Talk:Hachi: A Dog's Tale

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Nordic cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Rip-off of Greyfriars Bobby?

Surely this "true story" is simply an urban legend rip-off of Greyfriar's Bobby? Mrstonky (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- I have no clue if it's an urban legend, but it's an extremely well-known story in Japan. You might be able to find out more at the page for the real dog Hachiko. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.92.58 (talk) 13:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- It's amazing how some people can say that Hachiko's story is just an urban legend, when they themselves are clueless on what really took place. We certainly weren't there when it happened and there's no way for us to know for sure. However, documents such as photographs, newspapers and eyewitness accounts of the people from Shibuya -who lived during that time- were well aware of the truth. Do we have any documented accounts on Greyfriars Bobby? Well, there's an "albumen print" to prove his existence. But that will never be enough for critics whos sole purpose is to dissolve such beliefs that such act of loyalty among dogs are possible. A lot of people believe in Hachiko's story. I, for one, am a believer and I belive in these dogs, Hachi and Bobby, regardless of what people say. Being a dog-lover is more than enough for people to defend their stories. Are we that ill equipped to not study the uniqueness which some dogs exude? We all know so much about dogs than we do decades ago and it's no question that they are certainly capable of displaying such passion for the love of their master. -Wayne Saavedra 121.97.58.80 (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I loved the movie, even if the budget was rather expensive for the actors salaries, I am just glad they wrote a story about the Dog Hachi, it is an amazing story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.95.140.176 (talk) 20:42, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is the story of Hachiko (a well documented case might I add) which took place in the 1920s in Japan a "rip-off" of something similar that happened in the UK almost 35 years LATER?? As pedantic as it sounds, Greyfriar's Bobby shares only some similarities with Hachiko, definitely not the other way around. It's hard to imitate something that hasn't occurred yet. (58.109.12.198 (talk) 02:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)) -- 1872 is not 35 years later than 1920. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.106.123.0 (talk) 03:20, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Simple Edit

Made a simple edit where the plot incorrectly labeled "Hachi's" adoption. In the movie, Cate tells the "caller" that Hachi has already been "spoken" for. Cate simply noticed how attached her husband, Parker, had grown to Hachi and she decided to allow Parker to keep Hachi.68.60.60.117 (talk) 12:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Title outside United States

The article says the title outside the United States is Hachiko: A Dogs Tale. I'm from Ireland and I only know it as Hachi: A Dogs Story. What is the rules for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SexyIrishLeprechaun (talk • contribs) 21:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you've got the title right? I think you swapped the "Tale" and "Story" parts accidentally.

You're right that the "US title" wasn't only used in the US, looks like — the movie's IMDB entry lists "Hachi: A Dog's Tale" as the "International (English title) / UK / USA" title, so presumably that's the title you would have seen. Whereas, in most other countries, it was some form of "Hachiko: A Dog's Story". (Or just "Hatchi", in France, and "Hachi", in the Netherlands.) Regardless, I'm going to edit the title mention to say that it was called "Hachi: A Dog's Tale" in "English-speaking countries", or somesuch, instead of just in the US. -- FeRD_NYC (talk) 08:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Futurama?

Just thought I'd mention that Hachiko's story is also very similar and presumably the inspiration for the sad Futurama episode "Jurassic Bark" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.226.33 (talk) 10:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right, and that's noted in the Hachikō article. (Now. It may not have been when you initially mentioned it here.) That seems the proper place, unless there's a source that indicates the Futurama writers were inspired specifically by this movie. -- FeRD_NYC (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's amazing how long false information survives here

I just fixed the plot regarding the scene featuring Hatchi's death. There is absolutely nothing in the scene about the dog's and owner's spirits reuniting and "rising up to Heaven together." (Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=094BzJkSVP4.) That was originally added to the article in 2010 and survived hundreds of edits. Sad. JayHubie (talk) 04:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. While I think the ending is suppose to be ambiguous so as to allow the viewer to take what they want from the ending. I agree the desription of the end should be described in a neutral fashion as you have done. Nickeldorf (talk) 22:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The 1987 Japanese original Hachikō does actually represent dog and master as reunited in an other-worldly forest of vivid colors, before cutting back to the dead Hachi lying in the street. The Swedish/American remake tones this down (cultural differences?) but I would agree with Nickeldorf that viewers are left to make their own interpretation. 121.73.91.201 (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why were my edits deleted?

I want to know why my recent edits to "Hachi: A Dog's Tale" were removed for no reason. Now, I see that the page has been marked for major editing. So what does this mean to the changes I made recently? The info that I posted was very relevant to the page, and moreover, I have spent considerable amount of time researching to gather that info. I don't want my efforts to go wasted. Sudhindranath (talk) 19:29, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for the reasons behind each edit, the place to start is the article's history page, which you can see by clicking "View history" at the top of the article. You will then read the edit summaries which accompany the edits/revisions that concern you. Thanks. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 00:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have not used a new section heading as I believe this is relevant to the above, which mainly concerned the removal of links to Google maps added by Sudhindranath. Since then a link to a blog post has been added that includes the same Google map links. I have reverted this a couple of times today as I don't feel a blog is a reliable source. SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:57, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]