More stories

  • in

    ‘Fin’ Review: Eli Roth Wants to Save the Sharks

    The first documentary from the “Hostel” director uses a little expert advice and a lot of pathos to advocate against damaging commercial fishing practices.Eli Roth really, really loves sharks. That’s the newest information available in his first feature documentary, “Fin,” a screed against shark fishing that borrows its most galling stats and images primarily from other places and fills in the gaps with footage of Roth being upset.There is little here that was not already tackled in Rob Stewart’s 2007 documentary “Sharkwater,” nor in the more recent, less artful “Seaspiracy.” Though where Stewart painstakingly explained the beauty, intelligence and importance of sharks, Roth would rather that we love these animals simply because he does. This presents a challenge for anyone prone to find Roth, the director of exploitative horror films like “Hostel” and “The Green Inferno,” unsympathetic.The fishing practices shown in “Fin” are harming our oceans, to be sure, but Roth seems more comfortable painting East Asian people as savages for eating shark fin soup than he does explaining marine biology. (He spends a good half of this documentary doing the former, and very little time on the latter.) In one scene, as he sits down to try the delicacy, he compares what he is about to do with his own film, the cannibal horror movie “The Green Inferno,” in which a cartoonish Amazonian tribe butchers a group of American college students.Roth stands in for the outraged viewer for the duration of “Fin,” his indignation apparent as he repeatedly condemns the shark fishing he witnesses as crazy and pointless. Roth calls a shark clubbing the worst thing he’s ever seen. He passionately pushes for the maternal rights of a felled pregnant shark. He snidely condemns women who wear cosmetics, which can be made with shark liver oil. These words — coming from a director who helped coin “torture porn,” and whose fiction work consistently and degradingly compares makeup-caked bombshells to animals — feel disingenuous at best.There are passionate, knowledgeable experts at the margins of this film: ecologists, activists and divers. Why Roth had to be its focal point is anybody’s guess.FinNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 28 minutes. Watch on Discovery+. More

  • in

    After 'Tiger King,' Law Proposed to Protect Big Cats

    The Big Cat Public Safety Act has been introduced before, but a bipartisan group of lawmakers hopes the public outcry from the Netflix documentary series will finally help it become law.The former roadside zoo owner known as Joe Exotic, Joseph Maldonado-Passage, remains in prison. The animal rights activist he was convicted of trying to kill, Carole Baskin, was given control of his old zoo in Oklahoma.But one year after the premiere of the Netflix series “Tiger King,” an unexpected quarantine binge hit that focused on their feud and the cutthroat world of roadside zoos, big cats remain unprotected from the exploitative practices the series helped reveal.Now, a bipartisan group of United States senators has introduced the latest version of a bill designed to keep unlicensed individuals from owning tigers and other big cats and forbid zoo owners from letting the public pet the animals or hold cubs.Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, introduced the Big Cat Safety Act last year, but it did not make it to the floor for a vote. Mr. Blumenthal said he was hopeful that with Democrats in control and some Republicans already supportive of the legislation, this is the year the bill will finally clear the Senate.“What I’ve seen is a groundswell of support,” Mr. Blumenthal said on Tuesday. “I don’t want to overstate it, but it really seems like an idea whose time has come.”Two Republicans, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Richard Burr of North Carolina, agreed to introduce the bill on Monday with Mr. Blumenthal and Senator Tom Carper, a Delaware Democrat.“Big cats like lions, tigers, and cheetahs belong in their natural habitats, not in the hands of private owners where they are too often subject to cruelty or improper care,” Ms. Collins said in a statement.The bill is similar to legislation that Representative Mike Quigley, Democrat of Illinois, introduced in 2020.That bill, which would have allowed breeding and transporting of big cats only by educational facilities, and wildlife sanctuaries and zoos that restrict direct contact between animals and the public, had 230 sponsors and was passed by the House in December.Sara Amundson, president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund, said the Big Cat Safety Act had the support of law enforcement organizations and dozens of zoos and sanctuaries, giving it “significant momentum.”“Whether it’s Joe Exotic, Doc Antle or Joe Blow, we can’t permit private individuals to keep big cats captive for pleasure or profit,” she said in a statement. “These operations endanger the public and produce the worst possible fate for the animals involved.”Under Mr. Blumenthal’s bill, it would be illegal for a private individual to transport big cats across state lines, breed them or own them. Zoos, sanctuaries and other exhibitors and organizations that are licensed by the Department of Agriculture or by a federal facility registered with the department would be exempt. Under the bill, no zoo or exhibitor could allow direct contact between members of the public and the animals.The law already requires all zoos to be licensed federally, according to Mr. Blumenthal’s office.Ms. Baskin’s organization, Big Cat Rescue, has long pushed for the Big Cat Safety Act, which was first introduced in 2012. The organization has been calling for a ban on cub petting for more than 20 years.“There is almost nothing more adorable than a tiger cub, and it’s very understandable if you don’t know the back story to want to pet a tiger cub and take a picture with it,” said Howard Baskin, Ms. Baskin’s husband and the treasurer and secretary of Big Cat Rescue. “It’s a miserable life for the cub.”The documentary was criticized by conservation groups and animal rights activists for not focusing enough on the abusive practices of roadside zoos and instead playing up salacious details, including the mystery around the disappearance of Ms. Baskin’s first husband.More tigers live in captivity in backyards, roadside zoos and truck stops in the United States than remain in the wild, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Before his arrest and conviction, Mr. Maldonado-Passage was a major breeder and seller of tigers and other big cats, who churned out cubs for profitable petting and photo sessions. When they became too big and dangerous for play, he disposed of them.Some were sold as pets to private buyers and others went to other roadside zoos for breeding. Some simply disappeared.The documentary’s footage of baby cubs being ripped from their mothers so they could be petted by the public shocked many viewers. Since then, state legislators have introduced their own version of bills that would ban such practices.Keith Evans, president of the Lion Habitat Ranch in Las Vegas, which has 31 big cats, said he was worried that legislators have become too reactionary and that the new laws being passed around the country could create bureaucratic entanglements that would punish responsible zoo owners.“The way some of the bills are worded, they’re wide open to interpretation,” he said. “There are enough rules on the books that if they just enforce them it would make everybody happy.”Mr. Blumenthal said the bill he introduced was meant to protect big cats from cruel and dangerous practices, not hamstring responsible zoos and sanctuaries.He said the bill had been referred to the Environment and Public Works Committee, which Mr. Carper chairs.“My focus is on preventing abuse and exploitation of the big cats and safeguarding the public,” Mr. Blumenthal said. “Those two goals are paramount.” More

  • in

    ‘The Walrus and the Whistleblower’ Review: The Fight to Free a Friend

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story‘The Walrus and the Whistleblower’ Review: The Fight to Free a FriendAn animal trainer turned activist strives to end sea mammal captivity in this documentary that could use a sharper frame on its subject.Phil Demers, one of the subjects of “The Walrus and the Whistleblower.”Credit…Tom CometMarch 4, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETThe Walrus and the WhistleblowerDirected by Nathalie BibeauDocumentaryNot Rated1h 28mFind TicketsWhen you purchase a ticket for an independently reviewed film through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.In Marineland, the sprawling aquatic park in Niagara Falls, Ontario, lives a walrus named Smooshi. Concerns for the sea mammal’s well-being form the core of the documentary “The Walrus and the Whistleblower,” which follows the former trainer Phil Demers’s fight to free Smooshi from her captivity.Demers believes that, while he was working at Marineland, Smooshi imprinted on him, or deemed him her guardian. The director Nathalie Bibeau pairs Demers’s account with home video footage of the pair playing during off-hours at the park. At the time, a local news story about their bond spread nationally, even appearing on “Jimmy Kimmel Live.” But in 2012, after witnessing the animals suffer chemical burns, Demers quit his job and vowed to expose the park’s abuse.[embedded content]As Bibeau examines the movement born out of Demers’s allegations, she hews closely to her subject. The film tracks a hefty lawsuit Marineland files against Demers, and a bill he supports that would ban the captivity of whales and dolphins in Canada. The legal and legislative battles supply narrative through-lines, but their progression — or rather, their stagnation — proves dull padding for the story.More intriguing is Demers’s yearning for the walrus he is barred from seeing, a fixation that scans as alternately authentic and performed. Frustratingly, the documentary declines to probe Demers’s evolving relationship to his activism and newfound fame — particularly once he assumes a grandiose Twitter persona and scores repeat appearances on Joe Rogan’s podcast.“I’m Smoochi’s mom,” Demers declares at one point. “What’s more natural than reuniting a baby with its mother?” With sharper framing, this line might suggest irony, given the unusual nature of this cross-species relationship. Offered at face value, all that registers is bombast.The Walrus and the WhistleblowerNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 28 minutes. Watch on Discovery+.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More