AFM: D. Stevens’ THE PET

Reader Comments

1. Caterpillar 10/09/2006 @ 10:14am

   I was interested until they showed the random twist the teh intarweb’s online slave market and marines at which point I laughed and rolled my eyes. Thanks for the effort but I’ll stick with my pinku eiga. By the way, does anyone remember when BDSM was kinky and kinda shocking? 30 years before I was born…

2. Applecart 10/09/2006 @ 11:51pm

   The lead male is terrible. If he had any variation in tone i think i would cry.

3. Applecart 10/09/2006 @ 11:54pm

   If anyone wants to watch something with a story that is about the layers of domination in human and social behavior and is intellictually engaging, then watch Demonlover.

4. Misao 10/10/2006 @ 3:27am

   Did I hear “based on a true story” . . . ? X-x

5. janeaustenlover 10/26/2006 @ 2:42pm

   It’s no wonder that 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.

6. Lochai 12/13/2006 @ 2:38pm

   As a movie showing the evils of the slave trade. Good attempt, could have been much better if that was the main focus. As a movie showing the bdsm lifestyle. Very poorly done. The director started out to show the evils of the slave trade & then when he found out that there were people who had consensual relationships as pet & owner he decided to mesh the two.

   Personally I feel he did a poor job of researching the consensual side & should have left that aspect out of this film. It needs better writing & acting for it to be as shocking as it should be.
   The producers are touting this film as “The First Feature Film (since SECRETARY) that REALLY shows OUR WORLD!” meaning the bdsm world & this is the furthest from the BDSM world I know. This is about a slave trader who takes a pet of his own & pays her to stay on. He gets caught up in his own filth (the people he does business with) & gets her killed. This has nothing to do with consensual relationships. If the director wanted to show the evils of the slave trade then he should have watched Closetland & not have had the producers mislead people with their promotions.

   This is my feeling on the film…
   I just watched the entire movie last night with three other long time life-stylers, 2 subs & one other Dominant. We at first thought that the acting was a little off but we were thinking that maybe this was because real life-stylers were being used in the movie & not actors.
   As the movie progressed we realized that this was not the case.
   The “Consensual” relationship started out by a man active in the human slave trade (he was reviewing a potential pet to sell as the movie started) having a lead man search out a woman for him to replace his dead dog. Once this woman was found he started to ply her with money. First he pays for his $20 flowers (?) with a few $100 bills & says that change is not needed. She is floored. He then offers to pay for her dead cats body (that she can’t afford to get back from the vet) & gives her a check for 10k. Even though he is “negotiating” with her he is preying on her memory of her cat & the eviction notice she tells him about. He already had the check written out & all he does is put her name on the envelope & gives it to her. It is so poorly acted that her “Warming” up to him after she returns from the bathroom is more along the lines of a prostitute warming up to a John after she slips his $20 into her bra. It was very insulting to all of us watching because I have trained human dogs before & have owned slaves & a bribe is not the way to start any power exchange relationship. Once he brings her to his home & offers her a 2 day trial and another 10k we thought that this was maybe ok but then was sitting on his chair with GG at his feet reviewing the/his crew’s website selling humans. He was part of the “ring” & part of the shit that this movie was supposed to be about. He just bought her for himself from her! At one point when he turned down the offer to sell GG by his “Broker” he was told, “he’s your broker, listen to him” This says to me that he has been a part of this before & not a victim of the ring.

   It gets worse when he tells her that the second check he wrote for her is actually 20k instead of the 10k her originally offered her for the two days. He then goes & tells her that if she contracts for another 6 months he will give her 50k. This is very insulting to men & woman who willing give themselves over to another for nothing more than the love & appreciation they receive from their owners. He has already payed her 30k & now ups it to 80k. This is not how the lifestyle works with the few 1000 people I know in the lifestyle. This is where an intervention is needed & the woman brought to a safe-house.
   Now if the “Consensual” owner was not part of the traders to begin with and the story was much better written and the money aspect was changed to “when you are under my care I will make sure your financial needs are met” this would have been more realistic. All this seemed to be was that he bought her for himself. Yes he turned down offers to sell her but is this any different than a thief keeping his stolen goods instead of fencing them?

   I will say that the script did try to convey that she mentally did convert to a human puppy when they mentioned that she only heard commands & praise but all of this was delivered by the “evil” character & not her owner. Also, the “slave” pet GG was competing against seemed much happier than GG did!
   I don’t think that this was a malicious attack on the lifestyle but I think a lot more research & care should have gone into the script & story. We were very excited to have received the movie & to have had the chance to watch it together but now all I want to happen is for the movie to be pulled from sales & kept away from anyone who is looking to attack the lifestyle.

   People in the lifestyle should see the “red flags” of danger or a stalker (the money her gives her) & be able to see that there is a difference between slave trade & power exchange even though I don’t see much with this movie. Those not in the lifestyle will not see any line if they are able to follow who the characters are. They will have a negative feeling both about the slave trade & the lifestyle.
   Not ONE person in this movie is clean!!!! All characters are part of the trade except Mary who is bribed by a predator with good intentions! I am very disappointed & feel that this can only hurt real life-stylers & help those close-minded people who are looking for ways to attack us.

   Please recall your movie & do it right next time. This movie has very little to do with the lifestyle.
   Lochai
   ——-

Post Your Comments

• Next Entry
• Previous Entry