Cinema Bosses Pull Fanning Film Over Rape Scene


Cinema Bosses Pull Fanning Film Over Rape Scene

Posted by SexiVixxEN 433 days ago
Bosses at America's AMC theatre chain have pulled DAKOTA FANNING's new movie HOUNDDOG from their 5,117 cinemas across the U.S. over mounting pressure from family values groups upset about a rape scene in the film.

Officials at Concerned Women For America are leading the charge to boycott the movie, in which Fanning's character is raped.

The controversial Deborah Kampmeier film was supposed to hit movie screens late last year (07), but protests from family organisations led to legal investigations in certain parts of the country and the stalling of the movie's release.

Prosecutors in North Carolina, where Hounddog was filmed, reviewed the movie in November and interviewed crew members, producers and Fanning, who plays a nine-year-old girl in the film, and declared that although some people might find the film "disturbing and distasteful,” there was no evidence that the scene constituted “sexual activity” under North Carolina law, and cries of child exploitation were dismissed.

Promoting the film last week (ends20Sep08), director Kampmeier told WENN, "I feel a lot of compassion towards these people that are so angry about the film. Rape is a really tough subject and the film deals with issues that are really painful to look at and I think that a lot of people don't have the support in their life to look at their own lives; to look at their own pain.

"Instead they're facing their pain and projecting their anger and their fear onto my film. A lot of agendas are being projected off this film that have nothing to do with the film and they're being projected onto it by people who haven't actually seen the film. It's too bad.

"I didn't make the film to make a controversial film or a social commentary. I made the film for my heart and if it touches someone else's heart that's what it's about for me."

And the writer/director isn't alone in stating that her movie is an important one that should be seen; officials at U.S. women's organisation NOW is urging their supporters to rush to cinemas.

Hollywood NOW President Lindsey Horvath says, "Hounddog is a film that calls you to action. It returns innocence to the adolescent discovery of sexuality, and restores hope for those whose innocence has been taken.

"It's a brilliantly poignant film that clearly depicts how free expression of female sexuality remains unacceptable in today's world, and what survivors of sexual violence must do to reclaim their bodies and selves from their perpetrators. We need more women in Hollywood like Kampmeier to uncover society's oppression of women."

The film went on limited release in America last week (19Sep08).

33
 
Interesting Story?
Yes No

Comments


  • juluongo
    The Concerned Women for America are just promoting "biblical values." They're actually mad because the rapist in the movie didn't marry Fanning's character like that bit in Deuteronomy promotes ... you know the part that says a man who rapes a young woman must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father and marry her. Oh, biblical values, where would we be without you?
    posted by juluongo 432 days ago
  • nmwilliams82
    one thing I cannot do is watch a movie that has a rape scene being done to anyone, male, female, child, adult, I for one cannot handle it. But, it is something that unfortunately happens everywhere all the time, and just like all other movies, this one should be able to show what goes on in life. I think that as long as the actual rape scene is done tastefully (weird choice of words, but you know what I mean) then the movie should be shown and seen. Don't know if I would rush to see it though. But that's just me, I'm not gonna boycott a movie cuz of how I feel about it.
    posted by nmwilliams82 432 days ago
  • angrymonkey1969
    If they're not gonna show anything actually happening, why bitch about it? These protesters are probably pissed because they don't get laid enough or it brings back bad memories of Uncle Cletus.
    posted by angrymonkey1969 432 days ago
  • HornyJesus
    Reply to comment below by kattannie: What's the big deal? At least she'll know how to act (and won't make an idiot of herself) when she gets raped in real life. Jeez, it's not as though they teach in school these days.
    posted by HornyJesus 432 days ago
  • HornyJesus
    People are stupid assholes. Why boycott a movie for depicting something that happens all the time? As with anything you don't have to watch it if it makes you horny.
    posted by HornyJesus 432 days ago
  • MrGrimlock
    Remember when it seemed like Dakota Fanning was in every damn movie that had a little girl in it.I guess now that she's been replaced by the little miss sunshine girl, she's going to be in more serious movies.
    posted by MrGrimlock 432 days ago
  • kattannie
    People were upset when the movie was in production, but you cant really stop the production of a movie, however you can drum up enough pressure to keep a major movie theater from running it. I think its terrible for anyone to go thru such trama, so why on earth would you expect a child to put herself in a character & act out being raped, what has it done to her? BUT thats hollywood for you. They go way too far & everyone thinks 'its an expression of art' BS!
    posted by kattannie 433 days ago
  • wierdlygifted
    Good films address issues and make people think, if they stop controversial films from being seen it'll mean the people who could be becoming aware of the situation, or who could help it maybe won't be spurred into action. it annoys me when organizations make blind decisions just because it's uncomfortable for them.
    also dakota looks a lot like kirsten dunst in this picture when she was in Interview with the Vampire
    posted by wierdlygifted 433 days ago
  • deviousblackkitty
    wow!!!! i'd be pissed off if i was waiting for this movie
    (heheheheeehe)
    but anyways i think dakota fanning looks like a vampire here!!!!
    posted by deviousblackkitty 433 days ago
  • juelingeorgia
    Although I understand where AMC is coming from, they shouldn't have pulled the movie. All this is doing is drumming up more interest in the film. Rape is ugly and rape of a child is worse. Why weren't people enraged when the film was being shot? The whole thing is that it was ok when "they" weren't asked to see it. "They" should have been pissed from the start.
    posted by juelingeorgia 433 days ago
  • SHAME ON AMC for giving in to this! They should know better. Rape scenes of children SHOULD be upsetting! That's the whole point. Rape and murder and mayhem aren't supposed to be fun or entertaining. Things like this upset people because they are used to viewing sex and violence with such an over-the-top cartoony mindset. To be confronted with it in a realistic and therefore horrific fashion is more than most people want to accept. The worst part is that most people are probably upset with the scene not because a child is being raped but rather because a child is being portrayed in a sexual situation. If it means anything, I've read previously that the rape scene was put together with editing. At no time was Dakota Fanning ever put in a position of sexuality.
    posted by webalina 433 days ago
  • AMC giving in to censorship-disgusting. The director did a very good job of summing it up-ie: those protesting have not and will probably never see the film.
    posted by alush1 433 days ago