The kids were saying in the beginning that the old man killed a dog, among other things. Later on we see the old man gravely threatening a dog just for sniffing the trash he had just spilled. We find out later that he wasn't actually a wife beater, but the dog thing still irks me. If he has actually killed a dog and would do it again, that old bastard deserved everything he got, and then some. Did they think I would forget that, or just let it slide?
shareI just finished watching the movie for the first time. While it's not made clear I suspect that Ethan's father was the one blaming the old man for killing the dog, when in fact Ethan's father was the dog killer. Just like how Ethan's father turned out to be the alcoholic wife beater piece of *beep*. Ethan's father psychological defense mechanism is projection, so he projected all of his failings onto the old man, and told Ethan this in their email conversations.
The old man's threat against the dog was just a grumpy old man making a hollow threat.
Also, the guy owned a very friendly cat, making his alleged violence against pets even weaker.
Too bad he didn't take his anger out on his own father who actually did deserve it.
----
Also, I think he was very protective of the cat his wife adored so much, which would perhaps explain his hostility to dogs.
But I don't think he killed any dogs. That seemed to be the product of Ethan's fertile and vengeful imagination.
I doubt he killed a dog. He wasn't beating his wife like they said so why would the dog thing be true? Threatening to chop up the neighbors dog was probably just an empty threat. It's a real piss off having random dogs crapping and peeing all over your lawn plus the dog was right up at him barking at him in his own driveway. That was an irresponsible owner that needed to hear a threat to get his nuisance dog under control.
shareOh, you're one of those. Yawn.
No, he didn't kill a *beep* dog. It's a rumor. It was obvious it was just something one kid heard and the other was quick to affirm because he hated the old man.
That aside, if you think someone deserves to die because they once killed a dog, then your own sense of proportion is severely twisted. Grow up. Dogs aren't people. This isn't a Disney movie.
People are not innately more valuable than dogs. I would say that humans are LESS worthy than dogs, actually. So yes, if someone randomly and purposely kills a dog, I would be happy to have one of their human loved ones put to death, in front of the dog killer.
shareSo an innocent human, who did not kill the dog, should be killed? So the mother and sisters and brothers who lose said innocent human should suffer? Because of the actual dog killer? Please don't become a vigilante. You would be very bad at it.
----
thank you for posting a thoughtful, measured disagreement. That is rare on IMDb.
I've never found humans to be innocent (yes, even kids. i don't wish anyone generally any harm, but I don't find humans to be particularly special creatures either. We all kinda suck.). And if it helped get the word out to dog killers and abusers what would happen to them, then yes I'd be happy if society took a few loved ones from the abuser/killer. Yes, the logistics of that would be concerning, but the concept to me is excellent.
You're correct that I'd be a terrible vigilante. I've never been in a fight even. But the thought of this particular brand of an eye for an eye is appealing to me. Of course, it would suck if one of MY loved ones turned out to be a closet animal abuser...
You are an idiot. Terminate yourself so we have one less worthless human.
shareSeriously that is a really dumb thing to say, and I'm not saying that to try to insult you, it's the truth.
I understand the view that humans aren't innocent, and that no animal is worth any more or less than any other so humans aren't more valuable than a dog, and I can pretty much agree with that.
But why would you take someone who kills an animal, have nothing happen to them (if they really are so terrible than they may not even care much about their loved ones death because they're *beep* people) and instead kill possibly the greatest animal lover in the world that will commit their life to saving animals? This sounds utterly ridiculous and makes no sense. You are basically killing more animals yourself if that's what you'd do. Leave all of the people who kill animals or hurt/abuse other living things alive and well and kill all of the innocent people that are possibly doing exactly what you want them to do with their lives.
Stupidity at its finest. That is not an eye for an eye. An eye for an eye means the same thing is done back. That would be killing the person that killed the dog. And I can almost 100% guarantee you a loved one of yours has killed an animal at some point in their life. You are basically admitting you therefore deserve to die (but then you say it would suck if that happened right after). Even though you sound like someone who wants to help others. I hope you never do take action or have any sort of responsibility if you seriously think this through and decide that's a good idea. I can't even express how idiotic you sound.
And yes, I'm proud to be one of those. A person can be measured by how the weaker are treated. Dogs are loyal and affectionate and will give their lives for us. And they're just about powerless against us.
shareMy uncle killed his dog so I lost any respect for him and don't associate with him (then again I never did). So you think it would be justified if his sister (my mom, who takes care of dogs and cats) or any of my other aunts (who are great people) were killed for his actions? I love animals. I love animals so much that I can't even eat any animal at all, including fish. I have rescued a lot of dogs and cats. I currently take care of quite a few dogs and cats. I should not be punished for my uncle's actions. You need a psychiatrist.
shareyou are correct does are not people - they are are better than most people. And FYI - If anyone harmed my pets - they would be done for.
shareIt's made quite clear that he was actually just a lonely old man; not some mad psycho the kids thought he was. It's more likely that it was either rumours or Ethan exaggerating/ making stuff up.
shareAll you knobs saying that he wouldn't have deserved violent repercussions for poisoning an innocent creature that someone loved as part of their family are probably the same sadists that leave dogs outside to freeze because "they're not people". Yes, I'm aware that dogs are not people, but if the law started treating them as such, then maybe there wouldn't be so many starved, beaten, neglected and abandoned pets in the streets. Viewing domesticated animals as disposable, and their abusers as anything other than evil, sadistic piles of crap makes you no better than them. Shame on you. Also, I don't give a flying *beep* what you think of me. :)
shareLOL! I actually agree with you, given that my own dogs are quite precious to me, & what they did to the old man, reckless though it might have been, doesn't amount to actual violence. If he had killed a dog it would have been mild retribution at best.
But I agree with those who say he neither killed the dog nor beat his wife. Those were projections from the teen, more likely attributable to his own father. The old man didn't deserve what befell him. Circumstances, tragedy & his own reaction to it, however, made it difficult for his contemporary neighbors to empathize with him.
That's what made the boys' actions so utterly reckless--playing what was essentially a prank on someone particularly vulnerable to its machinations.
If the more sensible of the two hadn't been a newcomer to the neighborhood he have had a better sense of who the old man was, why he was the way he was & chosen a different target. But of course that wouldn't have suited his partner.
Reminds me of an early 60s potboiler-type film with John Ireland & Joan Crawford in which teen girls call up people at random saying "I saw what you did & I know who you are!", just a prank until they happen to ring a guy who just strangled his wife.
I love all of the dog defenders on here! Even though I'm against violence I understand the sentiment of thinking he got what he deserved if he had killed a dog.
share