Semi-OT: help keep Toronto film festival from showing cat torture movie
kaeli
The articles, e-mail, and links to the film festival site are all here.
http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
If you can stand it, read what happened to him, read about the movie, and
contact the film festival to protest their showing of it.
Thanks, all.
--
--
~kaeli~
Have you forgotten about Jesus?
Isn't it about time you did?
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Cat Protector
on the other if they show the film it might get people involved in wanting
to put a stop to animal abuse. It's a catch-22 situation. It's horrible what
the humans involved did to this cat and they should die the same way but
maybe if the video is shown people will know how serious the animal cruelty
issue is and that more laws should be put into place to protect the animals
instead of allowing a lot of these people who abuse them to get off with
only a slap on the wrist. The laws also need to be changed to make animal
cruelty a more severe offense. A zero tolerance law would be a nice idea.
This way the criminals know they can't plea it down to a lesser charge and
also make the sentence more severe.
"kaeli" <tiny...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b9e8c12f...@nntp.lucent.com...
Orchid
>news:MPG.1b9e8c12f...@nntp.lucent.com...
>>
>> The articles, e-mail, and links to the film festival site are all here.
>> http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
>>
>> I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
>> If you can stand it, read what happened to him, read about the movie, and
>> contact the film festival to protest their showing of it.
>>
>> Thanks, all.
Please note: They're not showing the killing of the cat.
They're showing a documentary that examines the case. From the film
festival site:
"You'll find the word "casuistry" (pronounced kazoo-istry) in most
dictionaries, just above "cat." It refers to a method of ethical
analysis which takes into account the unique circumstances of
particular cases. The term is often used disparagingly, in reference
to specious justifications. Casuistry: The Art of Killing a Cat
scratches its way beneath the surface of an infamous Toronto animal
cruelty case, deftly exploring the opaque logic surrounding this
macabre act.
<snip>
Fair warning: this is not an easy film. Incorporating interviews with
the cat killers, as well as journalists, artists, animal activists and
concerned citizens, Casuistry also contains disturbing imagery -
though, mercifully, not the notorious cat video. Filmmaker Zev Asher
eschews rote advocacy; rather, his documentary lurks curiously in
murky terrain, playing like the punk B-side of an Errol Morris film.
He places us in a unique space, one which vacillates between serious
reflection, horror, transgression, banality, righteousness, humour and
- mostly - paradox. This may be one of the most political films in
this year's Festival. "
So, I don't see the problem with the film -- it does not
appear to glorify their actions in any way, and it doesn't show the
actual torture of the poor cat.
Orchid
See Orchid's Kitties! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/bengalpage
Want a Purebred Cat? Read This! -- http://nik.ascendancy.net/orchid
zuz...@webtv.net
>So, I don't see the problem with the film
>-- it does not appear to glorify their
>actions in any way, and it doesn't show
>the actual torture of the poor cat.
Maybe you should do a little more research. It's right there. Hard to
miss.
http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/summary.html
The people involved are friends with, and apologists for, the
catkillers. One of them has also been engaged in some creepy stalking
behavior (along with the catkiller(s) who have been harrassing Suzanne
Lahale (FFA co-founder)for years. One of the catkillers is thought to
have committed murder of a human and, from what is known, has all the
earmarks
of behavior becoming a serial killer.
Megan
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."
-Edmund Burke
Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com
Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22
"Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one
elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and
splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then
providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision,
raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and
material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his
way."
- W.H. Murray
KellyH
news:29696-413...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net...
> Orchid wrote:
> >So, I don't see the problem with the film
> >-- it does not appear to glorify their
> >actions in any way, and it doesn't show
> >the actual torture of the poor cat.
>
> Maybe you should do a little more research. It's right there. Hard to
> miss.
> http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/summary.html
> The people involved are friends with, and apologists for, the
> catkillers. One of them has also been engaged in some creepy stalking
> behavior (along with the catkiller(s) who have been harrassing Suzanne
> Lahale (FFA co-founder)for years. One of the catkillers is thought to
> have committed murder of a human and, from what is known, has all the
> earmarks
> of behavior becoming a serial killer.
>
>
> Megan
>
Thanks for the summarizing, Megan. I started reading, but became too upset
to continue. Not in my "tough" frame of mind today.
--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
www.kelltek.com
Check out www.snittens.com
Mary
> http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
>
> I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
Kaeli,
I read the FAQ and that was enough. This sort of act is
one of the few things in life that makes me touch the brink of losing
control of my actions. Happily, crazier people than me know about this and
will find out more about it as time goes on. We have not heard the end of
these three men, or what repercussions they will face due to what they have
done.
What worries me: the usual percentage of sociopaths who will see this and
think, "cool idea." They are out there, and their will be copycat killings,
pardon the pun.
What worries me more: the people who derive some sort of pleasure from this
type of horrow who DON'T go public with it. In my heart I know they are out
there.
My only consolation: I honestly believe that there is justice for those who
dare to harm helpless dependent creatures, human or otherwise. I've seen it
happen, and I can feel it moving toward the perpetrators of the torture and
murder of Kensington at this minute, crazy as that sounds. I really mean it,
and I don't think I am rationalizing.
KellyH
news:1j6Zc.3969$MO3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
think it bears repeating.
Even though I am against the death penalty, part of me wants it for cases
like this. Sometimes I think the perpetrators should be killed in *exactly*
the same fasion as they killed their victim.
Mary
> http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
>
> I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
I cannot get this thing out of my mind. It is helping me to know more about
the men who did this.
http://www.findmatt.org/kaczorowski.htm
kaeli
ros...@email.com enlightened us with...
>
> "kaeli" <tiny...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1b9e8c12f...@nntp.lucent.com...
> >
> > The articles, e-mail, and links to the film festival site are all here.
> > http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
> >
> > I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
>
> I cannot get this thing out of my mind.
Me neither.
When I next update my cat site, Kensington is going in the memorial section.
I can't really say too much more. I'm still very upset about the whole thing.
I just keep thinking about my cats, and how I'd feel if this happened to one
of them. How Kensington must have suffered and how he must have wondered WHY,
in his own feline way.
Okay, I have to stop thinking about this before I start crying again.
--
--
~kaeli~
When you choke a smurf, what color does it turn?
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Mary
> In article <y0bZc.4028$MO3.3...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
> ros...@email.com enlightened us with...
> >
> > "kaeli" <tiny...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.1b9e8c12f...@nntp.lucent.com...
> > >
> > > The articles, e-mail, and links to the film festival site are all
here.
> > > http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
> > >
> > > I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
> >
> > I cannot get this thing out of my mind.
>
> Me neither.
> When I next update my cat site, Kensington is going in the memorial
section.
>
> I can't really say too much more. I'm still very upset about the whole
thing.
> I just keep thinking about my cats, and how I'd feel if this happened to
one
> of them. How Kensington must have suffered and how he must have wondered
WHY,
start crying again.
>
>
Kaeli--it is very dangerous stuff to have in our minds, that's for sure.
Damned near
unbearable. What I need is to feel I am doing something to combat this
sort of cruelty--then maybe I could stop dwelling on it. Unfortunately,
many of the things that come to mind have to do with the perps and are
not only abhorrent but also illegal--and this sort of retribution, or even
thoughts of it, diminish one. I really believe that.
I am also wondering why nobody would step forward and
claim him, you know?
kaeli
ros...@email.com enlightened us with...
> >
> >
> Kaeli--it is very dangerous stuff to have in our minds, that's for sure.
> Damned near
> unbearable. What I need is to feel I am doing something to combat this
> sort of cruelty--then maybe I could stop dwelling on it.
That's why I post these things - I am hoping more people will contact the
fest and ask them not to show it - to show people DO care about this issue.
Even better, contact the judge and complain about the light sentence while
you're at it.
Hopefully the next time someone does something this terrible, a harsher
sentence will be passed to the perps.
If everyone just sits back and clicks their tongues and does nothing, no one
will know how many people have strong feelings about this whole thing.
Like those commercials; I don't know if you've seen them, but there's this
one where the water is running in a sink in the bathroom and everyone gathers
around and says how bad it is to leave it running and makes faces and stuff,
but none of them turn it off. Finally one person walks up, turns it off, and
walks away.
The message, of course, being DO SOMETHING.
> Unfortunately,
> many of the things that come to mind have to do with the perps and are
> not only abhorrent but also illegal--and this sort of retribution, or even
> thoughts of it, diminish one. I really believe that.
As do I, despite my mouth, and brain, at times.
>
> I am also wondering why nobody would step forward and
> claim him, you know?
I don't know. Maybe they don't want the attention. Maybe they haven't seen
anything about it. Heck, maybe he was lost a LONG way from home. We'll
probably never know.
Ruby Tuesday
> http://freeanimals.org/~kensington/index.html
>
> I'm not posting any details. They made me cry.
> If you can stand it, read what happened to him, read about the movie, and
> contact the film festival to protest their showing of it.
>
> Thanks, all.
====================================================
Ignorance sparks fury over cat killer film
See the film before passing judgment
GEOFF PEVERE
MOVIE CRITIC for The Toronto Star
As a movie critic for this newspaper, I make every effort to adhere to what
I hold to be a basic journalistic principle: I see the movies before I
criticize them. In the past couple of weeks, for example, I have spent
approximately 60 hours watching movies scheduled for this year's Toronto
International Film Festival.
Call me old-fashioned but I believe my credibility depends on me having
actual first-hand experience of what I'm talking about. Any less, I would
fully expect to be fired.
One of the film fest movies I screened is called Casuistry: The Art Of
Killing A Cat. It's a documentary about the notorious 2001 "cat-killing
video" made in Toronto by three men who tortured a cat to death on video and
passed it off as art. Because of its controversial subject, animal-rights
activists in Toronto want the new documentary to be pulled from the
festival.
Quite simply and unequivocally, director Zev Asher's movie does not endorse
the actions of the would-be "artists." If anything, it sacrifices sensation
for balance. It probes not just what happened and the ensuing criminal
trial, but the alleged justifications for its occurrence. How could they do
it? This is what any reasonable person would ask themselves, and this is
what the movie asks as well. Moreover, it is the process of answering this
that the title refers to.
Interestingly, no one attacking the film seems so far to have bothered to
look up the meaning of "casuistry." Had they, the controversy might have
been deservedly nipped in its skinny little bud. According to my dictionary,
casuistry means "subtle but specious reasoning intended to rationalize or
mislead." After opening with images from an infamous art video made in the
1980s by the renowned provocateur Istvan Kantor, in which dead cats are
mutilated and used as props like hats, Casuistry offers a fairly steady,
down-the-middle account of what happened in the Toronto incident.
The participants in the act are interviewed, and they make fairly weak and
unconvincing arguments for the artistic imperative behind what they did. The
cop who arrested them is interviewed, and he makes it clear he thinks the
three men are creeps. Many animal-rights spokespeople are interviewed, and
they are predictably passionate, angry and — in some cases — outright
vengeful.
Then there are the images of cats. Asher's movie is full of images of cats:
cats walking, cats sleeping, cats staring with cat-like inscrutability right
at the camera. They punctuate the proceedings like a silent chorus, a
conscience.
In the context of the film, their presence ensures the death of the cat,
posthumously named Kensington, never becomes a mere issue or abstraction.
They remind you that we're talking about a creature that lived, suffered
horribly and died. Because of this, to consider the film as an endorsement
of what the cat-killers did is absurd.
And the only way you could possibly come to that conclusion is by not having
seen the movie.
Nevertheless, that is precisely the conclusion being widely and loudly
arrived at. Just yesterday, on this newspaper's op-ed page, an article
appeared under the headline, "Festival should pull plug on cat-killing
movie." Authored by Rondi Adamson, the piece arrived at a number of bluntly
expressed, indignantly held opinions about Casuistry — for instance, that it
was about "sickos" the author hoped were undergoing "hours and hours of
therapy" and the film ought to be pulled from the festival's lineup —
despite one minor, niggling breach of journalistic methodology: Rondi
Adamson has not seen the movie.
But that's okay. In fact, she's proud she hasn't. "I don't intend to," she
wrote. "I can make a judgment. I am willing to make a judgment right now and
stand by it.
"The movie is sick and I hope no one goes to see it."
For this, on my back pages, I would expect to be shown the door.
Meanwhile, the movie has become this week's hot-button, fur-flying
sensation. In the same edition of our paper containing Adamson's
sight-unseen condemnation of Casuistry, a reader's letter blasted the
festival's "heart-sickening decision to show the cat torture video;" and
under the "Darts and Laurels" on the opposite page, TIFF was darted "for
nuttiness: organizers are using `freedom of expression' as an excuse to
screen Casuistry: The Art Of Killing A Cat, a film about the videotaped
torture of a stray Toronto cat."
The documentary is being ranted about over talk radio airwaves, shouted over
on local TV shows, and covered in all the daily newspapers. Yesterday, the
Globe and Mail reported the festival programmer who selected the film, Sean
Farnel, had received a death threat at his home. The anonymous caller, a
woman, threatened to "skin him alive" and "shove knives in his eyes."
Apart from sheer, belligerent hysteria, the thread connecting all these
eruptions is garden-variety ignorance. No one who has commented on the movie
has seen it.
I have. That's why I'm shocked. But not by the "cat torture video," which —
despite what the letter-reader and so many others have claimed — does not
include footage showing the terrible death of Kensington the cat. (It shows
a printed transcript of the events in the video, but not the event itself.)
I'm shocked that so many people can get access to our local media outlets
without having seen the film. I'm shocked that so much blatantly incorrect
and easily checked information about the documentary has been printed as
fact. And I'm shocked that this newspaper would let those unfounded and
passionately biased opinions prevail on its pages.
And what are we to think when a newspaper throws darts at a film festival
for defending its programming selections on the basis of freedom of
expression?
I'm also shocked that this kind of unfounded, bullying and ignorant hysteria
is becoming so common.
I've already experienced it twice this year: once when readers assailed me
on the opening day of The Passion Of The Christ without having seen it, and
again when readers attacked me for writing about Michael Moore's Fahrenheit
9/11 after its premiere in Cannes, which was before anyone in this continent
had seen it.
There is much to be embarrassed about in this sorry affair, and I sincerely
hope it blows by with the furball speed that most irrational and
sensationalist news-spasms do.
Meanwhile, I merely ask that someone do me the courtesy of enlightening me
if I'm wrong about the way I'm doing my job. Gosh knows, if I can stop
actually seeing movies and still have opinions, get prominent play on op-ed
pages and still draw a paycheque for being a movie critic, I'm all for it.
It will give me a lot more time to spend at home with my dogs.
kaeli
with...
<snip>
>
>
> Quite simply and unequivocally, director Zev Asher's movie does not endorse
> the actions of the would-be "artists." If anything, it sacrifices sensation
> for balance. It probes not just what happened and the ensuing criminal
> trial, but the alleged justifications for its occurrence. How could they do
> it? This is what any reasonable person would ask themselves, and this is
> what the movie asks as well. Moreover, it is the process of answering this
> that the title refers to.
>
<snip rest of commentary>
A great commentary, and the author is more than entitled to his opinion, but
documentaries about heinous acts often inspire the insane, especially when
said documentaries sensationalize via the mere title. I don't want a
"balanced" account of what these men did. I wouldn't mind a complete
condemnation of it with a title with the words "cat killers" somewhere in it
being shown on Discovery or something (although I still probably wouldn't
watch it). But to have "the art of cat killing" in the title, despite the
(uncommon) qualifier "Casuistry", gives at least small merit, or at least
justification, to these monsters' actions. Tell me the makers of this movie
didn't KNOW that the majority of people would not know the meaning of that
word, nor look it up. They'd focus on the part of the title they DID
understand. That is pure sensationalism to stir up controversy and garner
attention for their film.
I don't think this movie needs to be shown at what is widely perceived as an
art festival, no matter what the intention of its makers. The title, and
where it is being shown, do more to indicate the film's purpose than
justifications of its content ever will.
My 2 cents, of course.
YMMV.
Everyone needs to make up their own minds and go by their own hearts.
--
--
~kaeli~
God was my co-pilot... but then we crashed in the mountains
and I had to eat him.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
Ray Ban
> I don't think this movie needs to be shown at what is widely perceived as an
> art festival, no matter what the intention of its makers. The title, and
> where it is being shown, do more to indicate the film's purpose than
> justifications of its content ever will.
I'm wondering how many movies are shown if only the ones needed to be
shown are. Most movies are shown to entertain, to inform, to express
some opinion, etc. Just don't watch it and convince as many people as
you can to not watch it.