Thing is, I'm pretty sure that Brooke Shields has specifically spoken out against how she was exploited by adults when she was a kid. Playboy took nude photos of her in a bathtub when she was 10, then she appeared nude at the age of 12 in Pretty Baby, then she had nude sex scenes at 16 in the movie Blue Lagoon. All highly controversial stuff back then that was technically allowed by law. Here we are, 40 years later, and children are still being sexually exploited in Hollywood. I think it's about high time that people finally make a stand against this, if Cuties is the straw that finally breaks the camel's back then so be it. It should not be ok for Hollywood and other film makers to skirt child pornography laws the way they do, claiming it is artistic expression.
Legally, where do you think the line should be? (Please try to avoid vague wording)
Personally? I don't think that any pictures or film showing nudity under the age of 18 should be allowed, unless it is very clearly non-sexual, for instance a mother taking a picture of her young kids bathing and posting it on social media. No nudity under 18 at all in professional films, not even if you use a body double for the scene who is over 18. Non-nude sex scenes or sexually suggestive clips in films I'd say are ok if both characters and actors are between 15-17, no younger than 15, and the actors should actually be non-nude for the scene, as in the actors wearing some clothes miming sex under covers, having them actually nude together is not ok, even if the camera doesn't show any breast/butt/penis/bush/whatever. I'd say underage underwear and 2 piece swimsuit modeling is ok, though there are some that find even that to be unacceptable, and I understand why they feel that way.