Why would any self serving parents allow their children...

[Cardinals.Ken]

I hope Tim Robbins didn't have to endure that in the Shawshank Redemption.

Director: "Now Tim, the only way we can make this scene work is if it's real. No lube or anything. I want real baby!"

It happened to Ned Beatty in "Deliverance", not intentionally of course. He still does not like discussing it.

Neither would I!

 

[Russ Smith]

It happened to Ned Beatty in "Deliverance", not intentionally of course. He still does not like discussing it.

Neither would I!

"Squeal like a pig."

To this day that's one of the scariest movies I've ever seen for that one scene.

 

[Covert Rain]

Well, then that's just wrong. No one should actually be raped for a movie.

Ha Ha Ha. Not what I meant. I mean while filming the scene, they did not atually simulate the "ACT" of committing rape.

 

[Pariah]

Ha Ha Ha. Not what I meant. I mean while filming the scene, they did not atually simulate the "ACT" of committing rape.

I know what you mean, but not because of this post. You haven't cleared anything up with this one.

 

[DWKB]

Jodi Foster played a 12(?) year old prostitute as a child actor and she turned out fairly normal.

 

[D-Dogg]

Dakota Fanning is a hell of an actress and is extremely mature of mind. She knows what she does and her job in it. SHE isn't manipulated by her parents. Take time to read or watch her interviews...it's like a 35 year old woman in a teensy little kid body.

She wouldn't do what she doesn't want to do. She has spoken on this role and what it meant doing it.

She very well may become a multiple oscar winner in her career, and I think this whole thing is getting blown out of proportion. I think it's more of a problem that they've already SHOT the scenes, but now they aren't getting investors to put the movie out there? Isn't that worse? That you "put her through" the scenes for naught? Don't you think that is counterproductive? She chose to do the movie, and she wanted it to say something. They probably weren't easy scenes to shoot, and since the public might get uppity about it they can't release it? Seems like a bass-ackward way of doing things.

 

[Linderbee]

yes, I've seen her interviews. She's 12. Why do you think she's so mature? Even still, do you really think that at that age, she really has a grasp on the world, and life? She doesn't. She can be wise, and mature, blah, blah. She's still only 12, and I hate parents that rob their children of their youth. It's disgusting.

 

[D-Dogg]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070124/film_nm/sundance_fanning_dc

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Precocious 12-year-old Dakota Fanning, star of the kids movie "Charlotte's Web," is as mad as she can be and is not going to take any more criticism about her latest role -- a rape victim.

Fanning saw her newest movie "Hounddog" premiere at the Sundance Film Festival this week after months of complaints from religious groups and others who questioned whether her family and the film's maker acted responsibly when asking her to act in a rape scene.

"When it gets to the point of attacking my mother, my agent ... my teacher, who were all on the set that day, that started to make me mad," she said in an interview.

"I can let other things go, but when people start to talk about my mother, like, that's really bad in my opinion ... that's an attack, and that's not fair. They hadn't seen the movie," she added.

Since the age of six, when Fanning appeared in an episode of U.S. television program "Ally McBeal," her fan base has grown into millions of people around the world.

She has starred in Hollywood movies ranging from "The Cat in the Hat," based on the Dr. Seuss children's book about a magical cat, to Steven Spielberg's "War of the Worlds," in which she played a young girl on the run from space aliens.

But Fanning is now entering her teen-age years -- she'll be 13 in February -- and like any girl or boy who is growing older and maturing, she finds herself attracted to new stories and roles she finds challenging and thought-provoking.

GOING ON 13

In "Hounddog," Fanning plays 12-year-old Lewellen, who lives in a Deep South town in the 1950s. Her dysfunctional family is poor, and the household is run by her grandmother.

Lewellen loves Elvis Presley, and in order to get a ticket to his concert, she agrees to do her Elvis impersonation for an older teen-age boy. Eventually that scene leads to the rape.

"I loved the Elvis Presley story line. I loved the fact she's born of hard circumstances and is trying to survive those," Fanning said. "I like so many things about it that had nothing to do with being abused, or sexually abused."

"Hounddog" is based on director Deborah Kampmeier's personal history, and she called the criticism of Fanning's decision to take the role an insult to the young actress.

"She should be applauded to the voice she has given to so many silenced women," Kampmeier said.

Kampmeier called the Georgia-born Fanning an "old soul" who understood Lewellen's thoughts and emotions from the moment the actress and director first discussed the part.

Fanning said she would tell her friends to see "Hounddog," with their parents' approval, because it addresses many topics they will either soon face or, perhaps, already have.

"I'm going to be a freshman in high school in September, and I think it would be irresponsible of my parents not to let me know of things that happen and to try not to get yourself in uncomfortable situations," she said. "It's educational."

Fanning said she loves acting and wants to continue to into her teens and adulthood. She added that she does not pick parts with a career plan, such as making the transition from child actor to adult, which is often hard to do successfully

As she talks, Fanning tries hard cover her teeth and hide her new braces. When told not to be shy because many adults went through the same issue with braces, she giggles. Then, she quickly brightens as she looks at Kampmeier.

"I know," she says, "let's make a movie about braces."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/24/sundance.fanning.ap/index.html

"It's not a rape movie," Fanning said Tuesday. "That's not even the point of the film."

The disturbing scene lasts a few minutes but is not graphic. There is no nudity, the scene is very darkly lit and only Fanning's face and hand are shown.

Kampmeier said it took her a decade to get the film made, largely because of the rape scene, but cutting it was a compromise she was unwilling to make.

"This issue is so silenced in our society. There are a lot of women who are alone with this story," she said.

"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."

Ted Baehr, chairman of the Christian Film and Television Commission and publisher of the Web site movieguide.org, claims "Hounddog" breaks federal child-pornography law. He said the law covers material that "appears" to show minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

"Even if they're not actually performing the explicit act, we are dealing with a legal issue here," he said.

Baehr said Fanning is being exploited in the film, and that it should be considered an outrage.

"Children at 12 do not have the ability to make the types of decisions that we're talking about here," he said. "If we're offended by some comedian's racial slur, why aren't we offended by somebody taking advantage of a 12-year-old child?"

Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said he has asked the U.S. Justice Department to investigate whether anti-pornography laws have been broken.

Two other children perform in the film. Cody Hanford plays Buddy, and Isabelle Fuhrman plays a girl nicknamed "Grasshopper."

Kampmeier said she talked with the children and their parents but didn't go into great detail with the young actors about the content.

"I didn't have to articulate to Cody and Isabelle the psychological elements that were going on in this film," she said. "I used images to tell the story. I didn't manipulate these children or explain to these children what was going on."

Fanning said she and Kampmeier talked for months before the film was shot and spent a day painting pottery together and discussing the story.

"It's not really happening," Fanning said of a rape. "It's a movie, and it's called acting. I'm not going through anything. Cody and Isabelle aren't going through anything, their characters are.
"And for me, when it's done it's done," she said. "I don't even think about it anymore."

 

[Linderbee]

I love your use of larger font. I wouldn't have understood the point without it, thank you.

Dakota has no grasp of what a parents' responsibilities are. Of course she will defend her mother. Children who are horribly physically abused defend their parents, because they don't understand the role parents are supposed to play. I am not saying that she has been horribly physically abused, I'm just saying her opinion on what she thinks of her mother doesn't matter to me. She loves her mother, and doesn't believe her mother would allow her to do something bad.

No amount of large fonted quotes from anyone will ever change my opinion on the matter, so it's best if we just agree to disagree.

 

[D-Dogg]

yes, I've seen her interviews. She's 12. Why do you think she's so mature? Even still, do you really think that at that age, she really has a grasp on the world, and life? She doesn't. She can be wise, and mature, blah, blah. She's still only 12, and I hate parents that rob their children of their youth. It's disgusting.

Because she thinks in a different way than others. Maturity isn't age-related. I know several people my age who are not mature, or who don't "get it." She does, and understands things at a different level. She talks about being able to observe Denzell in action, or to pick Spielberg's brain because she doesn't know when she'll have that opportunity again and she wants to learn as much as possible when the opportunity is there. That is not your normal 12 year old viewpoint on life. She has a lot of life to live and a TON of things to learn, but she's got a headstart and it shows in her serious acting (not cat in the hat, etc.).

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you in 99% of the cases out there of child actors, pageant queens, etc. Parents invariably hurt their kids because of their own machinations.

I do, however, think that Dakota is different and that her family is different from everything I've read about them.

I don't think you are wrong in general about parents and their acting/creative/athletic children. I just feel in this one particular case you are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Russ Smith]

I love your use of larger font. I wouldn't have understood the point without it, thank you.

Dakota has no grasp of what a parents' responsibilities are. Of course she will defend her mother. Children who are horribly physically abused defend their parents, because they don't understand the role parents are supposed to play. I am not saying that she has been horribly physically abused, I'm just saying her opinion on what she thinks of her mother doesn't matter to me. She loves her mother, and doesn't believe her mother would allow her to do something bad.

No amount of large fonted quotes from anyone will ever change my opinion on the matter, so it's best if we just agree to disagree.

Agreed, I bet Lindsay Lohan thought her mom was great at that age too, probably still does, who wouldn't like a mom that lets them get drunk at hollywood parties all the time?

Dakota is only 12, she can't make adult decisions on her own she needs parental help. I appreciate that it's a movie but my concern still stands, why do they have to show the rape at all? Some of the scariest movies ever made they didn't show the actual killings, some of the sexiest scenes in history had no real nudity.

I hope Dakota's right and everyone is overreacting but again she is only 12 years old, aren't the odds against her being right?

 

[D-Dogg]

I love your use of larger font. I wouldn't have understood the point without it, thank you.

Dakota has no grasp of what a parents' responsibilities are. Of course she will defend her mother. Children who are horribly physically abused defend their parents, because they don't understand the role parents are supposed to play. I am not saying that she has been horribly physically abused, I'm just saying her opinion on what she thinks of her mother doesn't matter to me. She loves her mother, and doesn't believe her mother would allow her to do something bad.

No amount of large fonted quotes from anyone will ever change my opinion on the matter, so it's best if we just agree to disagree.

But what about this line?

The disturbing scene lasts a few minutes but is not graphic. There is no nudity, the scene is very darkly lit and only Fanning's face and hand are shown.

Sounds like much ado about nothing, IMO. Tastefully shot, but serious and frightening subject matter. I don't know, as I haven't seen it.

And the large font quote wasn't intended for you as any sarcastic remark. I just thought it was a very funny way of putting it to some of the religious leaders who are quoted in that article as wanting it INVESTIGATED. Kind of ballsy of her to say.

 

[D-Dogg]

I appreciate that it's a movie but my concern still stands, why do they have to show the rape at all?

It sounds like it is done just like that....like the shower scene in Psycho. Dark shot, face, hand, etc.

The disturbing scene lasts a few minutes but is not graphic. There is no nudity, the scene is very darkly lit and only Fanning's face and hand are shown.

"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."

Isn't that exactly what you are talking about, Russ?

 

[Linderbee]

But what about this line?



Sounds like much ado about nothing, IMO. Tastefully shot, but serious and frightening subject matter. I don't know, as I haven't seen it.

And the large font quote wasn't intended for you as any sarcastic remark. I just thought it was a very funny way of putting it to some of the religious leaders who are quoted in that article as wanting it INVESTIGATED. Kind of ballsy of her to say.

I already knew nothing was shown. I never said in any of my posts that too much was shown. I think the subject matter alone is inappropriate for a child her age to even have to THINK about. I am largely against child acting at all. Especially in adult movies. I was against Man on Fire. Any movie that requires a child to have to portray being injured, or traumatized is just wrong to me. It's just how I feel. Kids--PG or less.

 

[D-Dogg]

I already knew nothing was shown. I never said in any of my posts that too much was shown. I think the subject matter alone is inappropriate for a child her age to even have to THINK about. I am largely against child acting at all. Especially in adult movies. I was against Man on Fire. Any movie that requires a child to have to portray being injured, or traumatized is just wrong to me. It's just how I feel. Kids--PG or less.

Ok, that explains a lot then. My other argument would have been the intense violence she had to deal with in Man on Fire. That was brutal, and she was involved with brutal scenes. Plus, kidnapped. Most of these people quoted never made a peep during Man on Fire, but now pop out of the woodwork. I admire your consistency with different subject matter and I agree with it on a lot of levels.

We will have to agree to disagree however, as I put Dakota on a different level as most other actors/actresses. Perhaps it is because of the way she acted in and talked about Man on Fire. I would have more of an issue if it were some other child actress in the role but I don't think all of the support group (especially the director, as parents would usually push a child) would allow someone not mentally strong to do this role. It's more a testament to the kid herself than a blanket acceptance of the subject matter for young actors in general. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Dakota and I'm putting money on her being one of the very few child actors who not only adjusts just fine but remains successful.

When I commented on maturity, picture the Olsen twins trying to do a role like this one. It would put them back in rehab. With Dakota, she just uses it to hone her craft. I know you don't agree, but I want to be clear on what I'm saying.

 

[Pariah]

why do they have to show the rape at all?

Seems they didn't.

But let's say they did. My answer to your question would be this: They didn't HAVE to, they chose to. Why didn't DiVinci paint a smile on Mona Lisa's face? Why didn't Van Gough paint roses instead of Sunflowers? They just didn't.

Please note I'm not saying this film is a timeless masterpiece, but it is a product of creativity, of art. Why they didn't do this or that is irrelevant in the context of making it politically correct.

Now, if you're critiquing it for the way the scene works as film, I think that's another thing.

 

[Russ Smith]

It sounds like it is done just like that....like the shower scene in Psycho. Dark shot, face, hand, etc.






Isn't that exactly what you are talking about, Russ?

If that's how it's done great but they said 5 minutes which to me implied a lot more than that.

Psycho is a great example of what I mean though. You don't have to see dismemberment to be scared by it.

Another example I saw the remakes of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the original was 10 times scarier, and IMHO the scariest scene in that whole movie is when the kids are outside the house. THey're trying to figure out if someone is home etc and all of a sudden Leatherface pulls up a door, grabs one of the kids and yanks her in and slams the door shut. It all happens very quickly, no gore at all but just a terrifying scene the first time I saw.

I guess to be fair I should wait until the movie is out but hey it's the age of the internet we read stuff, we react to it assuming it's true.