Jump to content

So have ya heard about this...

Commander Sheepard

By Commander Sheepard
in Movies & TV

 Share

Recommended Posts

Commander Sheepard Lower Midcarder

Commander Sheepard

Posted
Posted (edited)

Apparently, Nicole Kidman has a movie coming out called Birth, in which she believes that a 10 year old boy is the reincarnation of her dead husband. So what does she do? Does she try to help the boy grow into his teen years, all the while reflecting on her precious memories of her husband?

Hell no.

Instead, she gets naked with the kid in the bathtub, and then passionately makes out with him later. Sounds like a fun, friendly, pedophilic family film to me, what about YOU?

I haven't seen this posted anywhere on here, so hopefully this hasn't already been discussed. If it has, sorry.

So, any comments on this, um, thing?

Edited by bigsheep305
Link to comment
Share on other sites
zero Hall Of Famer

zero

Posted
Posted

The FCC has no control over film because it's not considered communication. The MPAA "regulates" film. Though they only rate movies and you don't HAVE to get your movie rated by the MPAA, of course, most theaters won't carry unrated or NC-17 movies, so you're unlikely to see this film in its intended form. And personally, I don't see what's so horrible about this. The reason people are freaking out about it is because it's edgy, original, and makes you feel uncomfortable. Yes it's fucked up, yes it's sick, but it's NOT REAL. The kid's parents had to agree to it, and I'm sure the child labor people were all over the set. Would you rather we get movies that make you think and make you go "whoa, that is fucked up," or would you rather go to your cinema and have the choice of Garfield, White Chicks, You Got Served, Soul Plane, and The Day After Tomorrow? There's a movie that came out not too long ago called "The Unsaid" that was even more disturbing than this, but no one said anything because the movie didn't have Nicole Kidman in it. It's fiction, if we can force people to edit it out of their movies, then we edit books, then we edit websites, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quom Main Eventer

Quom

Posted
Posted

The FCC has no control over film because it's not considered communication.  The MPAA "regulates" film.  Though they only rate movies and you don't HAVE to get your movie rated by the MPAA, of course, most theaters won't carry unrated or NC-17 movies, so you're unlikely to see this film in its intended form.  And personally, I don't see what's so horrible about this.  The reason people are freaking out about it is because it's edgy, original, and makes you feel uncomfortable.  Yes it's fucked up, yes it's sick, but it's NOT REAL.  The kid's parents had to agree to it, and I'm sure the child labor people were all over the set.  Would you rather we get movies that make you think and make you go "whoa, that is fucked up," or would you rather go to your cinema and have the choice of Garfield, White Chicks, You Got Served, Soul Plane, and The Day After Tomorrow?  There's a movie that came out not too long ago called "The Unsaid" that was even more disturbing than this, but no one said anything because the movie didn't have Nicole Kidman in it.  It's fiction, if we can force people to edit it out of their movies, then we edit books, then we edit websites, etc.

If someone gave permission to have their 10 year old son have sex on camera with a 37 year old female actor would that be sick? Or would it just be edgy? How about a 37 year old male actor with a 10 year old girl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A-Dub Lower Midcarder

A-Dub

Posted
Posted

Zero makes it sound not as bad, and Nicole Kidman makes it sound down right pleasent. I also dont mean to sound like a pedo here (seeing as i'm underage myself thats kinda hard) but as long as we see none of the lil guy (pun/double meaning not intended) I guess I don't have a problem with it.

Only IF we do get Nicole Kidman shots...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quom Main Eventer

Quom

Posted
Posted

oh well. lucky kid

Not really. I would imagine that he would prefer his first kiss be with someone he likes rather than someone his parents are willing to allow him to kiss to line their pockets. There is no way a 10 year old kid has the ability to make a decision to get naked get in a bath and romantically kiss an actress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zero Hall Of Famer

zero

Posted
Posted

If someone gave permission to have their 10 year old son have sex on camera with a 37 year old female actor would that be sick? Or would it just be edgy? How about a 37 year old male actor with a 10 year old girl?

But no one's having sex... they're pretending! I really don't see how this is a big deal. It's not like it's Nicole Kidman and this kid alone together in a room. There's hundreds of people around, there's nothing "romantic" about it. It's called acting. You make it sound like the kid was forced to do this, he's a fucking actor. Yeah, he's 11, but kids aren't fucking stupid. 11 years old is sixth grade, you know what sex was when you were in the sixth grade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quom Main Eventer

Quom

Posted
Posted (edited)

But no one's having sex... they're pretending!  I really don't see how this is a big deal.  It's not like it's Nicole Kidman and this kid alone together in a room.  There's hundreds of people around, there's nothing "romantic" about it.  It's called acting.  You make it sound like the kid was forced to do this, he's a fucking actor.  Yeah, he's 11, but kids aren't fucking stupid.  11 years old is sixth grade, you know what sex was when you were in the sixth grade.

I knew what sex was by the time I could read. I grew up in a very liberal household. Yet I find this reprehensible. To me it is one step away from kiddie porn, why? In movies if you get shot the actor lives, if the main character takes drugs the actor doesn't need to. A sex or sexually geared sex scene actually requires the actor to do something beyond make believe. Sure most movies (I say most because there are the exceptions although they are few and far between) don't require the actors to go as far as sexual penetration but the still have to kiss and use their bodies in a sexual manner. This I have no problem with, I am even happy with the actors actually having sex providing they are both consenting.

The difference here is the kid has no idea what he is doing. There is a difference between having knowledge and knowing what to do with that knowledge. He can't possibly consent nor should his parents be able to give consent on his behalf.

IDK, I can't assume anything

I was assuming from his age that the chances of him ever being in this position with someone before this encounter with Nicole was very slim. I didn't mean to offend you, I just think that the chances are very slim that this won't be the first time he has been in the bath fully naked with a fully naked woman engaging in kissing (well at least with a female he isn't related to.)

Edited by Quom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. To learn more, see our Privacy Policy