RSSMovie “Nothing Is Private” Shocks the Senses … Real Question, Is Nothing Sacred?
Is nothing too sleazy for Hollywood these days? Are there any boundaries of taste? All we ever hear is that Hollywood 
directors are artists. They are avant guard. No, they are smut peddlers acting under the guise of caring or having a point. Making movies and directing is supposed to be an art. What part about showing graphic sex with a 13 year old that leaves nothing to the imagination is supposed to make a point about pedophilia? One can more than make their point in others ways, its called artistic impression.
The film industry obviously learned nothing from the sick, pathetic and failed “Dakota Fanning rape project.” Was it any wonder when there were no takers for the movie at The Sandance Film Festival? Now The Toronto Film Festival is presented with the even more disturbing and bordering on child porn movie, “Nothing is Private”. When will these people ever learn? Or really care? One thins is for certain, for those buying tickets to this movie the police may want to be checking the registered sex offender list as patrons enter the theater. Making these types of films are not helping bring awareness to the issue, you are further exploiting it.
Nothing is Private is directed by Alan Ball who is better known for “Six Feet Under” and “American Beauty.” Ball’s graphic and offensive and way over the top movie of child abuse misses its mark due to the graphic sex scenes. One does not have to be this explicit or graphic in order to makes one’s point. The movie is being tauted as “Kiddie Porn Movie Rocks Toronto as ‘Feel-Awful’ Film of the Year”
The worst and most offensive movie I’ve seen in a while has just had three screenings at the kooky Toronto Film Festival.
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.
If you liked this post, you may also like these:
Comments
6 Responses to “Movie “Nothing Is Private” Shocks the Senses … Real Question, Is Nothing Sacred?”
Leave a Reply
And why is it that as the nation apparently faces mounting economic problems, people seem to feel the need for nonstop entertainment?
The people who peddle this crap must look on the American public, and possibly our counterparts all over the world, as the most moronic creatures in existence. “No matter what garbage we put out there, people will come see it.”
Some places put sales tax on food, or at least used to. Washington, D.C., did when I lived there. Imagine the outcry if the same were done for the products of the “entertainment” industry.
Yet which is more important?
Let’s hope that we Americans someday come to our senses.
The main point of any such film should be the effect on the child.
Just read an article on a Dutch newssite about 6 year old Hannah Mack (Texas). Sexualy abused, tortured and hung up in the garage where her mother found her. Absolute horror! Absolutely shocking!
The point of this story is very well put. There
are subtle ways that a director can portray the
act of sex with out actually showing it.
Case and Point: The movie “Ghost”
Hollywood raved for months on the brilliance
of the non-visual love scene… it was better
than sex!
Don’t take that review too seriously – Roger Friedman of FOX never actually saw this film. There were so many blatant factual errors in his review it was apalling – references to incidents which never occured (such as sodomy) – not to mention completely made up facts about characters. For just one example, the father in the film is NOT Iraqi, but Lebanese, and the film actually takes great pains to mention that numerous times. It’s a central point of one of the subplots. Friedman even spelled the name of the lead character incorrectly – it’s “Jasira” not “Jazeera”" – though I suppose over at FOX they were looking to make some allusion to “Al Jazeera” just to stir things up.
Friedman bases his reviews not on films but on vague mutterings he gets from people about them third-hand. I doubt he was even in the city of Toronto last weekend.
Friedman is the sort of “critic” who will pan a film without having seen it simply because the very subject matter or word-of-mouth regarding it makes him uncomfortable. It’s a bit like trashing “Deep Impact” because you’re vehemently opposed to comets hitting the earth.
Now, the film may not be to your taste, which is fine, it deals with a very uncomfortable subject. I wouldn’t bring the kiddies. But that has nothing to do with the quality, or more to the point the morality of the film. After all, one must face demons to face them down.
“A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide.” – Roger Ebert
Well done Dave. Unfortunately, the United States is full of mentally lazy individuals that would rather have a so called “journalists” tell them how they should feel regarding sex, war, presidential candidates, movies, etc. Rather than doing some homework on their own.
That type of mentality is what allowed the Bush administration to take away our freedom and rights (habeas corpus, free speech, Geneva conventions, etc.). They have thoroughly demonstrated how easily populations can be exploited through the use of fear and media…taking a page straight of the Adolph Hitler playbook.