Talk:The Adventures of Milo and Otis

message: The film opens in 1989 on Nippon Farm with a mother cat named Moth Ari who has given birth to kittens. One of the kittens is named Milo ("Chatran" in the Japanese version), and has a habit of being too curious and getting himself into trouble. He finds a pug-nosed pug puppy named Otis ("Poosky" in the Japanese version), and they soon become friends. When Milo is playing inside a box floating in the river, he accidentally drifts downstream. Otis runs after Milo. Milo goes on many adventures, escaping one incident after another.
He encounters three Bear, escapes from Raven that infested Deadwood Swamp, steals a dead muskrat from Fox, follows a train-track of a train named Nippon Bearway to the home of Deer, who shelters him, sleeps in the nest with Owl, stays for a while with Pig and her piglets, catches a fish, only to have it stolen by Racoon, is mobbed by The Seagulls, and evades Bear, then Snake, then falls into an old pit.
Otis, for his part, follows Milo throughout, usually only an hour behind and less than a mile out of range. Finally, the two catch up with one another. While Milo is in the hole, Otis pulls him out by means of a rope. Milo and Otis are reunited, and soon find mates of their own: Joyce, a white cat, for Milo, and Sondra, a French pug, for Otis. After this, they separate birth and raise puppies and kittens. Milo, Otis, Joyce, and Sondra find their way back together through the forest to their barn and the credits roll. In the credits, you get this sentence. It says "The animals used were filmed under strict supervision with the utmost concern for their handling."
207.109.12.27 (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please be more specific. What do you want to change? Perhaps highlight the changes with bold or italics. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --allthefoxes (Talk)  02:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2016 

message: I noticed the article only mentions the plot of the English version. It would be nice to also have the plot of the Japanese version, maybe even with the differences noted. --Mocha2007 (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 

message: Currently, the only sources for the first paragraph of the Animal Cruelty Allegations section are The Sunday Mail and a fan review website which is only copying rumours.
Cited from the wikipedia page: "When the film was first released, several Australian animal rights organizations raised allegations of animal cruelty during filming and called for a boycott."
Does this have a direct citation? Every search I've done myself has netted 0 results, only other blogs citing this wikipedia page. Of course, my search means nothing for it's validity. But the fact that this part isn't sourced does. Is the Sunday Mail the source for this? If that's so, I don't believe this section has enough sources to be put in 
The only credible thing about the first paragraph is this: "Other scenes that were the source of controversy were a scene of a cat falling off of a cliff and trying to climb back up, and a scene of a pug fighting a bear, all of which were deleted from the American version." 
These scenes are in the japanese movie, if they're "the source of controvercy", then this part is a just a fact.
But can we say a 1990 article from The Sunday Mail, a tabloid, is credible enough to be the sole (cited) source for this whole paragraph? At this point, unless someone is willing to request access to the archives of the old newspapers, we can't say for certain if it's 1:1 cited, if sentence were cherry picked to fit their tabloid, or if it was very sensationalized.
Even if it is perfectly cited, is this source enough?
The other source (chud.com) is just a review 20 years after the fact which has 0 sources and is just rumoring about this a lot. I think we can safely discredit that as a credible source.
And it's not an article no one reads. Hundreds of sites cite this wikipedia article about the animal cruelty allegations. Some websites clarify that these are just allegations, other just say "animal rights groups said that at least 20 kittens have been killed and one had his paws broken by the producer". Not once have i seen different source been cited than this wikipedia article, so that's why it's important that we triple check if this paragraph has actual credible sources. Tomodovodoo (talk) 01:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: We can remove that chud.com citation for being a low-quality citation. I was able to track down quotes from the articles in question alleging animal abuse, this first one is the Sunday Mail's news story from 1990:
An animal welfare group has called for a boycott on a popular children's film because of alleged horrific cruelty to animals used in the movie. Animal Liberation has asked the public to stay away from The Adventures of Milo and Otis to show their disgust at the reported killing of more than 20 kittens during production.
The group's president, Ms Jacqui Kent, said she was disturbed by reports from Europe which alleged other animals had been injured and, in one case, the producer had broken a cat's paw to make it appear unsteady on its feet. [...] Ms Kent said her organisation had a number of complaints from people who had seen the film and were concerned that it could not have been made without cruelty.
Animal Liberation is waiting on more detailed reports, but Ms Kent said she had been told Japanese and European animal welfare groups had protested about the film and in some parts of Europe it had lost money because of bad publicity.
Ms Kent said parents should be made aware that sensitive children could be upset by scenes in the film, and could even try to make their pets perform the feats they saw in the movie.
The film has the approval of the American Humane Society, but their officers were not present during filming. [...] A publicist for the distributors, Roadshow-Great Union, Ms Bronte Mullen, said the film had been approved by the American Humane Society so they had ""no qualms" about showing it.
She said the Japanese director, Hata, was a trained zoologist and animal lover who had his own zoo.
The Hobart Mercury reported additional concerns on September 18, 1990:
The children's film The Adventures of Milo and Otis about a kitten and a puppy which help each other survive in the wild has raised the ire of the Tasmanian and Victorian branches of the RSPCA.
The Victorian branch is concerned about movie-industry reports that several cats were killed during filming, with possibly up to 26 kittens dying.
It is believed a scene which showed a kitten in a box going over a waterfall resulted in the most fatalities.
The Japanese-made movie screened across Australia earlier this year had a return season in Tasmania during recent school holidays.
The president of the southern Tasmanian division of the RSPCA, Mr Peter Long, said yesterday he shared the disgust of the Victorian branch at the reported deaths.
"I will be writing to the RSPCA's national president, Mr Charles Wright, to register my concern and insist that further investigations are made," he said.
"Claims of cruelty during filming first came to the attention of the Victorian RSPCA about seven months ago but it did not want to act immediately because it could have given the movie further promotion.
"At this stage we haven't confirmed the cat deaths in Milo and Otis," he said.
These reports at least affirm that concerns over animal abuse in the movie aren't unfounded.The lorax (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

text: I think these blurbs are currently cited in the article. The Japanese Wikipedia also linked to this interesting blurb that claims that the women's magazine Josei Jishin interviewed Masanori Hata's brother in the late 90s and he allegedly attested to animal abuse on set. But I would prefer if there was a primary source (I'm not sure if old Japanese periodicals are archived.) The lorax (talk) 03:36, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validity sources Animal Cruelty Allegations.