More about Dakota Fanning in Hounddog

Sandy: Not all people, kids, etc. go through tough times in their lives. Dakota, can think for herself and while I simply don’t agree with the decision for this film to be shown, its not up to us. Fanning is a smart 13yr old, wise and knows EXACTLY what she was doing. And not to step on toes though I may have to, can I point out a scene, hence another movie that IS good, but disturbing to watch but have heard on a number of sites that it is a lot worse than this scene (With an actress about the same age) who has not had ANY issue with later life haunts…”Bastard out of Carolina” with Jena Malone.

No Hollywood is not trying to gather $$ by showing pedophilia, they are trying to make us aware that child-abuse is still an ongoing issue and problem in the world today, and they way they know how to make it is if it’s uncomfortable to watch then it will send the message home. Yes there are ways to do it without going exremes such as this movie or “Bastard out of Carolina” but honestly the director, producer and the alike felt this was the best way.

Dakota chooses her movies, and her parents back her, and if they felt it would damage her psyche then I’m sure they would have pulled her out.

The only problem I have with this film & it’s Director is the straighforward one that here in England, if some adults decided to talk about ‘Rape’ with an underage child (male or female) they could be arrested & charged with ‘indecency’, so, exactly how did this Director discuss the idea of FORCED ‘penis penetration’ of a ‘vagina’ with an underage girl?
If it was my daughter I’d have kicked him into next year!

Sandy, I meant 100%! ^_^

Sandy!!!!!!!
I am on your side 10% about this!!!
Your sooooooo right! The parents are making there kids do everything.
they probaly made it out not to sound that bad, I mean, When your parents tell you something like that is okay and you just a kid, your going to believe it! you know?
As a kid you always think your parents are the smartest truthfull poeple out there!

thats how I always thought about mine.

You really dont know anything about the Bible, do you? The scriptures cited tell of incest, yes, but , in no way does their inclusion in Genesis suggest the behavior is condoned by God. It is written, rather , to the contrary, that such behavior is SIN. You have to understand ALL of it in order to get ANY of it, my friend

For all the christians and so called church people in here bashing the film hounddog and dakota fannings family here is some words from the bible.You must be warned this is “sick stuff”.

Genesis 19

19:32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
19:33 And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
19:34 And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. The Seduction of Lot
19:35 And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
19:36 Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

Exodus 4

24 At a lodging place on the way, the LORD met {Moses} and was about to kill him. 25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin and touched {Moses’} feet with it.”Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me,” she said. 26 So the LORD let him alone.(At that time she said “bridegroom of blood,” referring to circumcision.)

these are but a few of the many graphic and sexual readings you may find in the bibles. Remember children are read and taught this stuff.HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS STUFF TO KIDS.Mabey we should ban children from reading the bible and remove from all public places then never allow any one under 18 years old to read such things.Who is the sick people now.

Now keep your mouths shut before you promote those that seek to destroy good people like dakota fanning and her family.

Hollywood loves to explore child abuse, rape and pedophilia, and is ever creative in means to get it on screen. Under the guise of ‘important awareness’; ‘opening dialogue for the silenced victims’, etc. Hollywood has managed to have near toddler non-related, newly acquainted naked boys in tubs with mature women (Birth 2004); pre adolescent teens becoming prostitutes (Taxi), young girls smoking and swilling booze (Paper Moon) and of course Kubricks Lolita whose name alone states the films premise. I’m sure there are many more films that I’m just not aware of. I have to confess, I haven’t seen any of these films - and don’t want too. The image of children being used and abused as pawns for Hollywood money-makers should be illegal.

I love Dakota Fanning and she is such a superb actress that I almost feel to deny her this role is not right. HOWEVER, I am inclined to say I don’t think I can go see this film due to the content. Dakota is only 12 - she shouldn’t even have to know about things such as rape yet. I think her parents and agent could have picture a different role for Dakota as her options have to be many in this industry.

This post is for Jeff. I have the script in front of me and I spoke to someone who saw the film last night at Sundance. The concensus is that the rape scene is one of the most disturbing scenes they have seen in film. Not only that, but from people in the audience, the film wasn’t even that good. As for Linda Blair, I know her personally and she did a documentary on E! where she tells of the trauma that she went through LATER in her life due to the things she did in “The Exorcist”. Trying to deal with issues like that at such a young age pushed her into drugs and other addictions. Her story is one of many with kids in Hollywood. All young actors are told what to do and manipulated by parents and agents. Dakota may be a bright, intelligent kid, but she can’t possibly make an adult decision about whether or not to do a certain film. She doesn’t think ahead and contemplate what this will mean for her future. She is a kid! No kid makes a conscious decision to go into show business at such a young age. Do you think she came out of the womb begging her mother to put her in films? No, the decision was made for her, just like it is being made for her sister Elle. It is the parent that makes that choice for them. I know what I am talking about. I was a child actress from the age of 5 and know exactly what goes on. Directors will push and push until someone steps in and stops them. Fortunately for me, I had strong welfare workers on the set that watched out for me. They weren’t on the production payroll and ONLY looked out for my welfare. Most of the parents want the fame and money, look at Macauley Culkin’s father. He didn’t care what Mac did as long as he was paid millions for it. So, think long and hard before you decide that this is “no big deal”. Until you have walked in the shoes of a child actor, please don’t make judgements.

I have not seen this movie and probably won’t, simply because it’s not my style of film. However, I have to say that, while I’m not surprised at the amount of publicity this film (and especially the rape scene) is getting, I am annoyed at the type of arguments people are laying forth. Yes, Hollywood often tramples over the line of decency. Yes, nude scenes are written for women in order to boost revenue. However, anyone who honestly thinks that this movie was made in order to push some sort of pro-pedophilia agenda is crazy. Child abuse, and especially child sexual abuse, is an extremely difficult thing to comprehend, let alone discuss. Something tells me that the perpetrators of this abuse in this film don’t come out looking like the good guys. This movie appears to tackle a very difficult and sensitive subject, and, in my opinion, might actually do it in a powerful way. Will it be uncomfortable to watch? Yes, and that’s exactly the point.

As another point of reference, The Exorcist featured child actress Linda Blair spewing some of the most vulgar, vile, and sometimes sexual things ever to be filmed. If I’m not mistaken, she was 13 at the time. That film didn’t scar her for life. Yes, there is a huge difference between her role in that movie and a simulated rape scene, but a child of that age can understand the difference between reality and fiction.

Other movies have tackled this subject matter, including two versions of Nabakov’s “Lolita.” Again, I know that neither of those films included a scene such as the one from Hounddog, but they dealt with similar subject matter.

I honestly think that movies such as this can be a positive way to raise discussions on issues of child abuse and child sexuality. However, claiming that all of Hollywood is “evil” and that Fanning’s mother should be sent to jail and that anyone who participated in this movie is pushing a pedophile agenda is so outlandish and purposefully abrasive that they cannot even be taken seriously. I think that discussion on this topic is both interesting and helpful. I also believe that there are some difficult questions here around whether Fanning should have portrayed some of these scenes at her age. However, I think it’s more helpful to keep the discussion reasonable and based in reality, as opposed to lashing out and accusatory.

i think this so call person should be taken to court along with that little girls mother and sent away for letting this happen to a child. who in their right mind would sit there and watch her little girl be raped by a adult male. and think it is just fine .and to take a close up of the girls face when it is happening you have to be one sick person. i believe all should be put away. that girl is a baby yet for gods skes.you sick s.o.b

I agree with Michael G ’s post in entirety with one exception. I do not agree that this is a partisan issue. Get off the wings and ride inside the fussilage with the rest of us. ;)

Other than that minor objection, Dakota’s parents and the producers of Hounddog should be indicted for child exploitation which is illegal in North Carolina and also violates federal law.

And to Defan;

You neglected to mention the mutual masturbation scene and that Dakota’s character is supposed to be 9 years old. It isn’t so much what she was wearing as what she was doing, as a 12 year old actress. You can’t pretend sex. Simulated sex just means there was no penetration. But if you as a parent caught the 20 year old babysitter pretending a similar playact with your 9 year old daughter, I bet you would call the police.

Many children do not realize they have been exploited until it is too late and the harm has already been done. Quoting Dakota on this film just furthers the exploitation of her, IMO. So cut it out.

Dakota is so naive that she does not realize that this film supports pornographers who simulate child porn with adult and/or child actors and also supports the pedophiles/sex offender/child molesters’ interests so much moreso than the film supports child sexual abuse survivors and victims of child pornogrphers. It is very sad that she will learn this lesson this way but it was predictable. Any porn producer could have told her that this would be the likely public reaction but did they? Greedy f*ckers! This is all because of the illegal choices that her parents made for her to further her exploitation knowingly too.

Dakota’s naivety is being exploited to produce and market this porn material that is non-protected speech by federal standards because it is harmful to minors to participate and there is no state where it is legal too solicit a 12 year old minor for sexual activity.

Make this film protected speech and we will have Hollywood producers putting infants into bondage sucking on plastic dildos that are indistinguishable from genetalia. Kampmeier should be in jail with her wannabe child pornographer comrads.

A twelve year old child cannot consent to sex nor even to simulating sex for an adult nor an adult audience. Dakota required parental consent to even appear in Charlotte’s Web. The sexually explicit exploitation of Fanning in Hounddog was not needed to support the theme.

The Hounddog middle school play will never happen because schools are held to be accountable to the law where Hollywood gets away with it so far.

Michael G - good post. I agree wholeheartedly. My heart breaks for that poor little girl. What kind of twisted, sick individual would encourage her 12 year old to even be involved in such a thing… real or otherwise? Some role model. Yikes. Poor Dakota has been so brainwashed that she can’t even see how damaging it could/will be to her sexually. It is a disgrace to this Nation that something like that would even be considered for “entertainment”. I am ashamed that there are adults who actually think it is ok to permit this kind of exploitation of a child… so much for trying to protect the innocence of our children. It’s sick and disturbing, and very saddening.

There are no child labor laws in North Carolina where this was filmed. Go to the website and you will see that they tout the fact that children are exempt from any labor laws. THAT is the reason that the DA won’t do anything. Why do you think they go there to film these movies? I am in the film business and I know that the director and producers want to get parents as far away from the set as they can, so all of this nonsense about Dakota’s parents being present for the scene is questionable. I have the script in front of me and you can’t tell me that any parent in their right mind would let their child simulate stripping and provacatively dancing before a 16 year old rapes her. A parent is going to watch this and say it is ok?!!!
Give me a break!

All I can say is if its illegal why has it been allowed to make it through editing and to premier. From my understanding there was a DA looking into but has been unable to find grounds to make any charges.

There was some question about that earlier this year, when it was announced that Fanning would be appearing in an untitled movie that will premiere at January’s Sundance Festival. Fanning plays a victim of family child abuse in what is said to be an unnerving rape scene, and it was originally said she would be partly nude.
Fanning says that was just wrong information; she is clothed in the scene and says it caused her no trauma. “It’s a character, it’s not me, and I never, ever confuse the two, whether I’m playing someone who is good or bad or troubled or whatever. If I’m going to be the actress I want to be, I’ll have all kinds of films and all kinds of scenes.

Correction to 4th para:

The story is contrived and designed to push a left-wing, pedophile-friendly (Consider that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg believes the age of consent should be reduced to no more than age 12) agenda.

OK—aside from there being a general crisis in morality here, let me make it clear:

child pornography laws in this country make it a felony to depict REAL or SIMULATED acts of sex involving a minor or EVEN anyone simply portraying a minor; it is also a felony in most circumstances for child nudity (barring family baby pictures); and child porn charges don’t even require the child to be naked.

The film has a 12 year old girl in bed with a LIVE naked MAN. And you people are OK with this? For the first time in my life, I am beginning to believe it may not only be morally right to have a purge (yes, I mean a purge), but it may even be necessary to save what little remains of this constitutional republic and it’s morality.

The story is contrived and designed to push a left-wing, pedophile-friendly (Consider that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg believes the age of consent should be reduced to no more than age 12).

Minors must be protected because no matter how precocious or seemingly mature; they are still children unable to appreciate the long term consequences of action and their parents cannot abrogate the protections afforded children by laws (including childporn laws). Parents cannot simply say, my 10, 11, or 12 year old daughter (or son) is mature, si I’ll allow her (him) to have sex with some adult (or even another child).

Those of us who rightfully find this unacceptable and disturbing do not hate sex–I am married and love sex with my wife: we are comfortable with our bodies when we are naked—this is a simple case of morality–of right and wrong. Depictions of child sex, sexuality, and nudity–and ESPECIALLY for commercial purposes–but even for so-called “artistic” purposes, because exploitation of children cannot be permitted, even for “art.” The arrogance of those in art is beyond all reason when they think there can or should be exceptions to the protections the law affords children with regard to sex, sexuality, and nudity.

Look, even adult actresses (usually, actresses, very few males are asked to get fully nude in films) are exploited, sometimes knowingly, sometimes not; but consider that females are all but blackmailed into nudity or explicit sex scenes to increase ticket sales–a fact that alone shows the depravity our society has reached–and if they don’t, see how much work they will get!

The fact is Hollywood has the agenda to have actual sexual acts performed in mainstream films. In Europe there are already numerous examples of this in their film industries. At one time it was forbidden there, but actual oral and penetrative sex is even shown on TV in France and in the United Kingdom. This is not an advance; it is a devolution into mindless depravity. Audiences are turned into sexual voyeurs and made to want more, because sex involves endorphins and makes such things highly addictive. It appeals to prurient interests.

Houndog WILL attract a huge following of pedophiles. In the end she (DF)could even end up being stalked and God-forbid, murdered. I wonder how much life insurance DFs parents have put out on her.

The characters main point as I understand it is about overcoming sexual abuse (how murdering three people, two being children, counts as surviving, I have no idea); but surely this could have been done—if it even HAD to be done—with someone 22 (there is a huge difference in maturity—usually—of someone 22 year of age over someone only 18) or so, playing an 18yo. But of course the agenda here is to make pedophilia “acceptable.”

The writer, the director, any crew that remained on the set, and the investors are all sick. The parents? Sick doesn’t even come close to describing the evil they did.

I have to say I think this is the first web site I have found where everyone is not trying to put this off as a disgraceful mistake made by her mother and agent to get an oscar. I for one must say that at 12 I think most get the basic concept of what this movie is about. And can anyone honestly say that didn’t have questions about sex at 12? I think Dakota will fair just fine and the nation may come out for the better. This isn’t the type of thing parents like to discuss with their kids and look at how much it’s being discussed now… the film hasn’t even made it to the theaters yet.

I agree with Craig’s comments. Dakota may only be 12, but she is extremely mature for her age. When she gets a script, she always asks questions about the plot, characters, etc. so I’m sure everything was explained to her about how the scene was going to be filmed. I’m sure her agent and mom also asked a lot of questions and made absolutely sure Dakota knew what she was getting into, or they never would have okayed the project in the first place. I don’t agree with others who said all they were interested in is a possible Oscar. Dakota has a long career ahead of her and if she doesn’t win an Oscar this time, she has plenty of opportunities to get the statue. Give Dakota some credit. Just because she’s a kid, she still has a lot of say when it comes to picking parts. I don’t think she’ll be traumatized at all and will see it as just another role, just like any other job.