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
Blog powered by Typepad

Photo Albums

« Houndog Director on Dakota Fanning Rape Scene At Sundance | Main | GIVE US A BREAK »

January 31, 2007


patti hurley

I have worked with Paul over the past 3 years and he is truly a wonder! If more people cared as he does and then would follow through...these things that are happening to Dakota and others like her, would be minimal...if not totally stopped! He is such a great guy and I have so much respect for him and he many causes!

Patti Hurley,
Resource Director,
A Minor Consideration

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Tre:

Let's take these well-founded questions in order:

1. A good point! Here's a little data from "Filmmaker" magazine (Winter 2005). Having gained (and later lost!) the financial backing of Cineric (a New York based "optical house"), Kampmeier gleefully announced a shoot date of June 2005 (!). The actors committed to the project were listed as Robin Wright Penn, David Morse and Lynn Redgrave. Now, when DID Dakota come into the picture? How were her parents sold on a project so obviously demeaning and morally abhorrent for their own precious daughter? When did Lynn Redgrave leave the cast and why? Did Cineric publically state their reasons for withdrawing? And... what did Dakota's advent on the project have to do with any of it?

2. Look to Cindy Osbrink for most of those questions. What goes on in the mind of an agent of child actors when her prime client hits puberty? A client, I might add, who can command a $3 million salary! The prospect of losing 10% of THAT has corrupted better people than her. Better parents than the Fannings, too, if history is any guide. And they, as parents, must bear the final responsibility.

3. Remember; Kampmeier took the unusual step of putting a disclaimer in her own script before the rape scene. Yet, the other scenes involving sex, violence and nudity were retained without futher comment. As we have it from witnesses as to the horrifying way in which the molestation scene was actually filmed, what does it say about those other repellant episodes? Having been themselves "unmolested" for months, the filmmakers had abundant time to remove whatever they felt necessary.

4. That's a very good question, Tre. I'm inclined to think, though, that they'd hardly have openly retained something like Miss Hoffman's personal notes. Can such things as that be required by law for use as evidence?

5. As above. One might also consider this: A technician who posted here (I'll stretch a point here as his statement seemed valid) described the Full Moon Films production staff as the most professionally inept group he had ever seen. That, besides their understandable disinclination to be forthright to any legal authority, might mean that such records were poorly maintained from the beginning.

6. That would be interesting, too. Just how well did Screen Gems co-operate and to what extent was Miss Jordan authorized to request or demand something like time cards, et al? Are such records normally retained for employee tax purposes? One would think so... but can a local authority require them to be produced?

7. Jan Cerwonka is Dakota's private tutor and has been for years. She's essentially a trusted family retainer. In California, where child laws are more strictly observed, she might have had some limited authority- but only insofar as the off-set status of her charge was concerned pertaining to legal requirements (hours of work and schooling per day). On set, if even allowed there, she would have no authority over the actual filmation. I doubt, in North Carolina, that she even had that. Besides, how long would she have held such a coveted job had she tried to interfere in such things? If she ever leaves the Fannings' service, I'd like to ask her a few pointed questions!

8. I was told that all the actors, Dakota included, recieved a "rate" salary. I don't know what that sum would be per the Screen Actors Guild. Whatever it was, it would mean that Joy Fanning, in her new status as Dakota's manager, received 10% off the top. Why would she agree to prostitute her own daughter in a cheap, vile movie like "Hounddog"? To answer that, let's recall her initial response right after "Hounddog" was outed on July 20th. She expressed her hope that her daughter would win an Oscar. Oscar=promise of an extended career=big bucks to come. Follow the money.

9. There's one I never considered. I should have, though. Morgan Brittany's story about having rescued an overworked child actress from a movie set and her uncaring parents (Hannity & Combes, January 16th) indicates that this rule may be fitfully observed at best... like so many child laws are.

10. Yes. Where ARE those video assists? Were the offices of Full Moon Films, Deerjen Films or The Motion Picture Group ever subpoenaed by Mr. David? I'll bet not. But... would he have the authority to do so out of state?

11. The lawyers are now claiming that the law is "vague" on these points. Naturally, they're splitting legalistic hairs to protect themselves and to deflect public criticism. Once again: The law is only as good as the willingness of legal authority to uphold it.

And yes, many thanks to Paul Petersen for his work. And thank you as well, Patti! God bless.

Stephen Smith

Reading the info on Wilmington, there needs to be someone who cares about the young people in the community. Look at what is/has gone on in one of the high schools with a male "christian," science teacher. I heard a number of parents, have tried (a real nasty account about what was done to a single patent, with a sick child) when intervention was sought. Everybody talks about it and connect with others, or want to know but... Does ANYBODY REALLY CARE?

hey happy brithday dakota GO BIG BLUE
coults win ya i hope you have a lovly brithday and your dreams are felld you love and for gevness as i hope you can see we all care we all just want the best for you.
no mader what is said here and you see this learn from it its the best anyone can do

OOPS Sorry ill Retipe it ok..
I hope you have a lovely one too.and all of your Hopes and dreams are filled with love forgevness and understanding as you can see lol your like our Daughter. and Hope you can aprishate our concern through all this. That all of us here and around the world only want the best for you just atif we like for are owne children. you are in our harts. ahah and Dont try to shock us agin ok.
As we are still recovering. you are our children superstar. Yes i said it[SUPERSTAR] and dont let go your head. ahaha they look up to you. You geve them hope. you made them cry /and Laugh. and yes SHOCK them to no end.YOU truely have a remarkable spirit to tuch so meny. All our love to you and elle.

hey this is cool. editing softwear check it out. some of you may know about this softwear
all redy. if not then take a look.

copy past in browser its cool.
and this link. / copy past in browser.

this nixt link make's me sad
this nixt link go's to a child star website. take a look. copy past in browers

ok iv told you about the photo's shapshots i got off the dvd in bastard out of carolina a movie that has /rape/ in it just like hounddog. ok this is the dfult pane mean's its on the dvd
but you cant see it untell you look at it in edit mod it show's everything even the bad things they dont want you to see. i found 3 shots that would make me go nuts and hart someone if it was my daughter.
now that i have seen this i belive the crewmen and there clam. you see its in the making of the film on set. you cant see.
when they try to make it look real some times they go out of there way. when you want to be the best at somthing you do what it takes. in bastard out of carolina thats what it looks like to me.they went way out of the way. now knowing what they can do with this softerwear above link. you would think they dident heart the kids in the making of the movie hounddog. well in this case of bastard out of carolina. and what i see makes me belive not to be true. i have the shots of this and it makes me sick. if i went through all the movies and found these thing then what.
dont just look at the moive and think its ok. you need to look at the footadge they took off in the editing room. ok take all the editing away. zoom out and then look. what do you see now' what would you see.
what they coverd up. you need to look at it befor its to late. stop talkin about it and do it. have sone one look at it. there going to tell you noughting happen. they want you to belive noughting happend. read the law. look even if noughting happend. dakota and the other kids in the making of this movie its stell illegal. rember i saw what they dident want you to see in bastard out of carolina. ok SO GITERDONE.

hi agin to help you understand here it is.



When describing camera angles, or creating them yourself, you have to think about three important factors

> The FRAMING or the LENGTH of shot

> The ANGLE of the shot

> If there is any MOVEMENT involved

When describing different cinematic shots, different terms are used [to indicate the amount of subject matter contained within a frame], [how far away the camera is from the subject], [and the perspective of the viewer]. Each different shot has a different purpose and effect. A change between two different shots is called a CUT.

1 . Extreme long shot

Can be taken from as much as a quarter of a mile away, and is generally used as a scene-setting, establishing shot. It normally shows an EXTERIOR, eg the outside of a building, or a landscape, and is often used to show scenes of thrilling action eg in a war film or disaster movie.

2. Long Shot

The most difficult to precisely categorise, but generally one which shows the image as approximately "life" size ie corresponding to the real distance between the audience and the screen in a cinema (the figure of a man would appear as six feet tall). This category includes the FULL SHOT showing the entire human body, with the head near the top of the frame and the feet near the bottom.

3. Medium Shot

Contains a figure from the knees/waist up and is normally used for dialogue scenes, or to show some detail of action. Variations on this include the TWO SHOT (containing two figures from the waist up) and the THREE SHOT (contains 3 figures...). NB. Any more than three figures and the shot tends to become a long shot. Another variation in this category is the OVER-THE-SHOULDER-SHOT, which positions the camera behind one figure, revealing the other figure, and part of the first figure's back, head and shoulder.

4. Close-Up

This shows very little background, and concentrates on either a face, or a detail of mise en scene. This shot magnifies the object (think of how big it looks on a cinema screen) and shows the importance of things, be it words written on paper, or the expression on someone's face. The close-up takes us into the mind of a character. In reality, we only let people that we really trust get THAT close to our face - mothers, children and lovers, usually - so a close up of a face is a very intimate shot. A film-maker may use this to make us feel extra comfortable or extremely uncomfortable about a character.

5. Extreme Close-Up

As its name suggests, an extreme version of the close up, generally magnifying beyond what the human eye would experience in reality. An extreme close-up of a face, for instance, would show only the mouth or eyes.



The relationship between the camera and the object being photographed (ie the ANGLE) gives emotional information to an audience, and guides their judgment about the character or object in shot. The more extreme the angle (ie the further away it is from eye left), the more symbolic and heavily-loaded the shot.

1. Bird's-Eye View

This shows a scene from directly overhead, a very unnatural and strange angle. Familiar objects viewed from this angle might seem totally unrecognisable at first (umbrellas in a crowd, dancers' legs). This shot does, however, put the audience in a godlike position, looking down on the action. People can be made to look insignificant, ant-like, part of a wider scheme of things. Hitchcock (and his admirers, like Brian de Palma) is fond of this style of shot.

2. High Angle

Not so extreme as a bird's eye view. The camera is elevated above the action using a crane to give a general overview. High angles make the object photographed seem smaller, and less significant (or scary). The object or character often gets swallowed up by their setting - they become part of a wider picture.

3. Eye Level

A fairly neutral shot; the camera is positioned as though it is a human actually observing a scene, so that eg actors' heads are on a level with the focus. The camera will be placed approximately five to six feet from the ground.

4. Low Angle

These increase height (useful for short actors like Tom Cruise) and give a sense of speeded motion. Low angles help give a sense of confusion to a viewer, of powerlessness within the action of a scene. The background of a low angle shot will tend to be just sky or ceiling, the lack of detail about the setting adding to the disorientation of the viewer. The added height of the object may make it inspire fear and insecurity in the viewer, who is psychologically dominated by the figure on the screen.

5. Oblique/Canted Angle

Sometimes the camera is tilted (ie is not placed horizontal to floor level), to suggest imbalance, transition and instability (Titanic!!). This technique is used to suggest POINT-OF-View shots (ie when the camera becomes the 'eyes' of one particular character,seeing what they see - a hand held camera is often used for this).



A director may choose to move action along by telling the story as a series of cuts, going from one shot to another, or they may decide to move the camera with the action. Moving the camera often takes a great deal of time, and makes the action seem slower, as it takes several second for a moving camera shot to be effective, when the same information may be placed on screen in a series of fast cuts. Not only must the style of movement be chosen, but the method of actually moving the camera must be selected too. There are seven basic methods:

1. Pans

A movement which scans a scene horizontally. The camera is placed on a tripod, which operates as a stationary axis point as the camera is turned, often to follow a moving object which is kept in the middle of the frame.

2. Tilts

A movement which scans a scene vertically, otherwise similar to a pan.

3. Dolly Shots

Sometimes called TRUCKING or TRACKING shots. The camera is placed on a moving vehicle and moves alongside the action, generally following a moving figure or object. Complicated dolly shots will involve a track being laid on set for the camera to follow, hence the name. The camera might be mounted on a car, a plane, or even a shopping trolley (good method for independent film-makers looking to save a few dollars). A dolly shot may be a good way of portraying movement, the journey of a character for instance, or for moving from a long shot to a close-up, gradually focusing the audience on a particular object or character.

4. Hand-held shots

The hand-held camera (despite its name, a heavy, awkward piece of machinery which is attached to its operator by a harness) was invented in the 1 950s to allow the camera operator to move in and out of scenes with greater speed. It gives a jerky, ragged effect, totally at odds with the organised smoothness of a dolly shot, and is favoured by filmmakers looking for a gritty realism (eg Scorsese), which involves the viewer very closely with a scene. Much favoured by the makers of NYPD Blue.

5. Crane Shots

Basically, dolly-shots-in-the-air. A crane is a useful way of moving a camera - it can move up, down, left, right, swooping in on action or moving diagonally out of it.

6. Zoom Lenses

The zoom lens means that the camera need not be moved (and saves a lot of time and trouble). The zoom lens can zip a camera in or out of a scene very quickly. The drawbacks include the fact that while a dolly shot involves a steady movement similar to the focusing change in the human eye, the zoom lens tends to be jerky (unless used very slowly) and to distort an image, making objects appear closer together than they really are. Zoom lenses are also drastically over-used by many directors (including those holding palmcorders), who try to give the impression of movement and excitement in a scene where it does not exist.

7. The Aerial Shot

An exciting variation of a crane shot, usually taken from a helicopter. This is often used at the beginning of a film, in order to establish setting and movement. A helicopter is like a particularly flexible sort of crane - it can go anywhere, keep up with anything, move in and out of a scene, and convey real drama and exhilaration.

dose this help you understand. what you dont see dose not mean somthing dident or did happen. if i was you and knowing what this movie is about. id lookin to it.dont just look at it.go in to edit mode there you will find it. if theres anything to find. here in edit mode you can add light that wasent there. go fram ot fram.add light go inbetween the fram's shots i told you i have found things in bastard out of carolina. ok SO GITERDONE.

GO BIG BLUE love you even if you dont pick up your phone ahaha cya. back to coding and modding maps for on line games hey chek out the links i put in your website cool editing softwear i love it.later

So now what hollywood going to get away with anoughter one. ????????????


Regarding the Film 'Hound Dog'

Two things (be cautioned - I am a student of the arts, law and sciences!):

First -- From a dramatic perspective, Lewellen’s hand pressing down on the rusty nail diverts the audience's attention away from the rape (it has a greater emotional value). Therefore, no sexual exploitation of a minor occurs. If the drama of the rape itself was the primary focus then exploitation could be argued. However, it still would not be illegal because

Second -- When the audience buys their movie tickets they are signing a contract which, among other things, acknowledges the fact that they are going to the theater knowing that what they are about to "witness" is an act and that it is not real. Therefore, this scene is not illegal. This film commits no felony because it is just that, a film; it is an artistic outlet protected by the audience's own intentions upon their purchase of a movie ticket.

Questions? Comments? This is especially crucial for a finer appreciation of the arts. I look forward to your responses.

Thank you.

(Citation borrowed from

Posted by: irfan | March 17, 2007 at 05:56 PM

Tre Benson


(not too sure where you got your law degree from but trust me, you deserve a refund)

First and last comment on this, What took place in the creation of the film and what was shown on the screen at Sundance are not necessarily the same thing. Perhaps you can get someone else to argue with you but I've got nothing to prove to you or anyone else. I know what I know and I am comfortable with that.

hey who gaff about the rape scene that was shot at the last min.. just to piss every one off. and do you know dakota wanted to be naked yes nud in the rape scene yes and she said that she wanted the boy raping her to find out she was not a vrigen. its all the other stuff they did in the making of the movie HOUNDDOG { HEY WHAT PART OF IN THE MAKING OF THE MOVIE do you not understand } who care if she was not nud you dont have to be nud to for it to be illagel get it.
she was in david mores lap acting out a SEX SCENE GET IT THATS TUCHING AND ILLAGEL get it. dakota fanning was in a bed in her UNDERWEAR ACTING OUT A SEX SCENE FOR TICKITS even if the boy was not there THATS ILLAGEL what becouse its in a movie made by hollywood its ok ahahahaha rong agin HEY FILM YOUR DAUGHTER IN HERE UNDERWAR DOING JUST THAT WHAT DAKOTA DID IN THE MAKING Of HOUNDDOG THEN POST IT ON YOUTUBE see how fast your ass go to jail bud wtf rong with you. dakota is in the bed. scene when david morse gets in it with her they say they film them apart that bullshit in the movie if hes in the bed and you see her there in the same fram then thay where together in the bed ACTING OUT A SEX SCENE GET IT even if there not nud its what took places on the set to get the shot to make the F***ing film get it. ok now i can see how they would have got away whith the masterbation sene lol but she had to know what she was doing there agin she was ACKING OUT A SEX SCENE even if she was not on the same set who knows they mite have ben ahaha i got to bring this up ok wite for it DAVID MORSE WAS IN A MOVIE WITH JENA AND JODY FOSTER AHAHA TOO. hes a pig ok it was in contic good movie but stell i think he like kids TO MUCH ya i think hes in love with dakota fanning hes in an other movie with her ahaha ill bet it save to say they dident have to brake his arme when they ask him to star in the movie with dakota fanning O wite he was doing dreamer with dakota fanning when they where they stared filmimg hounddog ahaha you think he just had to have dakota and set her up weeeeeee im on a role here for the mack daddy morse couldent get her in dramer so he cought her in hounddog he he. he was the staker in dramer. and hey live my snakes alone just becouse you see all the junk cars in my drive dont mean you can play in my shed and put my crock back in the river he ante doin anything rong how would you like it if some one came along and shot you in the ass with a dart and carryed you off and just becouse i have a black man for a frind dont mean you can scop out the nabor girl ill bet dakota fanning laught when cody show her his thing ahaha becouse he siad it takes to hands to handel my wopper so grandma said lets eat aha and get drunk grandma shouts david new girlfrind is comin to town to play in the shed and show dakota how to handel that snake but the truck is in the way o ya david go move the truck and dont be playin with it you know lighting strikes in the same places where is dakota well in bed with her derty underwear singin the blues for the tickits dont bet on it y becouse dakota is mader then a wet hen with a snke crowling betwein its lags ok who told her i got the tickits the other day from the milk man what no no david down there with the nabor gril she gots the tickits he told me dakota would do him right if hed get the tickits O lord i just told on my slfe dont fret it grandma dont think dakota her jua where is that gril go look in the shed O my my my O Lord gril what the hell why you in this shed with your daddy gril frind i gess the boys eant what have to whery about ahahaha hey we are all dum here he he ok ill stop hollwood got way out of hand here and they have to be stoped so try or mark or who ever you got the smokin gun so geterdone

hey ifan..

Questions? Comments? This is especially crucial for a finer appreciation of the arts. I look forward to your responses.

ARTS DOSE NOT GEVE YOU THE RIGHTS TO MAKE MOVIES HAVING SEX WITH KIDS BUDDY lol do you have photo of your kids in the nud or in her underwear or his witing for some one to steal there hart and sole you just told on your self infan do you think its ok for hollywood to make these movie and call it art there are laws becouse of all those so called fin arts movies holloywood made. go ahead run your mouth agin ahaha HEY JUST ask BROOKshilds HOW SHE FELLS KNOWING SHE IN A muziem just hanging around for evry one to look at and that they sold her sole for 150,000.00 dollors. and called it art too hummm. i gess takin a cross and sitckin in your daughter and filping her around tell she peuks is art too ahaha and here is a link to all your so called fine art movies and dont get me rong there are some good movies there but some of them go way over the top ya just like hounddog.

try or mark you guys can put an end to this mess and you know who has the smokin gun SO GETER DONE love you guys GO BIG BLUE hey i geve every year to the big blue that fall in the line of dudy. my gess is that if we had guys like you and who ever told on the dum ass that made this movie hounddog. we need them there on set all the time to look over there so called fine arts movies and not take a pay off or look the other way

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Readers:

"Hounddog" is back. On November 13th, The Motion Picture Group (the present owners of the movie) announced that their new re-re-re-edit of their "child porn classic" is now available for the viewing of and the sale to potential distributors. The initial story was carried by Businesswire and can be read on their website. Aside from an uninformative statement by TMPG CEO Scott Franklin and a vacuous monologue by director/writer Deborah Kampmeier, little else was said.

It remains unknown as to whether the Group actually hopes for a theater run, are looking for a DVD deal, or are just looking for whatever they can get. I'm personally speculating that they've waited all this time for a propitious moment to move on this... and that the writers' strike was seen as that right moment. Thus far, I am unaware of any statement from other participatory parties in the film such as Robin Wright Penn, David Morse, Jen Gatien, Cindy Osbrink or the families of the child actors who were exploited in it. For the story, access "" or my website "" under the thread "The Return Of 'Hounddog'?".

i told ya so ahahah.. NO rumors

i was viewing a a movie.
a commercial came on. i was editding the commercial and tapen the movie so i can see it later. this commercial was on the famely channel. well long to short i stoped for the commercial. /to edit them. in this commercial at the end of it was a child in a tub. they want us to think theyed impaled nude scenes.
adults/child in movies or commercial. the cammra came up from the bottom of the tub where the child was setting they showed an adult next to the child in the tub. she had soap all over her.i have seattle light so somthimes it freezes up or just freeze framed the shot. the cammra was forze between the top of the water where you can see a child a little girl with the adult women was nexts to her the child. and the other hafe of the camra was under the water where you can see plane as day where they tried to edit the total transformation
from under water shot to above shot of the little girl. well one would think its just a little girl taken a bath she was about 5 one would think its impaled to make you think she is taken a bath that its just a harmless commercial. that they would have put underwear or a swimsute on her bottom. but not here she was totaly nude in the tub
exposing all her jentales and plane as day you can see everything. ok now i know the child was nude. the point here is the commercial Does Not Exist Anymore at least that one.there is a commercial some what the same but the tub scenes is gone now they have children playing at the end of commercial. now if the child taken a bath nude in a tub for a commercial is harmless or nude scenes in movies are harmless and nudy shots/ photos are harmless and not illegal like Me said it was not Y would they try to edit it and then delete the tub scene. this kined of thing bothers me becouse its the things hollywood doses and gets away with it. its just accting they say pepole are going to jail for haven a harmless nude shot of there grand child taken a bath. and sharing it with famly mambers. if it looks pornogrphic its illegal
no matter how you try to spend it no matter how non revelling you try to make it its stell illegal if you share it or sell it would be illegal
pried. SO HOW THE F**k can they film this sick movie and say its not revelling or say its to bring awareness or any movie like hounddog its to make money souly for profit. jenna malone at a young age left her peranets becouse of money mismanagement or was it ?? if you follow jenna malone you will see she is in meny movies nude scenes bath scenes sex scenes and now nude photo shoots of her hummm.jenna malone 19 now said she was not harmed in the making of bastard out of carolina ya right lol and the things brooks went through and all the others put through the same thing. the movie recks of soft porn and there trying to make money of it thats
illegal one would think.

who so ever did the adio mix in B O C..
sucks ahaha you can here what the director
said to jenna malone when she did the car scene in BOC.. director to jenna ok hun.... lets do the hekups we practice this is when jenna got dried humped in the car scene humm.. i took a beter look at that with cool softwear. she had a shaw on her lages covering up the fact she was on his lap and couldn't help noticeing her pink underwear where down to her knees under the bown shaw on her lages WTF her underwear are at her kneess Y. if its just accting lol and whear do you think his hands are one is holding her fourhead whers the other one if you dont beleve me use the softwear you have on cumputer videomaker add light 3 or more times then look for your self use the fram for fram and slow down to hafe. they added blar to it but you can stell see what im talken about O well its over now but thats the thing there flimming and deleteing what would get them in trouble on set. shere there going to tell you they where not hart in flimming
thats what was in the contriact. its part of the preparations to make the pearents and acctors doing the part think its just acting its not real it just pretend lol hey ant that what a pedafile would say to there pry ahaha. hollywood is like a pedafile they pray on our kids then say they dident do it and then make money off it laugh at us and the kids know what to say allredy lol they trand them to say no i dident get heart its just aciting that dident happed to me ahaha. in Pretty Baby one scene made me puke Brooke Shields got dried humped too the man was in fact was betwieen her lages and in this scene she was nude or with a very thin see through colth that man walk in on her in the bath room scene but they could have done a side by side shot on that one but this one they could not fake and they dident say if it was a set in look like Brooke Shields to me. well that ones over too and i can go and on about all these movies hell they want you to bicth piss and grouwn.. but most of all they want the sick and twsited f**Ks that hert our kids to pay up for all ther sick shit they flim after all its all about the money ahaha. after all there are more sick then good hollywood knows that
O in BOC.. jenna said im not sucking it hey thats what she said dont get made at me im just telling about the movie and editer or somone said Y she say that hummm.. this is when she in the car in front seat he passes a mug with licker in it and the little girl is in the back seat the hole time the scene was shot lol she seaid im hungry and i cant make it out but i think she said are they done yet someone told her to pretend your asleep there more but i cant say Y am i sharing this becouse i can Y do i care dont know it dont mater anyway there stell filmming the sick movies anyway and getting away with it ahaha hollywood is like a thoug robbing of your hart mined and soule ahahahahahaha.... and dont forget your money

Steven Mark Pilling

Sorry I took so much time in answering. And was this Aubrey who just commented?

Jena Malone just turned 23, according to the newspaper. She's just a lower-tier actress these days and one whose life and career has been marred since childhood by sex-and-money scandals. What her personal life has been like... well, one can imagine. It's become an old story, I'm afraid.

Of course, Miss Malone's infamous film was still done in her adolescence, not actual childhood, and lacked the raw and relentless sexuality of "Hounddog". Still, it was an immediate vanguard if the child sex opii to come. If an alert public had been aroused to action over "The Bastard Out Of Carolina", maybe "Hounddog" and other abuses like it wouldn't have happened. I share in that fault.

There's still no word of "Hounddog" having been sold. I'll try to keep tabs on the situation. I suggest that you and other concerned readers keep checking on The Motion Picture Group's website and be alert for updates in Variety Online and The Hollywood Reporter.

Best wishes to all during the Holy Days!

oops my bad i thought she was 19
and about the commercia thats ture

Steven Mark Pilling

That's okay. If you really want to see something crazy, then try this. "Me" reminded me yesterday that the AARP is running a new TV ad. One of the actors involved is Dakota Fanning... posing with her little mongrel whom she's infamously named "Lewellen". I don't know what other actors they rounded up (I haven't seen it) or if they knew (or cared) about the message they were sending using Dakota. Knowing their political leanings, I wasn't going to join anyway!

yes its me aubrey
is this what yor talking about ??

here have a look see at this..


Ben Affleck, Garth Brooks, Morgan Freeman, Eva Mendes, Joaquin Phoenix, Jeremy Piven, Reese Witherspoon, Dakota Fanning, and her dog Lewellen.

Hollywood's leading nonprofit organizations, the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF) and the Motion Picture & Television Fund (MPTF), will join a national movement lead by AARP. "Divided We Fail" aims to bring attention to the issues that worry Americans the most: health care and financial security.

Currently, 47 million Americans have no health insurance - and more middle-class people are filing for bankruptcy because of health care-related expenses, than for any other reason.

Directed by actor and director Tony Goldwyn, with music composed by Philip Glass, a new public service announcement features Ben Affleck, Garth Brooks, Dakota Fanning, Morgan Freeman, Eva Mendes, Joaquin Phoenix, Jeremy Piven and Reese Witherspoon. The PSA encourages all viewers to go to to let their voices be heard on the need for affordable, quality health care and peace of mind about financial security.

Already, elected officials are taking notice of the Divided We Fail movement. So far, 160 Members of Congress have signed a pledge to commit to working in a bipartisan way to provide Americans with action and answers on health and lifetime financial security, or sent a letter in support.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

A short, two-bit TV ad... and you make it sound like "The Ten Commandments"! The AARP, to illustrate their "bipartisanship" (hold on to your wallet when they use THAT word!) got together a "cross-section" of celebrities to enact it. An old, ultra-liberal black guy, a middle-aged white country singer, a woman, a kid, etc. Why them in particular? Either they were otherwise unoccupied, were willing to work cheap... or both.

For SOME, having their images rehabilitated by appearing like decent, normal people (or kids) must have seemed like a fair bonus for a minor job. In other words, pure PR. The last thing Dakota needs to worry about is health insurance... until she starts playing musical rehabs a la Lindsey Lohan. That's when Kathy Griffin gets the last laugh.

stve ..
i think you can read between the lines unlike the rest of them ahaha.. its stell all about the money and fam they dont geve a rates ass about anyone but there self.hell if they cared they should use there power to correct the impurities of our society. and sex scnes in movies with kids is not one of them...


Morgan Freeman has ten movies in production with one being released this month. Eva Mendes has three movies in production. Joaquin Phoenix is currently filming with two others about to be released. Jeremy Piven has three movies and a HBO show in production. Dakota is currently filming with three others in production. All of them DONATED their time for what they considered a worthy cause. Exactly as you said they choose a cross section of personalities. A child, woman, man, middle aged man, older woman, and a red neck singer to appeal to people like yourself. If they needed a wanna be celebrity with nothing better to do they would have contacted someone like Paul Petersen.

Why would you call her dog a "little mongrel"? It's a beautiful dog and she is very lucky to have one of god's most loyal animals by her side.

BTW a half dozen new Hounddog publicity stills are now online. D-Day is getting closer.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

Celebrities appear on these things for the same primary reason that they work cheap in indie movies. It's called Public Relations. In other words, "exposure...exposure...exposure". And, when you're a kid actor, you do what your agent tells you. Some of these actors (or all!) might have believed in the ad's message as well. Fine. But "exposure" is always the key ingredient.

Of course, you know this.

And I see you still seem to think that "Hounddog" coming to DVD is some sort of personal vindication. Once again, it has long been predicted... and by me. That in no way alters the fact that the movie was evil in its making and will only lead to greater evils to come. That you can exult in works of child pornography and all that it entails is a sorry thing indeed.

By the way, I myself own a mixed-breed dog (i.e. "mongrel") whom I found abandoned in the park as a puppy. He's been my best dog ever. However, I didn't name him for a porn character... especially for one I might have been led to portray as a child! Some of us would consider that just a "bit" distasteful.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Aubrey:

Don't hold your breath waiting for Hollywood to do anything serious about child porn. Since "Hounddog", it's become part of their matinee!

According to my best source, "Hounddog" has been so extensively recut that it's virtually a different movie. Whether it's in any way coherent after that is another question! Of course, if they can remove enough from the film to render it merely tawdry rather than obscene, then it'll be easier to deflect criticism. That way, they can hope to show a profit over time. No one expects a lot of a direct-to-DVD film. But the names of Morse, Wright and, regrettably, Fanning will still draw the "impulse" buyers on the sleaze racks.

That hardly negates the means and motives of its making in the first place, naturally enough, or the fact that others will try where it failed. The salient point remains that a work of child pornography was presented openly to audiences without legal penalty. More WILL follow. What's important is that people not forget the original nature of this film, how it was made and what was done with children in that making.

You know, Aubrey. Looking back on all this, it still just astounds me that anyone who calls himself human could be anything less than appalled, disgusted and angry. It's a testimony to how far we've digressed as a society. When children (God help us!) are reduced to objects of licentious utility and profit- and OPENLY- then it means, quite simply, that no child in this country is safe from exploitation... or worse. And that this is actually defended by some...?!

Until people like Kampmeier, Osbrink, Penn (both of them!), Morse, Sanders and a number of others are doing hard time, as they so well deserve, no child is safe.


Kiddie Porn Movie Rocks Toronto as 'Feel-Awful' Film of the Year
Tuesday, September 11, 2007

By Roger Friedman


Aaron Eckhart
The worst and most offensive movie I’ve seen in a while has just had three screenings at the kooky Toronto Film Festival.

"Nothing Is Private" is written and directed by Alan Ball, the man behind "Six Feet Under" and "American Beauty." But it’s caused outrage here for its graphic depiction of sexual, mental and physical child abuse that verges quite literally on kiddie porn.

The movie — so odious that many people have simply walked out during the screenings — shows actor Aaron Eckhart having sex with a 13-year-old girl played by a now 19-year-old actress, Summer Bishil. The actress only turned 19 recently, however, which means that she was just on the cusp of 18 when she made the movie last year.

"Nothing Is Private" is based on a novel called "Towelhead" by Alicia Erian, and it very well may adhere to the book’s parameters. But books and films are very different.

In the movie version, the abuse heaped on 13-year-old Jazeera by her adult neighbor, her older teen boyfriend and her own father is shocking, ceaseless and disgusting. "Nothing Is Private" is the feel-awful movie of 2007.

RelatedColumn Archive
Kiddie Porn Movie Rocks Toronto as 'Feel-Awful' Film of the YearBritney Spears' Disaster: Dead Career BounceAlmost Everyone is Invited to Dannielynn's First Birthday PartyWalter Cronkite: Katie Couric Is Better Than Her ShowNo Sex Change for 'Matrix' Director Larry WachowskiFull-page Fox411 Archive
Eckhart, best known for roles in "Erin Brockovich" and "Thank You for Smoking" inexplicably agreed to this part. His character initially takes the girl’s virginity by fondling her, in a very graphic scene that leaves nothing to the imagination.

Later, he sodomizes her. In between, his pedophilia is played in such a way that the first and only thought is that we’re watching kiddie porn.

If Ball — who regularly toyed with conventions in his TV show and in "American Beauty" — thought all this would somehow illuminate the tragedy of child abuse, he was wrong. Too much is shown and too many lines are crossed for "Nothing Is Private" ever to be released by a major studio or distribution company to theatres. If nothing else, the endless "ick" factor involving nearly every character is a permanent obstacle.

It’s not like "Nothing Is Private" doesn’t have other problems as well. Jazeera has an Iraqi father (Peter Macdissi) who’s supposed to be a ladies' man but comes off swishier than Liberace. The father regularly hits Jazeera and threatens to beat her to death.

Her mother is a self-absorbed American (Maria Bello) who cares nothing for her child and loads her with more baggage than a porter at JFK.

And that’s not all. Jazeera, abandoned and then seduced by next-door neighbor Eckhart, has already been abused by Bello’s second husband.

She also falls into a kinky sexual relationship with a boy from school. That relationship is treated like all her others, blithely and almost without regard, as if this is the norm for any 13-year-old girl.

Remember when we thought the movie "Thirteen" with Evan Rachel Wood was scandalous? It seems like child’s play by comparison now.

Luckily, someone speaks up for Jazeera. That would be a pregnant neighbor played by Toni Collette and that character’s husband (Matt Letscher).

But by the time they realize something is wrong with Jazeera, the damage has been done and shown to us repeatedly and creepily. The couple provide a temporary safe haven for Jazeera, but it’s really too little, too late, at least for the audience.

"Nothing Is Private" comes within a year of "Hounddog," the film in which a 12-year-old girl (Dakota Fanning) is raped on screen. Of course, in that case it was really a 12-year-old. But something has definitely happened -- a change has occurred in the mindset of filmmakers who no longer see anything wrong with these depictions. How wrong they are.

Independent filmmaking is not supposed to be marked by a complete abandonment of taste, sensibility and propriety.

I don’t know if "Towelhead" is a good novel or not. But the way it’s been translated to film is certain to gross out even the most cutting-edge audiences. It’s simply unacceptable.


Roger Friedman is another nut case that works for Faux News that likes to spread gossip, rumors, and lies. Just goggle his name.


Moreover, for Roger Friedman, a Jew, to so incautiously swing these lies around like a bag full of angry cats is, in my opinion, deeply damaging to Jews everywhere who do not wish to be accused of being willing to stoop to any depth in order to maintain our position in society.

I am not sure that Roger Friedman meant to put such a blatant factual lie in print. I am sure his editors would have stopped it had they known. But Friedman failed to do the most basic job of being a journalist… checking out the facts. Instead, he lazily went to one internet source, apparently unaware of two basic facts: 1. Ticket sales websites are not well designed for long-range presales. 2. There is no movie ticket sales website that offers tickets to all the theaters in any major market.

It took me all of two minutes to find out that Roger Friedman's facts were incorrect. I went to two web sites and made one phone call.


"According to my best source, "Hounddog" has been so extensively recut that it's virtually a different movie."

Which blog site did you get this lie from??

The movie is basically the same as the version released at Sundance just cleaned up a bit. They fixed the transition problems between scenes, the sound problems, and cleaned up the crappy lighting and focus problems. The scenes are basically the same as they were when filmed. The storyline has been changed.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Aubrey: Thanks! I've seen that review by Friedman and, as always, he writes hard-nosed, take-no-prisoners columns. What makes him different from the standard Hollywood "psychophant" reviewer is that, because he works for Fox, he's not restricted from offering moral judgements on Industry deviance. That's why the "Hollywood inclined" (like "Me", here) despise him so utterly. Nothing ticks them off more than anyone DARING to suggest that their inherent perversity (especially toward kids) is not an expression of laudable artistry. Stripped of that false justification, they are held up to the world for what they are... morally bankrupt criminals in a corrupt subculture who can and will prey on children for profit. Thank God for Roger, Bill, Sean and Fox News in general.

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me": In other words, my source was pretty accurate! However, they still had to face the big problem. There's just only so much you can do with a film that's not only inept, but based solely on the utmost vileness with children. That movie has been so cut and pasted since the summer of 2006, you could probably get more continuity from a scrapbook! I wonder if anything's even left of the infamous molestation scene that sparked much of the protest. Even if it's gone, however, the rest remains. The Fannings and Mz Osbrink had better pray that the DVD never goes beyond the back of the porn racks. If "Hounddog" attracts another round in public inquiry, then their little "golden goose" will likely have laid her last egg.

can anyone tell WTF DAKOTA FANNING is looking at in the still photo on fron page himmm
durgs maby or ???
she playing a hooker there or what push is a stuped movie dee is a brate count down to her frist porn movie at the age of 18

O Hell..
come on.. i had a look see in to this i was right about the movie push. ahaha dee is only 13 yr old and a want to be hooker.
o im sorry maby its the so called responsible pepole around her called pinpen
money hungry jerks. hell if they had it there way and from the way it looks dee will be like a skydiven octopus lags straight up i swear to god she will ahah. dee will be in rehab or mentel hospital by the time she 18 or 21 saying i dident do anything its just acting.ahaha or all her fans well be werrying about here Well-being.
hollywood is pimpen kids for money.

Steven Mark Pilling

It seems like every film she's been announced for (or removed from) since "Hounddog" only re-enforces the vision of a badly used and psychologically damaged kid who's being further used for whatever roles (and money) can still be squeezed out of her name. My God, there are so many consciousless panderers that should have long since been in jail over this. May this Christmas and New Year see not only her rescue from Hollywood's perdition, but those of her endangered peers as well. God help the children!

O hell..
dakota wants to be a hooker sell her soul
live like a R-rated tramp to her right now all she knows that what she is doing is fun and she gets payed for it shes told its just actting out side of her pimps in hollywoold ahaha well i gess it save to say she dont play with dolls anymore ..
these blood sucking pigs go after the young and pimp them out the law dont care it wont be long tell shes fully nude in her rolls
just like all the rest of them feeding the sick f**Ks what 4 of her movies have somthing to do with rape nudy sex durges with no end in stie

one more dee is casting in somthing about being lost in the applelashes mountain..
has not ben set for filmming yet or she has not singed on yet but they did say she was up for it

lol... gess what gos on
i have to take this there humm ok
is there hookers in applelashes mountain??
ok that was rong but i gess she tired of the pigs tuching her and rapen her hahaha
now she going swimming in the applelashes mountain she was found by some guy and stays with him ahaha swimming sleeping and more??? i woner with dee its going to be a bad thing with a track like hers who knows

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear Posters:

It's been announced that Dakota Fanning is being seriously reconsidered for a role in the long-delayed production of "The Secret Lives Of Bees". The film's synopsis bears some commonality with that of "Hounddog" as it applies to yet another heavy melodrama about "abused children". As to whether it will approach the pornographic vileness of "Hounddog" remains to be determined. However, the "Hounddog" experience has taught us that the mention of abused children in a modern plotline is often a tip-off for depravity against kids.

If this is the case here, then Dakota faces a now sorrowfully familiar ordeal. Since her moral downfall, she's had little else to put on her resume. What's also concerning is that "Bees" will likely film at Screen Gems Studios in Wilmington. Therefore, little Miss Fanning may not only face additional degradation, but endure it in the very place where her initial fall from Grace occured!

This should surprise no one. Wilmington has proven a safe haven for the sexual exploitation of children in films. "Hounddog" proved that like little else could. And who better to star in possibly depraved children's picture than Dakota? What else has she been rendered good for? I must say, though, that returning this child to the scene of the crime like this- and for whatever purpose- is a crime in itself. Hollywood not only has no morals, but no pity toward its tools, however young.


You guys really need to get a life. She is not playing a prostitute in the movie Push. Once again a picture of her is being taken out of context. There is nothing obscene about that picture unless you let your imagination run wild. It's going to be a kid friendly rip off of the show Heroes.

"The Secret Lives Of Bees" is based on a kids book available at most elementary schools. If it's good enough for 12-14 year old kids to read then what's the big deal that a 13 year old will act in the movie? It's no more harmful than her part in "War of the Worlds" or "Hide and Seek" so get a grip.

As far as coming back to Wilmington, why not? She had a good time while she was here and made a lot of friends. If she wants to be traumatized all she has to do is read your comments, lies, and rumors.

i gess id let my daughter look at a pines
for a mill, or act like a hooker
round around on set in her underwear
jump in bed with a louser get felt up
smoke and do gurges and drink her ass off
to get the part and the money and then have ass kissers perade her around O look at me
im ok so its ok for all of you to do it
is this the missage ?? lol like she little miss dakota realy gevs a rates ass about what we say here ill bet when she did hounddog she dident think to do her research you think she sat down and talked to a rape victim a real one lol one who is not usen little girls and boy to make money to get there point across or to make a statemet hey Y the F**k dont they geve any or all of everything they make off this sick moive to the real victims who suffver from the sick f**ks that like these kinds of movies

ok me ..
I have a life a real one i dident sell it to the highest bider i dont have to jump in bed to get payed or dorp to my knees to get the part or bend over to get the boness
Hollywood can kiss my ass LA/NY/VA..

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me":

I honestly hope you're right about "The Secret Lives of Bees" being non-exploitive. But, if experience is any guide at all, one has to look upon this with a big grain of salt. Besides, the fact that this book is allowed for middle schoolers means nothing. A lot of books are peddled to children these days that would have gotten their authors locked up in days not long agone. Movies, too. And I am only too aware of what the Hollywood definition of "good times" and "good friends" means. I find those expressions when applied to children to be nothing less than sinister.

Once again; Dakota Fanning is liable to be led back to the scene of one of the greatest crimes in motion picture history... a crime to which she was a major tool. It's hard to imagine that she will do so without trepidity. Not, at least, if they've left anything human in her at all.


Christoph Sanders will be starting his new reacquiring role on CBS's hit show, Ghost Whisperer, next Friday 1/11/2008.


Maybe Tre can arrange a radio interview with Dakota or her mom. Wouldn't that be interesting!! Call some of your contacts that gave you all that great inside info about her being nude and ask if they can arrange an interview. I would love to hear their side of the story.

ok birnety sis is prago at 16 yrs old and a much older man got her that way some one in
hollywood her borfend siad hed help with the baby but its not his
Y the fuck is this ass nine not in jail

it was the production manager from the movie she stared in much older guy got a 16 yr old child prago she 3 muth her boyfriend siad hed help with her baby Y the fuck dont the low life that got her prago step up Y is he not in jail Y do the hollywood fucks do this to the kids humm.. ya im piss off out here in the real world we go to jial for that shit


What do you expect from a Disney star? Look at her former Disney star sister. Look at all the other Disney stars. They are all screwed up. They should have did the sex and violence movies then they would be award winning directors/actors/producers like Jodie Foster, Brook Shields, and soon Dakota Fanning.

These movies didn't make these kids bad, it make them rich and famous which is exactly what they wanted out of life. What more could anyone ask for?

not to be taken advantage of that what they know what they did to her what you think little birt ask for it like ill geve you this for that i dont think so he the ass nibe took advantage her ya id say she got what she wanted money and fam puls the part
but he the ass nine took more then she wanted to geve lol hey little brit take that ass hole for everythinhg hes got y is this stiry not on the front page hummm...

lol tipo im in the dark in my turck

Steven Mark Pilling

Dear "Me": "What more could anyone ask for?", did you ask? How about a healthy, decent and truely productive life? Do you think that all that fame and fortune has brought them any true happiness? Look at Britney Spears being carried away to a mental ward. Look at Lindsey Lohan choking on her own vomit. Look at Dakota (still a child!) being pushed into the same life of misery. Can anyone doubt that they would have been far happier in the long run if they had stayed at home with parents who hadn't become crazed with their "good" fortune in Hollywood?

The comments to this entry are closed.