I agree. These ads are just plain stupid, IMO. There’s another one, where a logger-type guy chops off his leg at the knee. It’s just DUMB.
I don’t want to get off track here (because I know it isn’t real), but how is it the dog’s fault that his owner was irresponsible and let him ride, unrestrained in the back of a pick up? It doesn’t help that the dog is a beagle (which is what my dog is…partially)
Once again, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DOGS ARE NOT REAL…neither were the thousands of Jews slaughtered in Schindler’s List. That movie still made me cry.
Because, Dan, one of the purposes of media, television, stage, radio, music, film, is to trigger real emotion in human beings, that’s how movies like Schindler’s List and Terms of Endearment and Old Yeller work. When I see a dog get thrown from a truck on television, I AM able to say “well yes, that was a fake dog. THAT PARTICULAR DOG was not killed”, but then I remember that my friend’s puppy was run down by a car on Lake Shore Drive going 55 miles an hour and my friend watched the whole thing happen. Funny? Not so much anymore. And it doesn’t inspire laughter when I see it recreated.
I’ve never personally seen someone have their head blown off either, but I imagine that it’s painful if not life ending, so I wonder why people laugh at Pulp Fiction…even though it isn’t real.
Yeah, except they wanted us to believe that they were. 
Nope, but you can bet I’ll never buy it!
jarbaby
Well in this case (and in this case only; I’m not lumping all other commericals with pets with this one), the dog was gnawing at the ropes that were holding the furniture down. Once he bit through the ropes, the furniture went flying. And with no furniture, he had no shelter against the wind, which then picked him up and tossed him out. So, in a very indirect way, it was his fault he fell out - BUT it’s absosmurfinlutely the owner’s fault for having him back there. I can’t explain why he was back there, to be honest.
jarbaby, secret love of my life, the thousands of Jews slaughtered in that movie represented a real-life event. I cried, too. Most sane people cried. It’s nothing like the commercial.
Again, I don’t disagree with you here at all. If you had witnessed either first-hand or second-hand a tragedy such as befell your friend’s dog, then certainly you’d have a negative reaction to the commercial. But many people - probably more than not - have not had this kind of experience, and it is to them that the commerical is aimed. In addition, even people who have experienced such a tragedy react to it in completely different ways, as you and I have. I do not equate what happened in a commerical to a fictional dog with what happened in real life to a real dog.
Ah, but did they? 
I’d wager that they just meant for him to fly off. I don’t want to overanalyze the thing (oh yeah, not like we already have, right?), but you could look at it any number of ways - the dog died, the dog was stunned, the dog was rescued by a flying ninja. It’s all plausible, because it’s a commercial.
[BTW, my dog was also a beagle.]
jarbaby - it’s the difference between the concept and the deed, the abstract verses the actual.
I can find a concept funny whilst recognising that the if the actual deed were to come to pass it wouldn’t be funny at all. Many people recognise a similar dichotomy in their sex life, fantasising about situations they would never actually like to be in.
Black humour. I haven’t seen the ads in question (wrong country), but I will freely admit to finding such things funny if they are well done. It sounds as if this particular ad is not well done. But Pulp Fiction was very well made indeed. When the guy accidentally gets his brains spattered all over the car in Pulp Fiction it is darkly humorous. The idea that such experienced and (to their mind at least) cool guys can screw up as much as the rest of us and the ensuing mess that they had to deal with was funny. If it had been real it would not have been.
I think that it is quite important to separate the idea of an action from the action itself.
pan
You mean the ENGLISH movie * A Fish Called Wanda*?
Made in London, England?
The London England that’s part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Wales(hoorah!), Scotland, and bits of Ireland?
(I love nitpicking - probably why I have no friends!)
The dog in Dante’s Peak mananged to survive the flow of molten lava, too. (made in Hollywood, USA)
Redmeanieboss
PS The sportscrazed but lovable jarbabyj is right, especially in terms of “who thought this was funny?” - it’s not good to get used to violence.
But I think kabbes makes an insightful contribution too (doesn’t he always?) in terms of the artistic daring behind the Pulp Fiction violence. Kind of like enjoying people quarreling in the Pit, as long as they’re colourful.
But why do I have the sneaking suspicion that dantheman doesnt actually own a dog himself?
[sub]watch, I’ll be proved wrong in about twenty minutes time![/sub]
It may have been made in England, but it was indeed a Hollywood production. There’s a difference between a British film and a film that was simply filmed on location in Britain.
And Redboss, I don’t blame you for not reading this entire thread, but it was only two posts before yours that I said I had owned one! 
Further, to use your logic, if I saw a movie in which someone’s brother got killed, I would be offended, because (surprise!) I have a brother. You see how silly that is? You’re right, we shouldn’t get used to violence - but that’s real violence. Myself, I’m jaded against violence which isn’t real (such as Warner Brothers cartoons, for example).
Oh alright I was wrong!
I did some research.
[ul]kabbes is a she, not a he.
dantheman does own a dog. (However his neighbours say it is not a very happy-looking dog. Looks worried, they said).
True, I didn’t read all the posts in the thread, but really it did get a bit boring.[/ul]
However I still maintain Wanda is an english movie.
So do the people at Videoflicks http://www.videoflicks.com/vf2/1007/1007420.ihtml?2139
and the dutch movie site http://www.kak.net/afishcalledwanda/ (I couldn’t understand a word of what was written, but they had a little union jack over the review).
And finally,
Roger Ebert says
So I wasn’t entirely wrong was I, dan my lad? [insert smiley face here]
Ebert also casts light on the debate above:
“And then there is the matter of the three murdered dogs. One friend of mine already says she won’t see “A Fish Called Wanda” because she has heard that dogs die in it (she is never, of course, reluctant to attend movies where people die). I tried to explain to her that the death of a pet is, of course, a tragic thing. But when the object is to inspire a heart attack in a little old lady who is a key prosecution witness, and when her little darling is crushed by a falling safe, well, you’ve just got to make a few sacrifices in the name of comedy.” [ibid]
But not perhaps in the name of Pemmican…
Redboss
[Not like we haven’t already gotten away from the OP… hehe]
Well, not entirely - but when I talk about an English production, I mean one that’s supported and financed by English companies (or British, if you will). Ebert called it a “mid-Atlantic production” because half of the leads were American and half were British. But the movie itself was a Hollywood product, as MGM was the production company involved.
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME!???!?!?!?!
:: pouting ::
You two, arguing about something totally off topic, and I’m left out in the cold. FINE
Anyhoo. In the end, the Pemmican ads are simply a matter of taste, as is Pulp Fiction. I haven’t seen enough real death in my life I suppose to think that death is common or funny. I’m not jaded to it even though I grew up on Tom and Jerry, and I’m not desensitized to it, even though I do go see movies like Face Off.
Funny that a girl into mild sadomasochism is so grossed out by violence. I mean, show me a girl being whipped and caned and I’ll pay $50.
jarbaby
hee hee!
Ok, jarbaby, tell you what. You pay me $50, and you can cane the heck out of me.
I think this thread’s about done…
I saw the commercial with the dog in the truck. I laughed. (Shoot me!) I thought they were trying to illustrate the stereotypical C&W song* where a guy loses everything, only he eats jerky instead of crying into his beer.
The commercials that bug me are the ones that say “Our product is so good, you’ll lie, cheat and steal from your best friend just to own one!”
Wanna bet?
*The ones that go something like “I was drunk the day my Mama got outta prison…” (Which is a real song, BTW.)
Redboss, you know I love ya. And with all the nice things you say about me, frankly you can call me anything you like. But strictly for the record, last time I OR my girlfriend checked, I was pretty sure that I am a “he” after all.
I’ve no desire to get into a wring/Czarcasm interchangable-called-he-or-she type situation here
pan
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dantheman *
**
You mean, you would decline to buy their product, or you would express a desire for them to literally burn in hell? (I know I’m taking what you said out of context, but it’s funny taken out of context, which is why I’m taking it out of context :)) I think you should use it as a sig quote.
I’ve always wondered why certain things that would be horrifying and traumatizing to witness in real life are so gosh darn funny onscreen. I mean, that is a fact, and I would really like to understand why it makes people (myself included) laugh when done right. Is it the same reason that people emit that nervous “chuckle-laugh” when they narrowly escape disaster? Is it a “better him than me” reaction? Psychologist, please…
The only commerical that upsets me that’s aired frequently (oddly, I’ve never seen an ad for jerky) is one paid for by some pro-choice group. Now, it’s not the fact that it’s pro-choice that bothers me, but that a woman is talking about her little girl and how when she grows up she’ll have to make responsible choices. Ok fine, but then the woman goes on to say something about how she should be able to choose(abortion) if she needs to. One way or the other please, do you expect the kid to grow up responsible, or to choose abortion as a birth control method? That’s not the implication they want to make, I’m sure, but that’s the tone of it…
[insert shocked, embarrassed, publicly humiliated, but despite it all , pleased that he was actually right the first time anyway smiley face]
So, uh, how about those Knicks!
Redface
[sub]see, sometimes words are better than emoticons![/sub]
A lot of commercials fall into this catagory. And they do suck. But when it is a beer commercial it just plain disturbing. If anyone wants a beer that badly there is something seriously wrong with him.
I agree about the beer commercials, especially the one for Miller Lite(?) that imposes an image of John Wayne on a bar scene or in the military. Those are just plain stupid, I can’t understand why anyone would buy beer just because “The Duke” supposedly likes that brand.
As we are on the subject, has anyone seen the commercial showing ‘teens’ in various piercings and giving their reason why they chose to do so? And then a shot of Jesus on the cross? I forgot the stupid tag line they use to connect these two ‘occurances’ but it never fails to make me want to puke.
There’s the Pepsi commercial where Britney Spears prances around like a cheap prostitute, and then Bob Dole says, “Down, boy!” to his dog. I think after taking all that Viagra, it’s not the golden retriever he’s talking to…
On the radio, there are two Chevy’s (the restaurant) ads that really piss me off. One makes fun of japanese culture in a rather racist way, and then the announcer says, “Our fajitas are only $9.99. That wouldn’t buy you much sushi.” The other one has a guy acting like a jackass pretending to be a cowboy, and then the same announcer says, “Come get the new Smokin’ Hot Habanero Fajitas… that is, if you’re man enough.” Well excuse me if I don’t meet Chevy’s ideal of manhood.