Movies News
Dakota Fanning 'mad as she can be' at 'Hounddog' critics
By Stone Martindale Jan 24, 2007, 21:23 GMT
On the Web
Dakota Fanning - View Dakota Fanning Pictures - Dakota Fanning News
|
|
|
|
|
Similar articles
- Dakota Fanning attends Jacobs' NYFW show
- IMAX TV spot for 'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse'
- New character featurette for 'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse'
- Three new clips from 'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse'
- Second trailer for 'The Twilight Saga: Eclipse' online
Latest Headlines in Movies
- 1. Meryl Streep and Julia Roberts ready for 'August: Osage County'
- 2. Oprah Winfrey could return in 'The Butler'
- 3. 'Butter' release date pushed back
- 4. 62nd Annual Berlinale International Film Festival The Iron Lady Photocall Pictures
- 5. Wicked Pictures Men In Black: A Hardcore Parody Pictures
Older Talkback
page: 1 2
If we think Lindsay Lohan and Danny Bonaduce are messed up, wait a few years and see how messed up Dakota Fanning is.
If people have trouble swallowing this movie maybe those same people have trouble swallowing reality. One dose of reality will show you that children are raped at ALL ages including infants. Shedding light on a subject that has been long held in the darkest closet is commendable not condemnable.
I think the previous poster's comments are more about her trauma and lack of action/reaction from her parents than a movie that hasn't been released yet.
Perhaps if the previous poster's rape were discussed before or after, then she wouldn't be so angry today.
As for the 'too big for her britches' comment... Ms. Fanning was asked what she thought by the press and she responded. She did what she was directed to do in the movie. It's interesting that most people can't seem to separate the actor from his/her character.
@Cootie
My 12-year-old brother has the wherewithal to be able to act in a scene like this. I think people forget how smart kids are, how aware they are.
As for her parents wanting her to just takes the roles so she can bring home the bacon and they can fry it. If they really wanted that, do you think they would have cast her in an independent film that had a total budget of $3 million?
Also, too big for her britches? Who says that? Has it been a while since you were a child?
It's a freedom of choice issue. In my opinion, if her parents believe she was mature enough to handle such a scene, then it really is nobody elses business to say if she should have done this or not.
You might disagree, you might be morally outraged, you might never let your child do a thing like that, but all of these are a result of personal choices you made.
Christians who take the moral high ground and try to go around imposing morality on others are not only being hypocritical, but the Bible actually warns in several places that self-righteousness is to be avoided and that it is really only God who can pass judgment upon others.
Reality flies in the face of the ideal of never judging others, but it makes good sense not be overly interested in the activities of others and to primarily worry about your own behavior.
The Lindsay Lohan/Danny Bonaduce comparison is misguided. Compare her to Jodie Foster or Brooke Sheilds who did similar roles at a similar age.
Cootie or cooties, I hope I don't catch any, or that self righteous attitude. Kids don't live in a box and at a comparative age know a lot more and about a lot more than their parents at that age, give them credit. Closing your eyes and pretending the world doesn't exit is naive, kids know this and must deal with it.
In response to the first comment, I want to point out that Dakota Fanning was not actually raped in the movie. I haven't seen the film, but I know enough about filmmaking to know that the camera can make something look very real. But do not confuse visual storytelling with the actual event. I, too, was raped as a 8 year old child. One of the difficult parts about the experience was not being able to talk about the confusion, the humiliation and the pain... Feeling alone in it. Even if we want to believe that these horrible events don't happen to children, even if we pretend they don't happen, they do. Healing begins with bringing the event into the open. Try to imagine what the impact might be on a child who has either experienced this or is the friend of someone who has experienced this. Make it ok to talk about. As much as we might not want to hear the message, don't shoot the messenger.
How dare any of you judge Dakota for taking on this role. For one, the movie hasnt even been released yet. No one has seen the scene, or the extent to which the rape is shown. Secondly, she WANTED to take on this role. Her parents did not force her. It was her decision. Her parents are merely supporting her choice. I commend her for taking the role. She is not only broadening her career, but she has become involved in something that can be quite powerful. Rape is a huge issue. No one is stupid.. especially kids. If you people really think that people her age havent known about sex and rape and everything that goes along with it then you really need to come out of la la land. Oh, and for those of you who are so upset about how she hasnt had a child hood... I think that was her own choice. Yeah, her parents started her in the business as a child.. but she didnt have to stay in it.
Hollywood and TV are merely a 'reflection' of a society?
Satan owns and controls things of this temporary world for now,and 'you will know him/them,by their fruit,amen???
This is merely another 'sign of these end times/last days now',days of Noah,which were characterized by 'violence,perversions,lusts'...
The Lord Jesus Christ is coming back now ,very soon,sooner than men 'think',repent,get right with God,before its too late for the coming judgment and wrath that is coming now...
Remember the sexuality of the young girl in 'The Exorcist'? We took that movie in our stride.
Critics of 'HoundDog' would do well to listen to Elvis Presley's beautiful ballads and calm down.
Of course calming down to Elvis's classic rendition of 'Hound Dog' which is heard throughout the movie is another matter altogether. That famous 1956 song excited whole generations. To this day.
Remember in 'War of the Worlds' little Miss Fanning had already faced Aliens.
Like she has already said, 'HoundDog' is just a movie'. She is a modern young lady, her head will not spin. :-)
http://irelandtoo.blogspot.com
My response is not emotional. As an educator, and family counselor, I must say the movie is inappropriate. It has been stated that the subject needs talked about, openness, etc, etc. This is all true, but there are way to communicate that don't include having children actively act out violent rape scenes. I know that the makers of the movie knew that this would stir up big controversy, and there for generate income. That's what it's all about. So basically Ms. Fanning was sexually exploited by the movie producers and her parents.
What scares me more than anything is the fact that children are put into these situations. Even though Dakota is an emotioanlly intelligent young lady, the effect of even portraying such a seen will eventually scare her once she has a little child. As a Christian, I would never let my child play in such a role. Although I have not seen the movie (and don't plan to) the actor who portrayed the rapist ought to be very ashamed. One thing that I do not understand is that in the movie industry, child protection laws might as well be null and void. Although a real rape did not occur on the set, the portrayal did happen. Just like on internet porn, it is illigal to portray the underage porn (computerized) or to cut and past faces to bodies. No child should be put in such a situation even if it is just 'acting'. I don't let my 5 year old daughter play doctor with older men, why would would I let her play or pretend to be a rape victim. As Christian, we all need to pray for the movie industry as well as the children involved who are taken advantage of for the purpose of money.
I feel sorry for you all.
Not beeing able to distinguish between fact and fiction.
This do infact happen since this is based on a true story.
We can not turn a blind eye to this situation.
Just because parents try to shield their children from reality they can only do so much.
Welcome to the real world...rape happens at any age.
There are two very important points to this story, one of which did not make the article.
1. All, or nearly all, of the people upset over the rape scene are people who HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE. They don't actually know what they are talkign about.
2. Dakota filmed the scene alone, with supportive people behind-the-scenes (like her mother). Dakota did not film the scene with the male actor. The scene itself is very dark and non-explicit: only parts of her body are illuminated, never together, and I believe they never show the male actor touching her.
The scene is mostly 'movie magic'. There is no need for outrage at what Dakota was asked to do, because she wasn't asked to do anything. Where is the harm to her? She has been educated about rape, she has been asked to portray a character who was raped, the experience was not recreated in any direct way.
Dakota is a very mature young woman. As she said, she's going to be a freshman in high school! I think it's admirable that she has the courage to take on such a challenging role.
Regarding the comment about Dakota ending up as drug and booze-addled as Lindsay Lohan and Danny Bonaduce, there's a big difference. Dakota truly has talent, huge talent actually, and I'm convinced she'll work consistently throughout her teens and into her 20s. With her gift, I can't imagine why she would ever need to perk up her emotions with substance abuse. Even at her young age, she is making her own decisions about which projects to accept.
From what I've read, this is not a porn flick. Dakota Fanning is the brightest, most mature child I've ever seen and my hope is that she will become a truely great adult actress--visions of greatness are, sadly, far too rare today. I think she has the brains to avoid being turned into a bimbo.
The holymen ought to stay out of this and leave her alone; I'm sick to death of them. Go Dakota!!!!
I say if Dakota Fanning is comfortable doing a scene like that, then I believe that she should be left alone. She is almost 13 years old and is capable of making her own decisions.
Perhaps they should have Sharon Stone play the 12 year old being raped. The movie can start with an explanation that all are to imagine Sharon as being 12, but that the showing of that which happened in real life can't be portrayed. This is all absurd to me. Locally a church is being sued by hundreds of (male) kids who were raped by their priest. Looks like hundreds of millions of dollars I think. Having that movie have people act it out once with a very established and experienced actress (no, not Stone) is just so minor and insignificant in comparison it's just hard for me to see what the fuss is about. And in the movie, I suspect things would be mostly implied, I suspect it's not even a hardcore movie.
To the woman who called herself 'cootie'...I too was raped in my 20s and I am sorry for your experience as a much younger woman. I applaud Ms. Fanning for her mature approach to a terrible issue that has occurred in this country and throughout the world. Cootie's assertion that neither she nor her parents spoke of her horrible experience are indicative of a problem that existed years ago and to this day regarding rape, silence and shame. If more people would speak out about this very senstive issue perhaps the indignity and embarrassment that weighs heavily on the shoulders of those men and women who have been abused by another may be eased ever so slightly. I can not bear to even give my real name in this discussion out of a sense of fear, worry that someone I might know may somehow connect me to this terrible secret I hold inside. It is a brave 12 year old that can approach this matter in the sensible and sensitve way that Miss Fanning seems to be comporting herself. Rape is a subject that should absolutely be addressed by responsible parents and teachers of adoloscents in junior high school as it is a very real issue.
Portrayl of this tragic tale by this young actress may make people uncomfortable; however, isn't the reality more uncomfortable than the fiction? Where is the outrage, the support and the response to the millions of young rape victims around the world?! Cover-up in the Church, silence from embarrassed parents, rape punishble by death to this day in other cultures...these are some of the very real reasons why this young woman's role is as important as it is. Bravo and thank you, Miss Fanning. I hope I can bear to see this brave film.
I'm sure you all know exactly how Ms. Fanning was raised and were in on every decision made in her life. Otherwsie, how can you sit back and judge the choices she and her family make. Do you really chategorize everyone you meet like that?
Do people really care that much about what roles a person chooses to make as an actor/actress? Who really has the right to judge any decisions they make about whether or not the parents should have stopped Dakota Fanning from playing a ROLE.
It's a movie. It is telling a story. The great thing about it is you have the right to choose whether or not you want to see the movie. So if you have this choice why make a negative comment about a movie that has not even been released?
Talk about having serious issues.
Dakota seems very level headed, caring, mature, responsible. Critical of her, huh? Are you jealous? Would you rather women be barefoot, pregnant & owned by men, men's corporate hierarchical money/power machines? Who are you people? I'm open minded but stay clear of fundamentalist & their reactionary thinking where they think they are their 'egos' & want to dominate others out of fear, & may have high IQs (but usually not), but are so stupid. Can a person get far enough away from such? The world is too much with YOU. Ever wonder how other normal people think all over the world, & what they think of these types of Americans? Too much to be disgusted about. If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention. There's my business, your business, & God's business. Keep your snout out of our business & clean the log/beam out of your own - hypocrite, phobic, manipulative, anal retentive control freak. Get my drift?
Dakota's Fanning parents made a huge error in judgement. The director appears to be another sick movie producer.
What a freeking sewer.
Geez, I wonder why Christians have so much trouble distinguishing fiction from reality? When you start threating legal action about a work of fiction,
as in the fictional 'da vinci code' or in this fictional movie, one wonders
why do they perceive fiction as reality? I wonder....
What is sickening is not this movie ... it is what takes place everyday in our homes, lives and around our neighborhoods. 1 our of 4 girls WILL be sexually assaulted by the time they are 11... FACT. If religous fundamentalist wish to have a target for their misguided judgementalism maybe they should start with the sexual repressive nature of the church!
I have never understood why or how Dakota Fanning has received such critical acclaim. To me she has displayed no real talent (take for instance War of the Worlds -- all she did was scream). At this point she should just be joyful over the publicity -- even bad publicity. It won't be long before she's Hollywood's pariah.
I love the comments from people using as their sole authority that they are 'Christians'. As if this self label makes the poster an actual moral person. The threats some of them then make when it is obvious that so many 'Christian' organizations are in fact helping to cover up, refuse to investigate allegations of issue's with their leadership or members activities and own morals. I think that if the so called 'Christians' spent more time cleaning their own house and their own issue's they might actual become the better people they spend so much time telling the rest of us we're not.
She is taking on a daring role and showing the truth at the same time. 12 year olds unfortunately do know what rape is...and it's better for the kids her age to be educated about it than have it be a 'taboo' subject. She is an actor after all, and she's chose to act out this role. Kudos to her for doing what many other actors her age won't do because of negative criticism. Her role supports those men and women who have been raped and there's nothing negative to say about that.
I have actually met and worked with Dakota and also met and spent time talking with her mother. As many people have pointed out, she is mature, professional and capable. Talking with her and her mother changed my mind about child actors. Some people are blessed with incredible talent at a young age and are equipped to do things most of us cant. I am a Christian and the other 'Christians' posting comments and/or rallying against this film might be surprised to learn that Dakota and her family are Christians as well. Dakota is doing a job, understands what's going on and I believe is trying to tell a story that supports her beliefs. I can only speak from my experience with Dakota and her mother and that experience was positive, refreshing and inspiring. I only hope that other Christians will reserve judgement and extend grace to a young woman who is following her convictions (all under public scrutiny no less) and realize that even Jesus told stories that included the 'ugly' aspects of humanity. But those stories had a message of hope, redemption and overcoming difficulties. I would assume that 'Houndog' does as well.
There are many issues about this scene in the filmt that bother me for various reasons. I keep on reading that this was a choice Dakota made on her own and that she was willing to do and so forth and so forth but I'm sorry, I forgot that 12-year olds are responsible enough to make adult decisions and always know what's in their best interest. Adults are not even capable of knowing what is best and yet somehow the the whole world thinks that because a 12-year old child makes a choice that is what is best for them. Our role as adults are to always protect, guide, and attempt to never harm a child in any way and I feel that by allowing a child (who does not know what is best for them by the mere fact that they haven't really experienced life yet) to even put themselves in that role and attempt to recreate the horrendous experience of rape is not only irresponsible but the opposite of what our role as adults constitutes.
Insofar that it is educational, the true way to educate people is to bring about understanding and that is not achieved through any scene in any film. You want to educate people, then join an organization that helps those who are victims of sexual abuse, or volunteer for an organization that deals with those topics, or go to meetings for individuals who have gone through those experiences. I doubt that this film or scene is going to bring any more understanding or educate about child sexual abuse than Gone in 60 seconds will do about stealing cars. A child who goes and sees this film will not understand rape any more than if they heard about it in the news, what brings understanding is dialect and a interaction amongst either individuals who have gone through the experience or someone who is capable of relaying the significance of it to a child.
I know that children are extremely smart and absorbant of their surroundings and are capable of understanding a lot more than most adults give them credit for however, I feel that a child should last a child as long as possible and not be polluted by all the filth in this world for that time will come when they will be bombarded by it and have to fend for themselves. All you can hope is that that child was given enough love and support through their childhood years that when they are faced with the perils of this world they will be able to not only deal with them but if they fall, get back up and be a better person than before. Peace and love to all! May God continue to bless all!
Those with the strongest convictions seem to be the most ignorant here. Based on their spelling and grammar, it seems 'Sunday school' was the only one in attendance by these people. It is unfortunate, but you're unable to articulate an intelligent argument. I can only assume that your logic for not attaining a proper education must be: 'Why bother? The end is near!'
I am not a religious man, I rid myself of that virus long ago, but I'm appalled at the level of judgment and hatred spewed by the religious zealots commenting on this article. You're not 'pretending' or 'acting out' your hatred, you're actually living it. Isn't your religion founded on love and forgiveness?
It's sad, but just as those passing judgment here, speaking of something they know nothing about, such as the scene they haven't even seen (yeah, 'scene' and 'seen' are two different words - look them up!), there are others who hold the same convictions and are in positions of power. The thought is frightening... imagine the logic behind their decisions! For example: 'There's no need to take care of the environment! Jesus is coming soon anyway.'
Some infants are raped in the womb. They don't even have a chance to run away.
Sadly, we cannot hold on to our innocence. The question seems to be, should the awareness of harsh realities be thrust upon a young person or should they be delicately eased into the darker aspects of human nature by a loving parental figure whenever possible? I opt for the latter. Who can say, beside Ms. Fanning and her parents, how Ms. Fanning has been educated regarding such things? Certainly not you or I.
The necessity of exposing a girl to the possibility of being raped depends on numerous factors, not the least of which being, statistically, how likely she is to be raped. No one can be sure of that, but probabilities can be established based on where she lives, what kind of school she attends, the prevalence of rape in her community, etc. The more risk, the more a girl should be educated in order to increase her chances of avoiding and/or escaping such a threat. In my opinion, the less risk there is, the more a child should be protected even from the notion of such things, as youth is short and she will find out soon enough.
My instinct is that an 11 or 12 yr. old girl, no matter how intelligent, talented and mature, should not be put in a position to act out being the victim in a rape scene (even if she wants to). Actors, in general, tend to be particularly sensitive people (I am an actor, so I know of what I speak). The more talented and committed they are (and Ms. Fanning seems to qualify), the more deeply they prepare for their roles and the more deeply they are affected by them. Add to that the sheer fact that she is a child and you may have a recipe for some kind of trauma. I repeat, MAY. It is not a guarantee that she will be damaged by the experience, but my feeling is, why take the chance? Entertainment doesn't justify it and there are plenty of other educational sources.
I bet there will be creepy single men in trench coats at the theater watching it over and over.
In responce to the fellow named 'ThereIsNoGod': Theirs no such thing as too words... 'scene' and 'seen' sound the same to me last time I cheked. You're jist talkin atheist nonsense to try to confuce us. But the Lord can see tru all, he even knos how many heirs are on your head. When the rapture comes, I'm glad I wont be here to see you scorch in the fires of hell.
Unlke the previous poster, I am a Christian and not afraid to admit it. As much as I am tempted to contribute to this conversation, however, I cannot offer much of an opinion as I have not actually seen the movie. I am a little confused, though. Is the raping of a child promoted/applauded in this movie or is it condemming it? If the movie is saying that forced intercourse on anyone is okay, then the outrage is justified. If the movie is telling a tragic story about a child who is raped, however, shouldn't the outrage be directed at the society that allows this to happen as long as we don't talk about it? Lastly, one might view the verbal attacks on the actor and her loved ones as a type of victimization in itself, don't you think?
You can't get a much more benign rape scene than a hand,
a scream and a zipper.
Rapists are out there and pretending they don't exist isn't going to make them away.
We need to educate our children so they are aware of the dangers growing up in this world.
Don't actors go through emotions as their characters do? I'm not an actor, but a translator/writer (though not in English), and I go through emotions of characters I write or translate as if I were them. It is definitely different from just reading characters from books. I once was nearly traumatized after translating a very dark book. And I should think actors, especially good actors, would go through the same thing.
If Ms. Fanning is as good an actress as people make her out to be, then I'm concerned.... It's not about filming without the male counterpart or creating a scene by showing the background... she must have gone through the mind of a raped girl, to properly portrait the character. That worries me - that a child, even as a second-hand experience, had to go through it.
I would've defended Ms. Fanning's parents if I hadn't experienced a trauma like real during the process of writing/translating. Now I know better... I just hope Ms. Fanning was not a good actor and acted superficially... because otherwise, it would be too bad for a little girl.
'Anonomous' please accept my apologies - my intent was never to murk the waters. You're right, 'scene' and 'seen' do sound the same. I guess as long as you're not writing them, it really doesn't matter which one you use, so feel free to disregard whichever spelling causes you the most trouble.
About the rapture, I can only say I'm glad God is not quite as expeditious when answering prayers, specially yours. Why, I'd probably be frying as I type this.
Good luck and take care.
'ThereIsNoGod' don't you worry bout me. I ain't the one to juge you, but the Lord above. You just keep on mockin him because he'll dispence what's comin to you.
My point had nothing to do with speling. I was talking bout the rape seen... is it not wrong? Maybe to you is not, but to any God fearing Christian it's a diferent story.
But now that you got me on the speling subject, do you kno what word is not even in the dictionary no more? RESPEK! Look it up! It ain't where it use to be. If that's no sign enough for you that the time is near, I don't know what is.
I really do hope you find your way back to the Lord. The road is difficult but the reward is great.
Much Love
My dear 'Anonomous',
You are right, the word RESPEK is not in the dictionary, though I have to confess, I never did look it up. I don't know whether at some point it might have been there, or rather, I do know. It was never there. 'Anonomous,' please believe when I say this: I wish I had the authority to add your word to the dictionary, and list your name as the contributor. I believe in what your word, RESPEK, represents, and though you might doubt it, I do live by it every day.
I can assure you the rape scene resembled nothing even similar to an actual rape, so there's nothing to be concerned about. You'd be surprised what a team of make up artist, along with video and audio editors can do with a few clicks of the mouse. Otherwise, imagine what horrors must have Mr. Caviezel (he played the role of Jesus) most have gone through during the filming of 'The Passion of The Christ,' a film I'm willing to bet my soul you've seen (there's that word again! 'seen').
As for finding my way back to the Lord, as much as I would enjoy your company, I'm afraid that's a road you'll have to travel alone.
Please do take care.
Dear 'ThereIsNoGod'
You're right, I did watch 'The Passion of The Christ' and one of the reasons I cried is becaus not only it reminded me of the suferin Jesus went tru for me, but also the suferin Mr. Caviezel (who oviosly has a seat reserved next to the Lord in heaven) went tru to portrait Jesus.
I don't care what anyone seys, the camara can only captur so much. If a rape seen is what you want, you need to play a rape seen for the camara. I wouldn't be surprise to find out their was actual penetrasion. Of course, they'll keep it hush hush because as perverce as society is, we're not at that stage yet.
I'm glad you recognise the degeneration of society by removing the word RESPEK from the dictionary. But that's only the first step. Their is more to come. I am sad to read you are not even considering following on the footsteps of the Lord. Even after seing the sings your own self.
If you choose not to follow him is your choise. I kno what road I'm following. And even if I'm sad to read you're not with us, I will bask when sitting next to the Lord, watchin you burn in the deepest pits of HELL. I hope you enjoy hot whether.
With all the love and RESPEK,
Anonomous
Intriguing, I’m not a Christian, but I do agree with what Confusion stated…I haven’t seen it so I can’t really comment on the movie itself. But a few things pop into mind…
First is that during the recording of the rape scene, from descriptions (of Dakota Fanning’s description) there were quite a few people on set, and a lot of those are close to her, so I think that it only make sense that if during the filming of that scene if it became too much, or even to real there would have been a stop to it, (remember according to acting sources, some of the worst and most serious scenes are the hardest to maintain seriousness, especially with a child actress)
And really, how many of the people who wrote messages here are actually going to take a 12 year old to see it…how many 12 year olds that you know that would really want to see it, even if they do know what it is…and would they really lose their innocence from watching the movie?…would they really gain anything? Or would they complain that they wanted to watch flushed away.
last things
people that don’t have a problem with it…you just might be more accepting than those next to you- which can be a good thing.
And to people that do have a problem with it…you just might be more caring than those next to you- which can also be a good thing.
Lets just hope the scene isn't too explicit. I think everyone can 'get the picture' of what is going on, with out the gory details. Acting in a low budget film, will still make her tons of money in the long run. Another credit, another job somewhere down the line. It can at times seem like the child is 'pimped' by their parents, sad to say.
People get over, she obviously wasn't dramatized by the film or the scene in question. There are truths in this world, vulgar though they may be, and whether or not you want to admit it these are things people need to be informed of. If you have a problem with your daughter or son seeing it, dont take them. If you yourself are offended, dont watch the movie, no one is making you.
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it an outrage or a scandal. Calling for the arrest of the actresses agent and mother is the most idiotic thing I've heard recently and -as far as I can tell- not a single person has offered a shread of proof that any laws were broken. What exactly should we arrest these people for.. offending you?
Why not arrest everyone that makes a movie that you don't like, or that is beyond the scope of a sitcom? I'm now calling for the arrest of everyone in involved in the making of 'American History X' and 'Requiem for a Dream'. They exposed me to the dark underbelly of this world ::SCOFF:: OH MY GOODNESS ARREST THEM!!!!
If anything, we should appreciate the fact that there are people out there trying to get real points across. I'm more outraged by the actions of our politicians.
It's time to stop shielding everyone from everything. It may be hard to believe for some of you, but people can handle making up their own minds.
My Dearest 'Anonomous',
You're too fast for me! Can't get one past you. You're right, the camera can only capture so much, thus the advent of what's called 'special effects.' I'm not sure (I must admit, I'm curious) how old you are, but surely you must have heard that term. Anyway, special effects allow filmmakers to introduce certain elements into a film that would otherwise be impossible. You can rest assured Mr. Caviezel did not endure actual crucifixion, though he does deserve praise for an outstanding performance.
Despite our differences, I believe we do have common ground. It seems we both have an interest in films, though our understanding of the medium might be slightly different. We might not live in 17th century America, but the digital witch hunts of today are a close second. We're both allowed to eat bacon - that's got to count for something. My point is I'm sure we'd get along just fine.
Take care,
ThereIsNoGod
P.S. I'd love to hear your take on 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' - poor people!
Some mighty good responses, Congratulations to the broadminded and logical thinkers. Not all oldsters are stuck in the doddery catagory and admire the ability of today's film makers to address some of our age-old bugaboos.
What about the actor that has to do the raping. Poor boy will be known as the rapest. I think it hard on both actors.
Anonymous - -its no wonder you can't own your comment. Grow up. Or at least explain how you can divine Dakota's parents motives. She is a brilliant actress who might wind up a huge star or a teacher, who knows?! At any rate a phenomenan and a human being,she deserves better than judgement from the likes of YOU.
Would it have still been ok is she did this movie when she was 6?
Where's the cutoff? The argument that we should shed light on this subject and in the same breath that these things happen to children of all ages, is obsurd. If you strongly feel that way, then reply back with this statement: 'I would go to the movies to watch a boy or girl of any age, including an infant, get raped and have no moral problems what so ever because someone of authority on the set said it was ok. I feel that a protrayal of a child rape seen, regardless of the actors age is a benefit to society as a whole and we should make more movies about this subject. Each movie should include children ranging in age from infant to 17 so that the public can TRULY see that it does happen to children of all ages. I feel so strongly, that the education of the public supercedes any and all judgement of morality or consequences.'
...DF is a child. is anyone going to argue that? how is it possible for her to evaluate the situation in such a way that she can judicially decide what is best for 'herself' now and down the road? she can't. that is why minors have so little power, and are not held responsible for their actions in the way that an adult is made to. her parents traded in her childhood, and DK's assertion that it's what 'she' wanted doesn't hold any water with me.
you might think Foster and Shields turned out 'fine,' but last time I checked, one was still not being upfront about her sexual-orientation (pretty strange), while the other attended a thetan celebration in honor of the bully who called her a big pill-popping loser...j/k...
You Americians are unbelievably stupid and puritanical. Get Real, why shade life to your rosey colours? You so like everything to be happy and non scarey. But guess what, it can be sometimes, an people NEED to know it can be so they can watch out for the bad things. She is an actress for gods sake, she is acting... DO YOU SEE?
Dakota Fanning was not raped in the scene. Is that being disputed? She is a child. She understands, even if only on a surface level what rape is. If those things are indeed true, what is the argument against this? Is rape something we should not even give attention to? Does ignorance of the problem make it go away? These are questions I ask the critics.
You know what? She's a kid. But she's a very smart kid. And she's also extremely right. I was also sexually assaulted as a child, and coming from that prespective...why in the name of the gods would anyone want to silence what others already silence too much? Are we so ready to turn our backs on situations like these? People who would want to stop it should be ashamed of themselves for not looking at the big picture. We're more keen to let movies be produced that depict people having their heads chopped off with light sabers than we are to show REALITY. The reality of life now a days folks is that these things do happen and have happened in the shadows that we ourselves have created for MANY generations past. And for the record, I'm 21 years old. I haven't got much time over this kid.
Brava Dakota :) And to your family and everyone else who let you do this role. And Brava to the director who was able to write about her own experiences and share them as a way to possibly help others shed some light on these deplorable situations. *claps her hands*
I surprise and sad that so call 'adult' who should know better are willing to castigate Dakota Fanning, her mother, her teacher and the film production team without having seen the movie. How the so call responsible adults going to be resposible for Dakota's well being. Dakota is more intelligent and matured than some of the hypocritical people who were morally outraged. Please let her live her own life the way she sees fit.
Cootie, have you EVER had an English lesson yourself? Don't be so damn critical of Fanning. If she & her family are smart, they'll be just fine.
If you find that kind of scene objectionable in the movies, then don't go see the movie. It's that simple. It's called the market economy. Learn about it. I find it hard to fathom though, at the same film festival, there is a movie about a guy who had relations with a horse, and died from a perforated colon. And no one is protesting about that. Are we that uptight that we can't even see something controversial and talk about it? Or does the 'religious right' expect to see Miss Fanning continue to remake the Dr. Seuss and Charlotte's Web movies when she's 35?
I think what the real issue here is, is that nobody wants to face the actual issue of child rape. Sure, it's easy to put it into a ABC movie of the week setting, where everything involves the prologue and aftereffects, but nobody... I repeat, NOBODY, short of the actual victims, want to examine the actual sensations and experiences of the rape.
Put plainly: If you are outraged at this, but do not want it to be censored, you are right. If you had similar experiences to this, and want to show it as it is, you are right. Seriously. If you are against showing the ugliness of such an experience, you are either guilty of supporting such, OR you experienced such and are blocking it because you don't want to be reminded of it.
Sorry, but in my own case, when I was a child, I didn't know it was a bad thing when I was raped at 7. I believe, however, that every one of you should be forced to see your world in that time period. Most people who were raped for human history weren't even acknowleged until about 20-30 years previously. Underaged rape victims were society's dirty little secret, to the point where some were given prefrontal lobotomies up til the 60s, because nobody wanted to admit they were raped.
So in this case, someone who happens to be the age that most of this happened is daring, god forbid, to acknowledge it happened, is suddenly under fire? Screw you, she deserves credit for presenting it as it was, as it happened, and acknowledging it actually occured.
Why must you DEFY me?
Elle, release the hounds!
It's too bad the religious fundamentalist cannot face the facts that such things do happen in real life. In fact there is an entire GENERATION of women from that era upwards to the 70s who have carried this secret because talking about rape and sexual assualt/molestation 'just wasn't done' back in the the day. I can totally identify with this story....only in my case my 'Elvis' was Rick Springfield. It was his music that help me survive the horror that was my pre-adolescence and being repeated molested by my mother's boyfriend...and having a mother who refused to believe me when I tried to tell her. I think this movie should be seen by families and teens....and followed with an honest talk that helps young people protect themselves from predatory animals who go after young kids. Forewarned is forearmed, that's what I say.
It sounds to me like Miss Fanning has some widom beyond her years...and yet people fault her for it? Ok, the media is mentioning Jodie Foster and Brook Shield, but what about Linda Blair? She too did similar movies. All this stereotyping about people who were child actors is ridiculous. Not all child actors are screwed up people. There are people who have never been in show business who are screwed up, too...so what's the excuse there?
Parents like to see their children in nice happy barney-like situations at all times and they refuse to acknowledge the fact that there are sexual predators out there who target our children - teenage or infant. The message of the movie has to be lauded, however im not sure how the actual crime is depicted having not seen the movie. i dont believe it's right to attack one's family and personal beliefs...it's a movie and it's not like Ms. Fanning submitted herself to this inhuman act!
The irony here was mentioned above. Those that condemn it most likely have supported it in some fashion in their past. Every woman I have ever met has had sex against her will. I think of Rape as a victims term, as I think many adults could avoid the situations. But children, they are different. They are seduced into thinking that it is ok, or are easily overpowered by an adult or larger child. The fact that people are afraid to talk about this is outrageous. Of course, what else can we expect from the religious community. I mean catholic priests are the ones doing the raping. God sure makes people great.
This is to cootie. First, read aloud exactly what you have typed. You should see how it makes zero sense. Second, go back and check the grammar and spelling. As far as your 'thoughts', I would suggest that you have to train yourself to be able to separate a role, character, or identity from the actual actor that is portraying someone.
As far as the comparison to Lohan and Bonaduce?? Are you kidding me?? It isnt even close!!!
Jody Foster and Brooke Shields both went on to become well educated women, worthy of the respect and prosperity their careers have brought them. I suspect that Dakota will follow in their footsteps and be an example to all.
Hiding the truth from girls is not the way to protect them. If even one girl is made aware and more wary as a result of this movie, then it has succeeded as an informational piece.
who knows maybe she'll grow up to be a smarter female teenage star than her counter-parts (lohan, duff, etc.) maybe for once a female role model for growing girls with intelligence, class, and fenesse and can actually act instead of just putting on a cute smile and giving something for all those growing boys and middle aged men to.. well i'm pretty sure most of you know. I say give her a chance, not every child is given the chance for a childhood, maybe her stardom will have its mental repracussions as it has on so many a child-star, we can only wish her luck and that she'll one day become a respectable and wonderful actress with a good resume of films.
File this under...' who bloody cares'
Cootie looks like you're the one in need of an eductaion!! Your grammar is horrible and you cant even use the correct words. Its scene not seen.
I first saw her in the scifi series TAKEN and she is a brilliant actor. She is much smarter than her peers at her same age. Her parents don't force her to do any roles. She discussed it on a Late Night Show w/ Jay Leno a few years back. Her parents will allow her to take any role that they believe she is mature enough for. The way she spoke on that show proved she is extremely mature. They also have a shrink examine her before she takes certain roles to make sure she is capable of handling what she is doing in contriversial scenes.
Mainly, it's not your kid so you have no say in what she can or can't do. Most grown people couldn't act as well as this little girl and they definitely don't have children that can.
I do believe that the purpose behind Ms. Fanning's actions are being widely misconstrued by critics. By shedding light on a such a difficult situation, Ms. Fanning as well as those who watch Hounddog, learn from it. Always running away from difficult situations, or avoiding just talking about them, does nothing towards educating todays youth. Yes, childhood is a wonderful time in hopefully every humans life, but that is not an excuse for turning a cheek to experiences humans are meant to learn from.
If Dakota didn't do it, some other 12-year old WOULD. However we probably wouldn't be talking about it because THAT 12-year old wouldn't be famous. In this day and age, why is a professional actress doing her job so shocking? I've got a strong feeling they wouldn't show Ms. Fanning exposed, because that would be kiddie porn and the producers would be arrested. So how is this exploitation?
The producers/writers/directors have already done their job, without even publicly screening the movie. They've brought attention to an issue they feel passionate about and it's forcing people to think outside of their box. The people raising the commotion are the 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!' crowd, the same people who would rather a child shuffle about foster homes and orphanages than have caring(god forbid!) gay parents. While it's important to 'think of the children', don't think of all the children as if they're yours, because they're not. They're OURS, and you have absolutely NO right to them, no matter how offended you are. That's the beauty of a free society. You're free to take your hyper-concern and paranoia and shove it up your ass.
What is it with people bringing religion into this? Christians, only those who claim higher moral authority, should get off their high horses. This is not a matter of religious belief, it is the matter of a learning experience, for both Dakota Fanning and the viewers of Hounddog. If Dakota Fanning and her family are fine with her doing the scene, leave it be, it is none of your business anyways. What better way to educate people about a social issue than through allowing people to see it in all it's truth? Props to Dakota for having the courage, that very few of her critics have, to confront and tackle an issue that is very real in our world.
Why use an 11 or 12 year old actress at all? Why not make the character a bit older (yet still a minor) and find a particularly young looking and talented 18 – 20 yr. old woman to play the part? The message of the film is still intact and there is no risk of child exploitation. It’s nothing new for Hollywood to cast older people in younger roles. As long as the actress is believable as the character, it’s all good.
...if I question the motivation behind putting a twelve year old in a rape scene, how is that equated with a desire to 'hide the truth' about child-rape? nice try, but clouding the issue, and throwing in a little pathos for good measure, isn't a substitute for debating the point. the question is: is DF old enough to make this call? I'm not sure what makes the majority on this board so positive she is. what's with that? as for the argument that the scene has an educational value, since indies tend to draw the already enlightened/the converted, and I doubt the pedophiles that will surely find this film are gonna turn over a new leaf, who exactly do you think will learn from it? if it was made as a some form of catharasis for those who suffered from child-abuse, well, that's not exactly educational, but more therapeutic, and I still won't agree with using a minor to make that point...
To Ms. Fanning, Congratulations on your bravery for tackling one of the most sensitive and most ignored issues that is rampant everywhere (and I mean, globally in all cultures- woe to those victims, though, that get victimized over and over again).
But please stop singling out Catholic priests as the only ones raping members of their congregations, I hope you’re not ignorant yourself that rapists/molesters/sex offenders can be found in any walk of life. Whoever thinks he’s “Holy” or “Without Sin” enough to spread the gospel of his or her so- called religion, please don’t tell me that all your preachers, or rabbis or Buddhist monks etc… are all flawless. Please go ahead and cast out the first stone. Any takers?? Any one?
Peace to all
I completely agree with Malvolio and Seeker of Love. This child should not have the responsibility to decide what is good for her. In other wards, should we just let our kids be their own boss at 12 and stop being parents, that they no longer need guidance - our job is finished!!! Gimme a break. I don't think people who are against the rape scene feel this doesn't happen in life - no one would who has the ability to read a paper or watch the news - just that we don't need to rely on a so-called movie to educate people. There again, it should be up to parents to do the educating, and we shouldn't stop the parenting at 12!! This girl is just a little too mature, and sometimes that can be a real turnoff when a child tries to act like a superior 'little adult'!!!! And yes,I also know that kids this age know much more about life than they did years ago, but that still doesn't mean she should have control over what she feels is right for her. Regardless of how mature they seem, they are still children and aren't capable of thinking and reasoning like an adult. And child stars who grow up to be responsible, successful actors are few and far between. I know it happens, but even the successful ones have had their share of major problems in life..............
I can't believe people actually think that the ones who are against this rape scene don't want to face the real facts - get a life, people. Most educated people are well aware of what life has to offer out there, that this happens all the time at any age, from infants on up!! They just don't feel this movie was made to educate, and that a 12 year old isn't mature enough to make the call of taking this kind of role, regardless of how wordly and mature some people view Dakota. She is a child or has everyone forgotten?? She comes across a little like a superior-acting, self-absorbed (so into herself) that it fails to be appealing - a little much!!
I have not seen the movie. I might see it. It appears (I do not know for a fact) Dakota Fanning is a mature, little girl, not a woman.
I understand and accept the burden and responsibility of the imperative to 'judge not'; _ it is, do not be hasty in your judgments.
I do not condemn Dakota or her family. It is a personal decision and guidance by both. There are some things I am made to wonder
about the 'outrage' posted here. Where is the 'outrage' for the screen depictions of murder and robbery in other movies? When
did those become alright for viewing by all including children? Where was the 'outrage' in Bastard out of Carolina?
This 'outrage' is one of great selectivity and it panders to the desired outcome; profit on the one hand, voyeurism on the other, and in fairness, art.
(Yes, that would be your third hand.)
Lets be, with all the talk of being 'adult' and 'realistic' when we espouse the addage that 'these things need to be talked about', mindful
of who feeds at that trough.
Yes, it is a movie. Yes, it is good acting, 'movie magic' and an 'important topic'. We buy into and sell out on the
educational quality byline. Yes, children are not naive about sex, rape, drugs. That's a superficial, clinical, six o'clock
news variety knowledge and not necessarily an understanding of the scars (they outlast the hurt) these can incur on an indivdual.
You may think this a stretch, but hear me out. Saddam Hussein has been judged and he is gone from his world.
How many people felt a need to view the execution online? It's a reality of life. How many thought nothing that a child, as
well as any adult, could view the hanging online with the justification that, 'it's justice'? There were some who saw it some who didn't among those little boys
who hanged themselves not fully understanding the meaning and consequences of certain actions to their own peril.
How much more perverse are they who view the movie, not for the rape, but for the 'director's great work', or
'an excellent handling of a controversial topic', then those who view a hanging be it for it 'historical significance',
its 'lesson on justice'?
As I have read, the movie is based on director Deborah Kampmeier's own life story. As I see it, Dakota and cast are just
so many people helping her tell her story, select portions of her life experience at that. I got laughter the first time
I soloed my rape story (it's not limited to little girls) sixteen years after the fact.
So, Christina Z., you think a going-on-13-year-old is capable of making her own decisions???? I doubt very much if you have children. I guess we should just raise our kids to 12 and turn them loose to do as they wish - whatever and whenever. The whole point isn't that no one is aware of what the real world is like - just that this movie was made to make money not to educate people. If we need to wait around 'till some producer decides to make such a movie before we educate our kids about life, then we have more of a problem than can be addressed here. But then, I guess 12 year olds already are 'mature' and wouldn't need guidance anyway!!!!!
Yes, I agree that Dakota acts a little too 'adult' - not so appealing. This is just a movie at any rate - whether it is fiction or fact, whether this child is old enough to make her own decisions - who should care - either spend your money and see it or not - take it at face value. It was made to make money, clear and simple - not for educational purposes. With all the news reports and tv coverage of the tremendous amount of sex offenders, I doubt if there is anyone who isn't well aware of it, and we don't need to wait around for a movie to educate the public. If that is the case, these people need more help than can be given here!!
Projection is what's likely going on here in at least some of the cases of complainers (likely nearly all). My wife is a retired psychotherapist. (She takes care of gardens now instead.) She points out that when someone protests really loudly and dramatically against something, it often means that they're projecting against their own characteristics and tendencies. Examples would include closet homosexuals who condemn homosexuality in the name of their religion, abusers and enablers of abuse who rail against abuse in the movies, warriors who condemn the violent actions of others, drug users who condemn drug use, etc. The unstated plea is to demand of others to protect themselves from themselves.
If you look closely at the child actors that have experienced the greatest challenges in their teens and young adult lives, you invariably find a public that are unwilling to see the actor in any other setting than what they are familiar with. The transition from innocence into reality is hard enough
for a child, let alone having it forever dominate thier adult lives.
This may not be the film or role that does it, but I'm betting that Dakota
choses a project in the near future that allows the world to see her as
a young woman rather than a little girl.
I think it is a good thing that annonymous's wife is now gardening instead of working as a psychotherapist........sad that someone would lump 'most' people together with one diagnosis. The bottom line here is that a lot of people feel Dakota was a little young to make her own decisions, and she was much younger when she made this film. No one is stating that rape doesn't happen in real life at all ages. This has gotten analized to pieces......way over the top. If we want our children to be 'little adults' we shouldn't be complaining about their disregard for any authority. People are just expressing their opinions - don't read into it more than it is. I don't remember a psychiatrist's couch being involved here!!!!
So Dakota says a movie like this is educational - that kids need to be aware of what is going on in the world. I think parents are better at 'educating' their children than seeing a movie that is being made for money by a 'child' who should not have been doing a rape scene!!!!!!! She is just a little too 'mature' and I agree with other comments - she acts too self righteous and a little like a 'know it all' and as stated before - not so appealing. She isn't exactly an authority on life regardless of how she thinks she is. First and foremost..........she is a child!!!
...who said the posters that disagree with the DF rape-scene didn't protest or complain when 'bastard' came out? i'm guessing that the people who read these boards and engage in 'debate' on them, are not shy with their opinions. my strong opinions regarding the exploitation of children do not begin and end with DF. I am still not speaking to a relative who gave her 4 and 7 year old daughters the 'bratz' collection this holiday season. all though i've never told her this, i question her ability to raise her children along with her 'sanity' in general. this is a message board and the topic is DF's rape-scene, so what's with all the finger-wagging and condescending bs in the posts directed at those who had a problem with it? personally, i don't think i'm the one who's in denial, or the one who needs a 'couch.' this isn't about a '12' year old making a poor decision today, it's about a little girl who hasn't spent 5 minutes out of the spotlight since the age of 4 making same-said decision. but, you keep telling yourself that she's a little sophisticate (that's called 'acting' too!). re-read the board, the majority of the posts that are judgemental and resort to 'name-calling' are all pro rape-scene -- with the exception of one obviously trolling (teenager???) mascarading as the religious-right, the posts arguing against the 'wisdom' behind the act have all been pretty docile...
Does Dakota know anything other than to 'act'? Maybe all her interviews, etc., are just her 'acting' a part - kind of sad. She isn't happy about the critics. Well, just because she does a movie doesn't mean everyone is going to like it - I thought she was supposed to be grown up?? She is used to playing 'little girl' roles and people thought she was cute. Now if she wants to get into the 'adult' world, she better get used to critics. 'Grown-up' isn't always cute!!!!
Everyone who is critical of the controversial scene in this film who has not actually viewed same will feel utterly foolish when the movie is released. I saw the film yesterday at Sundance, and the scene in question is filmed in such a way that it is not at all exploitative of the character or the actress. We see Miss Fanning only from the shoulders up; the camera cuts to the actor unzipping his fly with no one else in the frame, and the majority of the scene is a close up of Miss Fanning's face, shocked, tear-streaked and in wordless pain. From the way in which the scene is edited, Miss Fanning could very well have been completely alone and fully dressed while filming the scene, with sounds being dubbed in aftertwards in postproduction.
I think the director says it best: 'When you're shooting a film, it's the images you line up next to each other that create a story,' Kampmeier said. 'If you have a hand hitting the ground, Dakota screaming 'stop' and you see a zipper unzip -- that creates a rape.'
Get it? Three shots that, by themselves, wouldn't necessarily indicate a rape; yet, edit them in sequence, and it's the *audience* that infers the story behind what they've just been shown.
It's called filmmaking, folks. Child rape is horrible. But you have to separate the hotbed issue from the mechanics of how it is portrayed. You don't want to watch a sequence of shots that implies the rape of a child? Fine. But to rail against the artists for wanting to portray a serious issue and bring it to light, inferring, without actually knowing, that a child was abused during the filming of the movie? I can understand how such a belief would upset people, but I think it says more about the person jumping to conclusions and imposing knee-jerk moral platitudes.
Opinions on the topic of child abuse are irrelevant to the artists' process of making the film - unless of course you know exactly how it was shot, and/or have witnessed something untoward happening on set. To assume that the shooting of the scene involved anything even *close* to an actual rape is ignorant at best. Come on, people, *think*.
You are all missing the point!
Following the path of the Lord requires a great deal of retrain. While the lot of you bask in the pleasures of the flesh, those of us who have chosen the difficult path of purity are left watching from the sidelines. But we're only humans - how can you expect us to restrain our desires when films such as the one in question, rub in our faces the pleasures we're forgoing? How can I be held responsible, as a Pastor, for my actions when it is films like this that could drive me to act on my impulses? It is for these reasons that we must eradicate the proliferation of such material.
Thank you.
Yay Sarah! You said it - education of young children about such issues is paramount in protecting them in the long run. I too was assaulted at age 8 and the silence was deafening. Dakota Fanning has already proven that she is mature beyond her years as well as being a very talented actor. Such criticism aimed at her, her parents and the director etc., particularly from religious groups, is misplaced and potentially harmful - although I must say that well, any publicity might be considered 'good' publicity, if it gets people talking and responding to the issue.
Falling from Grace... since when is rape considered a 'pleasure of the flesh'? You moron...
From what I've read from the critics, the movie stinks regardless of the rape scene. None of the studios want it because it's just poorly done in general. I also read an article by a critic who said that the rape scene served no purpose in the film - it didn't advance the plot in any way nor what is necessary to the story. The victim never told anyone, it was never mentioned again in the film, and it was obviously there just for gratuitous shock value. If it had not been in the film at all, nobody would have missed it. That's not art - it's a hook to cater to an audiences prurient interests.
We don't have to be a film maker to know what the scene portrays. Everyone is missing the point........that people are voicing their opinion that this 'child/woman' shouldn't be the one to make the decision on doing the film. She might be 'mature beyond her years', and that is another point.......when do these kids ever get to be just kids. I'm sure she probably feels much above her peers at this point, but the whole thing is just sad. I agree with the comments that we don't need a film to learn about life. Hopefully there are responsible adults and parents out there who can do the job of teaching. As far as Dakota being so mad at all the criticism...she is now in the adult world that she apparently wants to be in and better get used to dealing with criticism and the publicity that comes with the millions she will no doubt some day receive. If she can't handle it - get out!!!!!!!!
You are right on, Janet. I couldn't have said it better!!
No one is implying there was an actual rape going on for the filming - you need to read more carefully. However it was done, most people don't think it was especially necessary or that a 12 year old was mature enough to make the decision of doing the film. And don't say that it serves a good purpose - what a cop out!! Read what Janet said.........she has a good comment - EOS!!!
So little Miss Fanning is 'mad as can be' at the critics of this film. Does she think that just because she has done a film, everyone should agree. She better quit her little fits and act like the so-called 'Mature' person she is protrayed to be. Accepting that the world doesn't just think everything she does is just wonderful is part of the maturing process, or hasn't that been explained to her since she is supposed to be so mature beyond her years??? Unfortunately, she will probably be headed toward the same place that a few other young entertainers have ended up. The world doesn't revolve around her and the sooner she understands that, the better off she will be. Granted, the public is guilty for putting these so-called entertainers on pedestals, but they better be prepared for the 'fall', for it will come. Case in point - her movie is being critisized - something she isn't used to and doesn't like!!!
I have to agree with Dakota. Why coverup something that happens everyday. Children and women are raped daily. As a matter of fact I gurantee you a woman and child are being raped right now. Of course its brutal its rape. Why does it seem like people want to cover this up as if it doesn't happen. Is it because its a woman's issue and men especially often believe rape isn't any vicious. Rape is a shameful act to commit but I don't believe its something should try to cover up. Plus this was just a movie that a lot of people are passing judgement on and haven't even seen.
For the love of heaven........no one is trying to cover up the fact that rape happens.......this had gotten blown way out of sight. It all boils down to whether people think Dakota, at the young age of 12,, is mature enough to make a decision like doing this so-called movie, and that she is mad at the critics.
She needs to get used to the 'mature' world and realize not everything she does will be met with approval. No one is denying rape happens all the time from babies - yes it does - to old women. And if you log onto the views of analysists, it has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with control???
Anyway, if she isn't able to handle the criticism, maybe she isn't as 'mature' as some have stated. Actually........who really cares???? There are scores of military getting killed all the time in this crazy war.....let's focus on something important besides the likes of this so-called entertainer/child!!!!
page: 1 2
Your Talkback on this Story