English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I ask this because an upcoming movie starring 12 year old Dakota Fanning has her being raped. The rape scene is said to be very graphic.

My impression is it's illegal to use a minor in any sexual way, even in a pretend rape for a movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0415856/board/threads/

2006-07-23 05:56:21 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music Movies

12 answers

ooh! you might have a point there! this matter is actually a statutory matter, and i looked up a few state statutes. In several states, the question, in legal terms, is this: is the material "patently offensive?" In Tennessee law, for instance, Patently Offensive is defined as "that which goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in describing or representing such matters." So it may be argued that the film's depiction exercises candor in the context of the plot.

Other states are not so lenient. In Maryland, for instance, MGS 11-207 prohibits any visual representation depicting a minor engaged as a subject in sadomassochistic abuse or sexual conduct. In this case, the film would clearly be a violation and would be a felony to distribute, view or possess.

Wow! This should be interesting!

2006-07-23 06:14:58 · answer #1 · answered by Firstd1mension 5 · 0 0

WOW!

I really don't know if it's illegal or not. It must not be, or maybe they found some loophole to do it.

I just had to say, I watched a special on Traci Lord (famous adult film star/porn model) who was famous for sex when she was between 15 and 18. She lied about her age to get there. Well once it all broke down that she was underaged when the movies were shot, or the pics were snapped, the movies and pics became illegal to own or sell.

The network wasn't even able to show her FACE on the cover of magazines, or any picture of her under 18, because of the connotation (her appearing on a sex magazine). They even had her interviewed on the show. It seems that even though SHE was THERE, and a legal adult, capable of representing herself, there was still a legal issue about the past decisions she made.

Interesting.

I am still wondering WHY it would be necessary to have a gory, detailed rape scene of a 12 year old. That makes me cringe.

2006-07-23 07:48:49 · answer #2 · answered by happy-dance 2 · 0 0

Jenna Malone was only 10 or 11 when she had a rape scene in "Bastard Out of Carolina" one of my favourite, if not, disturbing films from 1996.
I think they ask the permission from the child actor and their parent/guardian, and make sure it is not too disturbing for the child. Also I believe a psychologist or child advocate is present during the filming.

2006-07-23 06:14:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yeah, that's what i thought too. Maybe they're using a double or CGI for the sex scenes. I think theyy put the little girl's face on a stuntwoman's body in the first Jurassic Park movie (when she's hanging from the ceiling in the lab and the raptor is jumping at her feet)..

2006-07-23 06:39:58 · answer #4 · answered by A Guy Named Joe 2 · 0 0

thats one of those really sketchy things. motion pictures get away with it alot. BUT.... even using minors in the "portrayal" of a sexual act is illegal. So good question. not sure why the movies gets away with it, but if you were to record the EXACT same scene in your house, your goin to jail. hmmm..

2006-07-23 06:02:06 · answer #5 · answered by sodomy priest 1 · 0 0

I believe the distinction lies in the difference between pornography (sex for entertainment's sake) and art (sex for the purpose of ... Well, entertainment too, but ... You know what I mean). However, the idea of "simulated" sex may be a loophole to the underage statute, I'm not sure.

2006-07-23 06:02:16 · answer #6 · answered by Cols 3 · 0 0

yes I would say it is illegal to use any minor in a sexual way,real or fake

2006-07-23 05:59:52 · answer #7 · answered by sissyj 6 · 0 0

It sounds bad. I think there's a good chance it'll have a negative psychological effect on her in future years. Even though she's just acting, that doesn't mean anything. Can't it just be IMPLIED??? Do we really have to see it???

2006-07-23 06:01:53 · answer #8 · answered by flu(bad)ence 2 · 0 0

I don't know the legal aspect of it, but depending on the degree of how graphic it is will probably depend on the audience that will buy a ticket to see it.

2006-07-23 06:01:37 · answer #9 · answered by pamela_d_99 5 · 0 0

I don't think it is illegal, they just have to be extremely careful about how they film it.

Have you seen Lolita?? Very disturbing............

2006-07-23 06:02:24 · answer #10 · answered by Hoot 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers