My Photo

October 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad

Photo Albums

« AUTOPSY SAYS HOMICIDE | Main | Houndog Director on Dakota Fanning Rape Scene At Sundance »

January 24, 2007

Comments

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Disappointed:

Thank you for the information and the article. I really appreciate your time and effort. It's proved enlightening in many ways.

I noticed that, after a lot of (obligatory) elitist hot air, Bob Garfield comes to the heart of the matter in his last two sentences.

"It's hard to summon outrage on the issue of sexualizing children as long as the children are celebrities. They either are already so contaminated or are demigods who cannot be harmed- because, after all, they're not real people."

They're more than real people, Bob. They're real children and they're not to be written off so blythely. If they've become "contaminated celebrities", then action must be taken to rescue them from those who have depraved them for profit and tear down the system that allows it to happen in defiance of law and decency. And it must not be forgotten that, through these juvenile celebrites, other children will be exposed to their corruptive influences. Every child's soul is precious, celebrity or not.

And, knowing as I do of Cindy Osbrink's tendancies, her remarks can only be described as chilling. She controls the Fanning children and, mark my words, will squeeze every drop of profit she can out of them. Then she'll cast them aside; disgraced and emotionally ruined before their adulthood.

Two other items of note from this article. Firstly; it contains the first open acknowledgement I've yet seen in print that Dakota's career is rapidly waning. Secondly; it mentions "Alice in Wonderland", a project that, like her "Lovely Bones", was supposed to have been on indefinite hiatus. Has Spielberg actually decided to revive the project?... and in the wake of his one-time little protege's desecration in "Hounddog"? That needs to be checked out!

Once again, DDF, thanks for the update. Best wishes.

Me

"It turns out that, just after Sundance closed, the movie was featured for two showings at the Santa Barbara Film Festival."

A week at the Berlin Film Festival

"Another major re-edit is underway. They're giving themselves a few months (for the heat to die down!) and try once again for a distributor."

The movie was rushed to be edited and completed in time for Sundance. Lots of people complained that it was choppy. It's being edited to smooth out the movie and the transitions between scenes. The storyline isn't being changed. Some scenes that were edited out may even be returned now that they can edit around clothing visible in frame in the scenes where they appear to be nude.

"I was incorrect in my statement that Isabelle Fuhrman was not at Sundance. In fact, she attended the "Premiere Dinner". There was one picture posted of her there."

Wrong again! She spent four days in Utah. She attended the premier, photo shoot, after party, and dinner. She went on a ski trip with her family and returned on day four and spent most of the day with Jill Scott.

Dozens of pictures including a full cast photo:

http://www.hounddogmovie.org/gallery/

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Me:

I wasn't concerned with any showings of "Hounddog" in Europe and therefore didn't look. I was assuming all along that it would turn up there and would likely be well recieved, given the decadence that prevails there. No surprise.

Now, what is all this "wrong again" blather about Isabelle Fuhrman?! When I found out from a correspondent and saw a picture, I reported it as a correction, minor matter that it was. That's the responsible thing to do, "Me". Unlike social liberals, I believe in telling the truth before feeding my ego... which is why you people are so notorious for your intellectual dishonesty.

And ,of course, they're waiting for the story to cool down. Be both know that! Come off it! And, naturally, the film was choppy... and for the starkly evident reasons that I have commented on before. You cannot make a movie which has, as it's basis, the themes of mindless depravity and child sex and have a coherent film left if you remove much of it. Yet, to keep it legal and, ultimately, to present it to potential distributors as a legitimate work, that's exactly what the filmmakers had to do. After the negative reaction from reviewers to their pre-Sundance sneak preview, emergency last-minute work has done. The result was a film that was not only still depraved, but likewise inept.

Me

"the themes of mindless depravity and child sex and have a coherent film left if you remove much of it."

WHAT did they remove??? All of the scenes with a sexual nature are in the movie. Buddy pulls down his pants, in the movie, Lewellen is wearing panties and dancing, in the movie, Daddy having sex with stranger lady, in the movie, Lewellen interacting with old black man, in the movie, Lewellen walks into a room and sees daddy touching himself, in the movie, Buddy and Lewellen playing together, in the movie, two kids tied together with a snake, in the movie, the rape scene exactly as it was written in the script, in the movie.

What exactly did they edit out? With exception of minor details outlined in the script EVERYTHING else is in the movie. When I said choppy I mean that is was choppy in the sense that the film wasn't edited right. Some of the film literally started skipping and was shaky. I've seen this in a couple of reviews. The transitions between scenes wasn't smooth, they just cut to other scenes and some of the storyline didn't match up. Some of the characters were wearing the wrong kinds of clothes for a period piece set in the 1950's. The music, voice track, and folley effects were not properly aligned with the movie. Little details that can be picked up by a seasoned film buff. This was the main reason it wasn't picked up by a distributor, not the elements of the storyline or the sexual nature of the movie.

"And ,of course, they're waiting for the story to cool down. Be both know that! Come off it!"

Waiting for what to cool down? The controversy died a week after Sundance when everyone found out all your rumors and lies were no true. The media dropped it like a hot potato. Ted and Bill milked it for all the the publicity they could get then moved on to their next publicity stunt, Tomb of Jesus debate. With the exception of a handfull of people no one cares about the movie. Once they clean up the finished product and fix the problems with the film it will get distributed.

hi me you left out the scene where she gets in daddy lap you dident say anything about that scen and its in there and as far as all the cast being there at the frist showing of hounddog you are rong david morse was not there or the other guy woodboy or what ever his name is and no interviews with them at all. do you know how they edit movies? was you there when they shot the scens? did you see all of what they did in the scens??? and what dakota did in them with all the guys just asking how did they shoot the scene with dakota and david morse in bed with out being there together or when she on his lap and with out a blue screen to line up the shots how can they pull these scenes off you have to have the scene to edit the scenes.i know they said they dident shoot them together that there would have to be one hell of a shot to line up sorry but true or reshoot it tell they got it right look its the movie it should not have ben done at all its illagel all the way around when dakota was in bed doing her thing for the tickts even if the boy was not there that right there should have ben illagel. whats on the set is not what you see in the edit cut and there not going to tell you what they did on set. becouse what they did should have put them in jal.

Me

I never said David or Christoph were at the premier. David Morse was in Pre-production of his latest film which is currently filming in Canada. He rarely attends premiers or press junkets and doesn't promote his movies on talk shows. Christoph is currently in college and had a fairly small part in the movie. The other two boys were not there either, does that mean something? I don't think Frank, Ryan, Ron, or Jody attended either. Not everyone can go to Utah but all the main characters were there except David.

I haven't heard about the other scenes. I know they didn't use a blue scene and try to edit them together. If Dakota and David were in bed together I don't see what the big deal is, they were wearing clothes and didn't actually touch each other. Sitting on his lap is no big deal. They were both wearing clothes.

I said the scene where she walks in and sees him touching himself was filmed separately, they show David, cut to shot of Dakota, then show David again. That's what I was told, they are not in the same frame, each was filmed separately then the scene was edited together.

"becouse what they did should have put them in jal."

Hmmm, they didn't do anything. The district attorneys offices in two counties interviewed crew members, actors, and film makers and determined that there was no nudity, no fondling, no touching, and nothing illegal occurred on the set during filming. Unless someone can produce evidence to the contrary it's a closed cased and no legal action will ever be taken.

Hmmm, they didn't do anything. The district attorneys offices in two counties interviewed crew members, actors, and film makers and determined that there was no nudity, no fondling, no touching, and nothing illegal occurred on the set during filming

you realy beleve that lol they talk to the ones that had everything to hide. get it. there not going to tell what realy happend. and being on a clouse set well that tells me they only had the ones they could turst to keep there mouth shout. and its not busouces dakota was in her underwear thats bull she had to run around in her underwear 68% of the filming if they dident have anything to hide they would have talk to the press to let every one know they had noughting to hide. im particularly curious to y they dident. they just stop filming ahaha ya i know they had to find more money i think they said that to hide the fact they got cuoght. they new what they did on set with this movie was illagel thats y they dident doit in la iv read everything on this and if you ask me its all bullshit ahaha i dont care if dakota wanted to play with david mores or get raped or run around in her undwear. its the way there getting away with filming these dum movies kids/adults sex you or i or any one would go to jal if we did it so how dose hollywood get away with it.and yes i saw the link you put here of the boys playing on youtube lol i think they took that off to its not the same thing and you know this for one thing there not trying to sellit ahaha and from what i seen there alot of dum movies and not one in 15 yrs did they do anything to stop childrape y dont they just put up something on tv make a show with everything they need to know and what to look for and ear on tv with a number to call or put it on a dvd and geve it away if they need help even that wouldent help.

well on youtube there was one of the scenes with dakota and cody in a masterbation scene. they took it off its not there now and this was there befor the frist showing of the movie hounddog so some one has it lol. you dont have to be nud to do an illagel act thats what these guys are tring to tell every one. dakota is on david mores lap acting out a sex sene thats illagel even if there just in there underwear in edit mode you cant see what there doing but if you see them on set well you see evrything that would get them in truble. they had to act out these scenes to get them right. in the bed scen ding what she had to do for the tickets in her underwear that alone should have got them in truble and the boy being there or not stell she acted out in a sexmaner in her underwear.and when david mores went in her room and sets on her bed and what they had to do in that scene . even done in sets of filming she had to be there for it to work and line it up its what you see on set. NOT what you see on the bigscreen y did they just talk about the rape scene it was all about the rape scene y. if you ask me i think they shoud have look in to this about all the scene and not wite untell they did the editing y they wite. if that would have ben you doing all that with a little gril you bet your ass they would have ben all over you and you know this. me i think its all hollywood bs and they need to be stoped befor they realy hart some one kids if they hadent all redy. here look at this link

http://www.stormforcepictures.com/howto-buildabluescreen.php

look at this real good and learn what they do and how they edit movies. its the best softwear you can find for editing on line games movies websites and more even prerecorded movies you [ you have to use a zip file to do this] can set a prerecorded movie ie dvd in this softwear and reedit it or look at it like you would see it on set ya even take away the defalut pane.temptes ini files add light so on so on. its a 3d 4d v. box lol. you can see it in a 360 mode right off the dvd even add light where it dark tune in blrs make it a wide shot when inplaild ops lol thats right you can see it as if you where right there looking over the scene and it has an lots of thing you can do stell fram so on so on here one more
link check them out cool stuff.

http://www.stormforcepictures.com/howto-buildabluescreen.php

ok i dident see the movie i hope everything there saying is true for dakota sake and the other kids in any movie they make. O heres a link to a child star website that has lots of these sumt movies on it. its sick and dum to even have it there. i found a movies on this website that has a little girl on a man back and she is nud playing on his back setting up and yes you see everything then she lays down eatting somthing from his had and i found one that has a man holding a little gril on his lap and she is playing with him and gess what she playing with.and his hand is by her thiy and you can see what there doing that is sick and there is an older gril in the same movie he gaves a bath too. and has sex with her or rapes what ever all through that movie there is sick shit going on bad movie.and this movie is on this chilsstar website i think you know this afterall i got the link from you ME lol gofriger ahaha i found about 7 of them. and gess what these movies are old and there all over the pre to pre and in the irc channels too. and there are costdom photo shoots of the childstars like brookshilds from prettybaby. nud shots of her all over the enternet and this photo of her in the tub scen is in a muziem they sold that photo of her for 150,000.00 dollors. go ahead try to put that nud photo of brookshilds on your dasktop O its of her when she is 12 yr old and see how fast you go to jal for haven it on your computer thats what where trying to say here we cant do it y can they get away with it lol not to say i want to or anything like this movie hounddog or any movie lol buecouse its hollywood you bet its all about the money and you know this. they all know smut sales thats y there making these movies. and no one gaf

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

What did they remove, do you ask? It's nice of you to remind us of how sickening the movie still is with what was left in! The major factors of what was removed involve the shooting of the infamous molestation scene and, of course, the specific subject of this thread. As to anything else (as if the preceding wasn't enough!), who knows? They've had all these months to delete anything they wanted.

We know, based on the IMDB reviewer's report from the sneak preview, that at least one obscene take from the molestation scene was deleted in the Sundance version. Given all the edits they've performed, the still-perverted final version and the characters and histories of the principals themselves, I'd say that quite a bit was, as Sean Hannity put it, "left on the cutting room floor". Again; it must never be forgotten that this movie was the product of the depraved mind of a woman who's obsession with child sex and perversity is a matter of record. Now, in fact, as never before.

And "Me", you know as well as I do that the mass media jumps from story to story like a jumping bean. It's the nature of the business! After Sundance ended, it was all about Britney Spears' "tribulations", Lindsey Lohan's non-rehab and the Anna Nichole Smith soap opera. Issues of substance are easily crowded out because they require much more introspection than the latest dog-and-poney show.

Others of us, who see the threat that "Hounddog" and it's ilk pose and are motivated to act against it will carry on as we have before. For several weeks, at least, the popular press carried our message. Nobody reasonably hoped for even that much! It's now left for decent people to dedicate themselves to building on what has been achieved.

The first anonymous poster made some good points that you've danced away from. David Morse is also coming off his latest film since "Hounddog". It's called "Disturbia". 'Nuff said! And it's for good reasons that he doesn't attend promotions. He has two teenaged daughters. How would he explain himself to them when publically confronted with his criminal behavior on the person of a twelve year old girl? What does it do to any kids to learn that their own father is the next thing to a child molester?!

Yet another anti-child factor of "Hounddog's" ongoing legacy. The fact that you blatantly regard his scenes with Dakota, even those that yet remain in the film, as no big deal is pretty "disturbia" in itself. Your ankle bracelet must be a real bummer.

As for Christoph Sanders; he's attending Blue Ridge College (North Carolina Campus) as a freshman. I wonder if his fellow students know that they're sharing space with a deviant monster who humps little girls on a movie set for fun and profit? As with David Morse, who is no less a monster, I seriously want to see this young punk in jail for a very long time.

Fortunately, there is no statute of limitations in their sort of crimes. Corrupt D.A.s and their "findings" are not the end of this story. Don't fool yourself into thinking so. And just what is your PERSONAL handle in this affair, I wonder?

The second anonymous poster, who is obviously a young person, illustrates well just how prevalent these filmed and photographed obscenities are and how movies like "Hounddog" contribute to situation. He had a clearer and more moral outlook on the problem then you do... and by light-years! Perhaps, being younger and, therefore, less liable to the corruption that your (alleged) involvement in the film industry has imposed on you over the years, he has a fresher insight.

Young people, more and more, tend to be sick and tired of the trash and filth that is constantly being thrown at them in the popular culture. Ultimately, the hope for a better and saner environment for THEIR children will rest with them. Until then, some of us old, reformed baby boomers (like me!) who have far too late come to realize the sickness and tragedy our self-indulgence has released, will do what we can. God knows, it's the least we can do.

hey you guys try or mark update your radio talk show im dieing here man i live by the grate lakes and i cant here you HEY come in ahahaha adio its driving me nuts i gess ill have to move there if i want to here the best in talk radio. GETERHER DONE

Me

"David Morse is also coming off his latest film since "Hounddog". It's called "Disturbia". 'Nuff said!"

Disturbia was filmed BEFORE Hounddog. It was in post production and being edited when David came to NC. It's a typical Shia LaBeouf movie as he is the main character. It's no worse than the hundred similar movies released each year.

"The major factors of what was removed involve the shooting of the infamous molestation scene"

There was no molestation scene.

"based on the IMDB reviewer's report from the sneak preview, that at least one obscene take from the molestation scene was deleted"

Not true.

"How would he explain himself to them when publically confronted with his criminal behavior on the person of a twelve year old girl?"

David Morse didn't do anything criminal.

"The fact that you blatantly regard his scenes with Dakota"

I didn't disregard anything, these scenes are in the movie just as they were filmed. No nudity, no touching, and no fondling.

"there is no statute of limitations in their sort of crimes. Corrupt D.A.s and their "findings"

WHAT CRIME? Corrupt D.A.s? They did a full investigation. Interviewed CREW MEMBERS directly associated with the filming of the movie and they ALL said NOTHING happened. NOT ONE PERSON has ever come forward with claims they witnessed anything and NOT one shred of evidence has been presented. Who are the people that walked off the set? Didn't happen. Why did they claim she was nude? Didn't happen. Why did they claim the kids touched and fondled each other? Didn't happen. Why did they claim Christoph humped and groped her? Didn't happen. You got nothing. No laws were violated.

Me

"And just what is your PERSONAL handle in this affair, I wonder?"

I have no connection to this movie what so ever. I first heard about this when it was reported on the local news. I went to IMDB to get more information and found out about the claims on the Blue Line Site. I knew right away that some of these claims were not true and that was confirmed the next night when the local news reported that Marc Bensen was wrong about the nudity and that rape scene was filmed in the dark above the shoulders and shows mostly her facial expressions. Exactly the way it is in the movie. I know a couple of people that work in the business but were not in this movie and they said this was just a bunch of rumors started by some crew members upset because the production left town and a lot of people didn't get paid. Once everyone got paid they backed down but it was too late because the rumors had spread all over the internet. I'm still waiting to see the evidence but there is NO EVIDENCE so I'm confident they didn't do anything that has been rumored.

"it must never be forgotten that this movie was the product of the depraved mind of a woman who's obsession with child sex"

You have no idea what you are talking about. Her other movie was about a 17 year old girl played by a 19 year old actress. Deborah is just trying to make movies that appeal to women audiences. Rape and abuse is something that women can relate to. The people who were actually on the set and involved with the filming said she always handled the scenes with the kids with great care.

"Your ankle bracelet must be a real bummer."

I have never broken a law in my life other than traffic violations. I take offense to that remark. Taking a stand against your endless rumors and lies most of which have turned out not to be true doesn't make me a predator or a criminal. It's called free speech but that's something people like you want to stop.

HEY y conie J. tell you guys to forget about it when you guys interview her on the fact you try/mark had a lady call in and tell you she had consrens about what took places onset? now she backing out of it Y?. and even when conie J said she interview dakota and said she was well prepared for the role in hounddog that she was conterdicting her slfe. conie J. said that when she dose interviews in cases with childrape the victoms wished they never came forth with it becouse of the truble it coused. so do ya think dakota dident tell the truth? becouse she has so much to louse. even the crewmen and all others conie j interview said that dakota was not nud and no tuching that the boy was not on top of her. so do ya think when i brought up that me left out the scene with dakota was in david lap was not in the final cut. script calls for it thats tuching in that scene. and when daddy in bed with her lol somthing dont add up thats tuching too. Hey when she on the bed in her underwear doing her thing for the tickets thats sexual exploitation right. that alone should have got them in truble. y was it all about the rape scene you think it was to detour what was realy goin on was illagel. your words coverup i think so too. HEY you guys said you have some one that saw it all or just the rape scene?. and lots people there with cams scellphones that had recoding on them photos could have ben taken. was that cheked out ? no conie just look at the edited cut of the dvd and did a phone interview with who they wanted her to talk to all the crewmebers there dident see everything she did say she spoke with the ones that where on set that day and she dident say she talk with the other gril at all hmmm get it ahaha. the ones that where herd none seen. there was a scene of the masterbation with cody and dakota on youtube there was lots of hits on it but none vewd becouse it was blocked. then removed.and there was interviews with a fromer actor who was interviewd but now delted from youtube too hmmm. you guys get your 250;000 bucks yet? you guys here anything yet or is it a done deal.let us know.

hey did you guys check out the new 4D conbusation kyer editing softwear and tools.
i love it best thing por movie makers bst for editing bluescreens and so on.

Me

"there was a scene of the masterbation with cody and dakota on youtube there was lots of hits on it but none vewd becouse it was blocked. then removed.and there was interviews with a fromer actor who was interviewd but now delted from youtube too hmmm"

THAT'S A LIE

hey me i saw it there i tryed to vew it bud it wouldent play it was blacked and there was alot hits i went back and tryed to find it and it was deleted right youtube. whats with you me. hey did you look at the softwear 4Dcombusation kyer best in editing 3D/4d tools look i dont care ok aha come here becouse i like makin fun of that one movie ok well all of the movies they say make a point that has kids/adult sex in them
its not right. i hope for the best for dakota and the other kids dont brake a vain ahaha .

hey me.

would you like to here what the doricter told jena in the car scene when clen stared his assault on her ill tell ya
[in the 5 take of the care scene]
the doricter in baster out of carolina told jena to start doing her hiccups they praictes and then told her to move with glen
yes i took the raw adio off the dvd baster out of carolina and i see sone one from the rearviewmirror cant make it out but jena is holding somthing that it reflects some one cant tell if its a man or not but i can tell what that some one is wearing a scarf around there nick and has sunglasses on and a sute and setting in a chear by the car with lags crossed this is funny lol and has blonde hir long to shoders ask jena she knows and they did the scen where he glen pulled up her underwear after the assault y that was an over the sholder shot couldent see what was going on down there he could of fate it but he dident well he could have pull up an other pear over the ones she had on they did brak and setup on the same shot with her stell on his lap but you can see his hand grabing her underwear and pulled them up and she has a blanket on her lags but stell see her underwear is down i hard the assist ask if he needed help in a sey he said no i got it and she jena said ze from a new vew from behind like in back seat where the little gril was the hole shot by the way. i can tell you everthing that was said in the car scene raw footage and what i saw in the rearviewmirror as he tost jena off well what it looked liked anyway and some other things i found in the last scene of the rape just has hegot kicked off jena by mommy and that look like well im not going to say hmmm well ok ill tell ya when she mommy kicked him the last time by the growing it showed his thing ok thats what it looks like that dont mean it is. there i can do that to all the movies with this new softwear 4D conbusation kyer

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

If "Disturbia" was in the can for a long time; so what? All I said was that it is just now being released. As for the rest of your commentary (both to me and to Anonymous), it is either intellectually dishonest, the product of hateful conceit or consists of blanket denials. Nothing new there or anywhere.

And no, I did not mean to seriously suggest you are a convicted predator. Nor am I trying to take away anyone's "free speech". It's just that I don't consider child exploitation and corruption as something the Founding Fathers would have applied the First Amendment to. And, as a Christian, I consider children as all being special and worthy of protection from predators and panderers. That is apparently the basis of our disagreement.

P.S. I mentioned your possible connection with the film because I seemed to recall you hinting of such earlier. If it was someone else; sorry. I just can't help but wonder about someone who is so set on defending something so outrageously indefensible in any moral context.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Anonymous:

I wish I could access Tre's show! This primative, malfunctioning computer of mine...!

Naturally (and especially after all that time), Dakota was well rehearsed for her interview with Miss Jordan. She acts out interviews with reporters enough and is used to projecting the spin her handlers proscribe.

This time, however, there was a vital difference. This was a legal matter. No matter how long it was deferred and how lackluster it's pursuit, this still required Dakota to risk perjury. Even though there were certainly (by law!) adult supervisors present at the interview, that's still a terrible thing to make a child do. Yet, just look at what they had already made her done... like throwing away her spiritual innocence and relationship with God.

What, one wonders, were the specific inducements they placed on her for this... besides stuffing her head with talking points and watching her closely during the interview? (Like they so blatantly did at Sundance!)

Several come to mind. "You're an 'adult actress' now, so it doesn't matter." "You've 'moved on' from such bourgeois concepts of right and wrong." "You're in too deep to turn back (!)" Or (and we know they've used this one before), they're "attacking your mother". When a child is surrounded by corrupt adults and with no alternate viewpoints allowed, what can the result help but be?

P.S. I heard about those postings (and others) on YouTube as well. Like yourself, I was too late. Maybe it's just as well. Kids online see enough bad things. They don't need to see that. Dakota's been degraded enough by what HAS been released in the final film. I wouldn't even want to witness the rest... even as a member of a Grand Jury! I'd destroy it all, if I could. Only after, however, the principals were properly sentenced and jailed and those children were given the help and comfort they so desperately need.

Me

"it is either intellectually dishonest, the product of hateful conceit or consists of blanket denials. Nothing new there or anywhere".

"I wish I could access Tre's show! This primative, malfunctioning computer of mine...!"

You haven't even heard the interview with Connie Jordan and you call me dishonest. I did say that I made contact with some of the people that worked on the movie as well as people that were just in the business but I have no personal connection with the movie. I did break the silence and help get the ball rolling by starting the Support Hounddog Petition. I'm also the person who posted the information IMDB about Dakota waiting nine months and her training with a voice and movement coach. All of this was confirmed in the Premier magazine article. A lot of the information I provided has ended up in magazine articles and internet news stories. I haven't talked to the people that started these rumors because the Bensens will not tell anyone who they are, not even the district attorneys office.

DA of Brunswick county said no laws were violated, DA of New Hanover said no laws were violated, ASST DA of New Hanover said no laws were violated, Attorney General of Utah said no laws were violated. You still dispute that? It's a fact!! They interviewed the crew members that were ON THE SET, the people standing behind the cameras, local crew members with Wilmington addresses, and they ALL SAID THE SAME THING, at no time did they film kids or adults in sexual situations that required touching, fondling, or anything like that. No laws were broken and no legal action will ever be taken so get off that. All you have is a moral issue regarding the use of minors acting out scenes of a sexual nature which is not illegal as long as it does not appeal to the prudent interest of sex for the viewer which is clearly the case with this movie.

We can keep arguing about this until the end of time but nothing is going to change. The movie is getting released at some point. The movie will be on dvd at some point. Dakota and the others have already moved on to do other movies. The director has moved on to another movie. Most of your claims, rumors, speculation, and theories have been proven wrong.

I was intrigued by the "who done it aspect" of this and stayed involved to see how this would all turn out. I'm confident they did nothing wrong and you or no one else has proven otherwise. Unless you can produce eyewitnesses willing to testify in court or real evidence such as a video you have nothing. These claims that videos have been on you tube are a lie and you know it. Just like the "other" rape scene was a lie. That's all you people have is rumors, lies, and endless theories of what you "think" may have happened.

If you expanded your crusade to include other movies like Larry Clark films, I would have more respect but you are stuck on one movie and are damned determined to prove they did something, anything, the possibility of something wrong. You dragged these kids, their families, and the film makers through enough mud, give it a break.

BTW: Charlotte's Web is up to $160,000,000 worldwide with a dvd release set for next month. It opened with Pursuit of Happiness and Eragon which are also on dvd. The movie was successful and people did take their kids despite your claims they would not because of Hounddog. Another theory down in flames.

dear steven.
i run servers for kids for on line games and i mod them with this softwear 4D kyer yes i buld code files for the games i goit to the defult ini tempits files and set up code then make the game for them to play like desrtcombat/dcfinal/2142/css/and so on
i can do what i did with the 4D conbusation kyer to any movie and interviews. i checked one of them with dakota fanning and chuck on youtube i ran the dub through the adio and got the adio it was jumping all over the places but stell herd how they tret her like an adult you can see the kid in her as they tell to stop moving around lol here ya go this interview is old and i think dakota helped do the editing in this one or was there when they did it mabe it was mea the gril dakota call to for help in that interview as they startd the interview you can her them in the back grownd. to the point of this. one there is a spot they reworked y dont know ok i do ahaha dakota said that her hores name is Lewellen and they dubed it over to say Goldy y lol you can see her lips saying Lewellen but its dub to say goldy hit the back mask and tunning it i here all kinds of stuff one is that thay put in a subliminal message saying Q. im going to watch this girl /then adio tic said your an ediet plane as day ahaha cant beleve what im hereing when ask shed talk like she was druged or tyerd you can here slarsing in her voices in parts of the invterviews she talking about her hores when that heppend. and she keep moviein around couldent keep her hands stell its like she couldent stop. ok in 3 interviews with dakota about her pets her dog is called Lewellen/and she called her hores Lewellen and they dub it over to say Goldy
in Charlotte's Web they used allmost the same stoeyline as the interview with chuck and dakota but better prepared
i up loaded 7 movies from the childstar website of the link that MR>me put on this website and these movies well i think you know there are little grils setting on the back of an adult man nud i mean all the way nud playing then lays down on is back dam this is sick in one movie a little gril is setting on a mans lap playing with somthing and other gril not much older is gevein a bath from an adult man and them latter has sex with hem sick sick other movie that has lots of little grils running around in there underwear all through the movie some times just there underwear ok this is sick but im doing this becouse thruth is hollywood is useing the kids as a money bank sumt sels they know it and there used like cadle if i had the ruff cut of hounddog id lookin to it when they put the film through the retna onto computer it loads everything in to edit softwear and what they do to edit is stell there dont mader if they delete it its stell there from raw to edit it all show up in defult pan. so what ever is left on the dvd can be reclamd all raw file from contentpan files. by useing a zip porgrame that will load all Transparency inspiration /and see it as raw footage. O and this softwear has ben updated check it out the link is all over this website ahaha

dear. steve.

I wish I could access Tre's show! This primative, malfunctioning computer of mine...!"

sounds like you may need a adio/video frile to run midea files i can heip you in that try this frist update your midea porgrame then load this

copy past link
*****
http://www.free-codecs.com/FFDShow_download.htm

this link will play all media porgrames divx/Qtime/you may need an indeo file for Qtime/mediaplayer /max and so on

Me

"i up loaded 7 movies from the childstar website of the link that MR>me put on this website"

YOU ARE SICK FOR DOWNLOADING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY

That's illegal and I hope you get arrested!!

Now they are dubbing over Dakota's interviews and changing the name of her horse? Inserting subliminal messages saying Q?

You people are weird. You download child porn to look for subliminal messages and Steve spends most of his time online chatting with 12 and 13 year old girls.

That's sick.

"i up loaded 7 movies from the childstar website of the link that [MR.me] put on this website" now hes calling it childporn ahaha.

[ YOU ARE SICK FOR DOWNLOADING CHILD ]
***************************************
PORNOGRAPHY hahahahahahahahahaha me you kill me ..
the movies im talken about are the ones hollywood filmed like hounddog and yes the 7 movies that are on this website with all the child actors like dakota and elle/jena jody forster and so on. here check it out you know about this website you put it here ME.

http://www.childstarlets.com/lobby/index.htm

http://www.youngactressreviews.org/

http://www.youngactressreviews.org/mini_revi
ews/l

here look at it you can here what there saying dakota and chuck interview use a headset its better hit the slider bar back and turn it up ahaha. and yes subliminal messages is in there. look at your screen if it turns green like a line thats it the subliminal messages . hit the spaces bar in the video on youtube you will here it. heres the link ME just for you.

the messages is im going to Waich this gril.
lesen to it. lesen to it real good ahaha.sicko

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA7IRWlQqgc

and the interview with chuk and dakota is on youtube. there ME and yes i have the adio of that intervievew dakota and chuck. childporn you say ahaha then i gess you are the sick one ME you put that link in this website get it your the one that has all the info on all the movies that hollywood makes and defending them ahaha you lost it ME are you saying you agree that hounddog and the other movies hollywood makes is childporn ahaha and Q means I Quote bla bla ahaha me get a life. your braken a vain man ahaha and yes i put it apon my self to lookin to these movies no one will so i did and with this softwear 4D conbustaion kyer i can redit lookin to what HOLLYWOOD did to the kids in them the MAKING of these movies they made you calld childporn. evrything they put on the disk or dvd will be reclamed get it so go ahead put hounddog out ahaha i dear ya O and elle fanning is running around in that movie called bable no top on get it in her underwear only get it its on this so called childporn website that hollwood put up. now ME im going to let louse on you. you just accused me of up loding childporn and you got pisst off when steve accused you of being a childpredator and now your accusing steve of chatting with 12 and 13 year old girls now how would you know this unless you where there ahaha.HEY do you run this website? are you mark or try? are you inlove with dakota? your definding her alot i mite add? what is it your looking for ME? what do you want ME? how can i help you ME? y are you arguing with every one here about the movie hounddog ME? have you lost your mine ME? what do you care what mark dose ME? y are you follwing everyone here to argue with ME? have you brok a vain yet ME?
ahaha ok ME are you try or mark and i think you got your wiers crossed bucouse now im cofused. ME is saying

You haven't even heard the interview with Connie Jordan and you call me dishonest. I did say that I made contact with some of the people that worked on the movie as well as people that were just in the business but I have no personal connection with the movie. I did break the silence and help get the ball rolling by starting the Support Hounddog Petition. I'm also the person who posted the information IMDB about Dakota waiting nine months and her training with a voice and movement coach. All of this was confirmed in the Premier magazine article. A lot of the information I provided has ended up in magazine articles and internet news stories. I haven't talked to the people that started these rumors because the Bensens will not tell anyone who they are, not even the district attorneys office.

and im here trying to find out if there any
truth to this mess.

whos steve mark pilling ahaha
im way confused here

me. if your try or mark or who ever y are we doin this ? and steve who are you and y are you doin this?
y are we all doing this?

this is like so funny it could be a movie iv herd conie J interview with try and mark Bensens. iv herd all of the radio talk shows they put up and they sound like they have it together now im lost ahahaha and i dont care any more O well to who ever hollywood needs Eanema.


hey ME.

you did post here and say there is a movie that has a teen in a scene in a full masteration infull vew of other teen right
and that where full nud shots of adults haven sex with kids in it right and its in the maken right you brought that up becouse try or mark said somthing about hounddog being the only movie that had kids/adults sexs and being the only one right thought so ahahaha i think you need a brak.

Me

"well i think you know there are little grils setting on the back of an adult man nud i mean all the way nud playing then lays down on is back dam this is sick in one movie a little gril is setting on a mans lap playing with somthing and other gril not much older is gevein a bath from an adult man and them latter has sex with hem"

What you describe would be considered child porn. I never provided a link to such a site. You are lying. What movie is this?

"now your accusing steve of chatting with 12 and 13 year old girls now how would you know this unless you where there ahaha"

Google "Steve Mark Pilling" and you will find numerous websites where he has online chats with 12 and 13 year old girls. Fact.

me

"and that where full nud shots of adults haven sex with kids in it right and its in the maken right you brought that up becouse try or mark said somthing about hounddog being the only movie that had kids/adults sexs and being the only one right thought"

No I did not say that. Learn how to read. The movie was Ken Park directed by Larry Clark and has not yet been released in the US but was filmed in LA. It was Steve Pilling that said Hounddog was the only movie. I didn't say there were fully nude adults having sex with kids. That's another lie. Every movie I mentioned is perfectly legal in the United States of America as is Hounddog. I have never seen movies you claimed above involving nude adults giving baths to kids and having sex.

Honestly do you have a full understanding of the English language? You should learn to read and to spell properly before posting on a blog site with adults. None of the stuff you posted makes any sense. I viewed the you tube link and there was nothing there that you claimed. They dubbed over the part where she says the name of the horse? Really? She called it Lewellen but they dubbed over Goldie? Dreamer was filmed almost two years earlier. The clip was posted on you tube October 25, 2005 eight months before filming started on Hounddog.

I live where the movie was filmed, I have talked to people that worked on this movie, I know for a fact most of the rumors are not true, I know for a fact Steve Pilling has posted thousands of messages on hundreds of sites and most of his claims are not true, I know for a fact this movie is not child porn and is perfectly legal, I know for a fact that nothing illegal occurred during the filming of this movie, I know for a fact that no legal action has or will be taken against the film makers, and I try to disprove Steve's statements and theories as much as possible so other people will nknow the truth.

Unless you have something worthwhile to add this conversation is over.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

1. I read the review of Connie Jordan's "report". My opinion stands.

2. Yes, a lot of us have speculated on the full meaning of Dakota's "movement coach"... as opposed to a "dancing instructor".

3. Your problem with the Benson brothers is obviously personal and philosophical rather than factual.

4. The District Attorneys you mentioned waited for months until public pressure forced them to do "something"... which was far too little too late... as they intended. They had no wish to take on a political hot potato like this. They know that "bad things" happen to liberals who "diss" a major contributing pillar of their movement and an economic factor of their community. Similarly, the Utah A.G. was unwilling to undermine the Sundance Film Festival. Money trumps morality. If only they'd been dumb enough to try this in Texas!

5. You know as well as I that no one Connie Jordan spoke to had anything to gain and all to lose by admitting to any "irregularities". After five months in hiding, they certainly had their stories pretty well straight... and their film well edited. Only a full and immediate investigation would have had a chance of uncovering illegal activities. This was not done... deliberately.

6. The fact that this dangerous and despicable movie is still out there and that they're still attempting to find a distributor is well known. That's why we're not letting up.

7. I don't know first hand about these YouTube segments I've heard of, as I have repeatedly said. I only know what has been told to me by others. However, I've heard this from enough people to where I cannot completely discount it. Certainly, I wouldn't on your say-so! As to the alleged "second" rape scene (to which you repeatedly refer!), let me say this yet again: No one hopes more than I that it's NOT true. What IS true is terrible enough.

8. First of all, "Charlotte's Web" is not a central issue and never was. "Hounddog" is. Secondly; it's been widely reported in enterainment publications and from commentators that the film was a big disappointment. Sure, it'll eventually show a profit over time, but it was intended as a holiday blockbuster. In this, it failed. It's interesting to note that Dr. Ted Baehr, on whom you have no love lost, rated "Web" was one of the best films of the year for Christian families. He was likely right. What a terrible tragedy that Dakota's life and career went from THAT to THIS. No one would have believed it possible.

9. I dragged no one through the mud, "Me". The filmmakers you speak of DWELL there and, for profit, try to drag all others down with them. This time, however, they did it to three children. Now, through them, they would likewise defame their entire young generation. You're attempting to play "shoot the messenger" again. Those filmmakers are not the victims. They are vicious, immoral and conscienceless opportunists and child panderers. The children are the victims and it is for their sake we take a stand.

10. "Anonymous" was trying to illustrate a point of computer technology, "Me", by using the all-too-readily available depravity from the internet as an example. I believe he repeatedly referred to it as "sick". I would heartily concur. Would you, though? I believe that all this perversity, which is threatening to spread into feature films via "Hounddog", falls under your definition of "free speech". This degeneracy exists only because those of your philosophical persuasion uphold it and allow it to prosper. You also uphold unregulated, open forum websites that kids can freely access and thus be exposed to the gross profanity of the punks and the wiles of the online predators. That's what brought me (and, increasingly now, other concerned adults) to the "fansites" to warn these children of the dangers. This is how I learned about Dakota Fanning a year ago this month.

Don't call us sick, "Me". Look to yourself first. What we're trying to do is alleviate the very sickness that you and yours have brought about and continue to maintain.

Steven Mark Pilling

Well, it looks like I stepped right into the middle of a brawl! And I see that "Me" is again resorting to his previous attempts to brand me as a pervert. To quote a noted commentator, "He ran out of substance after thirty seconds and resorted to personal attack."!

Once again, "Me", I'm an anti-pervert... and a dedicated one. I've talked to many young people online and still do. However, I've always made certain that they know I'm an older man and why I'm there. I also, in the process of encouraging them to be cautious in what they say online, remind them that no one can be completely trusted from the faceless words they write on a computer screen. That includes me. It's an integral part of my message.

I knew when I first undertook this task that I would be vulnerable to exactly the spurious allegations that you are making now. The need to do so, however, was clearly there. Someone had to. The kids are worth it. I obviously hold their moral and physical safety on a far higher plane than you.

And don't try to draw a moral equivalence between my comments on "Hounddog's" principals and activities as compared to your allegations against me... as you've tried before. I speak of events that I have (and with much reluctance) come to accept as truthful through much investigation and soul-searching. I speak from my deep and natural concern as a decent adult for the safety of our most precious and innocent resource.

The defamation of those involved with the making of Hounddog" was of their own doing. Your accusations are merely an attempt to draw attention away from the issues by dishonestly denegrating the character of yours truely. All too typical, I'm afraid.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Anonymous:

I'm pressed for time, here, so I'll quickly clear up my background for you, in case "Me" has left you with any doubts.

Steven Mark Pilling is my true name. I never deliberately go under a pseudonym. When I was commenting on IMDB (when I had the time!) I accidentally was entered under the name "Geneos", which was the handle of my former email. I try to take pains to be upfront.

I live in Houston TX and am involved in civic and political affairs here. I'm a retired military cop (Regular Army M.P.s and Texas Air National Guard S.P.s) and currently work in private security. My concerns about child protection date back to 1977 (at Fort Bragg!) when I had my first encounter, face to face, with a child molester. I had the honor of putting that monster in jail where, I sincerely hope, he died shortly thereafter!

Now, having been made (all too belatedly!) aware of the advancement of child sexualization and other forms of their exploitation in the popular culture and understanding how it engenders the increasing criminality directed against children (and the early-on corruption OF them), I'm taking a stand.

The terrible fall from grace of such a dear child as Dakota Fanning (once) was and the means by which that fall was implemented should be a wake-up call for all decent adults everywhere. It was for me. I think we share that understanding. Best wishes.

P.S. I'm going to utilize "Geek Squad" the first chance I get! My biggest problem has always been printing off the computer and faxing... which was my chief purpose for it in the first place! I should have waited and gotten an Apple! Of course, if I had, I probably wouldn't have gotten involved in all this until it was too late!

me

"Only a full and immediate investigation would have had a chance of uncovering illegal activities. This was not done... deliberately."

HOW?? Tell me how they could fully investigate the claims when no one would come forward and no one would tell them who the people are that made the claims. After the public pressure? The director contacted them to prove to you people they did nothing wrong. There were dozens of people on the set, most of them work and live in Wilmington and they to this day have maintained that nothing illegal occurred during the filming of the movie. At no time was any kid nude or forced to act out sex scenes involving touching or fondling which is required to make it illegal. Sexual exploitation laws did not apply because the elements of the script were part of a storyline and did not appeal to the prudent interest of sexual pleasure for the viewer. This was confirmed in almost every review. Three district attorneys and the Utah Attorney General not only said it didn't violate the law they ENDORSED the movie as being a good representation of child abuse. I have no problem with the Bensens, in fact I enjoy their show most of the time. I just didn't agree with the way they presented the information, the misinformation, and the fact they wouldn't back up their story with eyewitnesses or evidence.

Your right about "Web" not being a good movie but you earlier claimed that no one would go see the movie because of Dakota's involvement with Hounddog which was complete nonsense. They did take their kids to see the movie even tho it wasn't good, they didn't like the way it was directed, the fake animal scenes, the changed storyline, or the added boy friend scenes but it had nothing to do with Dakota as you claimed.

I looked at every picture from Sundance and those kids had a ball and enjoyed every minute. Not exactly the scarred injured exploited kids you make them out to be. The rest of the cast except Christoph and David was there in full force and fully supported the movie. Dakota has several movies in pre-production despite your claims her career was ruined. You keep saying they are not good movies but how could you possibly make that claim when they haven't even been filmed yet?

There has never been any Hounddog clips on Youtube. Posting clips from an unreleased movie is a felony and the person who uploaded them would have been tracked down and arrested and it would have been all over the news. The same with the "other" rape nonsense. Never happened and just goes to show how far you people will go to make these film makers look bad. Deborah mentioned it at the question and answer session at Sundance. I got a good laugh out of that. It's even funnier that you still believe it was possible.

"I dragged no one through the mud, "Me"

I can't believe you can say that with a straight face. You have done everything possible to defame the people involved with no evidence what so ever to back up your claims. Insisting that Dakota is lying in her interviews, Christoph molested her in front of an entire film crew, that David was nude and touched her during some scenes, that Cody exposed himself, and your endless theories of what you "think" may have happened. None of it is true. For profit? WHAT PROFIT? This movie will never turn a profit and they knew that before it was filmed. The director did this for notoriety and to make a name for herself in the business. To make movies that appeal to a woman audience. It was funded and produced by almost all women.

"I believe that all this perversity, which is threatening to spread into feature films via "Hounddog"

What are you talking about? Via Hounddog? Hello, I already pointed out numerous movies that go WAY BEYOND what is depicted in Hounddog. There are hundreds more that have elements worse than what is in this movie but you keep insisting this was the first and it's not even close. Larry Clark has been making movies with minors in sexual situations for years. I don't see you getting all upset about his movies. Where was Bill and Ted's bogus crusade when his movies were released? Ken Park is by far ten times worse than Hounddog, what are you doing to stop that movie from being released in the US? It already released over seas.

It's clear you are obsessed with a 12 year old Dakota Fanning. I hate to break the news but she will not be 12 forever. The girl will grow up and move on to even more adult movies, like she hasn't already with "Man on Fire" and "Hide and Seek" which are not exactly kid friendly movies. You are delusional thinking she was some kind of representative of child innocence and thats somehow been destroyed.

"You also uphold unregulated, open forum websites that kids can freely access and thus be exposed to the gross profanity of the punks and the wiles of the online predators."

I'm responsible for these websites now? Foul mouth punks have been controlling chat rooms and message boards since the internet was first invented. There is plenty of blocking software that parents can use to restrict access to these sites. I don't think any website should be open forum. There should be two internets, one for kids and one for adults. The kid version of the internet should be strictly monitored.

hey ME.
thanks for maken fun of me and calling me studed ME just to let you know the movies i spoke of they are there on that website and yes there getting wores i dont care what happen in hounddog or any movie that has kids in them running around in there underwear. or in scenes with adults haven sex its the maken of thses movies. they sucks its sick
well im out of here hey ME when you get the movie hounddog make your kids vew it over and over and be proud of it and let thim vew it slowmo so they can get it right for what ever its worth

Me

"i up loaded 7 movies from the childstar website of the link that MR>me put on this website and these movies well i think you know there are little grils setting on the back of an adult man nud i mean all the way nud playing then lays down on is back dam this is sick in one movie a little gril is setting on a mans lap playing with somthing and other gril not much older is gevein a bath from an adult man and them latter has sex with hem sick sick other movie that has lots of little grils running around in there underwear all through the movie"

PROVE IT

There are 26 movies listed. NOT ONE OF THEM has scenes with nude girls taking baths with grown men and having sex with them as you claim. If so which movie?

In fact there is NOTHING obscene about the movies on that site and not one of them is pornographic. There were FOUR Dakota Fanning movies and one by Elle. That leaves 21 others and I've seen seven of them. That leaves 14 and you claimed you downloaded seven of them? BTW how did you download them? I checked the other 14 and not one mention of what you claimed.

Me

Oh wait I didn't see the mini reviews.

Seven more Dakota Fanning movies, another one with Elle, a couple with Kirsten Dunst, I know it wasn't ET or Harry Potter. OK seven of those movies I have never seen but seriously doubt there are nude kids taking baths with grown men.

Prove your statements. Which movie did you "download" from that site?

ok ME do you want me to show you the movies do you relly want to see them look harder man here ill help you ok.

this link

http://www.childstarlets.com/lobby/filmofday.html

go here and at the top there is a box of letters hit them and it takes you to all the movies in that wedsite and look at all of them. when you hit them it will show you screen caps of the movie ok and some of these movies are old. some of these movie are on the per to per or ric movie channels and you can down load them i have a supercomputer up loads 800kb to a mge ac. ok its just rong to make these kinds of movies with kids to go through this. even if its pretend or actting. its rough even for the adult actors. even they have turble doing some of these rols ok. its what they put the kids through to get to that point of actting. but that just me. i think they should stay kids unteal they become adults im not saying not have kids in movies but to have them act out sexs with an adult well its roung. sorry for tipo you see im like that becouse i was all most killed by a durnk driver.

ME>
i dident say that the adult man took a bath with the little gril i said he gave her a bath grt it right

Me

This is the link I posted:

http://youngactressreviews.org/mini_reviews/images.php?id=angela&shot=2

I didn't post a link to:

http://www.childstarlets.com/lobby/index.html

I don't know how you found that link but it really doesn't matter. I didn't see anything wrong with that site. It's nothing but screen caps from hundreds of tv shows and movies. I'm not clicking on every single link because there are thousands of links for shows and movies from the past seventy years or so. There is no way to upload the movies, nothing but small thumbnails of the screen caps. I didn't see a single picture that shows nudity.

ME. i know thats the link you put there.
if you go to that website you just put in and go to click on links to left it will take you to more links other websits page thats how i got the other links and i did see these movies in there ill get them and post the links here just for you i save the screen caps and blow them up thats how i new what was on them then i high light the name of the movie go to my per to per and send it and i down load them then i load it in my 4D conbusation kyer and i use a zip porgram to do this and then i open it up and add all the goodies to see what was done to the movies ok

ME. I want you to know there is noughting i want more then anything to be wrong about all of this. the kids is who im fiteing for ok. honddog is not the only movie that is done like this. and none of them did anything to slow or stop childrape if any all it did was made it wores and id love it if i made an ass of my self here. just thought id shere that with you

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

1. Ben David's office was, as they said themselves, handling large volumes of call-ins regarding his inaction on the "Hounddog" case. FIVE MONTHS elapsed before any action was taken... and that action was farcical.

2. And who made this determination that "Hounddog" didn't appeal to the "sexual pleasure " of the viewer? People who have either no political/financial interest in labelling it so or those whose philosophies are supportive of child sexualization. The film was ABOUT degeneracy and child sex- period. No one can read an honest review or the original screenplay and rationally state otherwise. Once again, the old and false excuse of "It'll raise awareness" is offered again and again by the depraved and/or by self-serving interests.

3. Body socks were used by those children for simulated nudity in sexual situations. The producers admitted this months ago! That's sexual exploitation of a minor. It's also immorality of the most crass and sickening nature.

4. I never said that "Charlotte's Web" was a bad movie.From what I've heard from reviewers whose opinions I trust (and who opposed "Hounddog" for it's immorality as well as it's ineptitude) it's likely a GOOD movie for kids. I also only speculated about "Hounddog" being a factor in it's box office failure. That it WAS a factor is undeniable. That DreamWorks considers it one is probable. As to what extent it was a factor- that's anyone's guess.

5. Publicity photos taken at a cinematic event would hardly be allowed to reflect any discord or troubles that might have occured. I don't know what the states of mind are for Cody Hanford or Isabelle Fuhrman. I do know that reports have come to me, including some from my foremost and most trusted source on the Fannings themselves, that Dakota has been exhibiting all the symptoms of post-traumatic stress and it's attendant depressive side-effects.

This has been noted in her since "Hounddog" wrapped and, particularly, since Sundance closed. As never before, I've started to worry about her personally. And don't try blaming US for it! Christian people don't put children in cheap, vile sex movies. Others do. Friends of yours.

One can only speculate on what might have occured HAD David Morse and/or Christoph Sanders shown up! I doubt it would have been pretty! For that reason, I very much doubt that either was in any way encouraged to attend.

6. Again you keep dragging up rumors about YouTube and the alleged molestation scene with David Morse. I know little about them BEYOND rumor, "Me", as I have repeatedly said. I've heard it mentioned from several sources, though, which is why I cannot entirely dismiss them. I only hope I can.

7. I said that Dakota is isolated, dominated and fed talking points from her handlers to say in tightly controlled interviews and events. To any dispassionate observer, this is blatantly obvious. I NEVER said that Christoph Sanders actually molested her and know of no responsible person who ever did. I did say that, spiritually speaking, there's little difference between a graphic enactment and the real thing... especially where children are concerned. I stand by that. If either Sanders or Morse were portrayed and/or "body socked" in nude representations, with children present in any manner, then what they did was criminally immoral. No decent person could think otherwise.

8. Yes, I certainly hope you're right that this movie will never turn a profit. Furthermore, I hope it will never again see the light of day!... in any venue! Decent people, caring for the physical and moral safety of children, cannot help but wish it so. Your statement that this was a "women's" film and never intended to make a profit may be the most wantonly absurd thing you've ever said!

9. Hello! I am aware that movies containing minors in sexual situations have happened before. So have those with young adults posing as teenagers... which is likewise morally repugnant. You don't even have to look beyond something like "Fast Times At Ridgemont High" to see that. Isn't it ironic that that particular film made Sean Penn a star?.. and that he then went on to make Dakota one?... and that his wife further went on to make her an "adult" one at 12 years of age?! As I've said so often: Depravity unchecked only leads to more and greater depravity.

The point however, which you continue to ignore, is this: The kids in "Hounddog" weren't even adolescents. They were chldren 12 years of age or younger! Even if others have matched (and we know of those which have approached) the degeneracy of "Hounddog"- IT'S ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE. It's only added reason for shame... and reason to take a firm stand against child sexual exploitation.

10. Here comes the "perverse obsession" charge again. It wasn't until the Christmas of 2005 that I knew Dakota Fanning even existed! It wasn't until the "Ides" of last March that I took any direct interest in her story... which I found to be heartwarming. Less heartwarming was the state of many of her unofficial fansites. That's when I got involved. It wasn't for her sake personally, but for those of the children (and so many fine ones!) who had come to love her.

Since July 20th, though, the focus of my activities has necessarily changed. I knew little about child actors before and the dangers to them and all other children from their sexualization in the popular culture. Now I do. There's where my "obsession" lies, "Me". There it will continue.

so steve what now where is there any up dates. are they going to do anything?

Me

1. Ben David's office was flooded with calls from people viewing the rumors online. Blog sites claiming she was molested and raped by the dad. Completely unfounded rumors about what happened on the set. You don't know when his or Rex Gore's investigation started. They may have investigated the claims right away and found nothing worth pursuing. I know for a fact the production company contacted the DA's office and asked them to review the film and interview anyone involved with the film to prove they did nothing wrong and to put an end to the rumors. There has NEVER been a published statement ANYWHERE that a crew member has contacted the media or law enforcement with claims that anyone was sexually exploited or forced to do ANYTHING inappropriate. Only anonymous post on blog sites from people claiming to be crew members.

2. "And who made this determination that "Hounddog" didn't appeal to the "sexual pleasure " of the viewer?"

EVERYONE THAT WATCHED THE MOVIE. I haven't seen one review that says this is a child sex movie, only you and others like you are making that claim and none of you have even seen the movie. How can you give a review for a movie you haven't seen?

3. "Body socks were used by those children for simulated nudity in sexual situations."

Dakota wore a body stocking during filming of the rape scene and she was filmed alone. The other kids were always shot above the waste or shoulders. I have never heard anyone claim the other kids were nude or wearing bodysuits, or at least anyone credible that was actually on the set.

4. "WEB" was up against some tough competition and despite some problems and bad reviews it still did very good at the box office and should do extremely well on dvd as young kids like to watch videos over and over again and it will keep getting purchased when every new generation of preschoolers come along. Dakota's ONLY kid friendly movie so far.

5. "Dakota has been exhibiting all the symptoms of post-traumatic stress"

Not from the movie! It's from all the publicity, Fox noise debates, numerous websites claiming she was exploited, people demanding her parents be arrested, and the endless internet debate. She has always maintained that she enjoyed the movie. This was her break through role as lead character and her Jodie Foster movie. Instead of being praised for doing a tough dramatic role everyone freaked out. It was totally not fair for everyone else to assume they know what is best for her and to make her the center of some crusade. Cody cashed in on his celebrity status by getting a role in a Broadway play of Disney's Little Mermaid. I've seen no evidence what so ever that any of these kids regret or were harmed by being in this movie.

6. The "other" rape was a lie posted by someone like you trying to deamonize the movie and make it sound worse than it really was and there is no evidence what so ever that these rumors were true. Just look at all the blog sites that got it wrong. Claiming she was molested by the dad and some saying she was raped by the dad. Only because they didn't take the time to do the research and find out it was the milk man's son. The storyline doesn't even expose molestation by the dad and only hints at because she says one time "I wish he was dead" but never mentioned it again. At no time does he touch or look at her in a sexual way. Most of the reviews confirm that it's not even implied. I keep bringing it up because it proves how far you people will go to prove they did something wrong and the fact you keep saying it could be true only because "YOU" haven't proven otherwise. You never will because it didn't happen.

7. "If either Sanders or Morse were portrayed and/or "body socked" in nude representations, with children present in any manner, then what they did was criminally immoral."

Christoph had no need to be in a bodysuit because he is not nude and wasn't even present through most of the scene. You have made many claims that he assaulted, molested, or defamed her and should go to prison. FOR WHAT? All he did was act like he was unzipping his pants. There is no evidence what so ever that he touched, humped, groped, or anything else. In fact crew members who were there said it didn't happen. Local crew members denied this. None of the implied nude scenes with David was filmed with the kids present, again confirmed in the reviews saying they are not in the same frame. Just because they were not at Sundance doesn't imply they had something to hide or fear. No every cast member attended, well mostly the men didn't attend.

8. It most certainly is a women's film. Pre Sundance viewing confirmed this. The men said it appeared like she invited the assault by the way she acted while women said it was not a factor and the rapist was just a bad guy. Most men find it disturbing and uneasy to watch while women find it engaging and representative of abuse and how an abused child would act. Indie films like this rarely turn a profit unless they have a herion addicted granddad who overdoses and is stuffed into the back of a van and driven halfway across the country then a ten year old does a strip tease at a beauty pageant. That's wholesome family fun worthy of an Oscar. They were over budget and over their heads before filming ever started. Nothing about this movie is commercial and not likely people will run out to buy the dvd so they can watch it over and over again. Everyone admits once is enough.

9&10. The legal issue has been resolved. Nothing they did was against the law. This is and has always been nothing more than a moral issue. Typical knee jerks reactions from the morally right who think they know what is best for everyone else. Not surprising the publicity hounds came out to engage the debate and quickly dropped their crusade once the cameras were turned off. Bill and Ted's bogus crusade on Fox noise was a prime example. I've seen it a hundred times before with rap music, rock music, movies, tv, video games, ect. and they rarely accomplish anything other than get air time for themselves. I do understand they are 12 and under. Nothing they did was harmful or degrading. It was acting. No worse than acting out a death scene, school shooting, murder, suicide, and any other theatrical element. Every person I talked to, every person the LE officials talked to, and everyone that supported the movie including actors and parents said the director handled the kids with the upmost of care and took extra precautions to insure they were comfortable with everything they did on and off camera. These kids supported the movie, their parents supported the movie, and it's just that A MOVIE. It's not going to change the world.

Me

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Motion Picture Group, Inc. (Pink Sheets:MPRG), a film and entertainment financing and production company, announced today a new film project with director Deborah Kampmeier. The title has not yet been determined but two titles have been considered, "The worst little whorehouse in Texas" and "The men in blue, the boys in stripes" revolving around the Texas Department of Prisons Youth Offender scandal. Widespread corruption in Texas facilities including molestation, sodomy, torture and beating children as young as ten years old. Thousands of accusations surfaced that children were being abused by prison officials and resulted in the resignation of the entire Texas Youth Commission. Lawmakers since have learned that a convicted sex offender was working as a guard at another center, and that an official suspected of molesting juvenile inmates was living with a 16-year-old boy. There also have been allegations that detention officials tampered with reports and concealed evidence of violence and sex abuse. Thousands of allegations of sexual misconduct committed by corrections officers and other employees dating to January 2000. After the reports about the Texas Rangers investigation, lawmakers found that allegations of sexual abuse and violence at state juvenile centers were widespread. Youth authority officials had referred more than 6,000 abuse allegations to local law enforcement, including accusations that employees engaged in sodomy and oral sex with boys and girls as young as ten years old. Eighteen of those cases were prosecuted. It is not clear how many resulted in convictions.

Filming will start in July 2007. Scott Franklin, Executive Producer of the film and CEO of The Motion Picture Group, added, "This is a story that must be told, a story that will show the world just how immoral those Texas folks really are despite their claims to be morally superior". The movie will be filmed in North Carolina because Texas does not provide tax incentives for film makers because they spend most of their tax money paying child molesters to run the state's juvenile prison system. 4000 extras will be used in the final segment of the movie when Gov. Rick Perry will release almost 90% of the entire population due to allegations that inmates sentences were increased if the resisted the abuse or reported it to officials. The director is looking forward to getting this story on the big screen to bring awareness to the problem of child sex abuse by prison officials employed to rehabilitate young offenders so they can return to society instead of making them sexual predators that may harm other children in the future.

ahahaha i gess ell and dakota will trying out for that one ME y dont you try out for that one ahaha. it mite be right up your ally. now and has bin elle and dakota are in nud-scens in there movies. elle talks to a NUD man standing right in front of her and saying your pines looks werd and he said my pines is werd hollywood nuoughting but prv. did you get to see all the other movies on that site look at them. cant see how the scene with dakota on the bed is not illagel that scene is sick. just becouse its in a movie its ok? o well keep on hollywood meybe we will get to see full blowen porn with kids some day ahaha after all thats what hollywood working on right and ME will be there for a look see. elle in 2 movies in her underwear then dakota in her new movie wingsomthing ahaha.

Me

Elle and Dakato are busy filming other movies. Why can't you people leave those kids alone? They have done nothing wrong. I would must certainly be in the movie if it would expose corruption in the Texas prison system and bring awareness to the problem of child abuse. You still haven't said what those seven movies were, I looked around that site and found zero nude pictures but I didn't look at every movie. Every single movie on that site was perfectly legal so get a grip. If you are so worried about child porn then contact your elected officials and demand that it be removed from the internet and all the pedophile priest and prison guards that molest kids be put in jail.

ME.
Elle fanning is in a movie [The Door in the Floor] and she is in a tub scene nud. looks at a nud adult man and talks about his pines. she saying your pines looks funny and he said my pines is funny. this man is nud in front of her alot. how is THAT bring awareness to child abuse. she walks in on adults haven sex dogstile. agin in her new movie Babel she is in just her underwear Y? to bring awareness to WHAT? the movie's i spoke of are on that website little kids in the scens of adults haven sex. some of these are not done in the us but most are. i told you how to get to them. a child totally nude on a mans back playing and you can see evrything hes nud too.Y? to bring awareness WHAT? the movie you skoke of in this blog site of 2 little grils has ben edited. its on that website mini-revews they took out the scene of her in sex act with the adult y? and the nud scene of the little gril with durt all over her Y? and when the grils are on the bed together nud or simmi-nud they took that out too y? they filmed it Y? did they edited out if its was ok to film. becouse its illagel. they are deleteing everything that had anything to do with the movie hounddog negative reviews only Y? the crumen that saw what hppen onset of the movie thought she was nud becouse the body stocking dosent cover anything scene 39# scen 53# so no so no they are not commin forth becouse they dont want to go to jial for being part of this dum sick foul movie.i my self do think she was hart in the making of the movie or any of the kids. when somone is saying they witness wrong doing of a child well you have to go after it guns loaded not just for the movie hounddog but all the movies they made with kids in sexact with adults. what they did to get to the point of the act of sex. what the kids have to go through to get to that point.? what they say to them. this movie dosent do anything to bring awareness just like all the other movies they made just look at this site. child porn is on the rizes just as humen,sex slave childrape and now they have ligel childmodel websites what the hell. all the movies they made in the past 17 years with kids/adult sex has done nughting to slow down or stop any of it. Y? becouse sex sales they know this. if you ask me the only awareness these movies bring is they can make money off the week and sick mines. dont get me rong ME i think it has done some good its bring awareness to all of what hollywood is doing to all the kids in these sick movies. just look at all the stars getting to turble out there. durgs sex tapes running around with no underwear shaving there heads dien of over dose drinking underage in privte hollywood partys
just becouse its actting dose not put them above the law. what there doing to these kids onset is rong. and if they had noughting to hide they would have gave them everything they shot on set of the maken of hounddog get it. [everything] NOT just an edit vewing of a dvd [EVERYTHING] THEY SHOT ON SET OF THE MOVIE HOUNDDOG. dakota is in her underwear gyrating on a bed in full vew that alone should have ben illagel just that one scene. here ya go film your daughter gyrating her hips in the bed in her underwear singen the blues post it on youtube. ME what do you think would happen to you hmmmm? just becouse its hollywood they can get way with maken movies like this is bullshit. O and the movies i spoke of there on that websits im not posten them here you want them and want to see what hollywood ben doing to these kids in the past 17 years then you find them and look at them dakota agin in Winged Creatures doing dum shit it gos to show ya sumt sales and they had to change her part in that movie too. ME.your on the rong side of the finces

lol get a grip
ME. you just dont want to see it do you hollywood sucks they can leve the us and i could care less you dident see all of them becouse you would said O snap there is a nud child on a mans back and the man is nud too and you mest the other movie that had alot of little grils allmost nud or just in underwear bathing in a river all throughout this movie. there in there underwear hmmm look harder ME. they are there and more you have to look harder your on the rong side of the finces ME. GET A GRIP

Me

The movie you are talking about is "Door in the floor" based on a KIDS book that is available in most school libraries across the country. The pictures on that site do not show her nude, she is wearing a night gown. The man is Jeff Bridges and he does NOTHING sexual to Elle during this movie. She does say "your penis looks funny." but she didn't actually see in in real life, it was acting. At no time is Elle nude in this movie. This is an excerpt from IMDB:

"Pleased be aware that all of the principals (except Ruthie, Elle Fanning) are seen in various stages of nudity in this film -- front, side, back and on top of one another. Everything is shown with great subtlety and sensitivity within the delicate context of the film. There was certainly no prurient interest in any of it. All of the nude scenes are handled in a realistic and matter-of-fact way. For example, little Ruthie sees her father naked, which some viewers may find objectionable, but which certainly works within the context of this film".

The character sees her naked father NOT the actor, most of the post in the message board say she is not in the same frame meaning it was edited together. Again you got nothing.

Nothing is that movie was illegal, immoral, or harmful to the actors. The movie got great reviews and nominated for multiple awards.

Me

"the movie you skoke of in this blog site of 2 little grils has ben edited. its on that website mini-revews they took out the scene of her in sex act with the adult y? and the nud scene of the little gril with durt all over her Y? and when the grils are on the bed together nud or simmi-nud they took that out too y? they filmed it Y? did they edited out if its was ok to film. becouse its illagel."

How do you come up with these lies? Where does it say they edited out a sex scene with an adult or they edited out other scenes with the kids in bed? It's about their overly religious mother who lets her religious beliefs drive her crazy. This movie received lots of great reviews and won multiple awards. Since when is nudity illegal? The Supreme Court ruled that nudity even child nudity is LEGAL as long as it does not appeal to the prudent interest of the viewer. IMDB excerpt:

"This is an amazing if bizarre film. The acting of the two little girls is superb and far surpasses those of child actors in big budget studio films.

I've read some disturbing posts accusing this film of child exploitation, particularly in the use of nudity. The nudity in this film is as innocent as a baby on a bearskin rug, but too many narrow-minded morons with internet access confuse this with pornography.

The use of nudity in this film is a bit artsy, but very natural and represents the only beauty in these girls lives. Swimming nude with their mother the only time in their lives they've experienced joy. But the religious views of Angela makes her see herself as sinful, and her sister as unclean. This film could have been improved by more nudity to show how this budding adolescent views her own body. She already has a negative view of sexuality. But it's an issue no American filmmaker would dare explore, and I don't blame them.

This is where the film becomes a near-satire of the dangers of blind faith in fear-based religions. This view of sin and uncleanliness leads Angela down a dangerous path but in her innocence, she doesn't view her actions as having negative consequences on her sister".

-------------------

"running around with no underwear shaving there heads"

What does Britney Spears have to do with anything. She is a MUSICIAN not an actress.

--------------------

"dakota is in her underwear gyrating on a bed in full vew that alone should have ben illagel just that one scene. here ya go film your daughter gyrating her hips in the bed in her underwear singen the blues post it on youtube. ME what do you think would happen to you hmmmm?"

Posting a clip on youtube is not the same as a theatrical element of a movie. The movie as a whole does not appeal to the prudent interest of the viewer, a small clip would as it has not artist merit. Not the same thing.

-------------------------------

"ME.your on the rong side of the finces"

You mean I'm not a religious fanatic with puritanical views that has mental issues with the very thought of any kind of sexuality that is perfectly harmless? The Supreme Court says I'm the one that is right in this debate so I guess I'm on the right side of the fence with the normal folks.

ME.

dakota is in her underwear gyrating on a bed in full vew that alone should have ben illagel just that one scene.

theatrical element / artist merit. holes no bounds here ME. this is a kid [12 years old]. by the way she got this foul script when she was 11 years old. she [ DAKOTA FANNING ]is acting out on a [scene] by its self and gyrating her hips in her underewar [edit to fit] in a movie called hounddog and your saying the law dose not look at it that way becouse hollywood made the movie. and its theatrical element artist merit. WOW and you think its ok to see little grils in there underwear doing that. Remine me not to let you around my daughters. WHAT THE HELL IS RONG WITH YOU ME. its not that shes in her underwear. its what shes doing in that scene in her underwear ME. and you just said that becouse hollywood has
liesons to do films like this they can do this and get away with it under theatrical element / artist merit.

so if you filmed your daughter doing the same thing as [DAKOTA FANNING] did in that one scene by its self you would go to jail. it would be illagel. its not the same thing. HELLO! ME. it is the same thing as you or I any one filmed it EVEN HOLLYWOOD for a movie. if its illagel for you or i to do this its illagel for hollywood. ME i know all the tricks they do in movies i put a link in this blogsite on how to make movies and blue screens and edit them. but this movie did go over the bounds with these 3 kids. all its going to take is one human being to buy this movie take it home and vew it. if they are convicents they witnessed an act of abuses/ assault on a child/ or child exploitation of a miner
of the movie hounddog and file a complanet all hell we brake louse trust me.

crewmembers
it was frontly lit and very graphic in the rape scene. Y would they say that if it dident happen?

dakota gets in to david morse lap becouse it fills good thats sick. acting out a sex scene with david morse on his lap

then in the bed with him

she look at him masterbating over the sholder shot?

dakota is on the bed gyrating her hips draemming of the tickets to see elvis.

dakota and cody in the shed ? all of this and nouthing was rong with it hmmm. if none of it was rong filmming it then way the hell did the impeail everything noughting happened as they say. then Y/ did they impeail everything and edit befor they gave a copy of it to the DA to vew. i want to beleve noughting happen to the kids and everything is ok and that the kids had fun and larn somthing from it.

this is how i see it lol
thats like telling me its ok to spit but becouse i did im going to jail only you can spit and get away with it.

that's racist right there ME. your words Me.
[You mean I'm not a religious fanatic] with puritanical views that has [mental issues

im not religious.
im not black or wite nor am i left or right in pelitcetl views
im just me i love evryone by color rices or religious. i dont think like you. i dont think like them im free and you have to prove to me life is far. thats how i am

if you think little grils gyrating her hips on a bed in this maner is harmless your sick in the head ME.

Me

"dakota is in her underwear gyrating on a bed in full vew that alone should have ben illagel just that one scene."

IT WASN'T ILLEGAL, just because you think is it doesn't mean anything. The law clearly states that the film is NOT pornography.

"theatrical element / artist merit. holes no bounds here"

It does in a court of law and is protected by the US Constitution.

"so if you filmed your daughter doing the same thing as [DAKOTA FANNING] did in that one scene by its self you would go to jail. it would be illagel."

NOT TRUE, if it was filmed in the context of a dramatic movie that had artist merit it would be LEGAL.

"they witnessed an act of abuses/ assault on a child/ or child exploitation of a miner
of the movie hounddog and file a complanet all hell we brake louse trust me."

NOT TRUE, this was confirmed by the DAs and the ATTORNEY GENERAL of Utah who clearly stated that the movie did not violate any laws and was not child exploitation.

Me.
shour shour. ahahaha Me. you kill ME.

The comments to this entry are closed.