• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

OmegaDragon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
214
I am not blaming any child. I am criticizing the adults that made a move that literally focuses the camera on young girls genitals as they perform a hypersexualized dance routine in very tight clothing. I am just going to put this out there as explicitly as possible. The problem with this film needs to be made clear. The dance routine at the end has the girls bending over and preforming sexualized dance moves while the camera focuses on their genitals. You can literally see the shape of their genitals (to put it crudely, cameltoe). Not once, not by accident, but instead multiple deliberate (sometimes in slow motion) camera shots. That is valid criticism regardless of who made the movie or what they were trying to convey.

Yeah this is my main problem with the movie as well. You have your 11 old characters performing highly sexualised dance moves because they are just copying stuff what they have seen elsewhere. I get that, you want to show how kids are influenced by these things. But why basically sexualise this even further with those camera tricks? That made me a lot more uncomfortable than the kids actually dong the moves. I think it's because they want to show how the girls (or girl, Amy) view themselves doing these things. This whole time they are copying sexualising dance moves, now there are also copying the camera work. They did make a 'music' video. I wonder if the camera work in the previous dance scenes (before the twerking) is tamer.

btw i like this shot during that scene:
XwsE090.png
 

Starmud

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,443
uhhh... i don't think the makers were trying to intentionally show outlines of genitalia (i didnt see that either, but i guess i wasn't looking that closely lol). if your seeing that maybe your looking a bit *too* hard on your end to see something... bodies are bodies.

there are a few in your face scenes regarding the topic of sexualization here, and it will be to much for an american audience. asking a general audience in this country to view sexualized content with some honesty, nuance and thought is a big ask, especially on the topic of famale minors.

this is the first movie on this sort of topic i've seen to cover the impact of social media on young people, which is good to see. theres questionable video and images all over SM of minors. a lot of people are still immune to it or scroll past it. the peer pressure of doing things like taking nude pics is a real problem for kids growing up today too. even as a 30 year old man on datings apps i feel pressured to have nude/sexual selfies... the issue feels like it largely gets painted as a joke though, especially for boys under age.

its not a film i'd peg for the average netflix viewer, but the movies message isn't bad even if it gets predictable, the spin about it being pedophilia are silly but the movie is also meant to spur a conversation with scenes made to make you uncomfortable.
 

Biggersmaller

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,966
Minneapolis
The problem is not the subject matter. Dance teams/clubs teaching routines young girls mimic from pop culture is a legitimate topic for debate and worthy of a documentary film (EDIT: versus a drama).

However, the direction and camera work is abhorrent. Not serious forensic shot with a bit of respect for the subject matter to demonstrate what the routines look like. No, the angles and cuts being made are emphasizing a child's body in ways that are highly inappropriate. Like if a true crime movie treated footage of real life violence like a Saw film.
 
Last edited:

phonicjoy

Banned
Jun 19, 2018
4,305
The problem is not the subject matter. Dance teams/clubs teaching routines young girls mimic from pop culture is a legitimate topic for debate and worthy of a documentary film.

However, the direction and camera work is abhorrent. Not serious forensic shot with a bit of respect for the subject matter to demonstrate what the routines look like. No, the angles and cuts being made are emphasizing a child's body in ways that are highly inappropriate. Like if a true crime documentary treated footage of real life violence like a Saw film.

which is the point and makes it uncomfortable to watch, which again is the point. You can't watch this film and say "well that's just girls being girls".

And every hypersexualized action by the girls has repercussions,just as the extreme conservatism does.
The amount of shots is also not anywhere near what I had assumed from all the righteous indignation.

I watched this with some friends who are feminist studies majors and I was constantly waiting for the other show to drop but it didn't.

it is a well paced, thought provoking, tragic, beautiful film that is only titillating if you are one sick fuck.
 

ken_matthews

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
838
uhhh... i don't think the makers were trying to intentionally show outlines of genitalia (i didnt see that either, but i guess i wasn't looking that closely lol). if your seeing that maybe your looking a bit *too* hard on your end to see something... bodies are bodies.

You got to be kidding, right? The are moments where the camera is focused on Amy's butt as she bends over in slow motion. It is literally the only thing on the screen for like 5 seconds. You are lying if you said you did not see that. It is literally front and center stage.
 

RedMercury

Blue Venus
Member
Dec 24, 2017
17,657
uhhh... i don't think the makers were trying to intentionally show outlines of genitalia (i didnt see that either, but i guess i wasn't looking that closely lol). if your seeing that maybe your looking a bit *too* hard on your end to see something... bodies are bodies.
Yeah I dunno, maybe it's because I have a daughter but I feel like the easiest solution to not sexualizing kids is not looking at them in a sexual way which should probably be the default? If you can't separate them being directly sexualized versus the discussion of sexualization through culture or whatever I don't know how the conversation or whatever message the movie is trying to get across can be discussed.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,122
It was just a suggestion, I didn't mean that it would be a better story. And the condom scene was also pretty good. There are actually some good segments in there and I believe a compelling story could have been told. It just didn't happen though. There are too many scenes that make no sense and do not appear to serve the story, and coincidently they all sexualize the girls.
What are the scenes you feel made no sense?

As to the "pic" scene I saw that as Amy becoming more irrational seeing as her window into the adult world (the phone) was being taken away from her permanently, leading to her attempting to manifest it in her actual life to extremes in several ways. I also think it makes for an interesting point about how her friends decide to regard her later in the movie

The problem is not the subject matter. Dance teams/clubs teaching routines young girls mimic from pop culture is a legitimate topic for debate and worthy of a documentary film.

However, the direction and camera work is abhorrent. Not serious forensic shot with a bit of respect for the subject matter to demonstrate what the routines look like. No, the angles and cuts being made are emphasizing a child's body in ways that are highly inappropriate. Like if a true crime documentary treated footage of real life violence like a Saw film.
It's not a documentary so I wouldn't really go into this movie expecting it to be shot like one
 
Last edited:

ken_matthews

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
838
What are the scenes you feel made no sense?

As to the "pic" scene I saw that as Amy becoming more irrational seeing as her window into the adult world (the phone) was being taken away from her permanently, leading to her attempting to manifest it in her actual life to extremes in several ways. I also think it makes for an interesting point about how her friends decide to regard her later in the movie

The biggest one was during the "ritual cleansing". She just breaks out and starts twerking? Really? And the camera had to pan around to focus on her butt? The phone scene gained nothing by her taking a picture of her vagina. The movie gained nothing by it and it might as well not had happened. All the dance rehearsal segments. They were shot like mini music videos with sexualized dance moves and camera work that focused on their butts and crotches. Why? Why do you need any of that?
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,122
The biggest one was during the "ritual cleansing". She just breaks out and starts twerking? Really? And the camera had to pan around to focus on her butt? The phone scene gained nothing by her taking a picture of her vagina. The movie gained nothing by it and it might as well not had happened. All the dance rehearsal segments. They were shot like mini music videos with sexualized dance moves and camera work that focused on their butts and crotches. Why? Why do you need any of that?
The "cleansing" scene I think is supposed to lead the viewer to think of Amy's frightening addiction to dance as sinful and demonic in nature and then subverts this when the imam/priest-figure tells her mother otherwise, instead, focusing on the tangible unhappiness that is present in their household (the dad coming home with a new wife). I am not Muslim so I can't speak to that faith specifically, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was meant to critique the ways in which the director felt religion allowed for her family to disregard real issues that were passed over in favor of easy concepts to fight against. I think that broader theme plays a part at the end of the film when Amy, her mom and her aunt have that final confrontation/conversation too

The phone one I shared my thoughts in my previous post, but yeah considering how Amy interacts with her friends and a classmate in the aftermath of posting that picture, Im not sure how you could omit that action without removing those scenes, and the commentary about slut-shaming, as well.

The dance rehearsals later in the film I thought were shot in ways that both clashed against the initial tone of the movie in the beginning, due to Amy's growing, frantic desire to "grow up freely", and attempted to make the point about the end result of children being raised on explicit dance vids as Amy consumed in the beginning of the movie. I get it being "too much" for people (though I think it was prominent enough to make a point without reaching a point of titillation) but I don't believe softer camera shots would've gotten across the emotion the movie was trying to invoke as Amy's life took on more turmoil
 

ken_matthews

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
838
The "cleansing" scene I think is supposed to lead the viewer to think of Amy's frightening addiction to dance as sinful and demonic in nature and then subverts this when the imam/priest-figure tells her mother otherwise, instead, focusing on the tangible unhappiness that is present in their household (the dad coming home with a new wife). I am not Muslim so I can't speak to that faith specifically, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was meant to critique the ways in which the director felt religion allowed for her family to disregard real issues that were passed over in favor of easy concepts to fight against. I think that broader theme plays a part at the end of the film when Amy, her mom and her aunt have that final confrontation/conversation too

I get that, but why did she have to start twerking? And why did the camera have to zoom in to her butt while she was on her hands and knees? Why did she need to be in her underwear?

The phone one I shared my thoughts in my previous post, but yeah considering how Amy interacts with her friends and a classmate in the aftermath of posting that picture, Im not sure how you could omit that action without removing those scenes, and the commentary about slut-shaming, as well.

Sure, they addressed it afterwards as you mentioned. But why did it happen in the first place. That was the last thing I expected to happen in the bathroom. It came out of nowhere, entirely unprovoked. Any number of other things could have happened to satisfy the narrative need for her negative reputation.

The dance rehearsals later in the film I thought were shot in ways that both clashed against the initial tone of the movie in the beginning, due to Amy's growing, frantic desire to "grow up freely", and attempted to make the point about the end result of children being raised on explicit dance vids as Amy consumed in the beginning of the movie. I get it being "too much" for people (though I think it was prominent enough to make a point without reaching a point of titillation) but I don't believe softer camera shots would've gotten across the emotion the movie was trying to invoke as Amy's life took on more turmoil

I disagree but I've criticized the movie enough so let me offer some praise. I thought there was a really smart scene in the beginning of the movie that really made the point well. This was when Amy first met one of the girls in the laundry room (I forget her name). Amy is standing in the doorway watching the girl dance. It is clear that Amy is captivated by the way she moves. The girl is not dancing in an overly provocative way, but she is moving her hips and wearing tight black leather pants that clearly show the curves of her body. At first you only see the girl dancing from behind and it is honestly not obvious that she is 11 years old. Then she turns around and you see a child looking at you. The first reaction I had was, "fuck, I thought I was looking at the backside of an attractive woman". This scene was very clever and it did provoke uncomfortable thoughts (for me at least). And if the movie's creators intended to provoke uncomfortable thoughts, then this was the only scene that was done well. The rest of the movie is just gratuitous sexualization that doesn't serve the narrative.
 

HardRojo

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,127
Peru
Yes.

I don't know where you're from but here the disgusting "Reggaetón" culture is imitated by very VERY young kids in some less educated areas more often than not with their parents encouraging it.

Back when I was 12 I attended several parties where other 12 year old girls grinded, touched and seductively danced to guys to the tune of the Reggaeton song "Noche de Sexo" (Sex Night). I remember calling my dad and asking him to get me the fuck out of there.

All I wanted was cake man...

That was 15 years ago. It can only be worse now.
Growing up while reggaetón started to gain wide acceptance and popularity was quite something lol, I think I was like 14 when it hit it big with Daddy Yankee, then Don Omar, Tito el Bambino, Wisin y Yandel and all those artists. I suppose my experience was somewhat different though, I went to parties for some cake, but stayed for the reggaeton 😅
Still, it's one thing experimenting sexuality with people your age while you're 12-15, it's all mystery at that point, but I don't know how I feel about representing such struggles in the manner this film seems to depict them. I'll probably watch it right now that I've got some time, in order to have a better and informed opinion of this topic.
 

nampad

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,238
Unbelievable that the carnival of stupid started again with that other thread.

Can people start to get sone critical thinking instead of just blabbering whatever seems en vogue?
Have not seen the movie but the short trailer that is shown on Netflix and it was ok.
 

HardRojo

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,127
Peru
I finished watching it a while ago. I'm just gonna say the message could've been conveyed in a much better way without all those ass shots, spread legs, ass spanks and more. And even ignoring those, the movie itself is just not good, the narrative doesn't make much sense and I was hoping they wouldn't go down the route of the girl embracing so much of this freedom that she ends up doing terrible things and ridiculing herself, but she did... so yeah, this movie is bad, even when ignoring the problematic stuff about the sexualization of minors. Also, I'm hoping that one boob shot was from a girl over 18, but it was hard to tell even afterwards when the girl from the video appears.

Edit: There were like 3 scenes that made me go "Ooookaaaay..." and I was close to dropping it. The first 40 or so mins are fine, I was actually thinking maybe it was all a misunderstanding, but nope, shit goes downhill after those first 40 mins.
 

phonicjoy

Banned
Jun 19, 2018
4,305
You got to be kidding, right? The are moments where the camera is focused on Amy's butt as she bends over in slow motion. It is literally the only thing on the screen for like 5 seconds. You are lying if you said you did not see that. It is literally front and center stage.

I didnt see it, the group I was with didnt see it, if it was there it def wasnt for long. The most shocking thing I saw was her posting her "selfie" which I felt in my bones. That and her getting caught.
I finished watching it a while ago. I'm just gonna say the message could've been conveyed in a much better way without all those ass shots, spread legs, ass spanks and more. And even ignoring those, the movie itself is just not good, the narrative doesn't make much sense and I was hoping they wouldn't go down the route of the girl embracing so much of this freedom that she ends up doing terrible things and ridiculing herself, but she did... so yeah, this movie is bad, even when ignoring the problematic stuff about the sexualization of minors. Also, I'm hoping that one boob shot was from a girl over 18, but it was hard to tell even afterwards when the girl from the video appears.

Edit: There were like 3 scenes that made me go "Ooookaaaay..." and I was close to dropping it. The first 40 or so mins are fine, I was actually thinking maybe it was all a misunderstanding, but nope, shit goes downhill after those first 40 mins.

I honestly don't get this. It was a nuanced look at being in the middle between conservatism and the excesses of pop culture, the damage both of those do, and it even has a happy ending where she finds herself. It describes the pressures to sexualize and grow up even when you're not ready for that, in both cultures (shown by the scenes with her dress for instance). It also comments on the position of women in both cultures and what it means to come of age spread between those two. It even speaks on French ghettoization, and the troubles with immigrants not being represented in institutions and having to rely on the in group for justice and support in the context of their culture.

Describing the scenes as "problematic" when that is what we do to children as a culture is problematic in itself. Yes, the acts are problematic and uncomfortable. Thats part of the point of the film. The shots are music video shots. Its what we present to children of that age. That means they will see that as adulthood and practice that, and those shots are confronting us with the actual implication of this, not letting us overlook it as childish playacting like playing doctor or fireman.
The director even makes a blunt point of the kid's innocence with the scene in the woods, and the main characters process in linking the female form and sexuality to freedom and adulthood in the mosque scene. These are kids play acting an image that we portray as normal, and this is the consequence. The way they perform is so clumsy and kid like that to see in to some sort of porn like intent is beyond my comprehension. It's also in line with how she acts with her friends outside of the dancing for instance the shopping scene where they ara performing adulthood in some sense as well. Not to mention the real life consequences she faces for every public display of that performance of sexuality and adulthood. It's constantly shown not to be the way for her to get to freedom.

It's even respectful of conservative Islam, with the clergyman near the end being one of the more reasonable people and the only one seeing the issue as it is; a girl acting out of frustration and the stress there is in the home situation.

As to the narrative, I dont know what to say. Its a coming of age story in a specific situation based on the author's youth, but as with most arthouse films it's not as rigidly crammed into a hollywood structure and is more about the ideas. The pacing was good, it had some really funny moments, and it left us talking for a few hours afterwards about parenting, pop culture and religious conservatism.
 

thediamondage

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,272
34 reviews from critics
www.rottentomatoes.com

Cuties

A talented 11-year-old girl joins a hip-hop dance troupe.

currently sitting at 88% fresh (7/10) from critics, and 3% (0.6/10) from audiences.

For controversial movies, shows, and games the gap between audiences and critics has grown enormous.
 

CloudWolf

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,624
This is the dumbest 'controversy'. 99% of the people hating on it haven't even watched the film and just assume it's something it's not.
 

Fj0823

Legendary Duelist
Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,659
Costa Rica
34 reviews from critics
www.rottentomatoes.com

Cuties

A talented 11-year-old girl joins a hip-hop dance troupe.

currently sitting at 88% fresh (7/10) from critics, and 3% (0.6/10) from audiences.

For controversial movies, shows, and games the gap between audiences and critics has grown enormous.

100% of the time, "The message could have been done better" in a controversial work means "I got the message loud and clear but it made me feel uncomfortable so it's bad and badly done"

And 80% of the time they won't tell you exactly how it could be done "better"
 

Flannel_and_Assam

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jun 21, 2020
256
United Kingdom
I've just finished watching it and I really regret the knee-jerk reaction I had when the poster was revealed. It's a solid and engaging film that doesn't deserve this moral crusade. I agree with Monica Castillo, who wrote the review for Roger Ebert, that it really pushes "depiction does not equal endorsement" to its limits and is all the better for it.
 

rjinaz

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
28,404
Phoenix
This is the dumbest 'controversy'. 99% of the people hating on it haven't even watched the film and just assume it's something it's not.
After spending a lot of time reading comments on both facebook and twitter I've come to the conclusion this is a losing battle in US. The public has made up its mind, right or wrong.

My guess is, Netflix pulls it.
 

rjinaz

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
28,404
Phoenix
I've just finished watching it and I really regret the knee-jerk reaction I had when the poster was revealed. It's a solid and engaging film that doesn't deserve this moral crusade. I agree with Monica Castillo, who wrote the review for Roger Ebert, that it really pushes "depiction does not equal endorsement" to its limits and is all the better for it.
thank you for sharing your opinion. Unfortunately a few risque shots, in the end, is going to end this movie in America. I wish people could gauge the overall picture but in the age of "it's fake news unless I say otherwise" this is where we are as a country. That said, I have no desire to watch this movie as a 37 year old man with no kids. I'm just not the target audience.
 

Deleted member 4461

User Requested Account Deletion
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,010
I think at this point, though, people understand the point of the movie. Even on social media. The point is that it goes about the point in a gratuitous way. I'm sure the movie is fine otherwise, but:



There must be limits to what should be shown on screen, yes? What do you guys who think it's fine... where is the line?

EDIT: And do you think the children in this film weren't sexualized in real life for the sake of making this point in a movie?
 

deimosmasque

Ugly, Queer, Gender-Fluid, Drive-In Mutant, yes?
Moderator
Apr 22, 2018
14,209
Tampa, Fl
Thanks to another thread. Let me share a different movie.

Kids
images


A movie made in 1995.

What does the synopsis say?

"Amoral teen Telly (Leo Fitzpatrick) has made it his goal to sleep with as many virgin girls as possible -- but he doesn't tell them that he's HIV positive. While on the hunt for his latest conquest, Telly and his best friend, Casper (Justin Pierce), smoke pot and steal from shops around New York. Meanwhile, Jenny (Chloë Sevigny), one of Telly's early victims, makes it her mission to save other girls from him. But before she has a chance to confront him at a party, everything goes horribly wrong."

This is not a new thing. The movie is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable and bad.

This would be like saying that you're a horror movie fan, but you hate the first Hellraiser movie because someone said:

"This is a movie without wit, style or reason, and the true horror is that actors were made to portray, and technicians to realize, its bankruptcy of imagination."

By the way that was Roger Ebert.
 

Flannel_and_Assam

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jun 21, 2020
256
United Kingdom
thank you for sharing your opinion. Unfortunately a few risque shots, in the end, is going to end this movie in America. I wish people could gauge the overall picture but in the age of "it's fake news unless I say otherwise" this is where we are as a country. That said, I have no desire to watch this movie as a 37 year old man with no kids. I'm just not the target audience.
There's a definite lack of critical thinking and people unwilling to explore themes that make them uncomfortable.

I think at this point, though, people understand the point of the movie. Even on social media. The point is that it goes about the point in a gratuitous way. I'm sure the movie is fine otherwise, but:



There must be limits to what should be shown on screen, yes? What do you guys who think it's fine... where is the line?


EDIT: And do you think the children in this film weren't sexualized in real life for the sake of making this point in a movie?

What an absolutely ridiculous comparison. It's more like raising awareness of police brutality by depicting people being brutalised by law enforcement - it can be shot in a gratuitous way with blood, gore, and children bawling, but does that make it bad? No. Gratuity can be a valuable asset.

Where you draw the line is difficult, but I would say it comes to down to production being unethical or illegal. Obviously, you can't actually murder someone for a film. Likewise, child actors have very strict legal protections when it comes to working on set and even more when it comes to scenes involving something even remotely sexual, so ethically, I don't see a problem with the dancing. They would have performed those scenes under very controlled conditions and strict safeguarding procedures. So no, I don't think the child actors were sexualised in real life for this. They are actors and the crew are professionals.

Kids (1995) begins with a teen boy persuading a twelve year old girl to have sex with him and Little Miss Sunshine (2006) ends with a ten year old girl doing a striptease to a shocked audience at a child pageant. The latter is played for comedy and is meant to empower the girl, from what I remember. Frankly, nothing in Cuties is that graphic or shocking compared to what has come before and the dance scenes are only a small part of the film and fit the narrative just fine.
 

Deleted member 4461

User Requested Account Deletion
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,010
There's a definite lack of critical thinking and people unwilling to explore themes that make them uncomfortable.


What an absolutely ridiculous comparison. It's more like raising awareness of police brutality by depicting people being brutalised by law enforcement - it can be shot in a gratuitous way with blood, gore, and children bawling, but does that make it bad? No. Gratuity can be a valuable asset.

Where you draw the line is difficult, but I would say it comes to down to production being unethical or illegal. Obviously, you can't actually murder someone for a film. Likewise, child actors have very strict legal protections when it comes to working on set and even more when it comes to scenes involving something even remotely sexual, so ethically, I don't see a problem with the dancing. They would have performed those scenes under very controlled conditions and strict safeguarding procedures. So no, I don't think the child actors were sexualised in real life for this. They are actors and the crew are professionals.

Kids (1995) begins with a teen boy persuading a twelve year old girl to have sex with him and Little Miss Sunshine (2006) ends with a ten year old girl doing a striptease to a shocked audience at a child pageant. The latter is played for comedy and is meant to empower the girl, from what I remember. Frankly, nothing in Cuties is that graphic or shocking compared to what has come before and the dance scenes are only a small part of the film and fit the narrative just fine.

What are the protections for child actors in France?

Also, I think your comparison is less accurate. Any awareness movie of police brutality would use fake blood and gore. Or existing blood and gore.

Sexualization itself is a weird, complex thing. But the issue is that in order to depict it, you have to actively sexualize your actors. And of course, Netflix's marketing only exacerbated this.

It becomes a whole new problem. And then with children, who are already eaten up and destroyed in places like Hollywood, who may not actually get the depth of what they're doing... You're either full on problematic or in the darkest possible grey.

EDIT: Also, I think you're thinking of sexualization in a very narrow way. The director doesn't have to be an abuser for the kids to be sexualized. No more than parents have to be abusing their children in order to put them in child pageants.
 

alexiswrite

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,418
What are the protections for child actors in France?

Also, I think your comparison is less accurate. Any awareness movie of police brutality would use fake blood and gore. Or existing blood and gore.

Sexualization itself is a weird, complex thing. But the issue is that in order to depict it, you have to actively sexualize your actors. And of course, Netflix's marketing only exacerbated this.

It becomes a whole new problem. And then with children, who are already eaten up and destroyed in places like Hollywood, who may not actually get the depth of what they're doing... You're either full on problematic or in the darkest possible grey.

EDIT: Also, I think you're thinking of sexualization in a very narrow way. The director doesn't have to be an abuser for the kids to be sexualized. No more than parents have to be abusing their children in order to put them in child pageants.

You're acting like this is some random Hollywood movie where the kids are instructed by some sleezy director to act "hot" because it sells tickets. This is explicitly a movie about child sexualisation and how it's fucked. The script is about that. You're acting like these kids are just brought in to act sexual and then discarded and not like they're active participants in creating and engaging with this work on all levels. They are actors. They are creatives. They are engaging with the themes and character arcs on a deeper level than anyone watching. So the idea that they don't really understand what is going on makes no sense. This can happen in a healthy way. Children acting in a sexualised way on a movie set where everyone is clear that children being sexualised is actually a bad thing, and that it's just happening in this case to make a larger point about sexualisation, is different than children acting in a sexualised way on the set of, say, a Michael bay movie. One can create safe spaces.

The idea that children should never be sexualised in movies makes sense as a basic tenet of our society until we realise that, whether you or I like it or not, there are kids who are right now sexualising themselves. I think it is important to have fiction that speaks to their lives, and speaks to how our society fails them. I think it's important for children and for our society. I think pretending that this doesn't happen or overly sanitising their experiences is ultimately a bad thing, that ultimately undermines the points being made.
 

el jacko

Member
Dec 12, 2017
947
I watched a portion of this clip and I have to say I agree with these ladies.




Anyway, I respect the writer/director's choice to make this film about her own life, and I can think of a half-dozen similar experiences amongst friends and other students when I was in junior high school. but I'm not sure I personally have the stomach for the film. I certainly didn't for this clip!
 

Ragnar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,354
What an absolutely ridiculous comparison. It's more like raising awareness of police brutality by depicting people being brutalised by law enforcement - it can be shot in a gratuitous way with blood, gore, and children bawling, but does that make it bad? No. Gratuity can be a valuable asset.
(This is my personal take on the subject, and although it might seem as though I'm dog-piling the film I'm actually ambivalent as to its merits and do not have any opinions set in stone. But for the sake of discussion:)

If we want to be really nitpicky, the most one-to-one comparison to Cuties would be if we made a film about police brutality where we staged but also thereby produced actual, real police brutality that would not otherwise be there, but was real and resulted in real-world injuries to the black person. Because Cuties produces sexualisation of children which would not otherwise be there, even if they are actors and even if the point is to critique.

Your description of raising awareness of police brutality gratuitously could either refer to a documentary where someone films the beating or killing of a black person, or it could refer to a film where special effects are used to get the illusion of physical harm. But in neither of these cases is the director actually creating the thing that they want to critique. They are either documenting pre-existing police brutality, or creating the illusion of police brutality without anyone actually getting hurt. However; you cannot create the illusion of sexualising children without also sexualising them in the process, even if that is not your explicit, primary intent. That is the difference between violence and sexualisation. One can be faked without actually taking place; the other not so much.

This is just my take on it, and my opinion is subject to modification.
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,197
Considering the film an equal parallel to if someone orchestrated and filmed the police brutalising some Black people. Thread has truly taken a dive my word.
 

Deleted member 42055

User requested account closure
Banned
Apr 12, 2018
11,215
I have followed the news cycle a bit but I haven't seen that film, as it isn't exactly my cup of tea. Is the discussion taking place just people expressing that they feel the approach taken with the subject matter isn't problematic while other people disagree with them? For 16 pages? Or Are there twists and turns I'm not expecting in this thread?
 

kamikazety

Banned
Dec 5, 2018
187
Film is gross and deserves the criticism. Literally exploiting children in a disgusting trashy way to make a point? Make a fucking documentary. How in the hell did the camera man not want to quit or worry about there future careers filming this garbage.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,965
Haven't seen the film yet, but it's a pity the shitstorm overpowered all nuanced discussion, because the overall point of "how far can you go with depicting something to criticize it?" is worth talking about

From what I understand there's an overall point about protecting the innocence of childhood that's similar to Little Miss Sunshine, only this film goes a lot farther in showing how prepubescent children react to being exposed to sexualized imagery

I have followed the news cycle a bit but I haven't seen that film, as it isn't exactly my cup of tea. Is the discussion taking place just people expressing that they feel the approach taken with the subject matter isn't problematic while other people disagree with them? For 16 pages? Or Are there twists and turns I'm not expecting in this thread?

This thread is from August and the film only came out on Netflix a few days ago. So most of it is about the controversy around the trailer vs Sundance reviews or comments from the director.

It was just bumped now because the film is out and we have critic reviews and people who've actually watched it (and the other thread about the film was a clusterfuck taking the twitter shitstorm at face value and was closed)

Probably a new thread would be better, but I guess nobody wants to create one seeing how the last one went
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,798
Just watched it and was surprised by how bad it is. It's mean-spirited for most of its runtime, exploitative, sometimes-incoherent, and spends so much of its time recording ass-shots of it's actors that it never developed a face for any of them. Stupid, soulless, and not worth anyone's time however you feel about the controversy.
 

rjinaz

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
28,404
Phoenix
After now seeing more of this I agree with this take. I don't see why the ass shots were needed. Could have been done in more tasteful ways even if the point is to make you uncomfortable. They are still kids. That said I still support the idea of the movie just not necessarily how it was approached here. The child porn accusations however remain ridiculous bs.

Edit meant to quote spoo above.
 

CloudWolf

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,624
Just watched it and was surprised by how bad it is. It's mean-spirited for most of its runtime, exploitative, sometimes-incoherent, and spends so much of its time recording ass-shots of it's actors that it never developed a face for any of them. Stupid, soulless, and not worth anyone's time however you feel about the controversy.
I'm baffled by these kind of responses. The movie is literally none of this.
 

silva1991

Member
Oct 26, 2017
10,498
That scene where an underage girl showed her breast was just vile, almost puked. Just terrible movie all around. Outrage is justified

edit: even if I'm wrong about the age of the girls in that scene it doesn't make the rest of the movie any less terrible.
 
Last edited: