12 yr old Dakota Fanning in controversial new film role

[AD011620]

I her

 

[elegantly_wasted]

Easy.. she just acts the way she does when her parents refuse to buy her something

 

[HavHasitAll!]

Dakota is adorable. However, adolesence and pre-puberty may not be the ideal time for a child to be challenged like that as an actress or otherwise.

I understand it's only a film, but I think with issues such as this, tredding lightly and with caution is so necessary.


I am not a mother, but if my daughter was an actress, no way in hell would she be parading around a grown man, acting or otherwise. JMO.


Parents must retain some standard and morality in their childs lives.

 

[HavHasitAll!]

Parading around naked, is what I meant to write.

 

[Juliet]

^ Well said HavHasitAll, I would never in hell let me child do that either!

 

[HavHasitAll!]

^

 

[Yanka]

It's a touchy subject. And not sure, but I believe it will be the first that a minor will act in detail about a r*pe on the big screen which is why it's controversial? Anyway, the subject matter is important and needs to be addressed, I agree with you there, *Happiness*. As to how many people will receive it, who knows. Needless to say, I'm not sure if the Academy will take into consideration to touch this. We shall see. The movie should be in the process if not already wrapped. Surprisingly, Penn is involved with financing the film?

eh... no... speaking of "happiness" did you see the movie "happiness" by Todd Solonz? A father rapes his son's 11 year old friend, it's not shown but it's implied and it's still disturbing. Did you see "mysterious skin" Araki where two six year old boys get raped on screen? This is not new or controversial, it's a social issue, it's life and it happens to a lot of people. It's no more shocking than a murder on screen. The only thing I'd be a bit quisy about is nudity. I belive you can easily go without seeing fanning actually naked on screen. Think of Lolita, 1997 version, great movie and the 15 year old actress didn't need to take off her clothes.

 

[BerrySweet]

Wasn't the little girl raped (and I think murdered afterwards) in the movie "A Time to Kill"? I don't recall anyone saying anything when the movie came out. It was about 10 years ago.

I've seen a Time to Kill and don't recall them actually showing the child being raped. They just show her tied up.

In the book though, her r*pe is very and horrifically graphic. But I think another reason that folks weren't up in arms about it was because of the setting of the story. It was about a little black girl raped by 2 white men. Happened in the deep South were folks didn't care too much about things like that.

Then the Dad kills the men, and the focus of the story turn to him and his actions, rather than what happened to the child. 75% of the movie is foucsed on the actual Trial of the father and that process, and not the prosecution of the r*pists.

So because of the storyline, I think folks were more involved in the father-murder storyline, and not the child being raped so much.

Just a theory.

 

[farren fashion]

well, i've adored dakota for awhile. she pulled off such intense characters. i've never seen ANY child actor live up to her ability. after watching this film has not yet been rated, i've changed my mind about a lot of censorship in movies. i feel that r*pe happens to children. the more we try to sweep it under the rug the more it'll fly under the radar. it's not exploitative. i don't think people give dakota enough credit. i'm positive she knows she she got herself into. and the film will give her the credit she deserves. go dakota!

 

[farren fashion]

i have a question. how old is dakota at the moment?

 

[mellowdrama]

^Surviving this turkey would make her about 36 in Hollywood years.

 

[farren fashion]

hahaha.

well, i always thought she gave off this aura of being much older than she is.

 

[mellowdrama]

Researching old Hollywood, I found this: Child Bride, from 1938, which predates my earlier guess of Bastard Out of Carolina as a kid exploitation pic by almost 60 years. Strange how it's been the same old, same old for so long. I wonder if it's a "classic"?

I don't think Hounddog ever picked up a distributor, did it? The reviews I've seen have been pretty negative, again for aesthetic reasons, not moral ones.

 

[farren fashion]

i saw the pic at the bottom of the page of an actual child bride. she was 12 and he was 19. wow... but that was normal back then. interesting.

 

[mellowdrama]

^Yeah, two-minute skinny-dipping scenes with above-the-waist nudity of a twelve-year old girl really furthered their cause, I'm sure. At least the bad guy gets his in the end in morality play fashion.

 

[farren fashion]

i've never seen the movie. i'll take your word for it though.

 

[mellowdrama]

I haven't seen it, either. Can't say I ever intend to. The girl who starred in that particular vehicle seems to have turned out all right. I don't doubt the resilience of child actors at all. I also don't blame filmmakers for some viewers' dirty minds. However, I disagree with the sentiment of a few posters in this thread that you have to see a film to judge it. There aren't hours enough in my life for that--but, hey, if they want to see it, have at it. They can watch people get their heads sawed off, too. If that's what it takes for them to decide head-sawing's a bad thing to do, they can have that picture burned in their heads for awhile. It's just not too aesthetically pleasing, is all.

As Robert Benchley said, " We didn't know about 'inhibitions' in my day. They came in with horn-rimmed glasses and Freud. We just said 'Yes, please,' or 'No, thanks,' and let it go at that."

Child r*pe? No, thanks.

 

[farren fashion]

When the videos were aired on that reporter getting decapitated, i saw it. I never intend to see something like that again. It made me sick, physically sick.

But I agree. You cannot blame filmmakers for other viewers who go and watch the movie just to see a child raped. You have just got to look at the bigger picture.

 

[I_Want_That_One]

A film can be dark and address controversial issues without crossing the line. I think this does. There's a difference between reading about something like this and then actually seeing it in front of you. Even though she is just acting and so is the person who "rapes" her, I can't imagine this having any positive effect on her or on people that watch the movie. Some things just shouldn't be visualized, especially so graphically that it requires a 12 year old girl to be naked on tape. It will make a pedo's day that's all.

 

[jjbunny79]

i am a lil bit more worry about the guy. what if trying to take advantge of it or something >.<