not here.

reply

[–] redlightdistricts 12 years ago

What? :-(

reply

[–] fayesbridegroom 12 years ago

both this film and dead man's shoes dealt with the primal urge for vengeance.
I observed in order to facilitate this experience, inconsistency need to exist in both scripts.
With Dead Man's Shoe's the avenger is portrayed as a marytr and so the moral code rests easily on the viewer. where with this film, the avenger remains a victim of sorts, which creates a more uneasy ending.
but the film does place a value on friendship and how to can grow from the most barren of social circles.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ha-rob 12 years ago

In the deleted scenes the voice over tells us that they told the authorities that the boy had been attacked by an unknown dog in the park

There are two kinds of people in the world my friend those with loaded guns and those who dig

reply

[–] cthulhulurks 12 years ago

Police are self-serving self-righteous lazy dumb dimwit selfish (unts.

my vote history:
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=27424531

reply

[–] Son_Of_Frankenhooker 12 years ago

That would happen, if the authorities knew what dog carried out the attack. The little boy's mother was also scared of her partner, I got the feeling she wouldn't tell anyone it was her partner's dog.

“I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.”

reply

[–] Cojo-Gobar 12 years ago

Exactly, there were no inconsistencies in this film, it's just that Considine refused to ruin his film by spelling everything out for the audience. The dog owner would have just told the hospital staff that the child was attacked by a stray, it probably wouldn't have even reached the police. As for the anti-social behaviour, most of those involved would have taken matters into their own hands instead of calling the police. Lastly JackyBryant, many people do get away with spousal abuse, even when it is glaringly obvious; if an abused person is walking the streets with a bruised face, if they say they weren't abused then there is nothing that anyone can do, and as for people not knowing that Hannah was being beaten, they probably did know but didn't want to involve themselves in the situation.

we'll see things they'll never see, you and I are gonna live forever.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Strazdamonas 12 years ago

The authorities would not be notified, and even if they would, they woudl be told that "theres a dog that attacks out there". the boyfriend would have made sure that his dog would not be mentioned.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

[–] bootblack987 12 years ago

So did we learn from this movie that the police treat poorer people different than the middle/owning class? What a great lesson we have discovered!

/sarcasm

reply

[–] Strazdamonas 12 years ago

No, we learn that woman are scared of thier agressive idiot boyfriend so much that they wouldnt call police even after it bit her son.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

reply

[–] TheNachoMan666 11 years ago

The authorities in some places in Britain are corrupt, simple.

reply

[–] TwittingOnTrender 11 years ago

The authorities in some places in Britain are corrupt, simple.

So because a film-maker creates something (however good) with inconsistencies in it, that's evidence that the system is corrupt, rather than that he messed up?

Tell me, how does it benefit the system, or an individual police officer, if the owner of a dangerous dog is allowed to get away with allowing his pet to maim a child? Where does the corruption come in?

The "stray dog" story wouldn't wash. Social services would become involved (if they aren't already) and would see that a potentially dangerous dog lives at the address. It wouldn't be too great a leap to put two and two together - especially when you'd have neighbours reporting (after the event) how dangerous the animal was. And would the child even be able to be anywhere near the dog again?

Around the corner from me there has recently been an incident where a 14 year old girl was savaged to death by dogs. There were neighbours coming out of the woodwork (after the event) to say how dangerous and vicious the dogs were.

In short, there is no way in the world they could cover up this matter.

No Guru, No Method, No Teacher.

reply