Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Excellent, a Must See

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

A movie about power exchange featuring bondage. Doomed from even before the word go, because nobody here knows what they are doing. The theme has crossed wires, the script is utterly lame, the acting is dull, the camera-work is bleak, the excitement is often off, and the performances are way under par. This thing is too tame to be an adult movie, yet its theme is highly controversial, guaranteed to upset everybody. So, to make it mainstream acceptable, director D. Stevens, who should never work in this town again as he just waists everybody's time, pulls back on the camera-work and makes it as visually appealing as close-circuit television, with images that are often static, frequently distant, or otherwise bland. The human body is, to put it mildly, very interesting. Mr. D. manages brilliantly to make nudity seem boring, for the most part anyway, although I absolutely love that bit "The Girls of The Pet" included as a filler at the end of the plodding main feature, where we get to see under-employed co-star Jane Steele do the Jane Seymour thing with her long, long red hair.The theme also gets entangled with bad guy organ harvesters, as if the bondage BDSM set is the same, or at least, related thing. Does that community a disservice.And those tiresome references likening her to a dog! Playing fetch, yapping, sniffing master's hand. Hell, nobody would regress to animal status overnight. The petting of the hair is real cute though.It also subscribes to the Neanderthal notion that masters want their slaves/pets marked, their charges to crawl around on their knees, and to lick their shoes. I guess this might be prevalent on the real-life scene, appealing to those who are too dumb to think up better fantasies for themselves, but the lead character seemed to be a more refined intelligent type... Anyway, you would have to be very stupid, very dense indeed, to mess up your 'property' so oafishly. I mean, you pay a fortune, and immediately mess up your investment? Hey, would these masters buy a sports car and then drive it through the swamps?Andrea Edmondson gamely tries. Hell, some story she could one day tell to her grandchildren (not).Even with copious nudity, what goes on on- screen, is just about as dull as ditch-water and as tepid as last week's stale tea. An anemic production that's one big yawn.The DVD's stylish box cover art showing the naked bound slave kneeling before her master, is the best thing about it. It is not the image shown here on IMDb, of course not. It is not even really part of the movie, it is obviously a borrowed image Breaking Glass obtained to make the packaging ultra-appealing, and lure in suckers like me. :(To sum it up, the Master/slave genre might be coming into its own with FIFTY SHADES OF GREY, no doubt what motivated Breaking Glass to acquire the rights to this little bit of flotsam, quick to get onto the bandwagon. This one is unsalvagable junk, though, an example of what not to do. Tame, so as not to catch too much flak, bland, because of misdirection and utter incompetence - and worst of all, dumb to the core, as thick as three short planks.

This is a great film. It would horrify so-called feminists, because it takes a really sexy, hot, princess type girl, strips her down naked for most of the film, puts a collar on her, brands her, dehumanizes her, makes her crawl on all fours, fetch sticks, run naked down the road, kiss guys shoes, be called "it", made to bark like a dog and kept in a cage. Wow. Excellent. And it also has another hot Asian girl,Sommer Ngyuen, in the same position. She was the casting director and she obviously purposely cast herself as the naked slave girl by her own choice. And didn't you see the hot Hispanic maid, Magi Avila's sexy character, looking wistfully, and jealously at GG and longing to be collared and totally humiliated and owned like that? The movie is a total psychological erotic head trip, especially for women. At first I hated it, but had to go back and watch again and again and just try to imagine what made a hottie like Andrea Edmondson want to totally strip off like that, and debase herself in such a deliciously humiliating way? She single handedly sets feminism back 500 years or more. It is quite something to see. And it really shows the vision of the future as imagined by the rich people of today - a world in which there are masters with money and human dogs to be lead around on leashes and controlled completely. I imagine this will be a kind of cult classic as the world falls further and further into neo-feudalism. As the guy in the film says - doesn't it feel so 'free' to be naked in the snow with an electric dog collar, fetching sticks for the entertainment of amoral rich people? Plenty of people in America probably agree and I imagine that a lot of people, including feminists, have a subconscious desire to find themselves 'free' of all requirements to think or worry about anything and in this kind of very erotic, submissive position.It definitely shows a dark, often subconscious and feared to be admitted side of human psychology. My only complaint is that it didn't go deeper. They tried to show Edmonson in a state of total complete submission, but I think she didn't go as far or as deep as she, or the audience really probably wanted.

I really did enjoy the concept and execution of this most fascinating film. I am amazed at the power exchange scenario never taking the easy way -- that is there are no ALL bad people or not ALL good people.The characters change and really was compelling. I thought the acting was quite good but if you enjoy the Hollywood bubble gum - you will not find it here.It seems to have upset a lot of people who have an ax to grind - I guess it is from some who think this about a certain type of people. Wow - it is a movie wake up.I like it most because it is about the rich exploiting the poor in a way that most might not even know they are being used. -- sounds familiar to me.Any way if you want a good discussion movie - rent and eat popcorn and be prepared to defend you ideals about what we are doing in America. I think real media are afraid of movies that are not in the box - go see Spider man which I happen to love as well. LOL

I felt The Pet opened up a genre heretofore not felt in some time. It provokes a disturbing blend of power exchange and an almost surreal alternative universe reminding me of 'Eyes Wide Shut' and sort of a 'King of Hearts' plot.It moved me greatly and I have reflected on my own life because of what I saw as pulling back the covering or turning over a rock of a hidden world of greed and exploitation that on the surface does not seem apparent. The movie shows a positive side of a different kind of relationship that grows on soiled ground.I thought the acting with both lead characters being new and unknown were outstanding. The idea that not one but two actresses can play two adult characters and then be renamed and become two believable puppies in the same movie - outstanding and kudos -- what a challenge. The eyes of The Pet was mesmerizing at times - her trust was evident and her enthusiasm to please was pronounced. The lead actor, Philip, was believable and scarily familiar in the Hollywood world of people pretending to be one thing and turning out to be something or someone else entirely. I would not want to be in the same room as the evil Colonel - he was frightening.The nice thing about the acting is you could see characters grow, Philip was changed by his pet - by 'owning' her he had to accept responsibility for his own exploitative ways. I do give a two thumbs up