Customer Reviews

The Pet

5 star:		(20)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

This will contain some spoilers, but this information needs to be known before you spend your money on this film. The Pet could have been a nice little film about a power exchange alternative lifestyle, even as unlikely as 24/7 animal/pet play may be. It had enough budget and was shot well enough. Even the actors were good enough(some were distinctly better than others though). Pierre Dulat as Philip was quite good. Andrea Edmondson as Mary/GG was also decent enough.
My BIG problem with the film is that the makers promoted it as a "true" look into a caring, power exchange alternate lifestyle. The maker's website description is misleading as is the film's trailer. They tell you the main characters are intruded upon by international slavers. In fact, the main characters (except for Mary/GG) are all business partners and friends in a kidnapping/murdering syndicate that deals in selling body parts and slave laborers. Philip's wish that Mary/GG not be sold as such is purely his personal wish. So, once again a chance to make a film showing the beauty of a loving dominant/submissive relationship is turned into just another demonization of the BDSM community. By this depiction, you are either crazy, evil or just plain stupid to participate in such a lifestyle. Yet, the makers promote this film as being about a loving consensual relationship. Its really just an exploitation film and
when you break down the ridiculous plot, there really is not much left to
like. One example of this plot is after a couple weeks of training, having your Pet be devoid of nearly all cognitive function(they do say that clearly). So, we have people talking about murdering their Pets and selling the organs right in front of them with no reaction. Oh, come on!
Non consensual Slave Trade is a serious subject and one that deserves much better than this film to bring attention to it.
Having said that, I did give The Pet two stars. It is filmed
well enough and it does have some nice scenes in it. Mary/GG and Nicky/Taps(played by Sommer Nguyan)fetching sticks in the nude outdoors
(in real snow and cold) is a standout. If you do see it, it is clear they did it for real. The other reason is the always lovely Lydia McLane(under a pseudonym Jane Steele), as Red. She has a particularly nice scene at the beginning of the film.
This is not a film to set as an example of any BDSM power exchange lifestyle. It is a terribly flawed, shamelessly misrepresented exploitation film. If you don't care about spending the money and seeing it for the few good scenes it does contain, you might get some enjoyment. If you are looking for a decent film about alternative lifestyles, The Pet is not it.

This movie is being promoted in its trailer and on its website as having something to do with the BDSM and consensual Master/slave relationships practiced by some in this community. In fact it is a piece of total BS that is about kidnapping women, selling them, killing them and selling their body parts. The plot makes no sense. All the details about such relationships are wrong. The presentation of "training" and its results are laughable. If you want to watch a couple of naked women running around and being treated like dogs for part of the movie, then it may be worthwhile, but unlike the opinion of some others here, this movie has nothing to do with anything that happens in the real world. And the acting, editing, etc. are not even B movie quality.

I looked forward to this movie's release, especially after seeing the trailers. In short, it is terrible in about every way imaginable. You could steer an aircraft carrier through the holes in the plot, and the acting was just awful.

Probably worse than the money I wasted on this is the black-eye it gives to BDSM. There is not a character in the film who could not be considered quite insane. This is not even a love story. It's a strange story about bizarre people, all of whom manage to be inept human beings with no moral bearing. All that and it manages to be boring too.

It's no wonder that some of the previous comments mock and attempt to diminish this film. Its subject matter, based in factual research, is both stomach-churning and thought-provoking. That the human slave trade is alive and well in the 21st Century, in the "Free World," makes us uncomfortable, and we try to deflect those feelings through sarcasm. Totally understandable, but a disservice to this film. This film bravely sought to shed light on this disturbing phenomenon, so that we might discuss it and possibly strategize how to put a stop to it. The credits alone, which list some of the slave trade statistics discovered in pre-production, are worth watching. I look forward to more meaningful work from this talented director, production crew and actors.

This was a gift to someone special last year, and I was thrilled to have it delivered before the holidays; we were both eagerly anticipating seeing it after having viewed its very intriguing trailer on the web. I can report that the actual film has a plot that is convoluted and crippled with an absence of logic. This effort tries to be many things, including being a lifestyle film with some thrill components, a morality tale, and, partly, a film that dips slightly into the psychological exploration of D/s. The result is a nicely photographed steaming pile of celluloid filled with bad acting and really bad lines that was incredibly disappointing to see. Once the credits rolled, I knew I had just experienced the worst film I had ever seen, and I felt utterly embarrassed that I had given it as a gift. I feel an obligation to caution any potential viewers: save your money and do not buy this dvd!

This is a deeply disturbing film that points out that slavery is still practiced today. Focusing on the exchange of power between two individuals and beautifully photographed, one is appalled at how easily a person can give up control of one's life and ultimately one's very existence no matter how well intentioned the exchange may be perceived by the participants. Most disturbing to me was the attitude of the wealthy & the traffickers who had no regard for the 'pets' as human beings, but simply as commodities for their own purposes whether it be labor, sex, a pet or replacement body parts(the last two are what this film portrays).

After the initial shock, for the mainstream lifestylers a.k.a. "newbies," who are under the mistaken, but albeit understandable, impression that the BDSm lifestyle, be it leather or non-leather, must, by definition, include a St. Andrews Cross at some private home/club/dungeon or a pair of floggers and leather pants, wears off, many will begin to see just how much of a lifestyle movie "The pet" is in both substance and form.

Believe it or not, years from now, this is a movie that will be spoken of in the same regard as movies "Story of O" and "Secretary." Why? Compared to the two other movies just mentioned, "The pet" comes the closest, ever in My humble opinion, to authentically portraying what one possible 24/7 Master and slave relationship would look like - this relationship happens to use an Owner/pet dynamic to express the M/s relationship.

And I note the Master did have the pet sign a slave contract after all. ;)

Moreover, and contrary to popular belief, there are many different and unique relationships in the lifestyle worldwide that do not exactly fit into a Master and slave paradigm. For example, one relationship may involve three people, Master A owning slave A, and slave A also being a Master to another slave, slave B, and all of this working harmoniously under one roof. With that said, "The pet" is but one of the many types of relationships that can manifest upon a foundation of BDSm. It is through this lens "The pet" is best, if not properly, viewed.

To be quite candid, the acting overall is not going to be up for an academy award this time around - but this actually helps make the movie seem more real. The people who played the Master and the pet did an outstanding job, especially the pet. Edmondson, the actress who played the pet, is not properly depicted in any of the promotional material, and probably for good reason on a personal level, as taking on this role was certainly a risky venture in the uptight "fantasy vanilla world" where no one is as they seem - and having her face plastered everywhere might raise problems with the hypocrites that plague that fantasy world. If that would not have been a problem for her, then this was a serious error in judgment. Edmondson is stunning to just look at, a solid 9 in My peculiar book, and her face on the cover and posters would have attracted more attention. Also, for someone who is not into the lifestyle, her acting is so convincing that I am sure watching this movie would move some seasoned Masters to believe Edmondson is probably slaving in her private life - I cannot say I was so fooled. ;)

The actor, who portrays the Master, Du Lat, fit the role of an eccentric man of wealth well and portrayed those of his ilk in the real world of the lifestyle with impressive accuracy. His love of his previous pet, an actual canine, inspired him to seek out a similar relationship with a fellow human being - and showing amazing depth and understanding of the complexity of the lifestyle, the Master character does not have a sexual relationship with his pet. It is one of service, which can be just as pleasing, if not more so.

An interesting contrast between the subtleties of fiction and reality is the fact the pet was paid/offered large sums of money for her submission/agreement to serve him as his pet - in reality, and more often than not, no such payment is required, and interestingly enough, a woman will give everything she has and more to be at the foot of a Master. I also appreciated how quickly the pet character submitted and fell into her new role, because, as hard as it may be for a vanilla person/mainstream lifestyler to believe, when a woman finds a Master she can surrender to, she submits wholly and with great haste - something the Master must handle with great care. Towards the end of the movie, and with great credit to D. Stevens, it is made clear that the money is meaningless to the pet and that all she wants in the world is to be at her Master's feet.

In the end, it was the Master's Pride that ripped His happiness away, just as it does for Us all in the lifestyle time and time again in one way or another. For budding Masters and Dominants, the lesson concerning the destructive nature of Pride makes this movie a must see. I also suggest the Shakespearian poem: "The Rape of Lucrece."

Although the intent of the movie was to bring the international slave trade to light, which is did and did surprisingly well, My humble opinion is that this movie's greatest impact will be how it heightens a much needed awareness of not only the existence of the lifestyle for vanillas plugged in and trapped in their fantasy based prison, but it will also raise a much needed awareness of the rich diversity that exists in the lifestyle itself in the minds of T/those in the leather and non-leather BDSm communities alike who are similarly trapped in cliques paradigms.

S.

[Questions and comments can also be directed to SimonBlaise at sbcglobal dot net]

If you are looking for a movie that is going to win awards ever for the acting, look elsewhere. But if you want an entertaining look at this erotic world then by all means watch this movie. Those into BDSM will enjoy it. The imagery is beautiful, as is the PET. But they should have left the story alone and not tried to combine two scenarios like they did. Over all, W/we enjoyed it.

An insightful movie that exposes an alternative lifestyle that I am sure many did not know exists. The movie shows how many of us are involved in some form of "consensual slavery" that dictates what we do everyday. Many of us are satisfied with that arrangement, the status quo, as long as we have "no worries," as the movie suggests. The fact that the movie does not involve lots of sex and violence allows the above messages to be successfully conveyed to the viewer. Alternative lifestyles exist, more that I know, and perhaps more than you know.

This film wins my vote for "Most Disappointing Film of 2006".

The actors sounded as if they were all reading in

monotone from cue cards. The film quality made those

old 8mm films from the 60's look high-tech.

It's not a BDSM film. It's not even a D/s film.

It's barely a film at all.

For those unfamiliar with the premise, this very

wealthy man's prize-winning Irish Setter dies, and he

sets about obtaining another pet, one who will love

him unconditionally. He has two goons looking around

Santa Monica, CA for just such a pet for him. The

girl that they find just lost her cat (it died), has a

scumbag for a boyfriend, and gets her 3 day eviction

notice from her apartment. She's a flower arranger,

and works in the street market. Mr. Moneybags finds

her and begins to befriend her, giving her a lot of

money, and a place to bury her cat on his estate. He

convinces her to agree to a two-day trial as his pet

(big bucks are offered for this trial). She of course

accepts. He sets about training her as a retriever.

From there, the viewer is spiralled into the white

slave trade (and the actors, who are supposed to be

very wealthy, prominent folks are about as believable

as if they had cast Gumby and Pokey in there to

portray the Rockefellers). It gets worse as the

viewer learns that within the white slave trade, these

very docile "pets" are also used as organ donors.

The plot is thin, the characters are unbelievable and

shallow, the BDSM is non-existent, the acting is

non-existent... and the message seems to be that,

while Mr. Moneybags is this wonderful person who is

vehemently against white slavery, he's not at all

savvy enough to avoid being hornswaggled by the slave

traders.

Prior to the credits rolling, there's a long list of

countries, and the part they play in the white slave

trade (whether a place of origin for slaves, or a

destination).

The message of the movie has virtually nothing to do

with consensual ownership, and everything to do with

making a political statement against the international

trade of human flesh. While it's a noble cause, it

falls flat on its face on both counts.