Movies News
By Stone Martindale Jan 25, 2007, 17:56 GMT
Fanning film avoided by distributors at Sundance
And Also
Dakota Fanning - View Dakota Fanning Pictures - Dakota Fanning News
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Headlines in Movies
- 1. Producing trio listening to 'The Piper'
- 2. Two 3D sequels being prepped
- 3. Summit, Participant ready for an 'Invasion'
- 4. Screen Gems is in 'Love'
- 5. The End of Poverty? - Movie Review
Older Talkback
page: 1 2
I have not seen the movie or read the book. Nor do I intend to. I can understand that writing about the experience may be cathartic...healing...for a person who has undergone such an experience. But, I question the wisdom of placing such images into public consciousness. I think such images, presented as entertainment, are harmful to society. I don't confine this opinion to just rape. I find that there are certain images that I just don't want to place into my consciousness anymore. Sadism, rape, violence, torture, I know these things exist and I am horrified by them. And while the vast majority of people will view such imagery as entertaining or thrilling, I think that the trend towards showing such imagery in public venues also stimulates a few people to inappropriate desires and behaviors that are unhealthy for society at large; then someone writes, paints a picture, or makes a movie about the new attrocity and the cycle perpetuates.
I would not advocate censoship, though. All of us should have the right to express ourselves in any manner. But I do wonder if we should recognize that there seems to be a rise in many forms of violence and attrocity in societies across the globe. I wonder if we should ask ourselves if there is a corelation between the rise of such violence and the production of arts or entertainments that, in a few, further justify or stimulate such violence. I can't prove it, but I, for one, have no doubt that the increased violence in our societies is directly related to the imagery that we allow to invade our minds.
A solution? I know of none, not if we are to be a truly free society. But, perhaps we can start a dialog with the people who produce these images, and appeal to their sense of public conscience. Or, perhaps we can teach ourselves and our children to be vigilant about what we allow to invade our minds, and let the marketplace define the boundaries of exposure.
I am not wild about the premise of the movie, however, I understand it was done with a lot of shadow images, etc. I find it interesting that nobody seems upset by Hannible Lecter movies, where canniblism is rampant and right in your face.
As a rape survivor, I cannot say I would be offended by this movie. On the contrary, I would be interested to see how honestly they would deal with this.
But go ahead, let Hannibel loose again - no harm in that, is there?
Good! Excellent that Distributors are running fast & furiously far away from 'HoundDog'. A rape scene involving a 12year old child???? Yes that is what a 12year old is, A CHILD! Even if this movie was about an 18 year old being visciously attacked, it WOULD STILL BE A SHAMEFUL MOVIE BECAUSE AN 18 YEAR OLD IS STILL YOUNG, NAIVE & IMPRESSIONABLE. NO RAPE ATTACK ON ANY BOY/FEMALE OF ANY AGE IS SOMETHING HOLLYWOOD SHOULD GLORIFY! What's more alarming is Dakota Fanning is upset that critics say she is too young to be in this kind of movie portraying herself in such a sexual way. Throughout the movie she is also seen dancing & singing very provacatively in her underwear & little tank top. It's too revealing. What is wrong with Dakota's Mom, is she crazy or something? Every Pedophile in North America is going to be running to see this movie when it comes out. This is the kind of filth(fantasizing about a child in sexually enticing ways) which these Men dream about. Psychologists & Police say it all the time! Dakota is arguing in support of her role & the Movie because she & her family want that damn Oscar. Obviously she's willing to sell her soul to the Devil to get it.But there's some good news! 'HoundDog' overall is receiving very bad reviews & now because of the lack of Distributors, will have a future by going straight to videos. Dakota needs to go back to playing child-like roles. They'll be plenty of time for her to take on these grown up roles. She's a baby, she still has many years in the business!
We shouldn't advocate censorship Stan? Oh YES WE SHOULD! When it comes to a child there is no 'censorship' view allowed. The right of a parent, guardian, adults are to always alway protect the innocence & life of a child. That is a human trait we must all exhibit! No questions asked!!
In the movie 'A Time To Kill' starring Samuel L. Jackson & Mathew McConaghey, Samuel's daughter is violently raped by a couple of racist country men. The movie takes place in the turmoil South! But the director of that movie did a fantastic job by not allowing graphic scenes of the sexual assault to be shown. It was tastefully done. Also the child was never portrayed as sexually inviting attention to herself. In 'HoundDog' that is the illusion that is presented to us as viewers which conjures up imagery of a child in control, aware of her conduct & creates the consequences of her 'rape' in the Movie. I can't believe a woman is directing this movie? Hollywood wonders why movies like 'Happy Feet' & other family animated-movies are doing better at the box-office than dramas & comedies? It's because not only can you take your kids to the theatre, but also we adults can leave the theatre believing in purity & goodness ONCE AGAIN!
I find it interesting that none of the commentators here have even seen the film in question. How can you comment on a film you haven't seen? l agree that child-rape is a highly disturbing subject. Unfortunately, however, it does happen on occasion. And I can't think of anything that happens in real life that won't be eventually protrayed on film. Art imitating life, you know the old cliche. Having not seen the film I can't comment on whether the rape scene is justifiable or not. But I will say it's all too typical for people to form opinions based on hearsay and preconceived notions. And THAT I consider a crime.
I don't think people are commenting so much on the film they haven't seen as disgust that Dakota had the role she did. We are well aware it was probably not explicit, but just the idea of her parents allowing her to partake in it is not good, nor the fact that Dakota is 'mad as she can be' at the critics. People have a right to their opinion, and like it or not, she is a child regardless of what she thinks. And the remarks that it is 'educational' - gimme a break!! There are a lot of better ways to be educated about the matter than viewing a 12-year-old being raped in a movie!!
I think this has been analized to death - time to give it a decent burial and concentrate on something really important. No one knows any of the people personally who are involved in this movie - how they feel, think, etc. Let it rest!!!
The point is, we have enough sickos in North America alone much less in the rest of the world who are taking pleasure of sexually attacking children! It's become too mainstream! When I was 12, I was fortunate to be raised in a household of mostly women & my family was very protective of me. So I wasn't aware of such acts on a child to even exist! Thank God!! I had a normal & innocent childhood. But many kids don't have the same luxury these days! Why so many people are disturbed by this movie is because you have a very young actress playing a rape victim & the character Dakota Fanning plays is too sexually inviting as well. Dakota is a child! We don't need Hollywood sending signals to Pedophiles that if a child is sexually suggestive then she must understand what she's doing! That's the issue! This movie is taking it one step to closer to making it mainstream....people just don't care to stop stuff like this anymore because it's everywhere. That's the sad reality! I hope this movie absolutely, 100% stays out of theatres!
Clips of the movie, premiered at Sundance have been leaked on the Internet!
I think that you can't critize something is you haven't seen it. Yes, child rape is wrong but if the Holocost and cannibalism can be depicted in movies, why not child rape? No one had a problem with Brooke Shields when she did a nude scene when she was 12(or somehwere around that age). The thing is, from what I have read, there isn't any nudity of Dakota and the movie doesn't really revolve around the rape, just healing from it. I have not been raped so I don't know how rape victims feel. Just watch the movie first and then comment.
Okay, it's about time that people quit saying stuff like, 'No one had a problem with Brooke Shields when she did a nude scene when she was 12(or somehwere around that age).' Who says nobody had a problem with it?? Personally, I'm very happy to see that SOMEBODY has a moral compass, so far. I have a feeling that they will get distribution somewhere, but this is refreshing that it hasn't gotten picked up yet. To use the argument that people didn't get upset when such and such movie was made is ridiculous because plenty of people did.
I completely agree with the first poster on here. Very well said!!
Barbara are you a man writing & hiding behind a woman's name?????????????????????
Excuse me, why not show child rape in a movie???????????????????????????????????
Huh???????????Are in you insane? A child, is a child, is a child! This is not something that is supposed to be done at anytime! It is absolutely wrong.
I know this World is sick & perverse & didn't think it could get much worse but IT JUST DID! First of all Brooke Shields & her Mother received a huge backlash in her movies 'Pretty Baby', 'Blue Lagoon'& 'Endless Love'. Brooke's Movie career never recovered from it & she went on to University & became a TV star instead. So get your facts correct! It was degrading then for a child & it is now! Dakota needs to go back to doing Disney Movies. She was acting a little too grown up in her last movies, WAR OF THE WORLDS & MAN UNDERFIRE! WE guess we should've seen it coming. Dakota enjoy your childhood, because once it's gone, it's gone forever!
Enjoy being a playful & innocent child, it's the best part of life.
I don't think we all had access to a computer with programs like this where you can comment when Brooke Shields was 12, so, no, how do we know how many people complained. And, besides, the reports from those who have seen Dakota's movie describe the sexual way she acts as one disturbing element, not just the rape scene that is implied. The ridiculous statements made by this 'child' that her parents don't want to shield her from these things and that she needs to experience what is happening - why does it have to be by acting in such a movie.....can't they explain things to her any other way........how 'immature' are those statements????
Maybe the public has gotten the idea of what is entertainment all wrong.
A lot of people don't care to sit through some of this garbage out there that doesn't leave you with a good feeling - only upset or depressed or sickened at best. I'm not on a moral soapbox, everyone has their opinion, but it seems like most films are just going for the shock value and nothing else. Anyway, apparently those whose job it is to purchase movies, feel like staying away from this one big time. Little Miss Fanning needs to slow down a little, before she finds herself just another Lindsey or Britney.
Exactly it is not just the Rape Scene that has critics, distributors and reviewers on fire. It is in the entire movie throughout where Dakota acts very sexually suggestive that is making everybody squirmish & uncomfortable! wearing skimpy clothes etc. The movie clips are on the Internet to see, so there is already a HUGE ISSUE here. By the way to the poster who said there wasn't Internet back when Brook Shields did her movies in the 70's & 80's, so we don't know how bad the backlash was? You must be really really young? First of all before we all became captured & addicted to our computers, there were two Media info. outlets called TV & Newspapers! You may have heard of them? We still have them as a another source for getting information. Brooke was on the TV News, in the Newspapers & Magazines when Pretty Baby hit. IT WAS A BIG NASTY CONTROVERSERY. But it is great to know that Brooke grew up survived it, to become an intelligent person & an actress.
To Chantal - I agreed wholeheartedly with your comments until you got to the part about criticising the commentor who remarked there weren't computers back when. I think they meant there weren't computers with these kinds of programs designed to be able to more accessively make comments about various things.
We all know there were TV's and newspapers with information, but we don't generally get to reply quite like this. Too bad you had to end your good comments with a nasty retort!!!!!!!!
I totally agree with 'Nasty' regarding Chantal's remarks........why would she need to spoil her good comments with a closing retort like that. The commentor was just making an honest accessment of the past as they knew it!!! Sure too bad for the scarcasm!!!!!!!
It seems like Chantal's name has come up before.......maybe she needs to get a life outside this website and go watch TV and read the newspapers that she so quickly pointed out were available during Brooke's bad movie days!!!!
Who cares about the computer stuff. The point is about Dakota Fanning. I completely agree with Chantal's point as absolutely correct & right on the money!
To this 'Too Often' poster- The name Chantal is a very common name. It could be different posters, genius. Maybe you're on here TOO OFTEN watching & criticizing? Maybe you should take your own advice & go read a newspaper & stop cracking on others! The issue here shouldn't be to entice a Blog fight. It's about a young actress who is doing a very questionable scene in a dark disturbing movie.
Stick to the discussion!
I can't stand people like this Too Often blogger. You're on here telling people to get a life because they may be on here too much. But you don't have too much of a life - hiding behind 'too often' alias afraid to use your name & criticizing others. Are you getting paid? You are obviously ON HERE quite a bit yourself because otherwise you wouldn't recognize names?? That already tells the rest of us YOU, who ever you are, is not in any kind of position to be dictating orders when you clearly don't follow them yourself! What's more alarming is you seem more concerned to write about a Blogger rather than a child actress who filmed a rape scene? That's a RED FLAG RIGHT THERE!!!
So J.J. is a name - ha!! I can't believe all of you and your crazy remarks - none of you are sticking to the whole point of this, and that's Dakota Fanning's bad choice. You all need to get a life!!!!! This should be a place to have a reasonable discussion, but it sure isn't, and that goes for most of you!!!!
page: 1 2
Your Talkback on this Story