Comments on: Dakota Fanning is questionable

By: Gail

Gail — Sun, 03 May 2009 18:55:24 +0000

you DON’T see her nude..

By: Gail

Gail — Sun, 03 May 2009 18:47:53 +0000

I happen to have just viewed this movie and it was done with no nudity for Fanning. Most things are implied and the site I visited describing all the taboos supposedly taking place in this movie were NOT in the movie.
I believe this movie was done with care, bringing the whole story with minimal exposure or harm to Fanning.
See the movie before judging.
And for the person implying that Fanning lost her virginity while filming this .. PLEASE… I can’t remember if they even filmed the boy touching any part of her during the scene.. again.. watch the movie first.

By: ?????? ??????

?????? ?????? — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:14:39 +0000

???… ??-????? ? ?????? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? :)

By: Dear Everyone + Kevin especially

Dear Everyone + Kevin especially — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 10:29:25 +0000

Youre an idiot.
The movie is about a little girls life.
And about what happened in her life.
If rape happened and it was pivotal why not show it.

Have you seen American History X?
Ed Norton was raped in that movie and afterwards he stopped curbstomping black people he meet 5 seconds earlier and I love that dude…but at the end of the day i know he was acting so i stop worrying about the issue of his butthole.

Dakota Fanning wasnt raped.
Rape is real.
it happens to everyone.
Get a Helmet.
If anything why dont we all just stand up and fight rape.
War on Rape. Oh….right thats impossible, so why did i just waste 5 minutes writing all this….oh i havent even seen the movie…..

They should make a movie about the child rape that goes on in Darfur starring Dakota Fanning and ill be waiting for all you self-righteous clowns to get on a plane to Africa armed and ready to fight….rape. sorry for being so sarcastic i know all you loser have your rape fighting fund money in your bank accounts set aside…ill relax now…P.S. were in a recession go watch the movie.

By: zoey

zoey — Fri, 09 May 2008 01:57:04 +0000

i’m not happy about dakota fanning in a rape scene because i wont b able 2 c th movie thn and thts gross…atleast i thnk so.
i thnk its sick in wrong cuz theres sumthngs tht ppl just dont do an thts 1 of em

By: wolflady

wolflady — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:35:06 +0000

you must be a pedaphile.

By: george

george — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:33:35 +0000

i am sich and tired of hollywood being exempt from the laws that the average man or woman have been sent to prison on………to me, showing a 12 year old naked whether its in a movie or someones personal photos is wrong….they say we have these laws because the kids dont know right from wrong and does extensive phsycological harm…if dakota fanning, at 12, knows right from wrong, whose to say other kids dont….all im saying, is if the act of a 12 year old posing nude or near nude is legally wrong, then the reason shouldnt matter…

By: D.H.

D.H. — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:49:45 +0000

This whole discussion about 12 year old girls is ridiculous. In the early days of the United States 12 and 13 year old girls were not only having sex but getting married to MEN and starting families. The laws in place about being 18 before having sex are just that a law. We are in a society that tries to “so call” protect children yet when a parent spanks a child it can get taken away from the parent. Protecting a child involves more than just keeping it from having sex. It involves discipline and punishment for breaking the rules. I agree that 12 years old is way young for sex but a lot of girls can get pregnant and are developing at that time and even the psychiatrists say that men fantasizing about girls that age is a normal thing. Everyone has to agree than when America had no laws about underage sex that the people were better people with better morals than by any of todays standards. Lets quit getting in an uproar about this insignificant thing and talk more about things that matter. Such as why it cost me $75.00 to fill up my vehicle with gas. Get a grip people!!!!

By: Borgie

Borgie — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:14:34 +0000

If people are going to use the Bible, use the New Test. after Jesus came. The Old Test has old rules before He came, and things like:
19:32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
Are not instructions. They are part of the story being told.
There is a big differences between the stories of the Bible and the instructions of it.
So go by what Jesus says, not what other stories tell.
For example, if you read the story of the beaten man left for dead, and everyone walks by him, are you going to do the same? Or are you going to be the Good Samaritan that helps him?

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 07:31:28 +0000

CORRECTED: So the movie is about a little girl with a nightmarish existance and finds hope in the music of Elvis?? “Frankly”, That sounds like one of the crapiest plots I’ve ever heard of. I still think they should have used an actress that was a little older for that part. By the way, I don’t think anyone needs Hollywood to inform them of the fact that some children are abused. I also have not seen any post accusing Fanning of being the antichrist. Her parents are just morons not evil. They think like some other morons think that art is some medium that should be immune to ridicule. If art is sooo great why is it so often used to offend other people? People preach peace and defend offensive and violent films at the same time!?!?!? I think this movie has as much chance to cause damage as it does to do anything good for humanity.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 07:29:54 +0000

So the movie is about a little girl with a nightmarish existance? “Frankly”, That sounds like one of the crapiest plots I’ve ever heard of. I still think they should have used an actress that was a little older for that part. By the way, I don’t think anyone needs Hollywood to inform them of the fact that some children are abused. I also have not seen any post accusing Fanning of being the antichrist. Her parents are just morons not evil. They think like some other morons think that art is some medium that should be immune to ridicule. If art is sooo great why is it so often used to offend other people? People preach peace and defend offensive and violent films at the same time!?!?!? I think this movie has as much chance to cause damage as it does to do anything good for humanity.

By: Archai

Archai — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 01:52:23 +0000

In case you people haven’t noticed this movie is about a young girl who’s childhood was a nightmarish exsistance. And guess what!? She finds hope in the form of the infamous musical talent of Elvis Presley. How horrifing. [/smartass]

And yes, there is a rape scene, but no explict act is shown. You hear various noises, and see a flurry of limbs, but that is as far as it goes.

So, frankly, stop acting like Dakota is the Anti-Christ, and realize that this movie might actually be a good thing.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 20:02:15 +0000

Anything to do with children and sex like this is anyway is wrong! This type of filming is not right and should never have been alowed. Children are beautiful and should be cared for not abused. Anyone who says that this is ok in just not in their right mind.