Not A Joke: Dakota Fanning To Be Raped, Shown In Underpants, In Upcoming Movie

Because, apparently, she's not getting enough work, and her mother figures child-rape movies are always good for an Oscar.

This girl is 1, an amazing actress, and 2, in every damn movie made. It doesn't matter what the movie is. Somehow they managed to work her into Doom, I think basically playing a Newt knock-off. Or a Marine. I forget.

A new adaptation of To Kill A Mockingbird will star Dakota. No, not as Scout. Dakota will be playing Boo Radley, the scary adult male neighbor once played by Robert Duvall. And you know what? I'll bet she pulls it off.

Anyway, we're always in a very weird and sketchy area when a very young girl who is, well, attractive for a young girl does a movie like this. Is this necessary? Do we really need to see her in her skivvies?

Based on the description of these scenes, it appears Dakota goes a bit farther than Brooke Shields and Jodie Foster did when they were that age.

Though it's been done before, I was still somewhat shocked to read Dakota's mother and agent liked the explicit scenes, thinking they had Oscar written all over them. While that may be true, who in their right mind wants to see a 12-year-old girl stripped naked and raped on screen? Would you want to pay ten bucks for that?

There are people who will, and somehow I think they'll manage to miss the "message" of this film.

Does no one appreciate the irony that a movie about child-abuse will draw a huge number of guys with sexual designs on a 12 year old girl?

But the Oscar! The Oscar! The mom needs that Oscar for Dakota, at 12 years old, as if it's not pretty much an inevitability at some point.

Hey, Mrs. Fanning. Just have her play a mentally retarded girl. No nudity required, and the Oscar is pretty much guaranteed.

Thanks to JohnS.

Whoops: Yeah, I never read To Kill A Mockingbird. Sue me. yls straightened me out on the names.

Whoops II: Okay, I didn't get the correction right either. Now I think it's correct.

I just think "Boo Radley" is a cute name for a little girl. Harper Lee should have named the girl "Boo Radley" and the scary guy "Scout."

I just saw Capote (well, until I got bored) and came away with a couple of things.

1) If you begin doing a Capote impression all day, people will hate you.

2) People hated Capote for doing a Capote impression all day, but also because he was an asshole.

3) He was such an asshole, in fact, that when rumors began that he, and not his dedicated assistant/lifelong friend Harper Lee, had actually written Mockingbird, he never strenuously denied them, but chose to let the rumor live on.

4) Because -- I didn't know this -- the idiot wrote two books in his whole life. When asked what he had written, I could only name Breakfast at Tiffany's and In Cold Blood; but, I said, "I'm sure there are lots of others." Guess what? There weren't.

5) Thus requiring the narcissitic prick to let it be believed he'd written Mockingbird.

Seriously though? Point number one? Start doing a Capote impression and see how long it takes your wife to hit you in the face with nine iron. The under/over is about two hours and ten minutes.

More Hollywood: Shayamalan's Lady in the Water (great title! I love movies with "water" in the title!) disappoints; Super Ex-Girlfriend bombs.

M. Night jumped the shark with the atmospheric and well-acted but pointless and Scooby-Doo-obvious The Village. Luke Wilson, for reasons I can't peg, is doomed to third-tier status, like the guy from Office Space.

posted by Ace at 04:22 PM

| Access Comments