From: "davidsquires", [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Daily Telegraph, Saturday, August 26, 2000 THE release of the new Brad Pitt film, Snatch, may be in jeopardy after animal welfare groups launched an investigation into claims that hares had been killed during filming. The RSPCA has asked to see the film, amid allegations, denied by the film's makers, that several hares were torn to pieces by dogs in the making of one scene showing a hare coursing meeting. In the finished version which audiences will see, the hare escapes. However it is alleged that there were several earlier takes in which other hares did not. The film, written and directed by Guy Ritchie, Madonna's boyfriend, and starring Pitt and Vinnie Jones, is due to go on general release next Friday. But its certificate is dependent on the makers being able to guarantee that no animals were hurt during production. The law prohibits the screening on film or television of any scene which required animals being cruelly treated or killed. Columbia Pictures, the film's distributors, agreed to let the RSPCA see a preview to assess the allegations. However it is unclear if they will be shown out-takes. The British Board of Film Classification raised concerns about the hare coursing scene with Ska Productions, Ritchie's film company. Matthew Vaughn, the producer, wrote back assuring the board that the law had been complied with. It is believed that even if the claims were proved Ska might be able to justify the inclusion of the scene because of a loophole in the law, which means wild hares are not classified as "animals". The 1937 Cinemagraphic Film (Animals) Act says it is illegal to show any scene "organised or directed" to involve actual cruelty to animals. It is usual for film makers to invite an RSPCA representative to monitor production. But it is understood that none was present for the making of the hare coursing scene in Snatch, which was shot some time after the main production had finished. Last year the board cut scenes involving cruelty to animals from nine videos, mostly foreign-made films. Although the board has no statutory powers to see out-takes, the RSPCA could take legal action to force the board to review its certificate. The film would not be able to go on general release in its present form without the board's classification. The film makers were unavailable for comment but Freud Communications, their public relations company, deny that any animals were mistreated. A spokesman said: "There's nothing cruel about it. The dogs don't catch the rabbit. The film company takes animal welfare very seriously." The film's credits contain a disclaimer to that effect. On Aug 17, the board gave Snatch an 18 certificate, after receiving Vaughn's letter. Snatch is Ritchie's first film since he leapt to fame with Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. ------------------------------- The reference to animals in the 1937 Act was, I presume, the same as in the 1911 Cruelty to Animals Act which only covers domestic animals; not a "loophole" but a deliberate omission. Obviously, the drafters did not consider hunting when writing it or all the film of big cats hunting in Africa would be banned. David -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web.onetel.net.uk/~davidsquires Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
