Hollywood Controversy...was a law broken?

[Larry_OHF]

Story in question.

The question being investigated is this: Can a director ask a 12 year old girl to act out a rape scene with a male co-actor and everything be okay? Would parental permission even be enough to keep this lawful? (I think anyone would say no).
Should the laws be reviewed regarding the safety of child actors, and possibly strengthen them if they are found weak?

In my opinion, I would think that Dakota Fanning is no ordinary 12 year old girl. She's already a very mature young lady, even though she's not even a teenager yet. But who can determine her maturity and say that she is competent enough to say yes to a rape scene?

If you went to any home in America and found a teenager playing a "rape" with a preteen, there would be heavy consequences...even though it were merely "pretend". But Hollywood is saying that since she was doing this for the camera for a movie, that makes it okay?

I have to agree with the majority on this one that something feels wrong about allowing Hollywood to do such things with 12 year old girls. I know I'll never watch the movie. Its grotesque art that I find too offensive. The link I provided says that the movie is not even about that scene, but the director admits to taking 10 years to make the movie, primarily because of trouble finding a 12 year old girl to play that part and refuses to cut it from the end result. That tells me that it is of great importance in the movie, and how can any rape scene not be considered pivotal in any story? That is such a huge thing...

[ 01-24-2007, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]

[PurpleXVI]

Tricky question. I'd say that it'd all depend on how it happens on-set.

A lot of things that look very real on-screen actually look hilariously fake when you see the behind-the-scenes stuff.

I'd like to have some sort of professional or official on the scene to confirm that things happen in an acceptable matter, but honestly, who is qualified for that? Psychologist to determine she's alright afterwards or something? Parental permission is, of course, an important must.

Two kids playing out a rape is also an entirely different situation. If they did so without any adult suggesting it or anything, they obviously have issues and are likely the victims of abuse, either that or the teen is a pedophile.

This is an entirely different situation. It's like saying that a guy shooting someone on the street is as worrying as someone pretending to shoot someone else in a movie, or something along those lines. It's hard to find an analogy, but the two situations you presented are hardly analogous, either.

As for the laws regarding child actors, I'm pretty sure they're well-protected as it is. They have all the protections normally assigned to children, and I'd be surprised if they don't also have agents and whatnot(At least the more succesful ones), or at least parents, who take care of their interests and safety.

I'm honestly not particularly horrified by this entire "controversy."

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

What's with the sexual dichotomy in our society? If the article's content is correct, it sounds as though Dakota made an informed decision here. How lovely to see a child making an informed decision related to what people are considering a sexual situation here.

However, the other end of things plays out over and over again in American society. Ever watch TV? Ever look at a magazine? Ever stop to consider the amount of sexual material children are exposed to? Are they making informed choices about these things? Are people discussing the sexual material in our society with children? Hell, some people don't want their teenagers taking sex ed!

Why aren't more people screaming about the Bratz dolls?

http://www.mgae.com/2004_product_pag...z-Fabulous.jpg

One could argue that it's more dangerous to let a child play with a Bratz doll and watch TV than make a decision like Dakota did. Note I said "Make a decision"... If a child isn't capable of making such a choice, so be it, but all children are not created equal.

Anyway, I think about the dichotomy thing a lot. I wonder how the hell America is such a prudish place regarding sexual discussion and sexual acts, yet it's in our faces all day, every day.

[PurpleXVI]

The reason a lot of us aren't screaming about Bratz dolls is that, quite frankly, they just depress the everloving hell out of us. They're like everything that's wrong about Western society and culture condensed into one, horrifying, pedo-licious package.

They used to make me rant, now they just make me want to go and play Russian Roulette.

[wellard]

Who played the young whore in taxi driver? was she not 12 or so?

Juliet was 12 or 13 ... so is every performance of Romeo and Juliet a pedo perverts meeting?

Lets hang on to common sense PLEASE [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[PurpleXVI]

Let's not forget that actors are often several years earlier than the ages of the characters they're portraying in movies. Especially when it comes to teenage/early teen roles.

[Larry_OHF]

I think you guys are forgetting that common sex acts cannot compare to the violent crime of a rape, which takes this discussion to a level that you have failed to consider so far.

Puberty is reached between the ages of 8 to 13. Dakota is 12. (FYI, She's also playing the part of a 12 year old girl in this movie). The odds are that she has started puberty, but she is not yet 13, so there is a chance that she has not...and if she has, she only just started and is still undergoing changes that are new to her...If her own body has not gone through the hormonal and bodily changes necessary to prepare her for a sexual experience in real life, how can she mentally make an informed decision to play the victim of a rape in a movie?

[PurpleXVI]

No, I HAVE considered it. Have you actually seen the act during the filming? No? Neither have I, but I'm willing to bet that it's far less harrowing than actual rape is, just a hunch. Plus, she's been an actor for a while now, she KNOWS what happens on stage isn't real. She knows it's just acting.

This is not a sexual experience for her, unless they've got a very, very screwed up director.

[Larry_OHF]

Originally posted by PurpleXVI: No, I HAVE considered it. Have you actually seen the act during the filming? No? Neither have I, but I'm willing to bet that it's far less harrowing than actual rape is, just a hunch. Plus, she's been an actor for a while now, she KNOWS what happens on stage isn't real. She knows it's just acting. This is not a sexual experience for her, unless they've got a very, very screwed up director.

In the end, you and I both can only assume since neither of us knows the truth behind it, which is actually being investigated, which the article states. I'll be interested in seeing what the investigation discovers, and I'll post the findings if they ever make it public enough for me to find somewhere.

[ 01-25-2007, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]

[Timber Loftis]

Why you have to SHOW a rape of a 12-yr-old on-screen is beyond my understanding.

The door to the bedroom being shut, the crying face afterward, etc. I don't see why when it comes to child rape and molestation you can't do the story and the acting without actually showing the sex act itself.

Commie Hollywood perverts ruining our morals if you ask me.