shikamaru317 said:
I've seen alot of people saying this on twitter and such, and I'm not sure why. I have yet to see a single person who is criticizing this movie defend Toddlers and Tiaras. Personally I've never watched a single episode of Toddlers and Tiaras and don't intend to, but surely the girls at these child beauty pageants aren't twerking on stage in sexualized outfits? Because that is what the girls in this movie do, among many other sexual things. And the movie might be a work of fiction, but the actors are real girls, and they had to do sexual dancing in sexual outfits in front of adult filming crew and actors for this movie. How is that ok? The movie may be protesting what modern culture does to young girls like the director claims, but in so doing it feeds the very problem she purports to fighting against. |
If Cutties were animation, CGI or anything similar I would have no issue, since yes fictional world, no real underage person damaged or exposed, etc. But since it had real child doing obscene stuff and being tapped it can`t be defended for being work of art.
Similar to a game or movie with violence or killing is totally fine since no real person or animal was harmed but if you decided to hit people on the street and tape it, wouldn`t be considered ok and art even if you done it with intention to talk against violence (by commiting it).

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







