Dakota Fanning's Rape Scene?!?

I don't see why people are making a big deal about this. This girl is an extremely talented actress. She can't play the safe roles forever. If she does, she will never grow as an actress. Do you guys really expect her to stay a child forever?

No, but we're not thrilled to have her naked and being "raped" on camera for all the friggin perverts to have masturbation material. You know all the child molesters are going to make this the Holy Grail of masturbation scenes. I think I could accept this if she was 16 or 17 when she did that scene, but 12 years old is a little too much for me.

I your right about the molesters but i thank she has guts taking on such a roll, parents need to no that stuff like that raly happend in real life, this will also reach the younger viewers who are faced, with the same topic, i no what it's like, i was attack by my father win i was only 5 yrs of age, joda foster was only 14 win she did a rape scene in the taxi driver, so i give her props for taking on the roll,

thats way 2 young wat movie r u talking about any ways?

I felt she's very talented. But, it seems like her camp is trying to get a Oscar bid for her...is the role really worth losing some innocence for that. The movie is tackling a tough subject...we all know is out there. I hope it will be shot to get the story across but not to be that distrubing...if not it will be a big failure. I guess we'll see what the critics think and if Oscar takes notice.
Z
GB+

you are all a bit presumtuous. the scene will mostly be suggestive of whats happening with no pervert material to be seen.any nudity will be incidental sholder or above or from behind. anyway she will show no more skin than she did in Man on fire in the swimming scenes. lve met her she is a smart kid and already has a successful carreer. unlike brooke shields who had to appear nude in her first movie at 12 to get started. or lindsey lohan who implied she was nude in a disney kids movie at 11. dakotas nudity will be no more than lindseys.

Ebony wrote:

I don't see why people are making a big deal about this. This girl is an extremely talented actress. She can't play the safe roles forever. If she does, she will never grow as an actress. Do you guys really expect her to stay a child forever?

At 12 years old, she IS a child. Oh wait, I forgot, it's 2006. We're enlightened.

Yeah, Steve. Aren't we "presumtuous", now? What could possibly be perverted about a child being stripped naked and molested? "Get Real" needs to "Get Real" in a big way. And, once again, even if all the nudity and child sex were edited out, that would still not "edit" the fact that it was done in the first place. A child was filmed, live on set, naked and in the process of a sexual assault. THIS IS THE ISSUE.

Dakota is heading in the wrong direction. What kind of mother allows their child to be physically RAPED???!!! Dakota knows better thsn that. This is just so wrong...

Ebony wrote:

I don't see why people are making a big deal about this. This girl is an extremely talented actress. She can't play the safe roles forever. If she does, she will never grow as an actress. Do you guys really expect her to stay a child forever?

"A child forever"? What a stupid question. This little girl IS a child. she's only 12 years old! How could she NOT be a child? The parents should be ashamed of themselves for not protecting their child from even the "role playing" of getting raped. I guess it's all about those big dollar signs that they all see coming in.

Ashleigh wrote:

Dakota is heading in the wrong direction. What kind of mother allows their child to be physically RAPED???!!! Dakota knows better thsn that. This is just so wrong...

She isn't raped. It is a DEPICTION of being raped. There is a HUGE difference there.

I think it's a smart career move for Dakota. She is a very smart young person.

I think this is just sick! What kind of person is willing to let a 12 year old girl go naked for a rape scene in front of millions of people

Daveigh Rachels wrote:

for real she is realy gonna be naked? I wonder if she is bald or shaved a landing strip?
---
okay that post was so disgusting, who wrote that? is that all you can think of?

---
dude, get a life and get off the child porn

Hey dakota! i am your BÝGGEST fan!i sen to mail for you once.but you dont't answer me:((please,answer me...write me a soon...

I think it's it's wron g for a girl under 18 to be raped even pretend to be raped. It just feels uncofterable to think about a 12 year old girl getting raped. Although it is fake.

I think the story should be told. But, I strongly disagree with her filming it naked. Adults actors and actresses refuse to be filmed naked...they have stand ins...or the scene can be filmed shadowy where she's wearing a body suit or something. I hope it's done right...she's has such great talent...I hope the adults around her protect her adgenda in the Hollywood world. I hate to see her become a messed up adult from too much bad exposure as a child actress.
Z
GB+

Zwrites: It's claimed now that the molestation scene was filmed mostly in darkness and that she wore a body sock in her nude dance scene. However, I maintain that this means little. The obvious intent was to present her as nude and being sexually assaulted. That's sick enough, but when one considers what must have occured on the set to present this and what psychological impact it must have had on a twelve year old child... this is where the point of contention begins.

I don't see what the big deal is at first I was shocked but this scene has been already safely rehersed and Fanning's parents are ok with it her Agent and mother signed her up for this Dakota is right for the part she will do fine

Steve wrote:

Zwrites: It's claimed now that the molestation scene was filmed mostly in darkness and that she wore a body sock in her nude dance scene. However, I maintain that this means little. The obvious intent was to present her as nude and being sexually assaulted. That's sick enough, but when one considers what must have occured on the set to present this and what psychological impact it must have had on a twelve year old child... this is where the point of contention begins.

I agree. I think it's a bad move on her part. But, most of all the adults that are supervsing her are the big guilty party. I got to read the content of the scene online. It's sickening. I can undertand exposing the subject matter. But, they went overboard ,I feel. I mentioned the filming techniques that they probably would use to say they we're doing it the right way. And, again someone could have stood in for her. But, this movie seems to just expose the subject matter and not seem to help promote healing in any form. All everyone seems to talk about is her getting Oscar for it. Tyler Perry talked about it in his movie without a child having to play a scene. So...I'm in total agreement. I've worked with abused children first hand, as a peds ER nurse. This movie doesn't seem to show any lesson of healing in it as I hoped. I remember "My name is Sybil". About the women with the personality orders. It helped to show the mental, psychic effects of abuse. Some of those scenes were distrubing. But, filmed in a concealing way.
The screenwriter/director seems to just enjoy the shock factor. We know she's after her Oscar too.
Z
GB+