MovieChat Forums > Tracks (2014) Discussion > (Mis)treatment of animals (spoilers) ?

(Mis)treatment of animals (spoilers) ?


I really wonder how they could fake the suffering of animals so well. I care about animal rights and I'm not a strict fighther of animals rights per se, but this seemed so real, my heart broke.

reply

Everything about the film seemed real and authentic, that's one of the major things about it that gives it power. You might, though, want to take some of those SPOILERS out of your O.P., for those unfamiliar with the story.

The producer of "Tracks", the person who put this film together is Emile Sherman (produced "The King's Speech", etc.). Sherman is a big animal rights proponent and is the founder of an organization called Voiceless, which is dedicated to animal rights. He would probably be the last person to abuse animals in a film. Here's an article on Emile Sherman and Voiceless.

http://travel.cnn.com/sydney/life/emile-sherman-kings-speech-voiceless -429594

reply

Thanks, interesting info.

About your spoiler remark, I announced in my subject line that I was going to address spoilers. Isn't that enough?

reply

I suppose, although the concern you have is a valid one and it's worth addressing (as I did) without writing down the specific events so that someone who hasn't seen the film could read the full o.p. and then my response without any spoilers. For example, if you just wrote in general terms re possible animal abuse in the film, without any examples, and ESPECIALLY one in particular. I've read other places where someone had the same concern, and I think people should know that the principle producer of the film is such a strongly committed animal activist.

Emile Sherman (producer of "Tracks") talking about animal rights movement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9QTRPPIU2c

reply

Well I am in Adelaide, South Australia. Tracks was made in my state. Funny that concern came in this Aussie film about animal abuse. I've always been worried about the horse dying in the stampede in the film 'Australia'. Jack Thompson was riding him and it looked liked a real incident where the horse tripped and broke his neck. BUT it was the same cinematographer as this film has - Mandy Walker - so I am guessing that there is a technical visual trick to filming those sorts of sequences that the average layman, like ourselves, doesn't really understand. I never saw 'Tracks'. It came out here ages ago. Might get it when it is on DVD. I've looked through the end credits many times in 'Australia' to see if there was anything said about no animals being harmed, but can't find it. Maybe there is something in the end credits of this film that says that when the film is released on DVD. I'm crossing my fingers that it just comes down to video trickery.

reply

@LifeVsArt I've adjusted the post.

@jillsand-1 Ok, this comforts me somewhat. Anyway I never expected they would really mistreat an animal for cinematographic purpose, not in these days. Thanks for your background info.

reply

"SPOILERS" - technical explanation of a scene, how they used effects to simulate reality.

Here you go - this is from an article that goes into specifics on how they made the scene of the wild bull camels look so real. I knew they didn't actually kill those camels, but I have to admit, I wondered how they made it look so real. From "The Invisible Effects of Tracks" - article linked below.

"For the shooting scenes, shots of tranquilised camels were enhanced by Iloura
For scenes in which the camels are shot, Iloura added bullet entry and exit wounds, and CG patches on the animals’ flanks to make the flesh appear to spasm

To create the sequence, male camels were filmed being dosed with tranquiliser darts.

“We manipulated the way they fell in comp, so they crumpled, shook and came down in a quietly dramatic way,” Rogers explained. “We did this using spline warps and rotoscoping appropriate elements from various takes. We added small bullet entry and exit wounds, as well as small CG patches on the flank which ripple and spasm.

“Additionally, we added froth to the camel’s mouths, using a base of motion-tracked 3D and live action elements. For the blood that pours out of the camels, we mixed up a few litres in the kitchen at work using recipes we’d found on the web. Then we filmed appropriate pours over objects in the car park, which we then composited in. The mouth foam was glycerol, art glue, and shaving cream – we shot it with a puppet camel mouth we’d made. There were quite a few elements included in the sequence, but ultimately it was a very simple, old-school approach.”

http://cinefex.com/blog/tracks/

reply

[deleted]

Well faking cruelty to animals is acceptable, because it does happen in real life and needs to be portrayed. What is unacceptable is the cruelty to animals that the lead character carried out, and in cinematic terms, it is also wrong to fail to condemn this in the narrative and make her seem like some sort of hero. She was sick, animal abusing, scum.

reply

Have you ever watched The Three Stooges? Do you realise the 3 actors don't actually hit each other and poke at each other's eyes? It's film trickery. Now you are having a go at this poor actress. I'm sure the real Robyn Davis DID hit at her camel (if that is in the book). Under the circumstances of what she was going through at the time, that would be a likelihood, but the actress? No. You''re wrong. Those scenes would have been edited. There would have been slow moving caning movements towards the camel that were sped up for effect in the movie, or something like that.

reply