MovieChat Forums > Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015) Discussion > What's the big deal with shooting a dog?...

What's the big deal with shooting a dog?

posted 8 years ago by sth78
17 replies | jump to latest

I mean seriously? A secret agent who can't put down an animal? I know this is supposed to be a family-friendly comedy, but they show far worse things in it, so what's the big deal?

[–] clarkn-nc2 8 years ago

I have a rule for movies: if an innocent human dies in an explosion or something - that's fine, who cares. If an innocent dog dies - not good. It will be tough to watch in future.

Now, the same goes for me if I was told to shoot a dog.

Oh, and... This isn't a family friendly film.

-----------
I may be a huge fan, but I'm certainly not a fanboy.

[–] eSJayBee 8 years ago

I don't know what kind of family movies you're used to but this movie was definitely not family-friendly.

And the point of the dog test, I think, was that the candidates raised these dogs since they were puppies and thus formed a bond with them. It's not like a random dog was brought into the room and they were asked to shoot it.

[–] Goatlips 8 years ago

Animal cruelty is a trait of psychopaths, but psychopaths don't know they're psychopaths, so you wouldn't know about that.
A pet's life is the owner's responsibility - a human life is no more important than an animal's.
The story actually made an error on that scene. They're meant to be training just, conscientious and moral assassins, that don't harm the innocent. Shooting the dog should've equalled a fail.
Instead of killing animals, here's a better idea: kill yourself.

[–] sth78 8 years ago

Come on. An agent can't afford the luxury of those emotions, he has to be able to make sacrifices, even during training.

[–] the_prophit01 8 years ago

Which is exactly why they ask them to kill the dog they've raised. It's a test, hence the revelation that it was actually blanks.

They didn't want him to kill the dog, just to pull the trigger to show that he could make the big decisions when required.

[–] fountainhead (323) 7 years ago

I agree with you. I didn't think the dog test fit with the rest of what the Kingsmen supposedly stood for, unless passing the test meant refusing to shoot. In fact, by refusing to shoot his dog, Eggsy showed that he has retained two character traits that would ultimately make him a great Kingsman in the end: #1 Do not always blindly follow orders (as his confrontation with Arthur demonstrated) and #2 Protect the innocent, which was their organization's goal in the first place.

[–] washclothrepairman 8 years ago

I agree. It's just a dog. It's not like it's something that matters, like a cat.

Never trust a black man named "Chip." 

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GotWood84 (384) 6 years ago

This was a funny comment. X-D

[–] sybil11 8 years ago

Lol! Sorry, you lost me at "family friendly". ????

[–] PaladinNJ (21784) 6 years ago

It was meant as a loyalty test. Are you willing to obey any order no matter what the circumstances? If so, then shoot the dog.

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

And why the dog looked scared when he pointed the gun on it? A normal dog wouldn't even care.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 3 years ago

The dog was an actor.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

I have been told that this was something the Nazis did in real life. That the training of certain elite agents or officers included being assigned a dog that would train with the Nazi, and that in order to graduate the Nazi actually had to shoot the dog dead on command. It was a way for Nazis to weed out anyone who wouldn't follow absolutely any order, no matter how horrible, and to make sure that nobody with a conscience, ethics, or any degree of compassion made it into the higher levels of their organization.

I don't know if this is true, I've heard the story and done zero research. But I think the scriptwriters had heard the same story, and decided to give it a twist, to show that the Kingsmen were not actually Nazis.