This is my issue. It’s not that the film is provocative or handling a sensitive topic.
It’s that the film is obviously sexualized and exploitive. The exact things it’s pretending to analyze and expose.
Does the movie purport to do these things? I skimmed a few reviews they said nothing of the sort, in fact the official synopsis from Netflix says:
Quote:
Eleven-year-old Amy starts to rebel against her conservative family’s traditions when she becomes fascinated with a free-spirited dance crew.
The reviews I skimmed said the same sort of things. If the movie is about shining a light on sexual exploitation of under age girls you'd think that would be in the tag line.
I don't accept any defence of this film, don't accept any context where it's "not that bad". Am not going to apologize for that. And I think I took your words exactly as they were written and did not misinterpret them.
There is no "pump the brakes" for me here.
In fact reading your post again, if anything I am under reacting to it.
That's fine, but yes you did and yes you are. Another example is the fact I never said it's "not that bad", as you directly imply with your quotations. Those are literal words literally being put in my mouth. I said that I have seen worse offenses in other media, which does nothing to make any of it OK. You went on to imply that I was of the mind to tell people to accept pedophiles based on sexual preference inclusiveness. That's offensive to me since I've given no indication that would lead you to that ridiculous conclusion.
I don't expect an apology, but again I would appreciate you not attributing words and ideas to me which I have not expressed.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
Oh yeah, Netflix, the director etc have all said this is meant to show the effects of hypersexualization and social media on young women.
It’s literally meant to be an “eye opener” type film that exposes the pressures young woman face to sexualize themselves as part of their personal identity.
I’ll admit, it’s a fine line when making a film about disturbing content without glorifying it. This filmmaker failed miserably and to make it worse, Netflix doubled down by marketing the movie on its sexualization! It’s impossible to pretend they didn’t see it, they based the advertising on it.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
Children should never be permitted/encouraged to perform highly sexualized content, full stop. Especially on film where it'll be distributed to the masses. It's not the audience that's missing the point, it's whoever thought that gratuitously showing kids doing just that was an acceptable way of telling a story. It's not and most of us recognize that, it's objectively not an overreaction.
I see and appreciate where you're coming from. I too don't believe this was the medium for this message, and I'm actually not a proponent at all for it being made, but I'm also not calling for the producers or distributors heads or delving into QAnon theories. That's where the objection towards overreaction for me lies. There were many other ways to call attention to this, and I'm of the mind we shouldn't have needed this controversy to do so.
These competitions are already being shown to large audiences, even through large distributors on network TV. I think we're on the same page of that being problematic.
Quote:
I would argue that it's disingenuous of you to assume that these 11 year old girls recognize the risk they're being put in. That they know exactly how their scenes will be used by the grosses of people. You say that pedos won't pay attention to stuff like this, but it's a hell of way to fly under the radar way to get their preferred content (I literally can't even type out the detail of the content because it grosses me out so much). It's fully promoted and endorsed by Netflix.
Abuse and exploitation are different, i'll give you that. But when you have a handful of young kids sexually exploited on film it's hard to see that line. They were made to perform and be sexual for entertainment. I'd argue that's abusive.
I would just give more credit to the child performers and the hundreds of personnel working on the film. There are measures to ensure people are not exploited in making film, plus children are a lot smarter than we want to believe. I, however, don't believe they fully understand the subtleties of consumption, but I don't believe that's clearly indicative of exploitation or abuse. It's not a decision I would have made.
To me this isn't abusive, and it's exploitative in the same sense (though not degree) as sexploitation and blaxploitation. Apart from a poor choice of platform probably the biggest mistake the producers made were in trusting the critical thought of the audience. Either that or they were oblivious. Like Cecil, I'm confused why they thought this was a good idea and/or would be universally appreciated the way they intended.
That's a critical cinematic POV, and not an endorsement of this film. Personally, I don't think it should have seen the light of day.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
The Following User Says Thank You to Yamer For This Useful Post:
I've always hated the idea of people being able to explain away or justify what they've done with the whole poor choice reasoning.
A writer and a director and a group of producers made this movie, that's not poor choices, this was their idea of art, and maybe they were trying to be edgy, but having a bunch of 11 to 14 year olds dancing in skin tight outfits with exposed skin while putting on stripper moves and dancing suggestively isn't a bad choice, it was just a choice on their part.
And it was a gross choice.
I wonder how they explained this to the parents. Or if they did, I wonder what the parents responses were to this garbage.
Honestly its not art, its not edgy, Netflix should rip it down, burn the films or hardrives and the people that made this should probably not work again.
Just watching that clip was gross and it felt like pedo marketing.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
That's fine, but yes you did and yes you are. Another example is the fact I never said it's "not that bad", as you directly imply with your quotations. Those are literal words literally being put in my mouth. I said that I have seen worse offenses in other media, which does nothing to make any of it OK. You went on to imply that I was of the mind to tell people to accept pedophiles based on sexual preference inclusiveness. That's offensive to me since I've given no indication that would lead you to that ridiculous conclusion.
I don't expect an apology, but again I would appreciate you not attributing words and ideas to me which I have not expressed.
I apologize to you, not trying to attribute to you what is not. I will explain my "being a pedo is a sexual preference" comment. The same crowd (for lack of a better word) that defends these types of movies, have said that about pedophiles.
Maybe I'm over reacting, have not seen the movie but the snippets I saw are vile and should not exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger
I’ll admit, it’s a fine line when making a film about disturbing content without glorifying it. This filmmaker failed miserably and to make it worse, Netflix doubled down by marketing the movie on its sexualization! It’s impossible to pretend they didn’t see it, they based the advertising on it.
It's worse, Netflix claimed the promotional imagery was an unfair characterization of the film. That's what the problem was, the posters and such not the movie itself, that is perfectly fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Honestly its not art, its not edgy, Netflix should rip it down, burn the films or hardrives and the people that made this should probably not work again.
Just watching that clip was gross and it felt like pedo marketing.
This is the problem, the people running Netflix don't think there is anything wrong they greenlit they thing after all. And are promoting it.
Just wrapped up watching "Away". I'm not sure why I pushed through finishing it, boredom I suppose. Kept hoping the space exploration side of the show would be interesting enough to overlook the overly gushy rest of the show. But really it's just guaranteed crying by half of the characters each episode, and me wondering who in their right mind would select any of these people for jobs this important. Guess it was kind of the trainwreck phenomenon.
.....wait this movie is rated for mature audiences. WTF? It gets even better (worse) RT critics generally LOVE the movie, 3% audience score https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cuties
This should prove that these so called critics are sick, sick people.
Critics got a career to protect, calling out pedophilia is a great way to get blackballed by traditional and social media, best to play it safe and pretend you dont see it.
I friggin love the Punisher. I hadn’t watched it for any particular reason. But I’m sure glad I finally did.
I am massively let down by S2. Those little plot holes and inconsistencies I overlooked in S1 have become gaping chasms in S2.
And stupid cops. Goddamn I hate stupid cops. I know given everything going on expecting highly educated, well trained cops isn’t realistic but that doesn’t mean all cops should lack any common sense or self preservation.
Wow, it's been years since there's been a moral panic. Some of you guys must be disappointed to realise you've grown up to become the old biddies who were claiming that heavy metal music contained satanic messages. Critics are sick, sick people for thinking it's a good film? The film should be burned? Good god. ####ing hysteria! Correct me if I'm wrong, but only Yamer has seen the film right? The rest of you are basing your judgements and your condemnations of the director's motivation on a scene or two right? Watching a few minutes of the film is enough to determine what the moral of the film is?
Now I haven't seen the film either, nor actually seen a clip, so I'm neither supporting (nor condemning) the film. The British Board of Film Classification has given the film a 15 rating. Not an 18 or the more restrictive R18 rating given to pornographic material. They're certainly not people who mess around when it comes to banning or censoring inappropriate images of children. Here's their breakdown of the film (spoilers ahead I guess)
Spoiler!
CUTIES is a French drama in which an 11-year-old girl joins a dance group at her school and finds herself torn between her new friends and her family's traditional values. Sex
Occasional sex references include a girl inflating a condom she has found, mistaking it for a balloon. Her friends mock her error, and worry she might have caught an illness from touching it. In another scene, it is implied some girls are looking at pornography on a phone, but there are no images shown. A girl takes a photograph of her genitals below screen, and it is implied she posts it online, although there is no sight of nudity. She is immediately criticised by her peers, teachers and family for her irresponsible actions. Language
There is use of strong language ('######'), as well as milder terms including 'bitch', 'whore', 'slut', 'skank', 'ho', '####', 'ass', 'putain', 'crap' and 'bugger', as well as use of the 'middle finger' gesture. Theme
The film is a coming of age drama, reflecting on sexualisation in popular culture and how it can mislead young people. A group of adolescent girls performs a routine in a dance competition in which they naively attempt to replicate moves they have seen in music videos performed by their heroes. However, it is met with boos and condemnation from the crowd, who view their routine as inappropriate. Additional information
There are scenes of bullying, moderate violence, and emotional upset. There is also brief natural nudity as an adult dancer in a video accidentally exposes her breast while dancing.
That sounds like a completely different film you guys are reacting to. In fact, it seems quite tame. Almost like the panic has been completely overblown and fabricated by right wing pundits who have a vendetta against the 'in bed with the Obamas' Netflix who by the way acquired the film, didn't produce it. Outrage and cancel culture exists on all sides it seems and isn't just limited to the supposed snowflakes on the left.
Interestingly, I (and thousands more) would never have heard of this film if it wasn't brought to our attention by these whiners. It's as if they haven't learned the lesson of the Streisand effect. It's probably not something I would've had an interest in otherwise, but I may check it out to see what the fuss is all about. In much the same way that teenage boys aren't trawling through Netflix for their porn, I suspect the pedos unfortunately have other avenues to get their jollies too.
Last edited by Swift; 09-14-2020 at 11:47 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Swift For This Useful Post:
I knew it was either the fault of the snowflake libtards or Alt right conspiracy theorists. Way too much critical thinking and good discussion going on ITT. Better to broadly and incorrectly generalize the opinions in this thread rather than form an educated and informed opinion and then post.
You truly are a master of modern internet discourse.
At the very least though, shouldn't relevant opinions be saved for people that have actually watched the movie? I haven't seen it, so I don't fall on either side (other than Netflix botched the #### out of the advertising), but I feel like 99% of the takes out there about this movie are by people who haven't seen it.
As an aside, someone who did watch the movie said a good trick to not exploit the girls but still be impactful from a filmmakers perspective would be to have adult actresses replace the younger actors during the dance scenes. I don't know how feasible that would be but I assume an auteur could pull it off.
I knew it was either the fault of the snowflake libtards or Alt right conspiracy theorists. Way too much critical thinking and good discussion going on ITT. Better to broadly and incorrectly generalize the opinions in this thread rather than form an educated and informed opinion and then post.
You truly are a master of modern internet discourse.
Point me to where I've broadly and incorrectly generalised opinions. Zamler said that the fact that critics "LOVE" the movie "should prove that these so called critics are sick, sick people". Captain Crunch said "Netflix should rip it down, burn the films or hardrives and the people that made this should probably not work again." Those are hysterical overreactions.
Agreed with Pscynet that the marketing campaign by Netflix on this was terrible. And yes only Yamer's opinion on the actual film itself can be considered valid here.
No, I think most intelligent adults on this forum have the mental capacity to form opinions based without sitting through the full 2 hours. That’s a very unconvincing argument I keep seeing that seems tied to movie snobbery. Like all these people just aren’t smart enough to understand the ####ed up exploitation and gratuitous sexualization that’s going on.
And anyone that forms an educated opinion actually isn’t and are just a bunch of far right wing nuts who think this movie is literal child porn.
Also, who gives a crap about “takes out there”. Out there where? In people’s minds? Why don’t we talk about the actual opinions on CP instead of a bunch of imaginary boogie men that are used as a reason to bash the people who’ve posted about this here?
What’s that? Oh I’m not reading your posts but I read some crazy opinions online so I’m just going to assume your opinions are exactly the same as the crazy people. Why? Reading like 10 posts on CP is too much work. But reading 50 crazy people on twitter and some random FB comments is totally cool.
Point me to where I've broadly and incorrectly generalised opinions. Zamler said that the fact that critics "LOVE" the movie "should prove that these so called critics are sick, sick people". Captain Crunch said "Netflix should rip it down, burn the films or hardrives and the people that made this should probably not work again." Those are hysterical overreactions.
Agreed with Pscynet that the marketing campaign by Netflix on this was terrible. And yes only Yamer's opinion on the actual film itself can be considered valid here.
So to summarize, you either can’t or don’t want to be informed. And you’re proudly declaring which opinions are and aren’t valid based on your lack of knowledge on this because you refuse to read the opinions you’ve deemed invalid.
What on earth are you talking about? I'm genuinely confused. What are you summarizing? Where did I say I don't want to be informed? Point that out please. I've read every post on the subject in this thread, another discussion on another forum, a couple of articles and the BBFC classification of the film. Explain to me how that means I'm unwilling to be informed. Also point out to me where I've said I refuse to read other opinions.
Also, yes Yamer's opinion is the only one that's valid right now. Would you trust a book review of someone who read the whole book or someone who read the first couple pages? Would you trust analysis of a hockey game of someone who watched the first few minutes and then left the room or someone who watched the whole game?
What on earth are you talking about? I'm genuinely confused. What are you summarizing? Where did I say I don't want to be informed? Point that out please. I've read every post on the subject in this thread, another discussion on another forum, a couple of articles and the BBFC classification of the film. Explain to me how that means I'm unwilling to be informed. Also point out to me where I've said I refuse to read other opinions.
Also, yes Yamer's opinion is the only one that's valid right now. Would you trust a book review of someone who read the whole book or someone who read the first couple pages? Would you trust analysis of a hockey game of someone who watched the first few minutes and then left the room or someone who watched the whole game?
Are you saying that if we see the movie, we'll find out that under age girls are not being sexualized? There are no gratuitous crotch shots (ugh) and other adult situations? I guess everyone that has pointed this stuff out is lying, or doesn't have the full "context".
