Cuties
 

Soooooooo this is quite the hot Potato at the moment, setting the Internet on fire. What are MoFo thoughts?

"Cuties (French: Mignonnes) is a 2020 French coming-of-age comedy-drama film written and directed by French-Senegalese Maïmouna Doucouré in her feature directorial debut. The film stars Fathia Youssouf, Médina El Aidi-Azouni, Esther Gohourou, Ilanah Cami-Goursolas and Maïmouna Gueye. The plot revolves around a French-Senegalese girl with a traditional Muslim upbringing who is caught between traditional values and Internet culture. According to the filmmakers, the film is intended to criticise the hypersexualisation of pre-adolescent girls"

I for one won't be watching as it's not something I find particularly interesting, and I don't like the thought of me, a 36 year old man sat at home watching some 11 year old's dance about in a somewhat sexual way.

However I do think the rage mob is going a bit over the top, but is their rage justified? I can't work it out.

Re: Cuties
 

Not paid any attention to it tbh, as far as I knew it was a movie about dancing kids.
Like, High School Musical for toddlers.

I guess people just get their asses in a knot over anything these days.

Re: Cuties
 

It won 60 awards during the film festival season.

Comment on it this morning on my friends Facebook post, "They should get the directors, producers and anyone behind the scenes and throw them straight on death row the filthy nonces". (made by someone I don't know).

Re: Cuties
 

that movie need to get banned

I watched it just to see what the fuss was about. I can't say I loved it, and I can't say I hated it either. I will provide a quick review of it later in the Rate the Last Movie You Saw thread.

Re: Cuties
 

No chance I'll be watching the movie, but the outrage against it seems excessive. The vulnerabilities are out there everywhere for young girls unfortunately, so I guess we should shut down all dance studios/gymnastics classes/etc for females until they turn 18.

Re: Cuties
 

It's nuanced, which is why people are fighting about it so fruitlessly: because the correct position is not easily summarized or clearly to one side.

It's obvious people who assumed the film was glorifying this stuff before they saw it jumped the gun. They hadn't seen the film or considered that it might be depicting something to expose it as unacceptable. Now that the film is out, we can see this is true, but we can also see that the filmmakers probably depicted too much in the service of that.

Re: Cuties
 

Whoooooo. Try to have a nuanced conversation with most of my facebook contacts. Trying to explain the movie may be more a criticism of the real world scenarios that so many parents support, if not create, and I'm likely to see my house in flames. I am always curious though, how people who run through the town with pitchforks and torches are usually the same people that support similar patterns with gradeschool pageants, cheerleader moves, or local dance groups. Odd balance, to me. I get the outrage of the movie. Not when what's depicted happens already and no one seems bothered by the reality of it. Just a movie about it. Very disappointing to me the complete lack of self reflection a lot of times.

Re: Cuties
 

Yeah, agreed. That said, I saw some clips and commentary from people who did see it, and boy...sure seems like they lost the plot a little in how they depicted a thing they're trying to criticize.

Re: Cuties
 

The outrage around this has been ridiculous and it's clear that any legitimate concerns about the content of the film were quickly hijacked to further what I see as an anti-liberal culture war by online conspiracy theorists, groups like Qanon.

It's disappointing that their aims were easily met and criticism spread like wildfire through social media, I've seen popular figures share inaccuracies about the film, people sharing false facts and scenes, fake screenshots and so on. Lots of US political candidates sharing false outrage having never watched the film, not just limited to "the right" either with people like Tulsi Gabbard playing into the populist narrative and jumping on something she clearly hasn't seen.

Some people when called out on whether they've seen it, reduce their criticisms to the fact that any depiction of underage girls dancing in a film is itself exploitation. Whether that is or not should be the actual debate. For the record, I don't think it does - from what I can tell, I still need to see it myself and I'm largely going off what I've read from critics I trust.

I really enjoyed reading Richard Brody's review and it makes me interested to see the film...

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/th...-wing-campaign

So yeah, this isn't part of some American Hollywood Liberal agenda to normalise paedophilia. It's a French film by a French-Senegalese director. How about we speak to the people involved in the film and see what they think? Yeah Netflix's marketing was terrible, but I honestly think it's embarrassing and a sad reflection of the current political discourse especially in the US that so many major figures are willing to play into this populist attack on the film.

I accused a friend this morning of getting his pitchfork out on this and other issues :)

Facebook is the modern version of villagers wanting to burn witches at the stake.

I used the analogy that it's like an anti racism film being made where characters repeatedly use the N word, to show how bad it is, and the trailer being all N this, N that without context, making black people very angry without having seen the film.

I wonder if Netflix will make a movie like this again? Probably not.

Inherently? No. But from what I've seen it's difficult to avoid the idea that it goes a bit far in that direction. I can link to some fairly substantive commentary/clips on this if that helps, but it seems clear that the film does beyond whatever amount of depiction would be strictly necessary to make its point.

Anyway, I agree that should be the debate. But now we're in the normal partisan wedge issue cycle of people overreacting and then other people reflexively taking the other side to counteract the overreacting and at that point the issue is just another cultural war/political proxy.

Re: Cuties
 

(oops. Yoda broke my reply order!)
:)

@gandalf26
In all honesty, I think they will. They've gotten a LOT of free advertisement out of this. I'm curious how many people have watched this movie now, only because of the outrage? I'm curious too, subscriber numbers and how that has been affected, if at all.

Well, as some may know I thrive on controversy so obviously I watched Cuties the day it came to Netflix. I didn't follow the premature rage very closely but some of it spilled (at least in the form of humoristic acknowledgment) to places where I go (I wasn't even aware of the film before that).

As expected, the presentation of the movie by haters is completely off. I presume that the vast majority of these people haven't seen the film but have formed their opinion based on a poor marketing campaign and the hate videos. I guess people need their hysteria.

Like I said in my short review in "rate the last movie you saw" thread, I didn't particularly like the film (I need my coming of age movies to have likable characters but I hated all the girls here). Technically it's solid and it has some seriously great acting (especially by the kids).

I wonder how low IQ is needed to see the film as praise to pedophilia, though (and I'm not even talking about these girls being pubescent)? Yes, Cuties has (a lot of) provocative material that's meant to make the viewer uncomfortable. It's about being a kid in a world where media/entertainment is so saturated with sex (and its conflict with a conservative Muslim background). The girls in the movie do nothing else than replicate what they see in their magazines, music videos, etc. It rubs this "children imitating the mainstream entertainment" imagery against the viewer's face quite relentlessly but leaves the conclusions to the viewer (good film making to me).

Cuties wants to say something. It needs its imagery to relay the message. I firmly believe that the people most enraged by it are the ones who feel seduced or aroused by those images, and want to blame anything but themselves of that troubling realization (like all those anti-gay pastors who've been caught having sex with men).

Yeah. It's (once again) a saddening proof that there are idiots on both sides of that fence. The same people ranting about the cancel culture are now screaming "CANCEL NETFLIX!"

Re: Cuties
 

I watched it to see what the fuss was all about.

I liked it. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it either. I felt it was a decent exploration into a young girl's experience of growing up too fast in a world of social media where all of our mistakes are up there forever. It was uncomfortable, incredibly so in some cases, but part of that was definitely because things like this happen in real life. Look at crap like Dance Moms, beauty pageants etc.

Was the poster Netflix used distasteful? Absolutely. Was the film exploitative? No, I don't think it was.

How do we know what people like Tulsi Gabbard have and haven't seen?

Re: Cuties
 

Tulsi Gabbard called it child pornography I believe, which it is not.

Fair point. I was just pushing back against assumptions about what other people have and haven't seen, when we can't really know.

I haven't seen it, but my first inkling was whether or not it was truly exploitative, or whether it was trying to make a statement about the media-infused childhoods young kids face these days, and the inevitable influence on their world view. This is something i will need to worry about in the future, as the father of a young girl.

Can we hold Netflix responsible for their marketing campaign?


There's a world of difference between the original posters of the movie and the ones created by Netflix. Almost a deliberate attempt by Netflix to create a controversy, which in turn would grab more attention.


PS: I haven't seen the movie.

Re: Cuties
 

Well I feel like people should not be allowed to judge a movie before they see it in context. Otherwise they are just pretending to be psychic and judging something they do not know of.

I don't have Netflix now, so I cannot watch it at the moment, but when I read some of the comments about the movie, it's still hard to judge what people are talking about, when it's taken out of context. For example, some comments say that one of the movies bad scenes is when an 11 year old, shows another character her breast.

But do we actually see a breast or is it just implied. Things like that make a huge difference but the comments I've come across do not go into such specifics, which I think are important.

Also, the movie did get a 90 on rottentomatoes, so that must mean something. But some people online have pointed out that the only reason why the filmmakers are praising the movie, is because the director is a female, and that if the filmmaker was male, they would tear it apart. Is that true though, and the critics are perhaps giving it a pass because of the director, rather than the movie itself?

How are you going to enforce that? The Thought Police? or maybe the Dream Police:p

Yes it does, and you make a good point. (I haven't seen the movie so I don't know what is or isn't shown)

It means nothing, at least to me.

Yup, if a man directed it, he would be called a pedophile by social media types and the film wouldn't have gotten released (IMO of course, cause I'm not psychic🙂)...Image if Roman Polanski had directed!

I only saw a quick clip on the news and I didn't like what I saw, but that's just how my mind works. I won't watch it, and given my taste, why would I? Someone else might view it differently, so if someone else wants to watch it, I don't care. Why would I?

Oh I'm not going to do anything to enforce it of course, I am just giving my opinion :).

But let's say the breast is not shown and it's just implied that one kid showed another her breast.

In the movie Jersey Girl (2004), two kids show each other their private parts to compare what they look like. And that hardly got any controversy, and you don't see Kevin Smith being called a pedophile for people for putting that in one of his movies, to compare...

If I can't even pronounce the director's name, I'm not watching the movie. Especially since the director is probably a child molester who searches the internet for child porn.

There are female pedophiles too. Sex offender registries are full of them.

No doubt that there is, but that wasn't my point.

I know:)

You ought to watch Cuties and post back on what you think of it, I'd like to know what you thought of it.

A lot of judgement considering none have watched it yet.
Social media types have indeed attacked the film, and by extension the director, although they have stopped short of calling her a pedophile, they are accusing her of Sexually exploiting Young girls. They’ve absolutely called for Netflix to remove it or risk being “canceled”.
It seems the message behind it is being overlooked, and although it pushes it the envelope from what I’ve read, one must remember that depiction doesn’t necessarily equal endorsement.*
Until I watch it, I can’t render a verdict.


*final line stolen from a critics review

Oh thank you :). Well I might get a Netflix free trial and check it out, it's just haven't had much time lately because of work. So hopefully it will stay on long enough for me to.

On another note, the title also sounds like it's in poor taste, which probably hasn't helped the controversy. I read in French the title means cute. I am not sure how the title comes off in their culture, but a movie is about 11 year old girls coming to terms with their sexuality, calling the movie 'Cuties', is probably not the best idea.

Another thing is, the movie does not seem to have been submitted for an MPAA rating, at least not that I could find so far. So I wonder, does the movie have NC-17 probable material in, and that is why they didn't want to submit, since audiences do not like seeing that rating. Could that be why...

Re: Cuties
 

Cuties isn't even the name of the film. America is quite possibly the dumbest country in the world. There is exactly one t*t in the film. One. And it's not clear how old the girl was because she was in a video the main girls were watching. All I can say is... if this is what it's like for kids today. Especially girls? Wow.

You make it sound like this very thing doesn’t exist in the real word. This film represents something that seriously is already out there, and is in all likely hood satirizing it.
I’m pretty PC, but not for the sake of being PC. If people are going to criticize it for its risqué theme and demand it be removed , then we’re dangerously close to censorship.

Re: Cuties
 

Well the French title is Mignonnes which means cute/cuties.

But yeah, I think at least some of the reason this has gotten so big or why people have such a hatred of it is because people don't/won't realise that there is an uncomfortable truth to it. Makes me very glad I grew up just before stuff like Snapchat and Instagram really took off. Although I don't miss my Blackberry

"Cuties" is the name of their dance troupe. There's a flash of a girl's breast. IMO, no possible NC-17 content and no reason to submit it for reasons discussed here concerning other films.

Re: Cuties
 

The definition I saw just said it meant cute or pretty. But I guess it can mean cuties too. I retract my statement. America is way smarter than I give it credit for. Sorry about that.

Oh okay, so they show a breast for like a third of a second basically?

Re: Cuties
 

Well as far as the idea is that the audience is uncomfortable with the movies truth, a couple of reviews for it, said that they have no problem with the subject matter and the story, it's just why show the dirty dancing and twirking butts in close up shots... Could that be it then? If they decided to show it in a wide shot, and not move the camera in close, that would have made all the difference?

Re: Cuties
 

If the filmmakers wanted to explore the sexualization of children, why not make a documentary on the topic instead of...sexualizing children in your fictionalized story? It's not like these are older girls playing younger kids like they usually do, these are simply 11 year old kids. I dunno. I haven't seen the flick, doubt I'll watch it though.

Re: Cuties
 

Very Nice

My opinion exactly.

I looked up the final dance scene on YouTube. And even if what they want to say is important it just doesn’t work the way they do it. A doc would be much more powerful and they wouldn’t have to recreate these scenes because there’s already plenty of beauty contests and the likes out there for young children, which you could easily cover without having to make a weird music video set pieces thingy with 11 year olds dancing like that.

So you’re saying you’d rather see actual footage of it rather then fictional footage......

I fail to see how it would have made any difference. Either way it explores the sexualization of adolescent girls, only one is fictional.
I get the issue is using young girls to portray it, and it makes people uncomfortable, but that’s probably the point.
Dance troupes for younger girls often are guilty of such things, and the movie is perhaps asking what effect it has on them as a result while also holding a magnifying glass towards the society That does so.

Of course. Why wouldn’t I? It makes way more sense than fictionalizing it and making girls do it all over again just to make a statement. I see no need for a feature film like that.

There’s plenty of disturbingly weird stuff going on already on full display about children being put in make up, walking catwalks and making suggestive dance moves. You don’t need to recreate it. And you don’t need to set it up. It’s already happening. To me it’s way more powerful to uncover that than just to make up a story yourself inspired by those types of things.

These people find what they are doing completely normal. I would love somebody to actually dig down into that twisted world and make people see what is already happening but not enough people know of or really understand enough.

I understand what you’re saying now. *
I agree that a doc would really be interesting, but I don’t think it would matter either way.
If people are offended by a fictional portrayal, I’d imagine they’d be even more offended by the real thing

^ Well said, I agree with both of these replies concerning this matter.

Perhaps. But that would only be great. At least they would be offended like “this is disgusting that this is actually going on in our world” instead of talking more about the fact that someone made a movie with underage actresses. That seems to be what most are upset about. That they made a movie like this. It kind of clouds the important subject matter, which wouldn’t be the case with a doc because their disgust or anger would be directly about actual footage and actual people in actual contests and whatnot. It would be a discussion about the real thing. The real problem. Not the movie talking about the problem through fiction.

Most of the comments on the dance video on YouTube is about how the director has the camera lingering on their butts and the likes. About how the director made the movie look. Again, if I want to I can definitely understand what the director tries to do. But to me it seems like the discussion and/or backlash this movie is getting is not as channeled and focused as it could and should have been and thereby tells me the director didn’t really get the full potential out of the subject matter awareness with his movie.

Re: Cuties
 

I've been following this for a few days.. I don't understand the double-standards. One minute, one group complains about women being exploited, but this same group doesn't seem to care that little girls are being exploited. I would never watch this garbage. But I'm not a person who wants anything I don't like canceled; I just wish there was better taste, and better movies, but I'm not holding my breath.

People are acting like the film has 6 year old children performing sexual acts on adults, full nudity and everything.

It's absurd. Irregardless of if the film is in bad taste or not.

Clickbait culture dude. I think it's largely the poster that they used for US audiences.

People choose rage and loose their sh1t over the stupidist things

Re: Cuties
 

Well when it comes to people asking for Netflix to be shut down as a result of this movie, I talked about the movie with a friend of mine, who is in the modeling business and knows more about this stuff. I am not denying any exploitation of children and I agree that it is, based on the trailers and clips I have seen.

However, my friend says that since the movie is about a dance competition, that these dance competitions for 11 year olds exist in real life, and that she doesn't understand why people think of the movie as exploitation, but people have been totally okay with exploiting children in these dance competitions for years, and no one has ever tried to get people to boycott and cancel the real dance competitions.

So she says that people are being double standard-ish on it as a result, since it's okay to watch in a contest, but not in a movie, if she has a point?

I haven't seen Cuties, but it sounds like it might be wrapping it's awareness message in a self serving sensationalized wrapper....doing just what it warns against, so as to turn a buck.

I wonder how Cuties compares to the infamous Child Bride (1938) a film that presented itself as a social warning message about the dangers of child brides in rural parts of America, while 'treating' the audiences to a peep show of a 12 year old girl who's topless in one scene.

I don't think there's that much comparison between the two (except the overblown reactions to both). Child Bride doesn't leave much for the viewer to think (if you accept its actually against the child marriages, it puts its message in plain words) while Cuties shows the world as it is (at least according to the movie) and wants the viewer to reach conclusion on their own.

And like @ironpony above said, Cuties brings to screen something that's already out there and hasn't caused much outrage until shown on Netflix fiction. It's not exploitative in the same sense as Child Bride's side boop or bare-butted swimming of a pre-teen girl. And both of these movies are way less daring than the full nudity of Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby (I obviously don't have issues with any of them, I try to be consistent with my defense of freedom of speech/art).

Absolutely agree with you. It seems to be an issue of people simply “clutching their pearls”.
Maybe the director , a woman btw which hardly matters but should still be pointed out, could have not lingered on these scenes, but I get her point of doing so.
I’m rarely offended of such matters, and despite having not seen it, can’t help but feel too many are judging it by the Poster and subject matter before having even watched it. Preconceived notions and all that.
It’s probably meant to make people uncomfortable, as I mentioned previously, because the director wants to shine a light on how the girls are sexualized at an early age during these dance troupes. Uncomfortable with it? Sure, but if they’re so uncomfortable with it, rather then attack the messenger, why not go after the industry portrayed?

Re: Cuties
 

Let's start with the boundaries:

Does everyone agree it can be potentially reasonable to depict a disturbing/bad thing in order to expose it, and therefore prevent more of it in the long run?

Similarly, does everyone agree that, in doing the above, you can depict too much of it? Especially when, in this case, the depiction is itself an example of the thing, IE: depicting animal cruelty is not engaging in it, but depicting pre-pubescent kids dancing suggestively is itself an example of the thing it's trying to stop.

Yes and yes.
I haven’t watched it yet, so I can’t say for sure if this film quite falls in the second category yet.

Re: Cuties
 

It amazes me how many people are making conclusions - either against or in defense of - this movie without having actually seen it. I don't understand why people are so up in arms about the movie itself. Every comment or video I've seen from someone who has been outraged has been someone who hasn't seen the movie or only watched a few minutes. It's ridiculous. I do get why people have a problem with the image that Netflix chose to use originally (which is NOT the official film poster), though.

Also, was waiting for Yoda to pop in and offer his opinion. What took you so long?!

Yup.
Yup again.

I think Ironpony is onto something with this thought from one of his post:
I can see what you're saying...it's not the subject matter per say, but how the director chooses to frame it.

I've not seen the movie so I have no idea what the director does or doesn't do. But any director can film his/her subject in many different ways: it can be done titillating, or shocking, or cold and dispassionate or humorous, etc.

Yes, obviously.

Maybe, but I don't think it's nearly as clear as the above.

You haven't seen the movie, I gather?

1) The girls aren't pre-pubescent

2) It's not about their suggestive dancing, but about sexualized entertainment and media (including social media), and how they affect the world view and behavior of children (at least that's how I interpret it). I guess you could say it's not about sexualizing children but about children getting sexualized influences they may not be ready to handle and understand properly. It's important (I think) that in the film the girls sexualize themselves based on the role models offered by media, everyone else treats them like kids.

Cool. :up:

What's the "above"? I'm not really trying to defend any specific person's reaction. I just assume people have reacted in unreasonable or over-the-top ways, from places of pure ignorance. This is about establishing the most reasonable argument possible and addressing that, instead of the low-hanging fruit of silly people.

Correct. And I found myself arguing with people who were mad about it before release. That said, I watched a pretty lengthy review with lots of clips and context, and some of those clips, I can't really fathom being necessary even to the best-intentioned example I mentioned earlier. I don't think it's plausible that something like 20-30 seconds of close-ups on kids gyrating in overtly sexual ways is necessary to make the point.

Let's not really litigate this, or parse the significance of that line, and just agree that they're of an age where overtly sexualizing them isn't appropriate. Do we agree there?

Yes, that seems to be the point. And I'm not disputing it! The question I'm posing is, even granting that this is what the film is about, and even granting the intentions here are pure, are the depictions of the behavior appropriate and necessary to the end of making that point?

To summarize, do the ends justify the means?
I know I couldn’t answer that without watching the film proper.

Re: Cuties
 

Watch this movie make top 10 in the all-time 100 list coming up. Mid January expect a press release stating that that was their only intention the whole time, thanking all the social media hits for pushing their dream to reality.

The "above" referred to your first "claim" which I agreed with.

I believe they are.

Perhaps that could be it. When it comes to how things are portrayed, for example, I have a friend who finds Schindler's List to be exploitative because the cinematography was too goodlooking and too sensational looking, for such dark, true subject matter. I guess that is just an example, how something like cinematography or shots, can make something look exploitative to someone.

Ah, got it.

You think it won't be disturbing enough if it's only shown from a distance or for a few seconds?

It's not about being a certain level of disturbing, but showing how the show biz role models apply to children. In my opinion, it requires imagery that properly imitates the influencing material. So, in a way, yes, the watered-down versions wouldn't work in the context of the film.

I'd have to disagree with your friend about Schindler's List being exploitative because the cinematography was too good looking. It wasn't that good looking and it certainly wasn't overly artsy or stylish. In fact I'd say the cinematography style matched the austere feeling of the movie.

And in the same way I'd be curious if the cinematography style matched the tone of the story line in Cuties. Though I'm not real interested in seeing the movie myself.

Re: Cuties
 

Yeah I agree, I love Schindlier's List. He said that film noir lighting in a lot of the scenes is too stylistic for such a true tragedy movie. But I love the movie and no complaints from me.

Mirrors can be brutality confronting.

Right, but that's just about whether it should be depicted, in a binary sense. The thing I've been asking about this whole time is how that's done. For example:

This is what I've been asking, so I think we might not be on the same page, if your responses are just about the decision to depict it at all, if you follow.

I don't know why you cut the following sentence from my quote which, in my opinion, should clarify my meaning:
So to be 100% clear. I think that the "how much" in Cuties is in a right place. I don't think that wide shots or short flashes would have the same effect in its context. In my opinion, Cuties doesn't depict too much.

Re: Cuties
 

I only made it to the trailer last night. Actually, it looks like a good movie. It presents itself as a story about (I assume) a daughter of an immigrant family trying to find her way from the more conservative expectations of her family and wanting to fit in with kids in school. It looks like that bridge is in the form of dance. Without all the social media frenzy, I'd probably just take it from the trailer that this was a more adult'ish ...Footloose? I mean adult in the sense in how the topic of social acceptance is treated, not in the sexuality.

There were blips in the trailer that I caught that I would never have questioned without knowing what I already knew before watching it. For example, it seems that the daughter steals some money from her mother to help her dance friends buy costumes. For a beat, you see the girls more or less skipping down the sidewalk with shopping bags and one of the kids had a bra on the outside of her shirt. It looked like an old Madonna standard, but on a kid. I'm not sure I would have questioned that cut, knowing where social media is today. Side story incoming: My boss has a daughter that's around 14. She (my boss) is always telling me her fears and, from time to time, a horror story of how some of her daughter's friends have private Instagram accounts that they share in their circle of friends. Apparently one friend in particular posts inappropriate pics of herself to share with boyfriends. This is, of course, third-hand knowledge. The kid tells the mom/boss, and the boss tells us at work when she reaches a limit and needs to vent. I have no idea if it's true or just another urban legend projected onto "that one kid." It's unfortunate, but ultimately matters like this fall on the parent to teach their kids restraint and of the risks that this world has. That's another topic, I know. But it touches back on parents flipping out over this movie when I genuinely would not be shocked in the slightest to learn that their own kids are doing worse things. I'm not sure what to make of that as I'm not a parent and technically am only sitting on the sideline here observing others interact. Seems off though.

All that out of the way, the trailer looked interesting and thoughtful. I did pick up a sense of tension but not to the level or even the topic of what's being criticized of it. This felt more of a conflict between parental and social norms and acceptance. I can see that spilling over into the appearance of sexuality, specifically in dance and not the actual act of it, but at a glance I would assume that would be more to heighten the tension of the religious conservativism (I'm still assuming this btw) of the immigrant mother and the divide that will probably create in losing her daughter to worldly standards. That by itself is an interesting subject and seems legit, given the trailer. Based on reactions and even posts here, I feel that I'm way off base though so who knows. I don't yet.

I will try to watch it this weekend. It's not a movie I would normally have interest in but you know. People screamin' bout stuff gets attention. It's French and it's sub-titled, so there's that.

I cut it because it did not, in fact, clarify your meaning for me, and actually seems dissonant with the rest of it. Just to be clear that it was done for clarity and not to try to hide some obvious meaning (it is still not obvious for me how the two ideas are meant to work together, but nevermind, since you go on to clarify explicitly right after this, below).

Understood, thanks for clarifying.

I guess I don't really understand that position, since you specifically say it's not about the length being sufficiently disturbing, and that the depiction is just about accurately representing the type of thing kids are shown. If that's the case, I don't see any reason why very little of it, along with explanations of how long or explicit it might be in the media they consume, wouldn't suffice. I keep asking about whether "disturbing people is the point" because that's literally the only argument I can fathom for depicting it this way.

Perhaps we're just at an impasse, then.

https://mobile.twitter.com/TulsiGabb...87833584226305

Does the same "logic" apply to movies depicting theft, robbery, violence and murder? If not, why?

I don’t know whether this will open for everyone, but it explores the issue rather well:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/...-poster-right/

The poster very much misrepresents what it’s about and does the film a great disservice.

Bad cinema is just bad cinema.*

Bad cinema that tries to argue it’s a critique of more exploitive realities so as to avoid getting called out for something clearly distasteful and, in the process, getting awards and critical praise is just a symptom of the times.

I don’t need a film to tell me that a hyper sexualized world is making it more difficult/dangerous for girls to become adults, but when child marriage is still legal in the United States I couldn’t careless about the ramblings or knee jerk reactions of critics.

Most of the reviews I’ve read of this movie are from keyboard warriors who think it’s a cinematic success. I can smell their moral apathy through my screen.

Good point! Tulsi Gabbard's opinion matters to me about as much as Dell Monty's does, though they do make a good can of fruit:p

But just say movies were always responsible for their subject matter, then Scorsese and Tarantino must be Public Enemy #1 and #2;)

Meh. Weak to me. Those are actors acting in a fake movie about those subjects. These are legitimate kids being sexually exploited in my opinion. The marketing of the movie isn't helpful as they seem to be celebrating it. A movie like Spotlight was about pedophilia but it was not celebrating it.

It's just not reading the room very well. By all means make the movie, but don't expect people to love seeing real children twerking as a legitimate world wide pedo ring comes to light. Not a good look.

Re: Cuties
 

There's a quote, I think from Soderbergh, that when an actor takes their clothes off in a film it's "no longer a film, it's a documentary." You can pretend to do a lot of things in movies, but you can't pretend to be naked, in other words, it's a thing you literally have to do to depict it. This is kind of the same idea. You can fake a robbery or a murder, but you can't fake having kids do things like this. That creates a more complication that doesn't exist in the depiction of lots of other things.

Fancy linking an article you have to pay for (or free trial) :)

That would be mighty mean, and I was worried I might do that accidentally as I do have a Telegraph subscription. But I checked it via private browsing mode and it seemed to work.

Could be a sneaky marketing move, though!

For me I could only read first paragraph then would have to sort the free trial out, which of course I'll forget to cancel and lost like £7.99 or whatever it is.

This also reminds me of something Neal McDonough said when he talked about why he won’t kiss costars or do sex scenes:

“Killing people on screen – that’s fake, that’s not real. When you’re in bed with another woman on screen, guess what? That’s real.”

Oh, dear. @Yoda, feel free to delete the damn thing...

Interesting to read everyone's thoughts but I'm a bit surprised with some of the people I have seen put the film down and criticise it as a bad piece of cinema.

Without trying to sound pretentious, I found Richard Brody's review fascinating - as I've already mentioned. He's a man who's hard to impress and is always fascinating to read in his analysis of cinema. Hardly some keyboard warrior.

STATEMENT – Netflix’s ‘Cuties’ is Prime Example of How Racist Stereotypes and Sexual Exploitation are Connected

Washington, DC (August 21, 2020) – The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) decried Netflix for its new movie, “Cuties,” which sexualizes pubescent girls and says is a prime example of how racist stereotypes and sexual exploitation are connected. Netflix is listed as one of NCOSE’s 2020 Dirty Dozen List of mainstream contributors to sexual exploitation.

“Quite sadly, Netflix has given us a clear example of how racist stereotypes and sexual exploitation are connected. ‘Cuties’ clearly sexualizes children, and in particular, girls of color. The pornography industry is built on these stereotypes, and Netflix is taking a page from this playbook by featuring these children in such a manner. Netflix must stop this practice immediately,” said Dawn Hawkins, senior vice president and executive director of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “While Netflix apologized for its sexualized marketing, it has not apologized for hosting the film.”

“The fact that ‘Cuties’ features pubescent girls doing hypersexualized dance is abhorrent. In the midst of the child sexual abuse materials crisis, this sends the message that girls’ bodies are supposed to be sexualized, and this normalization can lead to a host of problems.”


https://endsexualexploitation.org/ar...are-connected/

First, I don’t subscribe to Netflix for political reasons, so the fact that was the primary backer of this film was a mark against it. But it makes sense that a network known for the exploitation of women and marginalized groups would pick it up.

Second, I have never given any stock to film critics, as the job is one of little worth. I have never understood the allegiance to the opinions of strangers.

Finally, the film topic/story has merit and potential, but based on the synopsis and few clips I’ve seen of it it is painfully obvious that the director is a bad director. And I’m glad you shared that article because now I know why. They approached this material in a cold scientific way and it has no feeling: Perfunctory cinema is bad cinema.

EDIT and TL; DR: I suppose what I mean to say is everything that Brody’s review touches on and forms his opinion of it is the same thing that makes me not like it.

Re: Cuties
 

I saw one of the dancing clips on twitter. I get the point but that scene just goes on for waaayyy too long, and that's what people are upset about. They know it's social commentary but it's so explicit that it starts to feel or look like the filmmakers wanted to sexually exploit children, using commentary as an excuse, which is similar to how offensive people speak their uncouth opinions and pass their own comments off as comedy. Admittedly, I cancelled my subscription after seeing that because I almost lost my lunch. I understand that to get these kinds of points across you have to disturb the audience but it would seem that at some point the intention to shock was focused on too much. I wanted to see it for myself to see how bad it was or if it was worth the fuss but children being sexually exploited like that, even for a message is honestly sickening to me, especially because I've seen the same message be done plenty of times in a more tasteful manner. And sure, France is probably more accepting of this kind of stuff but in that case, why can't Netflix just take it down from the American server? Or edit the scenes down? It's like, "I get the point," but it keeps going and it just gets worse and worse. It's unfair for squeamish people like me who already understand the message going in and I'm sure mothers who actually exploit their children in pageants or fail to teach them about how deceptive the television is would find it so disgusting that they would fail to associate themselves with it. And I know, I'm judging it by one literally clip but like I said, I can't watch stuff like that without getting physically sick so all I have are educated guesses.

I just wanted to comment on your curiosity as to why people are interested in what critics have to say. They are known to have more knowledge about film and therefore have more "insight" as to what makes a good film. This obviously isn't true for every critic as some of them are just your average joe who sees what everyone else sees instead of getting paid to see everything and therefore picking up on patterns that would sneak past a casual viewer and some critics who do see a lot of movies just enjoy movies and therefore don't really have any in depth input for them other than "it was a movie." But people like to take them seriously and tailor their own opinions to these critics to make themselves feel more "educated."
Another reason (my reason) is that some critics are charismatic and are just interesting people. Like most celebrities, you want to know what makes them tick, what they found funny, what found annoying etc. In this case the celebrity is literally famous for having opinions.
Lastly, depending on the critic you listen to, they can be useful for gaging an idea of what movies you are willing to pay to see. If you look over reviews from a critic who watches a lot of sci-fi and likes a lot of movies that you also like then he/she can probably predict whether or not you in particular would like Tenet. As opposed to a critic who watches a lot of history films or other genres you find really boring. That critic will not be able to tell you whether or not you should see said movie.
This wasn't to persuade you into liking or listening to critics. I simply wanted to give you insight as to why other people do :)

Re: Cuties
 

This movie is great for anyone who has a pre teen girl or is a pre teen girl or was a preteen girl or just wants to know what is in the head of a preteen girl. They are not children and that is the problem. They are very young women going through a quite a number of stressors not the least of which is social media, becoming a sex object and dealing with their own burgeoning sexuality. Add watching your mother being ousted from her place in the family by a woman who is probably not much older than Amy the main character. And you have the basics of this story.
I didn’t feel that it was criticizing so much as watching the girl explore these issues. My favorite scene is when she is sitting in the mosque and pulls the Hijab (I think that is what it is called) over her head to watch a raunchy hip hop video while the women around her are praying. It made me laugh. There was nothing salacious for the sake of being salacious. And the director makes sure you know what is going on in the head of the main character as she navigates these treacherous waters. It is a highly nuanced film.
The only place where I see criticism is at the end where she eschews both the whorish get up she wore in the dance competition and the native dress she is supposed to wear to her father’s wedding to his second wife. She joins in with a bunch of children who are jumping rope in the street and she rises in the air slowly her face glowing with a smile. It’s a very upbeat ending. I don’t know if you are meant to see her as having finally traversed the murky waters of preteen hell or she is taking a brief respite to enjoy herself as any other child would. I like this movie. I don’t love it. It would’ve had to move a little faster for me to love it. But I do think this director is very promising.

Re: Cuties
 

Well there is also this latest news lately:

https://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...1f2485022ccfe1

I guess this quote from that article sums this up quite well:

It's a French film that's suitable for all ages in there. So it's no one's idea to make a film that has "11 year-olds twerking and the show is rated for mature audiences". The Twitter twits don't seem to understand that the USA does not equal the whole world.

The whole indictment is ridiculous and in any sensible judicial system it would be laughed out of the court. Not in the US though, I'm afraid. If people on the left like it, the people on the right will attack it and vice versa. Nobody gives an F about the facts and topics anymore, it's all about who says instead of what.

Re: Cuties
 

Oh okay, but if the movie is for suitable for all ages, then why is it rated TV-MA, doesn't that mean mature audiences? Also, the filmmakers never submitted to the MPAA for a rating, which raises suspicion. Does this mean they were afraid they were going to get an NC-17, and thought that would hurt the movie, and therefore didn't submit?

In France its rating is Tous publics (universal/U): suitable for all audiences. I'd assume that as a French movie they were mostly concerned about their local rating system.

I guess this whole spectacle shows why Netflix chose TV-MA as the US rating. What comes to MPAA I'm under impression that they have no legal authority and submitting to them (or to their standards) is wholly voluntary. It really boggles my mind why anyone gives a damn about them anymore. And no, there's nothing to warrant NC-17 (or anything above PG really) in Cuties.

Re: Cuties
 

Oh I know it's voluntary, it's just that people still do it, so I asssumed therefore audiences still gave a damn about it?

I haven't seen Cuties, but I read there is a scene where a 11 year old girl takes a photo of her vagina and sends it out online. I thought that would get a PG-13, along with the dirty dancing at least, wouldn't it?

Re: Cuties
 

People definitely overreacted when it first came out. I was accused of being a pedophile by people who hadn't even seen the film just because I watched it and liked it. Here is my review/thoughts after I first watched it:

The film is well written and beautifully directed. This feels like an honest depiction of a girl growing up and trying to fit in. Fathia Youssouf is fantastic, believable, and sympathetic. The other young girls in the film are very good too. The film has depth, heart, and is always engaging and compelling. Doucouré does a great job of bringing out the humour in some of the film's lighter moments. And for those who were concerned or confused by the marketing of the film, Cuties does not in exploit/sexualize children or condone pedophilia in any way, shape or form. If you have not seen the film, you should not be judging, rating, or reviewing it. Now that the film is available on Netflix, go watch it and decide for yourself! My rating is a 9/10.

Re: Cuties
 

So I watched the movie and and I do agree that it does have depth and heart, but as far as the dirty dancing scenes go, how was the director suppose to show the audience what the dancing was without actually showing the dancing? The director could have kept the cameras on their faces the entire time but then we would have no idea what they were doing and we would just become confused wouldn't we? So was showing it necessary therefore?

Also, another thing about the movie is that when you read what all the people who are trashing the movie online have to say, the scene that is complained most about is a scene where a breast is shown, some have said. Others have called it a 'topless scene', thereby implying topless, meaning two breasts are shown. I have these comments before watching the movie, so I was on the lookout for this scene. Not that I want to see child nudity at all in a movie, and I was hoping there wasn't going to be any. And I'm glad to say this scene didn't happen in the movie. I watched the whole thing, so that means 3 things.

`1. Either I somehow missed the scene when I was watching it.

2. The people who said there is a topless scene lied in order to trash the movie more and stir the pot more.

3. Netflix has edited the footage out since they first aired the movie.

But this is my preliminary assessment of the movie as I just watched it and it has to sink in more. What do you think? Is there a way to make a movie about showing 11 year olds be subjected to dirty dancing, without having to show how dirty the dancing is, for viewer to get the point?

This has been addressed over and over again throughout the thread, just the first two I ran into:

It's not binary, it's a sliding scale. You don't need only wide shots, but neither do you need tons of close-ups, or lingering shots, if you're simply trying to show people what the dancing is like.

Re: Cuties
 

Oh okay thanks, but what do you mean by sliding scale in this context?

Re: Cuties
 

I mean, I said "it's not binary, it's a sliding scale," so the definition of "binary" should make things pretty clear. It means it's not on/off, it's a matter of degree.