I am very disturbed because of something I saw on a Movie....

Originally posted by mr-lizard
You do realise, a film is a delicate, mulit-faceted and highly editted medium right?

Those kids are no doubt intelligent enough to understand what is occuring, the 'dingy basement' is actually a studio and many aspects of the law are involved from Stage A to stage Z.

Those kids will be protected, well fed, informed and legally covered.

And just because a film is about abuse, does not mean any child involved suffered from any abuse.

It's a film. With actors, studios, lights, special fx etc.

Just to add to your great post -
There were 30 people around that "dingy basement" holding microphes, cameras, lights, scripts, etc. About 10 feet away from the "dingy basement" was a craft service table with candy, muffins, chips, drinks, etc.
Real seedy enivonment there.

reply to post by Kram09


Yes, because the author is not asking a child to directly do it. An author recognizing the real world in a book is different. The characters dont exist other than in the reader's mind. A movie is very different. We pre-read every book our kids read. Now that they are getting older, we allow certain things we wouldnt have before, because I do agree, you shouldnt "shelter" your kids. But if I heard that language from them? There would be consequences.

reply to post by billiam

We pre-read every book our kids read

I feel very sorry for your kids. I love reading and always have since I was a child. It would have tarnished the experience if I'd had my parents screening my books before hand.

Originally posted by simone50m
I started to watch this scary paranormal themed movie ---on TV--- I think it was SYFY. Very quickly in, it was constantly this grown woman with a girl (about 8 maybe) in all kinds of situations which 'necessitaded' them being interlocked, either sitting up or laying down, with the woman's legs open and the girl ya know, in there snug. It was so ickee ickee ickee sexual uncomfortable, I couldn't take it, and was outa there. Feeling really pissed off about that, too. They try to draw you in. Bait and switch. F****rs.

You sound like a pervert. Why would your mind go there? That isn't what the movie was about.

And this thread made the front page why?

Originally posted by abeverage
Hollywood will not stop making indecent movies as long as people pay to see them.

edit on 2-8-2011 by abeverage because: spelling

edit on 2-8-2011 by abeverage because: spelling

EXACTLY! People want to see them. DON'T GO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE IT, BUT DON'T FRAKING TELL ME I CANT. Jeesh, the nerve of some holier-than-thou types. Mind your own business!

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by billiam

 

We pre-read every book our kids read

I feel very sorry for your kids. I love reading and always have since I was a child. It would have tarnished the experience if I'd had my parents screening my books before hand.

Lol. You seem to think that somehow us pre-reading changes the stories. It doesnt, I assure you. And we dont screen to remove various books from them indefinately. Only to ensure that they are mature enough for the material within. Our daughter is a book worm. She, like you, loves to read also and our screening has never hindered her enjoyment of a book.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Sexual abuse of children is part of the satanic agenda and this is the beginning of them conditioning people so it becomes socially acceptable. They want to degrade humanity to the absolute worst degree possible and they are very smart at using the media for mind control and social conditioning.

Honestly no where in the Satanic way of life is child abuse endorsed or done. It was the Christian extremists who made up lies throughout history about Satanism in order to keep their followers from running to a religion that asks you to exercise the beast within not exorcise it. If you wanna blame any group of people for controlling the media and allowing child actors to be put in these situations, then look no further than the Jews. While I'm not playing the anti-semitic role here, but the truth is many of those who control Hollywood are of the Jewish faith. So it truly isn't the "evil" Satanist doing any of this blame it on the age old scape goat the Jews. And once again I'm not an anti-semite I truly hate all religious groups equally.

Originally posted by MartyMcFlyJr

Originally posted by mr-lizard
You do realise, a film is a delicate, mulit-faceted and highly editted medium right?

Those kids are no doubt intelligent enough to understand what is occuring, the 'dingy basement' is actually a studio and many aspects of the law are involved from Stage A to stage Z.

Those kids will be protected, well fed, informed and legally covered.

And just because a film is about abuse, does not mean any child involved suffered from any abuse.

It's a film. With actors, studios, lights, special fx etc.

Just to add to your great post -
There were 30 people around that "dingy basement" holding microphes, cameras, lights, scripts, etc. About 10 feet away from the "dingy basement" was a craft service table with candy, muffins, chips, drinks, etc.
Real seedy enivonment there.

Thank you! They act like the director goes out to find some abandoned house in the middle of nowhere. If you take a few more steps from the craft service table you can walk out of the building and onto the lot, covered with people! Trying to compare Daddy having Little Suzy "act" in front of the camera in a private home is just plain stupid!

A movie set has oversight for these kids. It is made sure that no harm comes to the kids. Daddy pretending with Suzy is not. That is why Suzy gets a new family.

Like I said in an earlier post: The very fact that this thread exists shows the film maker did exactly what he intended to do. He wanted the viewer to be disgusted with what was being portrayed on screen. He wanted to illicit a reaction. Congratulations! You danced right into the film makers arms!

I guess we should just all stop acknowledging that things like this exist! Put our heads in the sand! This doesn't happen! Our world is sunshine and rainbows. And unicorns! The whole scene was to illicit a reaction and show how negative of an effect it had on one of the main characters. I just cannot fathom what some people are thinking.

BUT DON'T FRAKING TELL ME I CANT. Jeesh, the nerve of some holier-than-thou types. Mind your own business!

I never said you couldn't...not once did I say you can't, watch whatever you like, I will choose not to. My point was Hollywood makes crap that people pay for…stop paying for it they will turn to whatever the masses want. If blood and hate are the candy give them what they want.
Nor am I holier-than-thou I am an agnostic so not a lot of holliness there. LOL and in an open forum like this my opinion is just as relevant as yours ok?

If people like the OP had thier way we wouldn't have such amazing films because of "too much violence" , "implied sexual acts/rape", "adult language"(I always loved that one) heh adult language.

We'd be deprived of classics like A Clockwork Orange , The Exorcist, The GodFather, Many of Quentin Taratinos movies, "OldBoy, EraserHead, Audition, Taxi Driver (yes a 13 yr old Jodie Foster playing a prostitute). One of my top 5 favorite movies of all time. I could go on and on, but you cannot censor art.

But there is a line although none of the above movies even come close to crossing it. I would say showing actually children (non adults) in sexual acts to be crossing that line. Even the scene the poster brought up in the movie Game of Thrones is pushing the line, haven't seen it, but by the description, probably not my cup of tea.

But any movie I can rent in Blockbuster video probably isn't gonna compel me to start a thread on a forum saying, this needs to be censored. Mainly Because I know it's make believe. Movies are art. Either you like it or you don't. But just because you don't like it, or it's too much for your stomach to handle, don't try and censor it.

I keep hearing about the implied "Kiddie Porn pictures" scene in Butterfly Effect which is pretty tame from most of the stuff that makes me even think hmm is that ok to do? (then my brain starts working again and I realize, IT's A MOVIE, It's MAKE-BELIEVE.)

I'm also hearing alot of...."How did they get away with that?" When if they were to do that in real life it'd be a crime. Well 1) It's NOT real Life it's a Movie, might be the obvious answer. Letters of consent from the actors parents would probably be #2 on that list. As well as haveing child psychologists and other people with alot of letters behind thier names on set to make sure everything on the up and up, last thing the studio wants is a lawsuit. Then there's the use of body doubles, shooting scenes with just the child alone, then useing camera cuts to make it seem it's all happening at the same time in the same room ect. CGI, dubbing, splicing ect, ect.

I mean if Linda Blair turned out ok, after simulating masterbating with a crucifix in a "movie scene" at the age of 13 or 14 or whatever she was when they shot the scene. Then I think the kids posing for pictures in The Butterfly Effect will be ok too, if they choose to.

It's funny too because I find some of the scenes, and jokes in Cartoons like Family Guy and American Dad to be way more sadistic; and politically as well as socially incorrect than anything I've seen in the movies recently. Forget about Robot Chicken it's even worse, but I think most of that stuff is too grown up and goes by so fast, and the references go right over kids that are 13 and youngers heads. Still though it's crazy. Great shows for adults imo, but befinitely not gor kids < 13 years old.

But remember kids Movies are not Real. There's no Killer clowns like in Poltergeist (now to me that is SCARY!!!) I hate clowns, they should be censored from all television and film!!!

Haha... Wow... 3 pages of comments in about 5 hours, just when I thought this thread was winding down! It seems that this thread has hit a nerve in some people, the first few pages contained some very civil, intelligent discussion that seemed to cover almost all the points in these later pages (looks like people don't really read threads... ), these later pages seem much more volatile. For instance someone posted to the OP "why do you keep posting then?"… I believe the OP hasn't posted since around page 3 where they posted...

Originally posted by Thurisaz
reply to post by puzzlesphere

 

thank you for posting that info. It is reassuring to know that.

... they posted a couple other inconsequential posts after that on p4, but obviously their original concern had been assuaged by that point, based on facts presented.

After scanning through all the new posts, much of it was already covered in the first 3 pages, without the vitriol.

I'll add one of my previous posts that addressed the ongoing content of this tread...

Originally posted by puzzlesphere
Not all child actors are messed up, and there are many examples of disturbed children that grow up to be disturbed adults, that never acted a moment in their lives. It's just that with child stars they are in the limelight, and get huge amounts of media attention, so we get to see it, plus they are actors, and by their nature (whether developed because they went into acting, or maybe it's the reason they become actors to begin with) they are essentially attention seekers. Whether wrong or right, they enjoy being the centre of attention, and plus get paid astronomically for it.

Drew Barrymore may have been slightly messed up in her younger years, but she has had an amazing life, and I'm sure she wouldn't trade a moment of it these day. She seems like a very well-adjusted woman these days, who has everything she could ever want, especially compared with the likes of Lindsay Lohan. Or even worse some unknown child, physically, sexually or mentally abused by their parents (or other adults in their lives, teachers, religious figures, some random on the street, etc.), that you will never hear about, who may grow up to be a drug dealer, user, prostitute, etc...

Concerning the "shock" value of movies, it's nothing new to society... there are more examples of violence for entertainment in history than I could ever name, such as the Colosseum in Rome, stoning’s in multiple countries and cultures (some even still happening today... now that's interactive entertainment...

), lashings and hangings in Europe... these were all considered entertainment by someone at some stage, and even marketed that way! By comparison, movies of today are tame!

In the end, successful child actors are much better off and more "aware" of the world than some poor child from the slums, or even a third world country.

edit on 2-8-2011 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)

Particularly take note of the bit about violence in history as entertainment, what we see in movies is just mimicking real life, and is tame compared to the past and is nothing new. A read through the first few pages should answer most peoples "concerns".

Everyone always think they are living in “special times” (end of days, judgement day, the awakening of the human race… etc. etc.) when realistically there isn’t really much difference between any other stage in history. These days, we just get to see a lot more of it more quickly because of media and the internet.

To sum it up, movies are entertainment, and not such a bad form of entertainment compared to others historically.

Cheers

to the person, i think it was billiam who said that they have no problem with these types of child characters in the books, just not in movies with child actors portraying them... so... you think that we should ban certain books from being made into movies? That is not only censorship, it's discrimination of sorts.

this is a prime example of how our government has brainwashed people into thinking that they really truly have the right and DUTY to morally police the world. because of people like ya'll, REAL LIFE children are getting blown to bits in wars that have nothing to do with them... you just don't see them as children because they've been given the name "terror" instead. pshh.

"what're you people?!? on dope?!?" - Mr. Hand, Fast Times at Ridgemont High (a soon to be banned movie, according to the movie gestapo of ATS)

How sad that not wanting your child to play make believe with a grown man pretending to rape them is now considered being a bad parent by "sheltering" them. Many of you seem too dense to comprehend the point the OP is making. If your average Joe set up a video camera at home and pretended to rape a child for some home-made movie, there's no doubt that child services would be called. I personally would be very upset if my parents had allowed me to take part in a rape scene as a child all for the sake of making money.

Originally posted by Theorytripper


From what I know Linda Blair did grow up with no major mental problems, such as drug abuse, as far as the public record goes.

WRONG! Linda Blair did have DRUG Problems.

Originally posted by Charmed707
How sad that not wanting your child to play make believe with a grown man pretending to rape them is now considered being a bad parent by "sheltering" them. Many of you seem too dense to comprehend the point the OP is making. If your average Joe set up a video camera at home and pretended to rape a child for some home-made movie, there's no doubt that child services would be called. I personally would be very upset if my parents had allowed me to take part in a rape scene as a child all for the sake of making money.

again, this isnt about average joe at home or his "home made movie." this is about actors on a set. do you really think the butterfly effect was filmed with some seedy video camera in someone's home?!? i dont understand how you guys keep going from MOVIE SET to HOME VIDEO.

Originally posted by proob4

Originally posted by Theorytripper


From what I know Linda Blair did grow up with no major mental problems, such as drug abuse, as far as the public record goes.

WRONG! Linda Blair did have DRUG Problems.

what does that have to do with anything anyway? lots of people who aren't in movies have drug problems. it's usually the preachers daughter who is the most promiscuous girl in school... or the cop's son is the biggest drug dealer.

i bet i could do a search and type out and entire laundry list of "upstanding" citizens who have kids that are in and out of trouble and in and out of rehab, etc.

"your father is rich, he's the man, he's the judge, he's the guy that got your sentence reduced. but in the back of his mind he well knows what he'd find if he looked a little deeper in you. drag the water some more..." - my old buddy pillip

reply to post by highpriestess


The Hollywood movie producers & actors are somehow more trustworthy around children and therefore able to film children in whatever manner they please as long as it's "acting", while anyone else should be held accountable for child abuse?

Originally posted by edward777
I felt the same way about the TV show "21/2 Men" in which many sexual jokes were made in front of the boy who was playing Alan's son. And as for R rated movies, it is ironic that a kid can star in a movie that he/she is too young to go into without their parent.

!!!! Excellent point you make!!

A big thumbs up to you for pointing that one out!!

What about the naratives???

oh naratives don't matter either... perhaps the kid isn't really speaking or hearing? Perhaps that is a camera trick too?? ....

Originally posted by lilowl53
I'm glad to hear someone else was upset of the movie. I went to see it in theaters when it came out years ago with some friends, and ended up getting up and leaving...

thank you for sharing... when I read some of the comments directed at me from some posters... I am made to feel like I am the only one who has a problem or that I am over reacting so I should just accept it...

thank you! It makes me feel better to know that I am not the only one to have been disturbed by that movie.


reply to post by billiam


yes... another exceptional point raised. What about kids being asked to act out killling things? other kids etc??

Originally posted by Charmed707
reply to post by highpriestess

 

The Hollywood movie producers & actors are somehow more trustworthy around children and therefore able to film children in whatever manner they please as long as it's "acting", while anyone else should be held accountable for child abuse?

yeah, because everyone leaves the studio and leaves the children all alone with the ONE director.... there's not an entire film crew, the parents, most of the time the child's agent OR attorney present AT ALL. if the filmmakers were having the children DO things... ACTUALLY physically DO sex acts and be nude, etc... then certainly it is wrong, but you guys keep dancing around the fact that that is NOT the case here. You guys can keep wording it nine ways to Sunday, but you can't change the facts. we aren;t talking about someone making a "private" "home movie" with "children simulating sex acts" ... we're talking about the freakin Butterfly Effect. um... hello?!? is this thing on?!?