Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Child Star Controversy: No More Make Believe, But It's Still Only Acting

People love controversy; just look at the media hype surrounding Anna Nicole’s sudden death and quest for the father of the baby or Britney spears recent delve into insanity which culminated in shaving her head and checking herself into rehab. One can’t escape from the myriad of coverage both of these events are receiving because in the entertainment field a quick recipe for instant media hype is to add one part controversial subject matter and one part big star and instantly; guaranteed success. Think Boys Don’t Cry, Monster, and Pretty Baby, which were all controversial films that gained each respective actor acclaim. However, when the actor in question is a child and the subject matter is sexually risqué, it leads to a whole other controversy. Two Hollywood tots currently creating quite a stir are Dakota Fanning and Danielle Radcliffe. Fanning’s film Hounddog which recently opened in Sundance (this years logo depicted above) contains a brief rape scene which sent conservatives all over the country into a tizzy and Radcliffe who is set to appear in London’s West End Stage production of “Equus,” opening February 27 has parents everywhere in shock. These provocative performances have created quite a debate, begging the question when it comes to child actors, what is too much?

America’s sweetheart Dakota Fanning charmed audiences in Dreamer and Charlotte’s Web (family friendly film poster shown below to the right)and warmed hearts in I am Sam, making a name and an résumé many actors five times her age would admire. She is cute and likeable, yet it is her intellect and maturity people often remark on, making it difficult to remember that she is still very young; young and acting out a rape scene, which is why there is such animosity surrounding the film. Hounddog tells the story of a young motherless girl living in Alabama in the 1950s (Fanning shown with co-star Robin Wright Penn below to the left). Filmmaker Deborah Kampmeier explains that she did not set out to make a controversial film, there were just “so many stories I needed to tell in Hounddog, about motherlessness, the cycle of abuse, the triumph of this girl’s spirit, and the power of female sexuality,” which by nature can be quite controversial subjects. However, conservatives have been outraged with the film claiming not only is the depiction disturbing and encouraging child-rape, but also that acting in this will have a very strong emotional impact on Fanning. Critic Kevin Jackson of the Christian Post claims that depicting child rape is “taking the worst parts of human behavior and putting them up on the big screen and desensitizing the general population to them.” However as the scene was never shot from start to finish, but in pieces, where Fanning was in a body suit the whole time, it was never an environment that simulated an actual rape, explains Kampmeier. In regards to the second concern that Fanning might suffer mental distress, there is some validity to this claim. “Pretending leads to reality. Intellectually, kids feel it, live it, express it. Children can’t shrug it off,” explains Paul Peterson, former child actor an active advocate in the rape debate. However, regardless of whether it will affect the young starlet or not, it is a decision for Fanning, her parents, and managers alone, not everybody else in this country who has an opinion. It is Dakota’s life and it is not as if she is going out and telling anybody else how to live theirs. People need some perspective as they get all wrapped up in this issue, because Hounddog is just a film, one person’s artistic vision on screen, so if someone does not like it, luckily America is a country where no one is being forced to watch it. Yet the controversy does not end in Park City but continues to the other side of the Atlantic, where another beloved child star is making waves in London.

Harry Potter’s Danielle Radcliffe will appear nude on stage in ‘Equus” and racy promotional photos (one promo shown to the right) have popped up everywhere making it very clear that Harry has grown up. Parents are in outrage that a character their children look up to will appear nude in a sexual encounter on stage and want the risky advertising photos taken down. This just seems completely ludicrous, as Radcliffe is a 17-year-old more than capable and mature of handling a nude scene. The play deals with very deep and dark issues where the “script requires Radcliffe’s character to strip to the buff in one pivotal scene.” It is not as if the director just wanted some extra publicity and decided it would really make people go crazy to see Radcliffe nude; it is an important and crucial part of the role, just as Fanning’s character’s rape was. Critics of Radcliffe’s role are complaining that while movies have ratings, theaters do not, and children who want to see their idol live will be able to even with this questionable material. However, it is not up to the London stages to keep children from inappropriate content, but up to the parents. Furthermore, with all the violence and language children see in the media every day, why are people getting so worked up over a little nudity; the natural human form? The whole situation seems ridiculous and brave young actors like Radcliffe should not have to bear the brunt of culture’s taboo around s-e-x.

Another thing to consider is that these young actors are not choosing roles to create debate, but to further their careers. However controversial the roles may be, they are roles that will push Fanning and Radcliffe’s career to the next level. Many childhood actors have gained great acclaim from risky roles including Brooke Shield’s in Pretty Baby (shown first on the left in the film and below currently with her two children) and Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver. Both seemed to come off the movies with little emotional damage, and had skyrocketing careers after the films. In regards to Fanning, Cindy Osbrink, Fanning’s agent says that Hounddog was, “Something that really challenged her talent. Hounddog was one of the best experiences of her life, a story that needs to be told, and she tells it with her soul as no one else can.” This role will show producers and directors that Fanning is more than just a cute filler, that she wants more challenging material, and can handle it. Radcliffe is also in the midst of a transition. He will soon be done with Harry Potter movies and needs a career after that, one that does not involve brooms or wizards, so showcasing his ability in a radically different way will help people start to see him as more than just Harry. West End Stage is “London’s equivalent to Broadway” and it is incredible that Radcliffe has gotten this part. He must be nervous enough about his much-awaited performance without having to worry about upset parents and alienating his fan base. It is a fantastic move for his career and real fans should support him.

Reflecting on all this mess, one has to ask themselves why people care so much about the decisions these young people are making for their own lives? I think that people see that by banning these very public depictions, it somehow sends a message or makes them believe they have helped to stop the real issue. Stopping Fanning and Hounddog from playing is not going to stop child sexual abuse, and if someone wants to make a movie about it, it is a story that deserves to be told just as much as any. Are parents really against a 17-year-old actor doing a nude scene for a very prestigious play, or is it that they are afraid to realize that their own children are growing up and will soon be having sex too. Getting mad at Radcliffe or at Fanning’s team is much easier than simply dealing with these realizations. People need to remember at the end of the day, it is these actor’s lives and decisions, and they are in fact acting. Instead of worrying about the effects of such performances, maybe people should be more concerned with the issues in real life more than what is being performed on some small stage in London or screen in Park City.

No comments: