what do you see?
I haven't seen this movie. In fact I hadn't heard of it till half an hour ago when I saw it going for a HUGE price on Ebay and thought, WTF? There was no explanation of what it was, so I came here and have read a few posts to try and work out what's going on.
What on earth happens in this movie that gets so much controversy? Naked 12-yr-olds "running around"? Doesn't sound like much of a plot. "Simulated sex"? That could mean anything from the vilest child pornography to the most innocuous offscreen fondling. I presume if it was really foul it wouldn't even be on imdb, though - and what bugs me about these discussions is that some people seem to be objecting to images of naked children per se, no other reason given. "Naked child - the most disgusting image in the universe! Naked children make me want to puke!"
So can somebody help me out here? I don't particularly want to see it, I'm just curious what gets such a reaction from people. Is Truffaut's L'Argent de Poche kiddy porn? What about the australian flick Mouth to Mouth? Or then again, does a 12-yr-old actress bump her face against someone's groin to simulate a blowjob? That would definitely be abusive to the actress, but presumably as I say it doesn't descend to that level...or everyone would be condemning it and it wouldn't be legal anywhere on the planet.
When I was shooting a promotional video for the Grt Russell St YMCA, in London, we had two weeks to film all the activities that took place, then to be edited into a montage: the pool, the gyms, the art studio...at one point I saw a class of children, with a bloke in the middle swivelling, throwing a football to each kid in turn. They were so cute! "Film that!" I cried to the cameraman. "Get the kids! Look at them, they're so cute!"
But the PR manager of the YMCA stepped in and covered the lens with his hand. "I hope you're not filming the kids," he said. "We can't have that, for legal reasons. Take the camera somewhere else."
I was flabberghasted. "But they're just throwing a ball! It's a great image: bring your kids!" Nothing doing. No images of those kids were allowed. Not least because permission would have been needed from all of the parents (why?), and of course in today's climate what parent would say yes? The YMCA weren't even going to ask them.
If someone finds children sexy, it's easy enough to ogle the pyjama pages of a clothes catalogue. And personally, I don't believe in thought-crime anyway...