Slightly creeped out - Moonrise Kingdom (2012) Discussion

[–] tbm-5 10 years ago

Not at all. Jared and Kara are midgets, they were both 23 years old when the movie was made.

reply

[–] DazzlingSpectre 10 years ago

No I mean the characters...it just feels wrong

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Alucard_13 10 years ago

I disagree. It feels like NORMAL consensual sexual exploration at that age...with an age appropriate partner.

I'd be all about jumping on it and condemning it if either were paired with someone older, or if it appeared to be forced or unhealthy.

Sex is part of life folks and sexual curiosity happens at this age. No reason to be prudes about it. Think back to the first time you ever kissed someone of the opposite sex or touched them.

An argument could be made that there is something objectionable about letting a girl this age portray this as part of her acting career...

but very honestly, that argument could be made about a hundred other far less healthy portrayals young actresses do without public condemnation.

Meh...didn't offend me at all. Young love/sexuality....between like-aged consenting kids....is honest and appropriate.

reply

[–] chopper-9 8 years ago

I think the creep factor is that you've got a guy in his thirties instructing two 14 years to grope one another. That is creepy. And, to address what was claimed in a slightly earlier response, Kara was not 23, she was 14 at the time of release so she may have been 13 at the time of production.

"Never eat yellow snow" 

reply

[–] aji_gps 10 years ago

I just Checked, Kara Hayward is born on the 17th of November 1998. She is exactly 15 years old now. How can they be midgets?

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chilone 10 years ago

No kidding!!!

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

[–] skymoscow 10 years ago

+1 again.
Tired of low-IQ posters too.

reply

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 10 years ago

Oh for *beep* sake. Stop with that "I'm smarter than people who post stuff I don't agree with" BS. There's nothing dumber than declaring your own alleged intelligence on a movie discussion board.

reply

[–] skymoscow 10 years ago

There is. Having butthurt from that is way worse.

reply

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 10 years ago

Using the word "butthurt" after declaring that others have lower IQ??? Oh geez... I hope you realize someday that you don't have a higher IQ than most teenagers who comment here.

reply

[–] AllieMDA 9 years ago

teenagers have lower IQs than everyone else? When did this happen? And at what point do you suppose they grow into a proper, adult IQ? Do you even know what an IQ is?

reply

[–] Tales-from-the-Goondocks 9 years ago

First of all, yes, I know what IQ is. I don't even know where the hell are you taking that I don't know that. Second of all, I never claimed that teenagers have lower IQs. I used the word "teenager" to note that the poster I was talking to is probably a teenager, and that he isn't smarter than other dumb teenagers posting here. I would really love it if people like you started reading properly before replying dumb sh** next time.

reply

[–] AllieMDA 9 years ago

Oh. Thank you for explaining.

reply

[–] nm11 10 years ago

IQ doesn't mean anything.

reply

[–] skymoscow 10 years ago

Yea, i can see that. Not.

reply

[–] AllieMDA 9 years ago

Agreed.

reply

[–] drgreenthumb1001 9 years ago

Ugh, IQ means pretty much everything in that regard.

Its much more important then being "educated" that is for sure

reply

[–] sparkvark111 10 years ago

You never think happens in real life? It is more common then you think.

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."

reply

[–] peeeter-f 10 years ago

So what that is happens in real life? Lots of kids have sex at 14, 15, it doesn't mean it would be okay to make them have sex on camera at that age.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] X-Hal 10 years ago

Don't forget they were talking about shock-therapy for a child. That's not creepy at all.

- - -

Whether they find life there or not, I think Jupiter should be considered an enemy planet.

reply

[–] Alucard_13 10 years ago

They're not having sex, FFS. They're talking about and wondering about...sex. Perfectly normal for that age. They're touching a little....over the clothes. So what?

More over...they're each consensual, with an age appropriate partner, who is portrayed as kind and sensitive to the other.

How the hell could anyone find objection?

reply

[–] AllieMDA 9 years ago

it doesn't mean it would be okay to make them have sex on camera at that age.

Ok and at what age is it ok to "make" people have sex on camera?
This is not what is happening here.

reply

[–] mattshular 10 years ago

I was too. I'm not a prude by any stretch, but seeing 12 year olds french kissing and fondling each other made me pretty uncomfortable. Especially when she says "its hard, I like it" talking about his "member."

Also, were the upskirt shots necessary? She was dressed in a short skirt and several times during the film she was positioned so that the audience got flashes of her panties.

Call it art all you want, but the reality is there are a lot of perverts that are getting off to this movie. Just check some Youtube comments of the makeout scene. I know if I was their parent I wouldn't want them exploited like that.

reply

[–] peeeter-f 10 years ago

Agreed, feel kinda wrong to force kids at that age to do these things on camera.

reply

[–] mia-beach 10 years ago

Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, your mom and dad have (or had) sex.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] charan-rfs 10 years ago

Way to go sir

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] charan-rfs 10 years ago

Don't u dare criticize Mr.Polanski.. he went through a lot of troubles during his childhood.. he survived "The Liquidation done by Nazis" .. "He watched his parents get shot".. "He lost his loving wife in a brutal murder"..all these things will cause a huge psychological impact on ones mind..

if he is an animal he couldn't have made such beautiful movies..

look at the way you speak

he signed the polanksi petition

he is not the animal.. its you who is the animal making fun of such sensitive things...

reply

[–] Godsbrokenpromise 10 years ago

Don't u dare criticize Mr.Polanski.. he went through a lot of troubles during his childhood.. he survived "The Liquidation done by Nazis" .. "He watched his parents get shot".. "He lost his loving wife in a brutal murder"..all these things will cause a huge psychological impact on ones mind..

LMAO...you are joking right? Saying a bad childhood is justification of raping minors, don't most child molestors have bad childhoods?

I told her not to read it.
Read what?
The angry pajama people.

reply

[–] soonerpike697 9 years ago

Drugging/raping minors... Also he knew he did wrong and fled instead of owning up, *beep* that guy...

I do what I say and I say what I mean

reply

[–] betenoire-1 10 years ago

Mattshular:

I'm not a prude by any stretch,

Could have stopped right there. But you had to add a "but ..." clause.

So, you are a prude. You are completely within your rights of course, but please do not try to deny it.

but the reality is there are a lot of perverts that are getting off to this movie.

Yes, but it is their problem. Not that of the actors or the director. There are perverts getting off on almost anything imaginable. If one cannot make a movie out of fear that someone somewhere will get inappropriately excited about it, that will surely be the end of interesting stories being told on film.

reply

[–] juniorstickam 10 years ago

This post is brilliant, good job.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lanis_cupus 9 years ago

The scene itself was borderline but I could probably have lived with it. But when you add in the upskirts, it becomes obvious what type of people these filmmakers are--which then calls into question the other content of the movie.

It's a sad day for Hollywood.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] AllieMDA 9 years ago

And this list is intended to signify what, exactly?

reply

[–] Oddjob22667 8 years ago

I just saw the movie. They weren't exploited. The entire film was children's interpretation of what an idealized life should be - true love, rebellion, adventure.

The ear-peircing scene was their first time having sex; the second time they run away from home was them leaving home to get married and start their own life together; in the cousin's camp they actually get married; then there is great conflict, as in real-life, and the climax has them hovering over a cemetery, contemplating their impending death together as if they were an old couple.

Don't let the perverts prevent the creation of something great. They have always existed and always will. When Harpo Marx, a woman, and horse are shown in bed together in the film Duck Soup I'm sure it was only meant at the time to look incongruent and seem funny, but now people see that scene and think it was done as some kind of dirty joke.

reply

[–] absitomen 10 years ago

What do you mean by "husband"? You're a man!

reply

[–] mia-beach 10 years ago

Uh, kids experiment and that is exactly what they were doing. Kids discovering their sexuality the best way they know how at that age. Calm down, you are the typical uptight American when it comes to sex.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mia-beach 10 years ago

It's more projection of their (the original poster and reply's) own feelings.

reply

[–] kev17-885-804432 10 years ago

@DazzlinSpetre. Don't you know school kids are hyper sexualized? They masturbate (boys and girls) at 11 12 13... YO in school closet even in class sometime. Girls do fellatios to boys in schoolbus for candies, they make nude selfies and send them to their bf/gf I would say to you many things about that but I don't speak English...

reply

[–] PacificHeights 10 years ago

It wasn't "creepy" at all. They were two kids experimenting. Male sexuality has been so marginalized for the past forty years. It's ridiculous. Two kids finding out about each other. It's normal and healthy.

reply

[–] kev17-885-804432 10 years ago

"Male sexuality has been so marginalized for the past forty years." NO it was girl/female which has been so marginalized/taboo for the past forty years and for centuries.

reply

[–] kaiser071 10 years ago

I don't think so, now the idea that women are to be desired and men are the ones to desire is the basic premise, both sides have draw backs due to this dynamic (men have to work harder for sex, ugly women don't get the offer of sex). The effects of this can very likely quantified but I'll just go with my experience, uglier girls are more "slutty" because they have to be, men won't work as hard trying to have sex with them. How this relates to male sexuality is that any depiction of females from the male perspective is treated as exploitive and while the opposite is "never" the case. This is partly due to the inequality depicted by media (which I don't think necessarily represent real life anymore) which shows that men are chauvinists who only want sex (so of course if a woman wants sex it must be that she is being exploited for the male audience) or that a woman shouldn't want to have sex (because if you do truly want that, you must be a slut and that's apparently a derogatory term). But in essence, in sex woman have the right to choose and men have the right to pursue, which imo short changes all men and some ugly women. Also this problem stays even in a serious relationship, woman are in 2/3 of the time more likely to initiate divorce, this may be because 2/3 of men are mostly ass holes, or that woman have been programmed to always go for the upgrade (woman have the right to choose) so when their spouse disappoints them, they are designed to go pick a different mate. But this disappointment could also be due to men's programming (men have the right to pursue) which is always looking for the most desirable person to have sex with. Basically both genders have been exploited by the media's depiction of the two roles, and neither are ahead of the other.

reply

[–] lanis_cupus 9 years ago

But the media didn't create the basic dynamic, which is natural and has been in play for thousands of years.

The media just warps and exaggerates everything which can certainly create problems.

Is this to be an empathy test?

reply

[–] roadrunnerx6 10 years ago

I think you totally missed the point. This movie is in part about young love (a frequent theme in Mr. Anderson's movies) and two misfits finding each other. What could be more pure? The scene in question is about exploring, and finding out about the most natural instincts we all should hopefully have. It is also a very clumsy and awkward scene, but were any of you as good with the opposite sex as Sam was his first go-around? As other posters have stated, this kind of thing has been happening since children have been on the earth. Even the later scene with the scouts discussing Sam getting to second base, and the question of "under or over shirt?" is asked is showing the awkwardness, and curiosity of the age.

This movie was also set in 1965, so comparisons to kid's sexuality today are off-point. The '65 setting makes it even more innocent in my eyes.

*edit-Kinda shows how f'd up this country is too. You're not so concerned they are willing to die for each other and because they feel misunderstood and unwanted at the end, but a little sex and everyone gets all bent creeped out. If they're willing to get married and die for each other, I say they should at least get to second base, even if it is only over-shirt.

reply

[–] bobgk4 10 years ago

My problem isn't with the characters Sam and Suzy innocently exploring their feelings. My problem is with the idea of director Wes Anderson with a film crew of adults behind as he says to 13-year-old actress Kara Hayward "Now tell him you like that it's hard and it's OK for him to touch your chest."

It felt exploitative and devoid of the innocence of youth that they were trying to portray on screen.

reply

[–] airborne3502 10 years ago

Thank you for your post Dazzling Spectre. I'm glad I'm not the only one that was was creeped out by that scene. I found it a bit jarring and out of place in this otherwise charming film. If I was the age of the kids portrayed in the movie, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. However, as an adult observer, I didn't want to see it or be anywhere near it.

Bobgk4 made a good point:

My problem isn't with the characters Sam and Suzy innocently exploring their feelings. My problem is with the idea of director Wes Anderson with a film crew of adults behind as he says to 13-year-old actress Kara Hayward "Now tell him you like that it's hard and it's OK for him to touch your chest."

It felt exploitative and devoid of the innocence of youth that they were trying to portray on screen.

mattshular said:

I know if I was their parent I wouldn't want them exploited like that.

The fact of the matter is, the parents or guardians of those child actors read the script and signed off on that scene. At what point does being a stage parent stop and being a pimp begin? No matter how much I wanted my kid to make it in Hollywood, I would never take a chance on them becoming stimulation for some pedophile. No freakin' way.

Internet courage is such a yawn.

reply

[–] ChocolateButt 10 years ago

If we all allowed our fear of hypothetical pedophiles to hold us (or our children) back from career opportunities, we would be depriving the world of some awesome art. I was also creeped out by the scene, but I am pretty sure Wes Anderson and co. wanted me to be. They are not child porn peddlers. They are artists, and sometimes their art makes people uncomfortable.

Look at Sia's video for Chandelier. It features a young dancer wearing a flesh-coloured leotard. Her performance is f<cking stunning and it elevates an already amazing song. But there will always be perverts that fixate on all the wrong things. As long as they stay in their dark dirty corner, I will happily ignore them.

Come with me if you don't want paint on your clothes.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChocolateButt 10 years ago

...what?

Stop! Manners time.

reply

[–] climbingfish 10 years ago

Woody Allen
Pedro Almodovar
Wes Anderson
Asia Argento
Darren Aronofsky
Monica Bellucci
Alfonso Cuaron
Luc et Jean-Pierre Dardenne
Jonathan Demme
Alexandre Desplat
Stephen Frears
Costa Gavras
Terry Gilliam
David Heyman
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Harmony Korine
John Landis
David Lynch
Michael Mann
Jeanne Moreau
Alexander Payne
Walter Salles
Jerry Schatzberg
Julian Schnabel
Barbet Schroeder
Martin Scorcese
Paolo Sorrentino
Tilda Swinton
Bertrand Tavernier
Giuseppe Tornatore
Wim Wenders

Which one would you choose to do your babysitting then? lol

Personally, this movie is symbolically creepy as well, there is a disney malevolance about it, i cant quite put my finger on. And although im very broadminded. I kind of get the OP's point, its an adult that directed the children. Tell me you wouldn't feel uncomfortable watching with your 13 year old daughter at the scene of the backside upskirt in the tent. Now pause it, and leave the room, and get a beer, and come back.

Ooh its societies judgements.

So the film is subjective and can be read in so many ways, yes.
Being someone who psychology, is a real pastime, or a vocation if you like

It seems harmless enough, until you see more of the slow drip injecting of the twisted morals into society, about it being ok, to see youngsters, and children, in less than an innocent state.

Now children being molested happens all the time sadly, but when is the need for realism, going to get to that level in order for us to be entertained in a proper manner. How far do you think, film makers would go, if the censors were lifted?

reply

[–] Whatthecurtain? (33) 3 years ago

If you are pausing at scenes like that guess who is the pervert

reply

[–] lukieledoux 10 years ago

That song plays at work every day and I hate it.

reply

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 10 years ago

This is one of those weird situations where I really like the movie, love the story and what they are portraying, but when you break it down like that I have to admit I can't really dispute your point. I guess ultimately I'm coming down on the side of the idea that for the creation of great art, it's okay for there to be something mildly morally wrong happening in the process.

--------
Daily single-tweet movie reviews: https://twitter.com/SlackerInc

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

You people are a bunch of narrow minded fucking pussies...

reply

[–] Frogarama (12942) 7 years ago

^tis true. Plus the girl in this movie is really cute.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

That wasn't my point, I don't have any problem with you saying so though. My point was more that it is first far from being the major element of this cinematic adventure. Second, it is really not shown in a creepy way but in a actually realistic way. It is not like if the directors made her suck (or pretend) on his dick.

reply

[–] Frogarama (12942) 7 years ago

I think the thread got full of people who had sheltered childhoods and never touched the opposite sex until they were old enough to have their own kids (which is still early teens), plus they probably didn't realize how common it is. I agree it wasn't handled distastefully in the movie. I wonder if that actress is 18+ now....

reply

[–] spencersfocus 10 years ago

I seriously doubt that scene was something the director just snuck into the script at the last minute. Have you seen this guys films? They're about as controlled as it gets. These actors knew exactly what they were going to be saying and doing when they first read the script, discussed it with the director, and then took the job.
Nobody was forcing anybody to say or do anything against their will.

reply

[–] ReptilePatrol 10 years ago

I'm not sure if anybody's pointed this out yet, so I'll just put it here.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/story/2012-05-22/moonrise-kingdom-gilman-hayward/55144430/1

http://news.moviefone.ca/2012/05/21/moonrise-kingdom-kara-hayward-jared-gilman-interview/

In these interviews with Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman (and there's plenty of others like these as well), the young actors detail what was going on when that scene was filmed. In short, it was saved until the very end of filming, both were friends and trusted each other by then, it was closed set (just them, the cameraman, and Wes Anderson), and Anderson supposedly made both of them very comfortable with what they were about to do. Additionally, as someone else already mentioned here, they and their parents obviously agreed to doing this beforehand as well.

reply

[–] CJ_Thorpe 10 years ago

Solid interviews.

They come across as highly intelligent kids, no not even kids, just highly intelligent people in general.

reply

[–] sirfire 10 years ago

totally agree ... the world is all f'd up in terms of creeped out .... they have no issues with a neglected child ... or mental abuse of a child or murder of a child. But when a child wants to explore sexually they are completely upset. If you guys cared about kids as much as you care about the idea of kids being sexually active then perhaps our teenage suicide and mental issues when they grow up will be far far lower today.

reply

[–] Flight_of_Fantasy 10 years ago

The scene in question is about exploring, and finding out about the most natural instincts we all should hopefully have.

Why should we all "hopefully" have sexual feelings? Have you ever heard of asexuality? If it's okay to experience sexual attraction, why should it not be okay to not?

I'm sorry, I don't mean to get all butthurt and confrontational, but as an asexual, that sort of casual rejection of a sexual orientation is just offensive and maddening.

Peter, is your social worker in that horse?

reply

[–] bureau203 9 years ago

I'm sorry, I don't mean to get all butthurt and confrontational, but as an asexual, that sort of casual rejection of a sexual orientation is just offensive and maddening.

For... God's... sake. What do people like you enjoy so much about being offended?

I've seen things that would make you want to write a book on how to puke.

reply

[–] InkedInBlood 9 years ago

They live coddled lives with no real problems.

I don't like the way blood money spends.

reply

[–] praisethelove 8 years ago

"To the pure, all things are pure."

If your heart is pure, I don't think the scene will much bother you. You will be able to shrug your shoulders and move on. Take it for what it is. The child actors know they didn't really do that in real life. They were reading lines for a movie. I wouldn't take it too seriously.

reply