Movies and TV Dakota Fanning to be raped onscreen - Page 20

Hammock Parties · 07-21-2006, 08:32 PM

This is disturbing. I hope people boycott this movie because there's no need for crap like this.

Dakota, 12, to star in 'disturbing paedophile film'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1773

Child actress Dakota Fanning will appear in a controversial new movie featuring paedophile scenes.

War of the Worlds star Dakota, 12, has signed up to appear in Hounddog.

The screenplay calls for Fanning's character to be raped in one explicit scene and to appear naked or clad only in "underpants" in several other horrifying moments.

A source close to the film said: "The two taboos in Hollywood are child abuse and the killing of animals.

"In this movie, both things happen." Fanning's mother, Joy, and her Hollywood agent, Cindy Osbrink, see the movie, written and directed by Deborah Kampmeier, as a possible Oscar vehicle for the pint-size star.

But despite Fanning's status as a bankable actress - whose movies, including last year's War of the Worlds have earned more than half a billion dollars since 2001 - the alarming material seems to have scared off potential investors, according to the New York Daily News.

The film charts the life of a girl who is abused and finds solace in the music of Elvis Presley.

Fanning's carefully choreographed rape scene has already been filmed. But then the production - which also stars Robin Wright Penn, David Morse and Piper Laurie - was stopped because of a lack of money.

But emergency investors were found and the movie is set to be finished by the end of the week.

"It's not just the rape scene - the whole story is challenging Dakota as an actress," Fanning's agent, Osbrink, said.

"And I've never been so proud of her in my life. In every scene she gets better and better."

Mosbonian · 07-22-2006, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

I think you're right, he didn't intentionally place her there. But he knew what message and visual he was looking for, and took the opportunity.

And I highly doubt it was shown for entertainment, just as a highly doubt Dakota Fanning being raped is for a few good laughs.

What, pray tell is the reason for the need to put in the "simulated" rape?

mmaddog
*******

hypersensitiveZO6 · 07-22-2006, 07:16 PM

This is the equality to Children's Internet Porn. I don't know how they allow this.

HolmeZz · 07-22-2006, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

I think you're right, he didn't intentionally place her there. But he knew what message and visual he was looking for, and took the opportunity.

And I highly doubt it was shown for entertainment, just as a highly doubt Dakota Fanning being raped is for a few good laughs.

The photographer was covering the war and the horrors that go along with it. I'm sure he never expected to have to photograph a nude girl running through the streets, but he knew he would be covering atrocities and taking very shots of bad images.

On no level is it even comparable to having a 12 year old girl appear nude in a movie.

tk13 · 07-22-2006, 07:29 PM

The thing I find most interesting about this counter argument regarding "art" throughout this thread... is that I think you're basically blurring all lines.

If you can simulate a rape scene in the sake of art, why can't you just film an actual rape scene? Why don't you just have somebody rape her, film it, and put that in the movie? That would be the absolute most disturbing thing you can do. That would KILL the audience. That's what we're saying here, that the director needs to get his point across, regardless of how he gets there. The intent would be exactly the same.

Rudy tossed tigger's salad · 07-22-2006, 07:33 PM

I'm not talking about the simulated rape here, just the nudity. Isn't it the same as a scene where a kid is taking a bath and they "appear" to be naked. Don't assume you are going to see anything more than bare shoulders in this scene. Journalists like to stir the pot by writing Fanning is going to appear naked, when they should say appear to be naked. It's like when they say a celebrity is going to appear naked on some magazine, but her arms are always in the way.

If Im wrong, then Ill eat my words, but this is my opinion of what the scene will be.

go bo · 07-22-2006, 07:38 PM

i'm looking forward to seeing the film...

aren't all old men dirty?

hypersensitiveZO6 · 07-22-2006, 07:40 PM

Sadly, there's nothing we can do.

pikesome · 07-22-2006, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmaddog

Why.....why is that necessary?

Money, the making of money for whoever is involved. People can spout whatever reason they think sounds better but it is always about money first and foremost, this is America.

tk13 · 07-22-2006, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla

I'm not talking about the simulated rape here, just the nudity. Isn't it the same as a scene where a kid is taking a bath and they "appear" to be naked. Don't assume you are going to see anything more than bare shoulders in this scene. Journalists like to stir the pot by writing Fanning is going to appear naked, when they should say appear to be naked. It's like when they say a celebrity is going to appear naked on some magazine, but her arms are always in the way.

If Im wrong, then Ill eat my words, but this is my opinion of what the scene will be.

I've wondered that myself. Maybe this is just hype and the actual scene won't be that graphic.

Either way that probably doesn't affect the heart of the argument in this thread, I think people would still hold the opinions they hold if it was full out nudity with simulated hip movement.... but I guess we'll have to see.

Mosbonian · 07-22-2006, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pikesome

Money, the making of money for whoever is involved. People can spout whatever reason they think sounds better but it is always about money first and foremost, this is America.

I agree....I was just wondering if there would be any attempt to paint this as something else.

mmaddog
*******

**KcMizzou** · 07-22-2006, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go bo

i'm looking forward to seeing the film...

aren't all old men dirty?

Not that dirty.

go bo · 07-22-2006, 08:01 PM

actually, i prefer looking at somewhat older girls...

pre-pubescent doesn't do it for me at all...

i just think it's an important subject that should be dealt with openly and have as much light thrown on it as possible...

Rudy tossed tigger's salad · 07-22-2006, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13

I've wondered that myself. Maybe this is just hype and the actual scene won't be that graphic.

Either way that probably doesn't affect the heart of the argument in this thread, I think people would still hold the opinions they hold if it was full out nudity with simulated hip movement.... but I guess we'll have to see.

yeah, I know, but I just thought people were overreacting to a scene nobody has seen. I just wanted to throw something out there that wasn't the worst possible scenerio.

now if there was nudity, I would be dissapointed in the parents and filmmaker. but let's say there was no nudity other than a bare shoulder blade. I find it interesting that there is such a drastic difference in the role of a 12 yr old murder victim vs. a 12 year old rape victim. I know rape is looked down upon more and the victims have to live with the trauma that results from it, but I find it odd that a child playing a murder victim in a gruesome murder scene wouldn't cause much of a fuss. This, however, has people screaming child porn.

Mr. Laz · 07-22-2006, 08:27 PM

its disturbing ....... but i don't think there is anyway to show nudity for a girl below the age of 18 without getting thrown in jail.

even if the girl is suppose be young the actress is over 18.

no way does Dakota fanning actually has a nude scene of any kind.

it will be a "start" of a rape scene with a cut away

still disgusting

Jenson71 · 07-22-2006, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

its disturbing ....... but i don't think there is anyway to show nudity for a girl below the age of 18 without getting thrown in jail.

even if the girl is suppose be young the actress is over 18.

American Beauty. Filmmakers got permission from her parents.

07-21-2006, 08:32 PM
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $1010478	Dakota Fanning to be raped onscreen This is disturbing. I hope people boycott this movie because there's no need for crap like this. Dakota, 12, to star in 'disturbing paedophile film' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1773 Child actress Dakota Fanning will appear in a controversial new movie featuring paedophile scenes. War of the Worlds star Dakota, 12, has signed up to appear in Hounddog. The screenplay calls for Fanning's character to be raped in one explicit scene and to appear naked or clad only in "underpants" in several other horrifying moments. A source close to the film said: "The two taboos in Hollywood are child abuse and the killing of animals. "In this movie, both things happen." Fanning's mother, Joy, and her Hollywood agent, Cindy Osbrink, see the movie, written and directed by Deborah Kampmeier, as a possible Oscar vehicle for the pint-size star. But despite Fanning's status as a bankable actress - whose movies, including last year's War of the Worlds have earned more than half a billion dollars since 2001 - the alarming material seems to have scared off potential investors, according to the New York Daily News. The film charts the life of a girl who is abused and finds solace in the music of Elvis Presley. Fanning's carefully choreographed rape scene has already been filmed. But then the production - which also stars Robin Wright Penn, David Morse and Piper Laurie - was stopped because of a lack of money. But emergency investors were found and the movie is set to be finished by the end of the week. "It's not just the rape scene - the whole story is challenging Dakota as an actress," Fanning's agent, Osbrink, said. "And I've never been so proud of her in my life. In every scene she gets better and better."
Posts: 296,760

07-22-2006, 07:16 PM	#287
hypersensitiveZO6 EK Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: KCMO Casino cash: $10004900	This is the equality to Children's Internet Porn. I don't know how they allow this. __________________ WHO: Kansas City Chiefs WHAT: Super Bowl XLI WHERE: South Florida 02.04.07 "Football is not a game but a religion, a metaphysical island of fundamental truth in a highly verbalized, disguised society, a throwback of 30,000 generations of anthropological time." -Arnold Mandrell JOIN THE TRENT GREEN FOR PLAYOFFS BANDWAGON!
Posts: 2,394

07-22-2006, 07:29 PM	#289
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $-1687500	The thing I find most interesting about this counter argument regarding "art" throughout this thread... is that I think you're basically blurring all lines. If you can simulate a rape scene in the sake of art, why can't you just film an actual rape scene? Why don't you just have somebody rape her, film it, and put that in the movie? That would be the absolute most disturbing thing you can do. That would KILL the audience. That's what we're saying here, that the director needs to get his point across, regardless of how he gets there. The intent would be exactly the same.
Posts: 56,601

07-22-2006, 07:33 PM	#290
Rudy tossed tigger's salad Better than Nelson Join Date: Mar 2003 Casino cash: $10000400	I'm not talking about the simulated rape here, just the nudity. Isn't it the same as a scene where a kid is taking a bath and they "appear" to be naked. Don't assume you are going to see anything more than bare shoulders in this scene. Journalists like to stir the pot by writing Fanning is going to appear naked, when they should say appear to be naked. It's like when they say a celebrity is going to appear naked on some magazine, but her arms are always in the way. If Im wrong, then Ill eat my words, but this is my opinion of what the scene will be.
Posts: 17,356

07-22-2006, 07:38 PM	#291
go bo Flop = Man of Steel!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: independence Casino cash: $10006405	i'm looking forward to seeing the film... aren't all old men dirty?
Posts: 36,678

07-22-2006, 07:40 PM	#292
hypersensitiveZO6 EK Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: KCMO Casino cash: $10004900	Sadly, there's nothing we can do. __________________ WHO: Kansas City Chiefs WHAT: Super Bowl XLI WHERE: South Florida 02.04.07 "Football is not a game but a religion, a metaphysical island of fundamental truth in a highly verbalized, disguised society, a throwback of 30,000 generations of anthropological time." -Arnold Mandrell JOIN THE TRENT GREEN FOR PLAYOFFS BANDWAGON!
Posts: 2,394

07-22-2006, 08:01 PM	#297
go bo Flop = Man of Steel!! Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: independence Casino cash: $10006405	actually, i prefer looking at somewhat older girls... pre-pubescent doesn't do it for me at all... i just think it's an important subject that should be dealt with openly and have as much light thrown on it as possible...
Posts: 36,678

07-22-2006, 08:27 PM	#299
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $11047037	its disturbing ....... but i don't think there is anyway to show nudity for a girl below the age of 18 without getting thrown in jail. even if the girl is suppose be young the actress is over 18. no way does Dakota fanning actually has a nude scene of any kind. it will be a "start" of a rape scene with a cut away still disgusting __________________
Posts: 95,626