Child movie related or un-related discussion can go here i.e. movies, images, links, tv, music etc. All posts allowed unless specified otherwise in the rules. Please refrain from posting flames, personal information, using this board as a private message system or help questions.
Warg wrote:It has become rare everywhere. But isn't that political uber-correctness rather restricted to Hollywood? Even in the USA you could make a film like Angela in 1995.
I guess there isn't any law that prevents making such films even in the USA. It's just that Hollywood is 100% profit-oriented and no studio allows any controversial stuff that would lessen the profits.
A local book store had to remove a lolita-themed book, not because of law, but because people in social media started a campaign against them...
The Usamericans are scandalous, anything that is a blow to the morale the media makes noise even for the rape of Dakota Fanning in Houndog only that they went out to explain the scene was moderate, and they also polemicized Dance topless moms that episode was not issued for fear request
uggla wrote:I guess there isn't any law that prevents making such films even in the USA. It's just that Hollywood is 100% profit-oriented and no studio allows any controversial stuff that would lessen the profits.
A local book store had to remove a lolita-themed book, not because of law, but because people in social media started a campaign against them...
Exactly - and this happens not only in the USA ... Normally incenting such a campaign should be criminal but in this case no one complains. It's part of the irrational witchhunt I spoke of.
In the USA some guy was convicted in court because he possessed a legal David Hamilton Photobook. I still remember that in the 80es Hamilton was celebrated a genius for his style of photography. If a judge can name such a book "the worst pornographic filth" he is definitly deciding by his own taste and not by the law - giving the signal for any kind of pogrome.
That's why I warn never to believe in the letter of the law ...
The bottom line is we won't go down that road. We don't prohibit it but we don't emphasize it. Be discrete, don't be blatant. There's no reason to and many reasons not to. If you want that sort of thing, there are many other sources on the internet, don't come here for it. And that should be the end of the discussion.
Warg, Not only was that case, Tambien Jock sturges a photographer had jobs similar to Hamilton the court exonerated him because his work was artistic and not illegal
Sully23, I must not have been clear enough. The discussion about whether this is right or or wrong is finished. The issue is what the authorities decide, not whether it's fair or correct. Further argument is a waste of time, is probably not wise to continue, and doesn't pertain to the topic - identifying films. Please take this conversation to PM (private messages).
Even in the USA you could make a film like Angela in 1995.
