MovieChat Forums > À ma soeur ! (2001) Discussion > Child pornography masquerading as art!

Child pornography masquerading as art!

posted 18 years ago by sev_hreshtak
51 replies | jump to latest

This is child pornography masquerading as art. Please don't f'ing fly off your handles and start bashing me for being simple-minded and self-righteous.

I admired many aspects of the movie, but I can't for the life of me reconcile myself with the fact that a real 13-year-old had to bare her breasts in front of the cast and crew of the movie and tens of thousands of viewers.

I'm a tolerant person and all; I think euthanasia, prostitution, gay marriages and pot should all be legal. But this is intolerable.

The prefrontal cortex of the adolescent brain, the part responsible decision-making takes a f'ing vacation between puberty and early 20's. Therefore, claiming that a teenager willfully made a decision to participate in these scenes is absolute balderdash. Where the f' where her parents?

This is intolerable abuse of artistic license.

[–] Bladerunner 13 years ago

You had my support until you said the bit about "early 20's". What does that mean, every women from 18 to 23 isn't responsible for her sexuality? That is "absolute balderdash".

I have written several posts bashing Breillat, Bercot and others:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0284970/board/nest/151674164

for doing crap like this with children. So, I agree with you about this being "pornography masquerading as art". On that, we agree fully.

However, saying "the part responsible decision-making takes a f'ing vacation between puberty and early 20's", is pretty silly. We have laws in which people are considered adults for a reason, because that is the age they should be considered adults. If they make mistakes then, they are making it as an adult and have to suffer the consequences like any other adult. However, we protect people under the age 18 because they don't yet possess the ability to make adult decisions. I won't mention age-of-consent laws here because it doesn't pertain to the legality of allowing someone under 18 to do nudity or scenes with sexual content.

My eldest son is 18-years-old and his decision-making is on no vacation. When you lump people in their "early 20's" in with pubescent teens under the age of 18, you weaken your argument. Stick to the wrongness of allowing a child under the age of 18 to appear nude an in sexual situations and leave the over 18 crowd to another discussion.

"...nothing is left of me, each time I see her..." - Catullus

[–] gambit82-2 13 years ago

nudity isn't pornography, it's all to do with intent, did the director intend the scene to provide sexual excitement or to shock the audience, do u watch films with babies in and say, "that's disgusting that child is naked!" No because the child isn't there to 'get you going' it's just a part of the film.

Also you do realise that your opinion of paedophilia may not match peoples in other countries, for example in the US some states have the legal age as 16 and others 18, hell in some countries the age may be as low as 12, or even as high as 20.

It's your type of attitude to this that has ruined many great works of art due to censorship and fosters the belief that all media should be controlled.

As for her parents, any child actor has to have the permission of their legal guardians to appear.

For the tl;dr crowd - basically shut your mouth and know your role. If you dont like the film, don't watch it

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cinesimonj 13 years ago

What a bizarre post.
Regardless of your silly attempts at defending yourself ahead of time, you very clearly have an issue with reality.

[–] grrrdevin 12 years ago

I agree, 13-year-olds are mentally retarded until they reach the age of 18, whereupon they magically transform into able-minded adults.

"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"

[–] the_gathering_fan 12 years ago

I know I'm late as *beep* on this reply...but oh well....this was too tempting to pass up lol This -hordak-2 guy has to be some kind of legally retarded. "It was not a sexual scene" lol... wow....Is he serious? Getting raped isn't sexual? Lol wtf O.o I don't see how some people have the intelligence to turn on their computers and log on to imdb.

They were probably referring to the first scene that shows the nudity. The one where Anais is looking into the mirror, then her sister enters the room.

[–] grrrdevin 12 years ago

Why are you replying to me regarding somebody else's post?

"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"

[–] the_gathering_fan 12 years ago

Because it looks weird posting in the middle of a thread, no other forums are like that...and I quoted who I was replying to, so it's really not that big of a deal. I'm sorry I wasted five precious seconds of your time.

[–] grrrdevin 12 years ago

That explanation makes absolutely no sense, but okay. Have fun being irrational and computer-illiterate.

"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"

[–] OldSamVimes 12 years ago

Didn't bother me.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] THX1701 11 years ago

WHO WAS REALLY BEARING HER BREASTS AT AGE 13?!

Roxane Mesquida is the only woman seen naked and she was 19 when she made this "child porn" movie.

Always the single-minded self-righteous are bringing our world down.

================
Use the Force.

[–] lazarillo 11 years ago

I think the younger overweight sister does have a brief nude scene in the end. But why does that bother people so much?

If I was always complaining about naked men in movies, wouldn't you conclude I was a gay? Well, what does that say about the people who endlessly complain about stuff like this? Roxane Mesquida was 19 and her sex scenes are pretty hot, but if you're turned on by the chubby 12-year-old sister getting raped at the end, there's something wrong with YOU.

You might also be turned on by children's underwear ads, naked babies, or the famous photo of the 11-year-old Vietnamese running stark naked away from her napalmed village, but that doesn't make those things "child porn". It just makes YOU someone to stay away from. When I was a kid, parents filmed their children in the bathtub sometimes--it's not because they were child pornographers, but because it never occurred to them that the world would someday become so lousy with pedophiles and people who are apparently so afraid they might turn into pedophiles that they overcompensate by being ridiculously self-righteous prudes.

[–] bludcrimson 10 years ago

I dont know about you people but I just came reading this thread.