I've heard that snails aren't actually covered by the whole "animal protection in films" thing anyway, so not only was it probably real, it was perfectly legal if it was. I can understand why someone would be offended by a human killing something for the purpose of telling a fictional story, but it's a snail.
Maybe that's egotistical, but I think humans are more important than snails. There, I said it. Come and sue me, snails. Haha, you have no rights. You're so helpless, you don't even "count" as an animal! You snails probably haven't even seen the movie, because you can't work a DVD player. And we humans will never (NEVER!) make a "snail-friendly" DVD player so that you can, because you don't pay taxes. Suck it, snails!
That's what you get for trying to crawl in under my living room door in the late summer. You're lucky she didn't use salt, because that's what I'd have done. F-U snails!
reply
share
charlie_brown_cool
15 years ago
I HATE SNAILS
reply
share
hitchers636
15 years ago
I probably just stood on a snail on the way home from work. By accident, it's dark and they're all over the place, I'd say I'm quite good in that from that first crunch, I'm jumping all over the pavement trying to dodge them.
In the big reality of things, it doesn't reaaaaally matter, hundreds of snails are probably being killed every second. But the thought of deliberately killing something for entertainment doesn't quite seem right.
reply
share
kaada_1
15 years ago
quote: "Another question they got came in response to three of the kids cutting themselves with a knife. Estes explains that they were able to make three separate blood packs that didn’t all release at once. It’s just a trick.
The big, glaring, obvious question this leads to is whether Estes and company really did kill a snail. After taking pains to explain that “it’s not real blood,” their pointed silence on the snail-stab (and the lack of an American Humane logo in the credits) says it all. (The fact that none of these seven disorganized, unprepared voices makes a comment over one of the film’s most powerful moments makes me wonder whether they agreed not to speak of it."
(source: http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:QQl9RbjzPB8J:www.moviehabit.com/r eview.php%3Fstory%3Dmea_bd05+mean+creek+%22real+snail&cd=1&hl= en&ct=clnk)
I agree with hitchers636. DELIBERATELY killing a sentient being for entertainment is not right.
Some people complained that no one cared about the kid's death? WTF? This is such a stupid comparison. He's an actor, we know he didn't really die.
Reality continues to ruin my life. ~ Calvin
reply
share
15 years ago
[deleted]
15 years ago
[deleted]
nakedcitizens1
14 years ago
Who cares! There's a million more. How many bugs does your car, or bike, or skateboard roll over or hit?
reply
share
im-dck
12 years ago
then they add injury to insult by not even listing the snail in the credits!
rip snail
reply
share
AmosNomore
14 years ago
Millie carved the word "SNAP" into the log the snail was slithering upon just before the stabbing in reference to Sam's(?) query "If you could just snap your fingers and make George drop dead, would you?". I believe this was intended to mock the callousness of such a question in an attempt to distance herself from forced complicity in an act having far graver consequences than the killing of a gastropod.
As for the scene's alleged gratuitousness, where does one draw the line when animal death is portrayed in film for entertainment purposes? Was the slaughter of the water buffalo really necessary in "Apocalypse Now"? Should scenes of fish being killed by being caught in nets be prohibited? How is the slapping of a mosquito different from the slaughter of a lamb (or the harvest of a head of lettuce, for that matter) when the acts are motivated by human survival? These are difficult questions to which everyone has a right to an opinion but may, ultimately, have no universally acceptable answers in this morally morphing and ethically challenged world we must share (not to imply that said questions aren't worthy of discussion).
reply
share
bobbyh64
14 years ago
You're comparing the death of a lamb to the death of a mosquito? Obviously it's worse to kill a lamb since lambs have a greater range of suffering than mosquitoes.
reply
share
babz12
14 years ago
Yes, but you could eat a lamb, not a mosquito. I mean you could, but it would not keep you alive. Not that that has anything to do with anything, just saying.
But the general consensus on invertebrates is that they don't feel pain, because they're not complex enough. So even if the snail was killed, it didn't feel pain. Sure, maybe it wasn't a justified killing, but lots of people kill bugs and such. I don't think, "Ew! It's a bug!" justifies killing a centipede either, but I know a lot of people would kill one if they saw it because those things are friggin' gross.
reply
share
Madz024
12 years ago
I like the fact that the death of a snail created one of the longest threads on this board... haha!
I'm everything you ever were afraid of. - Pennywise the Clown in It
reply
share