Andrew Abrahams ‘ documentary DOG WAR takes a blinders off look at two veterans on a crusade against the Dog Meat trade in South Korea
Andrew Abrahams ‘ documentary DOG WAR looks at two veterans on a crusade against the Dog Meat trade in South Korea
Although certain individuals have made a lot of hay this year with false accusations of eating dogs and cats, the practice is not unheard of in some parts of the world.
Notably South Korea, where documentarian Andrew Abrahams went undercover with two U.S. Military veterans to bust crimes against canines.
At the time of filming, dog meat wasn’t illegal to eat, and indeed, among older generations, often justified as tradition.
Sponsored Ad:
Indie Filmmakers, browse camera lens deals for your next production
Find great indie films available to watch now on Amazon Prime
Your favorite movies deserve a home cinema experience.
Find your next favorite indie film tonight on Tubi TV
As Abrahams’ camera shows in the movie Dog War, however, the horrific conditions under which the meat is often produced are often significantly less than legal, and that’s before anyone even stops to consider whether or not they’re moral.
Dog War anticipates many of the questions viewers will have, and addresses them throughout its run time, but that doesn’t mean Films Gone Wild couldn’t think of more.
FILMS GONE WILD: We have to start with the obvious question: could you ever have predicted that talk of eating dogs would actually become a trending topic – however off-base — in a U.S. Presidential election? How do you feel about the way that’s played out right as your film is beginning to screen?
ANDREW ABRAHAMS: I think this whole incident points to how politicized and polarized the news cycle is at this moment in time. But it also shows how ethnocentric we are in the U.S. Apart from politics, on one hand, the idea of eating dogs and cats as food is totally outside the realm of possibility to us. On the other hand, once confronted with this reality—that, yes indeed, there are peoples and cultures that eat dogs as food, we move quickly to cultural relativism: it’s no different than us eating cows and pigs. I saw these dynamics played out in the varying responses to Trump’s remarks about immigrants eating pets in Ohio. On a few occasions when we did enter the discussion, attesting to the fact that some cultures DID eat dogs and pets as food, and offering our film as case in point, we were accused of trying to profit from the news cycle! Basically I believe that bringing this discussion to the fore is a good thing. Let’s start the conversation!
FGW: Did you ever feel in any danger yourself during production of the film?
AA: Yes, the cold open in the film was basically my cold open to South Korea. It was our first production trip and one of the first things we did was break into an illegal dog farm with hundreds of caged dogs. The owner or caretaker came back while we were inside and shut the gates with us still inside. I had no idea if he had firearms or what his intentions were. But he seemed focused on me, since I was the one filming. Ultimately, we left after a minor skirmish. After that, I never felt in danger, but often I felt a lot of adrenaline!
FGW: Was the COVID pandemic, and the increased awareness of wet markets that it induced, ever a factor in the illegal trade you were documenting?
AA: We did think that the issue of wet markets and the sanitary and hygienic problems they represented would help boost the film’s relevance. But, like a lot of things Covid-related, the issue sort of came and went. I’m not sure to what extent wet markets have been affected in Asia post-Covid. I doubt much.
FGW: For a lot of people who are natural allies in this cause, there are scenes in this film that may be too much for them to handle. How did you balance how much to show with how much dog lovers will be able to take? (The “fire flavor” section in particular)
AA: It was a constant balance of how much of the reality to show vs. how much to hide so that people could just watch. In the end I think we found a good balance. There are some people who would never watch the film because of the topic alone. For people who do watch the film, they say there are just a few very uncomfortable parts, but that they felt they needed this exposure, and that it was not nearly as bad as they thought it might be. Sometimes I say Dog War is the “must see movie you thought you couldn’t watch.”
FGW: Now that South Korea’s laws have changed, do you think your subjects were key figures in getting that to happen?
AA: Certainly, the monumental law change banning dog meat starting in 2027 was a concerted effort of activists over a long period of time. The subjects of our film were part of this movement and added an element that Korean activists themselves usually wouldn’t engage in: covert, sometimes illegal actions. The “dog wars” were fought within the country, with battle lines distinctly drawn between the activists and the pro-dog meat constituency. Often it was generational, pitting young vs. old, and also cultural/geographical—urban vs. country. But as well it was West vs. East, and South Korea over time has strongly been influenced by Western ways, especially with the ubiquitous presence of U.S. army bases in the country. In cities, Koreans are increasingly living alone and adopting dogs as companions. This is a gigantic shift. However, there is still a belief that dogs come in two varieties: either pet (small) dogs or meat (large) dogs. I imagine this too will change as the dog meat market declines, the prejudice against large dogs dissipates, and homes need to be found for the larger breeds.
FGW: The title of the film evokes thoughts of Whale Wars, which also involves the killing of animals that we don’t find culturally appropriate in ways that some countries do. Was it an inspiration at all? And is there enough ongoing material that Dog War could be further developed as/or create a docu-series?
AA: I’ve never heard of Whale Wars so it certainly wasn’t an inspiration. However, The Cove was. It’s the story of American activist trying to stop the slaughter of dolphins in Japan. It was widely viewed and even won an Academy Award. However, we’ve learned that people have a harder time hearing about dogs being slaughtered than dolphins! In any event, we are looking at a documentary series that will show our subjects going all over the world and saving dogs—not just from the dog meat trade, but from war zones, climate and environmental disasters, and other hot spots.
FGW: How did you first come across your two subjects – and given that one conceals his identity throughout, was it a difficult pitching the documentary filming process to them in any way?
AA: I was introduced to K9 Global Rescue and duo of Jon Barocas and “Phil” through my co-producer Janette Warren who knew about their work. I was drawn to the juxtaposition of macho, war-hardened veterans, trained to kill, making it their life mission to save vulnerable dogs throughout the world. I was also interested in some of the ethical questions that it brought up, like cultural imperialism. To what extent was their work the imposition of foreign values? To what extent is it just cultural relativism: we eat cows and pigs. What’s the difference? I think we addressed those questions in the film. The other ethical consideration of concealing identity was somewhat simpler: Jon didn’t mind showing his face. He felt the issue was too important to stay hidden. “Phil” was worried that it could compromise his relationship with his position in the military.
FGW: What are your feelings about eating meat generally, and did making this movie make you reconsider them at all?
AA: I have been a vegetarian on and off my entire life. When I first started filming in Korea, I decided to become vegetarian again. While I do see eating dogs as different from eating cows (we domesticated dogs to be our friends—so it is a profound breach of trust), once you pull back the curtain and peer into the ugly world of animal slaughter and consumption, it’s a small step from dogs to cows or pigs. I think this is another valuable message of Dog War: where do we draw the line of “acceptable” when it comes to hurting other beings for our benefit?
FGW: As far as you know, is there any kind of similar black-market trade in cats?
AA: Yes, there is a much smaller market, but it exists. Sometimes people call it: DCMT—the dog and cat meat trade.
FGW: Speaking of The Cove, that film had a very successful film festival run, while you have spoken about the challenges in reception by programmers to Dog War due to concerns in how audiences will receive the film. Can you talk about your conversations with the Raindance and Chelsea film festivals versus others that (to this point) have been shy to screen the film?
AA: Some programmers have been shy to show the film because Dog War might be too gruesome or because it advanced the idea of cultural imperialism, concerns of which are very much in the zeitgeist today. Raindance saw this as brave and “independent,” asking important questions and expecting the audience to grapple with them. For this the film was awarded the “Spirit of Raindance” award. Chelsea Film Festival highlights international issues and so was drawn to the topic and film. But there is a very large audience and community that would eat up (pardon the pun) the film and we hope to tap into this market soon!
Dog War is currently in the midst of its film festival tour.
