How is this legal?
A 12-year-old girl, appearing stark naked in a movie about child prostitution. How can a 12-year-old girl appear stark naked and it be LEGAL, never mind getting past the censors?
Again, how is this legal?
Great movie this was. Or rubbish. Depends on what forum I'm on.
Because, their is no law against nudity in films, regardless of age. As long as its done in a tasteful way and does not contain a sex act, it is totally legal.
shareholy *beep* what the hell was her mom thinking?
shareHer mother was thinking of her daughter`s future.... obviously this movie made Brooke Shields a STAR. I wouldn`t recommend doing this for everyone but in Brooke`s case, this film turned out to be a huge step forward in her career.
Besides, what they did in this film is NOT illegal. Your moral view on it is just an opinion.
i guess that makes sense. but the director of the film obviosly had a sick mind.
shareI don`t know Louis Malle personally, so its hard to judge him based on one film. However, the story was written by Polly Platt and Malle just translated it to film. But the content you see in this film still happens in certain parts of the world today. Its amazing and also rather sad that this type of thing is still happening in the 21st century.
shareDon't be an ignoramous. This stuff happens in society and trying to sweep it under the carpet is not the solution. These movies are made for a reason to document real life and pay it it's proper respect just like any other things that happen in society. When you watch a war film do you consider the director to have a sick mind as well?
Wake up people. There are far worse things happening in this world then some young girl showing her naked body, which I won't even go into the messed up human nature that suggests we should be ashamed of nudity, but we embrace violence.
I personally question the idea that reality deserves respect. It ain't done much to earn my respect in my 30+ years on earth :-).
Sometimes evil is just applied stupidity-Ronar
That's a rather unfortunate thing to say about a respected filmmaker. Malle made Pretty Baby uncomfortable for right minded audiences to watch. He shows the mixed up mind of a child brought up in such conditions as well as the vile behaviour of most of the adults around her. And he did so for a reason. To talk about and raise in debate the issue of child prostitution - something that, horrifically, is still very much with us.
Louise Malle made difficult and challenging films to get people thinking and talking, not for personal sexual satisfaction. That is the difference between art and pornography.
"Well there's something you don't see everyday...unless of course you're me"
this is up for strong debate. Her mother wasn't thinking of her daughter's future, she was thinking of her own. Brooke fired her mother when she became an adult and they didn't speak for many years (and I think they still aren't exactly thick as thieves), because of Terry's actions while she was pimping her 10 year old daughter.
shareI'm neither an extreme liberal or conservative, though I am a Christian and see this film as putting something out there that could bring out pedophilia thoughts in men, without doubt. Just read some of the comments on here about how attractive she was. I was just younger than Brooke when this came out and watched it as a teenager. I remember thinking then, that there was NO way I would've done those scenes or been in a film that made light, at times, of that lifestyle. Back then (especially) 10-12 year old girls should not have even known what life in a brothel was like, much like portrayed it on film. I remember being shocked that a girl my age would have a mother who would approve of this, even for the sake of 'art'. Come on - as parents we're supposed to shield our children from what may hurt them, and a lifetime of debates over whether your film was pornographic or not, well... that leaves a lot, lot, lot to be desired as a protective mother. As a mother now, I would do anything to spare my child pain and persecution, so obviously she was thinking of the money and fame. There were many other roles that Brooke could've been pushed into. OK, off my soapbox. I agree though, WTH??
share[deleted]
Mom WASN'T thinking of her daughter's future only M O N E Y! I saw a supposed art photo of Brooke at a well known city art Museum. Obviousy still young and stark naked, standing next to a tub. My children were there and I was embaressed. Yeah she became such a star that she went on to do Blue Lagoon and other promiscous films. She was a terrible actress early on butimproved some. Kinda like Jessica Alba today.
shareHow is Blue Lagoon a promiscuous film? Two kids are left alone on an island for a decade, they go through puberty together, fall in love and a have a child...was Em running around with the natives that sacrifice people behind Richards back?
Monkey!...I mean Dog!
[deleted]
Mom WASN'T thinking of her daughter's future only M O N E Y! I saw a supposed art photo of Brooke at a well known city art Museum. Obviousy still young and stark naked, standing next to a tub. My children were there and I was embaressed. Yeah she became such a star that she went on to do Blue Lagoon and other promiscous films. She was a terrible actress early on butimproved some. Kinda like Jessica Alba today.
shareWe read it the first time ...
shareYes, and it was just as silly the first time. Apparently Lzzy518 doesn't know what the word "promiscuous" means, but sure likes to type it.
For the record, the word "promiscuous" means having multiple sex partners. This would apply to the working girls Violet knew, and even to her for a while (a non-promiscuous prostitute seems sort of like a tea-totaling wine taster, ya know?). It would utterly NOT apply to Emmeline in The Blue Lagoon, however, because in her entire life she had sex with ONE person.
- Aging is a physical problem, and physical problems are amenable to engineering solutions.
Her mother would've signed her up to be sodomized in public, on stage, by Satan himself if it meant getting the part and capturing the act on film.
shareIf I'm not mistaken, her mother sent her head shots to playboy for an ad campaign right around the time of this movie.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
It was hardly an innocent ad. I won't think too much about an ad for children's Motrin being in Playboy, but that was definitely not the type of ad her mother intended. Perhaps I should have said "for" Playboy rather than "in". Anyway, the pictures her mother/manager submitted were head shots of a very young Brooke made up to look very adult and sexy. I think it was for promo materials or something where they couldn't have any nudity in them, they just needed a strikingly beautiful female face. I believe Playboy backed off when they learned her age b/c of the ookiness factor.
Look, I am not a prude by any means. I do not think Playboy is evil- I have much naughtier materials in my home- but it is ADULT entertainment. I am not so naive as to think that children are not sexual beings, as much as some adults do not want to accept that. I have a problem when adults exploit children as sexual objects. Lolita did not bother me so much, b/c Lo was just as exploitative as the men in her life. Same here. Violet uses the man in her life to get what she wants. Yes, it is sad and horrible that the girls are put into these situations, but it happens everyday, around the world. But we are supposed to be outside observers, seeing these men use these little girls- understanding their lust, but not sharing in it. Brooke was a beautiful little girl when she made this movie, but by no means was she sexy.
[deleted]
[deleted]
<< Her mother would've signed her up to be sodomized in public, on stage, by Satan himself if it meant getting the part and capturing the act on film. >>
OMG! That's one of the funniest things I've read at imdb, though I don't think it's exactly true.
Terri Shields approved a wide variety of jobs for her daughter...she did all kinds of wholesome ads over her young modeling career, and not all her early films were salacious. It's not like Terri Shields called her daughter's agents and said, "I want the sleaziest jobs imaginable submitted NOW, People!"
If I had a daughter, I would not approve her posing topless (as Shields did for more than one photographer, including Francesco Scavullo), as those might embarras her later on when she was grown up. But within the context of a film directed by Louis Malle, acting alongside Susan Sarandon and Keith Carradine? I would be okay with that if she were, too.
It's interesting that in Pretty Baby, Shields' nudity is never presented in an erotic way, and there are no intercourse scenes for anyone. What nudity there is (which is not much) is all rather mundane and matter-of-fact.
[deleted]
Hardly so. People have been convicted for child pornography for taking still photographs of little girls in swimsuits. The pictures were considered pornographic because the girls were in "sexy" poses... legs apart, etc. You don't need to have actual sex to have pornography.
This movie could not be made today. It IS child pornography.
Soooo.... where are the prosecutions of the director, cast, Brooke's mother, the producers, distributors, theatre-owners, and sellers of the DVD, hmm?
shareI think what's more disturbing is the number of deleted posts in this thread. Peds probably? Disgusting.
shareI believe the director handled this movie in a sensitive way. He didn't go too silly with the sexual side of things - just presented the stark reality in an artistic way.
-- Leet.
~ Gíñä ®ïl€ÿ ¡§  GødÐes§! ~
Hey guys im like 14 years old, just thought i get this movie and Brooke Shields owns lol. But yeah it was kind of messed up... i mean i felt really sad... for like brooke. i know it's NOT ilegal and stuff but like... they made her sell her Virginity for like money.... that was so messed up
I SWEAR i almost threw up when she scremed.... the funny thing i read once on wikipedia that 1 out of ever 4 men show some kind of attraction to younger girls. WTF! o.O
but honestly doesn't young Brooke in this movie just blow your mind away. Just look at her face in the shower seen when the madam walks in with that guys. Im just like. wow. And one more thing. SOMeone PLZ AnsErw this
WHAT THE *beep*
Why did'nt she stay with her lover in the end. I mean seriously i wanna go back in time hold a gun to Malle and make him change the ending. Did'nt the guy love brooke? THis makes hookers look sooooo cheap and low don't you guys think so?
Plz this flim has scared me someone anserw my post
the funny thing i read once on wikipedia that 1 out of ever 4 men show some kind of attraction to younger girls.
Why did'nt she stay with her lover in the end. I mean seriously i wanna go back in time hold a gun to Malle and make him change the ending. Did'nt the guy love brooke? THis makes hookers look sooooo cheap and low don't you guys think so?
Yeah man totally messed up,
By the way you think brooke is hot in this film
AND
Yeah i in my mind minors with adults rocks, i dun give a *beep* as long as its not rape or *beep* like that.
What worse endings have you seen.
The ending blew defintaly
[deleted]
Agree xeno... If I was a younger I would probably think she`s VERY hot but today I think she`s just VERY cute. Her famous nude scene in this film was not meant to be erotic, it was just an artistic scene of a photographer and his muse.
shareBut Brooke didn't do the nude scenes in Blue Lagoon--she had a body double. Once she was able to decide for herself, I don't think she did any more nude scenes.
shareIt's perhaps natural to be attracted to a teenage girl, but a 12 year old? That's gross. And as for her "life long mate" I call BS, because well 12 year olds don't have life long mates. They aren't capable of those kind of feelings. If you want to argue about history blah blah blah, you'll find that children married at young ages like that were either abused, or were in marriages where the grooms mother or relatives were living in the home to raise the girl the rest of the way.
No parent I know thinks their kids are hot, or that their kids' friends are hot, or think their kids' relationships are long standing.
[deleted]
The correct answer to this, Scander, would have been "I disagree". You don't have the right to go around telling people they're wrong. It's clear that you have a certain view of kids that affords them much more competency than is normally attributed to them. That's not necessarily a bad thing to think, but it's still just your opinion. I know you later said the term "puppy love" is demeaning in your opinion, but you still began by saying "Wrong." The person you're answering isn't "wrong." They just have a different opinion than you do.
share[deleted]
It's not just opinion, it's true.No, it's a matter of opinion. You've brought examples, but I can bring examples that contradict what you've said. A fact is something that can be proved. An opinion is something that people disagree on. This is one of those cases. A lot of people disagree with you and there is no clear proof one way or the other. So how exactly can you say what you think is fact and what other people think is wrong? On what are you basing this? Just the fact that you said it means it must be true? Bring me hard proof, and we'll talk; but if you're going to state things that others disagree with you on as fact, with no proof, that's just ignorant, and I can't continue arguing with you.
[deleted]
Then alot of people are wrong. :)Then you are an ignorant person . share
[deleted]
"A lot of people disagree with you..." Then alot of people are wrong. :)Well who am I to argue with your education. But if you think people are wrong because they disagree with you on matters of opinion, then you should get your money back from whatever place did the educating. These are not things educated people say.
[deleted]
The key parts are not personal opinion but facts stated by professionals in the field which I'm sharing here.Let's take a look at the facts you've stated and see which have been stated by professionals as facts:
It's not just opinion, it's true. Kids aren't as stupid and naive as most would like to think or assume.Professionals never stated this as fact. This an opinion.
The fact is what they are experiencing is indeed love, romantic love even... both kinds of love aren't exclusive to adults only. Love is caring for someone else more than yourself... kids are indeed capable of that.Professionals never stated this as fact either. The notion that what kids are experiencing is romantic love is an opinion. And your definition of love does not define romantic love enough to differentiate it from something like familial love.
[deleted]
I picked out the ones you said were facts.
share[deleted]
"You don't have the right to go around telling people they're wrong."
No, its a matter of the situation. Of course, if someone said that the sky is green and there are pink elephants that fly, i would tell them they are wrong, only because it is a proven fact that the sky is NOT green and that there are NOT pink elephants that can fly. But if someone said that a movie is good, or a certain food tastes bad, what right do you have to tell them that they're wrong? Its a matter of fact and opinion. Study up on your english.
Think about it stickman. She's 12. She's not emotionally mature enough to handle the marriage between herself and Belloqc, probably didn't even REALLY love the guy, so of course she's gonna choose her mother over him.
share"Pretty Baby" is a very detached look at a child's loss of virginity in 1917 America. In some ways, it is a very sad picture...but that sadness is brought by the viewer, not the filmmaker. The film itself is made up of small, episodic scenes...some so short you wonder why you're seeing them. Some are just simply shots of Violet sitting around or amusing herself as best as she can.
Bellocq's character is not unlike Charles Dodgson, a.k.a. Lewis Carroll, who wrote the "Alice In Wonderland" stories. Carroll was a brilliant mathematician and Oxford scholar who never married, but formed fast friendships with the children (usually the girls) of his colleagues. Within the past 25 years or so, information came to light that Carroll - also an amateur photographer - kept private photographs of young, prebuscent girls. These girls were usually scantily clad or naked.
Was he a child molester or a pedophile? Or did he simply wish to capture youth and innocence?
Hard to say. We're talking about the 19th Century with Lewis Carroll, author of one of the most beloved children's books of all time.
Bellocq in "Pretty Baby" seems much too absorbed in his "art" of photography to appear to me as someone who just likes taking salacious pictures of whores and, later, naked 12-year-old girls. He is deferential, soft spoken, and takes his time with the photographs...a great deal of screen action shows him adjusting lights, the lenses...dusting a lens with a brush, etc. He wants his compositions to be perfect. If his goal was pornography I doubt there would be such care. He really only gets worked up whenever his art is compromised or when his equipment is threatened (he slaps Violet HARD when she nearly exposes a negative and later chastizes her for dumping out his chemicals, and locks her out when she has destroyed a plate).
Changing the subject, Violet may have lost her virginity but she does not lose her innocence. Despite the fact she was raised in a brothel, she continues to behave like a child. Being a whore seems another kind of play to her - she gets to dress up fancy, put on make-up, behave like the other girls, etc. She does not understand the reality of her situation because, quite frankly, she doesn't know any other reality. Even after she loses her virginity she continues to behave in an immature fashion...see the scene in the stable with Red Top and the cook's boy, or her reaction to being bought a doll (she calls the doll "Violet" and speaks to the doll as her mother spoke to her in the early scenes of the film).
Lastly, Violet doesn't seem to have any roots. The brothel was her home, and when she is punished for her stable behavior she throws a tantrum and leaves. When the Bellocq situation doesn't work out, she goes back to the brothel. When the world of the brothel is dismantled, she goes back to Bellocq. It makes perfect sense for her to return to her mother's care. Violet will go to the next best situation. At Bellocq's, she is bored out of her skull and has no one her age to play with. One shot says it all: Violet standing at Bellocq's gate as if she were an animal in a zoo, watching the people walk by.
She is honest about everything: "I can't read yet." She thinks someday she will.
Violet learns how to survive in the world the way most if not all of us do: she imitates the adults, particularly her parents...in her case, her mother is a whore.
Her final, blank gaze in the last shot at the train station tells us that none of what we've seen has left a deep impression on Violet, nor has it matured her.
her mother is a whoreHA!
[deleted]
She was wearing panties (well, a g-string), so not totally nude. But still...why ?
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Dude Xeno you obviously would do brooke even when she was 12 st fu XENOPHILE lol
you *beep* we all know the truth lol
plus you spend alot of time on this IMDB page... COMON COME OUT CLEAN BIATCH
[deleted]
[deleted]
well who cares i liked the movie. what we should be concerend about is what a network on tv called FOX is doing... they have soo many not right show's famliy guy in which they always make sexual refrences to males that are way too young to even laugh at the jokes, this makes it sick and bizzre... also a show called herlodo at large in wich he was doing a news report on the Sick child internet porn ring guys and it showed the pictures WHICH WAS DESTERBING as Hell!! also they always seem to obsess over subjects like this, like some sick and twised lady who melested her 12 year old student male.. and she is not in jail!!!! pis*es me off... i get soo mad at this!! and they always disrespcet little girls on this network some poor girl got killed by my area! and fox news CHICAGO only had a report for a couple sec's and when something happens to males they have a whole segment on it!! WHY!! why do they not respect women and little girl's on simpsions they always have disrespect but they treat guys Just Great... women and little girls always seem to get shouved around and treated like garbage on the FOX network they treat them as if they are male shovinist Pigs!! this really steems me!! in my opionion little girls and women are the future ..... the FOX net work always does stuff like this!! now how the hell or how in the name of god do THEY get away with this~?~??~???? and just how in the name of God does a movie like GRANDMA's BOY get away with this sick stuff? , i saw the previwes and was sickened . now someone please explain to me how the HELL and why this happens!! ):'
someone please tell me!
[deleted]
guess you're right bro. . it is just wrong though... i cant see why the FOX network can do stuff with underage guys but if people come out with ANYTHING with underage girls people have a Fuc*in* fit.... and call it TABOO. this is bull!!!!
shareI was thinkin' about seeing this movie, but after seeing this page I think I fear it a little.... liked the comment about brooke's mom though the satan thing, classic. It's true a lot of child stars' mothers do take advantage of their privalage of motherhood. Not just mothers parents in general, their sell their kid's souls away and expose (in this case literally) their all. I think If I were brooke i'd still be crying about doing that today. or just not do it either way. *beep* that's friggin' sick, there's no law against that? This is like a freaking pedophiles wet dream come to life.
I admit there is more static created when girls are objectified like this but then again it's a statistic that there are more male offenders in this sort of area than female. Not trying to disturb the water here people, but it's a fact.
I don't even want to think about that movie, Grandma's Boy.
Just so's you know, The Family guy also does poke fun at women... men too. I think they try to even it out as best they can. Don't really watch the simpsons..... at all.
Hmmm u seem like an understandable individual and I listen to people like that... really you seem to at least have more intelligence then the people disagreeing with me my DAKOTA FANNING post.
shareCan I ask something???
Let's say an 11 year old is watching this and actually get's off on the nudity. Is that wrong?
It's the same age, and it's the same as a 30 year old looking at another 30 year old naked.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
think If I were brooke i'd still be crying about doing that today
*beep* that's friggin' sick, there's no law against that? This is like a freaking pedophiles wet dream come to life.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
playboy is a widely published, popular magazine. do you really think they'd let a 10 year old pose for them? theres kind of that little issue of hm, child pornography? like, its illegal? oh yeah!...
share[deleted]
It is perfectly legal as it very well should be. Every individual is different in his or her own unique way unlike that of anyone else. Just because someone is not of legal age and therefore prohibited from appearing in erotic settings publicly doesn't mean that he or she can appear publicly stark naked in some other form. Regardless of any legal system (which varies greatly from one state, province, or republic to another) legal violations happen at every second in every place and are a normal part of every society. In just about every average family movie made in the USA we see children pestering, harrassing, and even commiting crimes against one another or an adult and getting away with it, and what sort of example does anyone think this will set on any child who watched it? Bullying others is a terrible thing that we must teach all younger generation members to avoid, and representing it as normal in the media on such an often basis will teach them that it is not unusual to want to do, and has no natural consequence. So illegal as it may be, child prostitution does happen along with everything else prohibited legally, and there is nothing wrong with making a movie of it. Also keep in mind that this movie is set in 1917 and society at that point was dramatically different than in the current day and age. It was even considered practical, and legitimate for small children as young as 4 to work in factories every day rather than attend school! By creating vivid dramas like this we are reminded when seeing them that horrible things have and will continue to occur in the world, and that we must be aware of, and justify them. Not to mention whenever we see something that we oppose we never think for a second about the good aspects that come of it. This movie contained nothing illegal or illegitimate and I feel totally positive about it's existence!
Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I oppose this movie, I was just wondering how it managed to get past the Mighty Lords of Censorship.
Great movie this was. Or rubbish. Depends on what forum I'm on.
hmmmm.. this is the first time i've ever heard of this film. i saw a photo on a susan sarandon site of her breast feeding a baby but never ever thought it was a scene from a movie. im a huge susan sarandon fan from rocky horror and thelma and louise ya da ya da. was wondering if i should bother getting this film? im 14, and just found out this film was about child prostitution. it didnt really appeal to me but it doesnt bother me watching movies like that but i didnt realise that brooke shields was pushed to do this film..? ah well, couldnt be bothered getting into details. seems like lots of you guys are fighting over something or rather, AWESOME.. well uhh, yeah. anyone wanna give me an opinion on this film? or whether i should bother watching it, im quite intruiged now, not in 'that' sorta way but i wanna watch it since susan's in it. i really dont wanr a reply saying 'this movie is bad natured and sick blah blah blah' basically i just want to know if overall its a worth watching film?
THANKS.
[deleted]
Ahh well. I've decided to watch it, next time I'm in the shops I'll get it. I doubt I'll be too creeped out by a naked 12 year old.. It doesn' really appeal to me but It's one of the very few Susan Sarandon film's I haven't seen so I may aswell watch it. It seems like a pretty good film. Minus the 12 year old prostitution.. But HEYY that makes no sense at all, right. Well it ain't like we never seen a showy movie, so Im'a watch it :)
shareRocker,
your comments on violence are dead on. My 6yo nephew was allowed to watch "Home Alone" a few weeks ago. Since then he has managed to setup a "prank" and break my step-moms foot. Children are much more likely to emulate violence, since they can, than sex, which they can't and have no interest in doing. Needless to say, I told my parents to stay away from the other "Home Alone" movies and "Dennis the Menace".
[deleted]