TOMBOY, First Look

TOMBOY (2011) Laure (Zoé Herán), is a 10-year-old girl who is the new kid on the block,  she's just moved to a new neighborhood outside Paris with her parents and little sister Jeanne (Malonn Lévana). Because she is in need of new friends and does not know anybody, Laure impulsively introduces herself as “Mickael.”  She becomes close to Lisa, who does not know her new best friend is not a boy. 

I Hate Dakota Fanning!

I HATE DAKOTA FANNING! There now, I've gone and said it.  I thought that just might make you sit up and take notice,  now that I have your attention, let me elaborate.  Dakota Fanning, is the most important and influential child star of the new millennium  and is poised to embark upon a new career as an adult actress. I can count on the fingers of one hand the child stars that stand in her shadow: Margret O’Brian, Shirley Temple, Tatum O’Neal and Jodie Foster.  Did I ever tell you how much I hate Dakota Fanning?
     Dakota Fanning, (Gwad how I hate her!) So what's not to like?  She’s  young, smart, beautiful, a talented actress.  Dakota is a funny girl. Generous to her fans,  she involves her self in numerous worthy charities like Walk-fit, Stand up to Cancer, PSA for (RED), Alzheimer association, Shane’s Inspiration, St Jude’s children research hospital, children’s health and voter education. By all estimations Dakota is a good girl, she gets good grades, is enrolled in NYU. She doesn’t drink, smoke or do drugs─Neither has she been to rehab nor become embroiled in a Hollywood tabloid scandal.

      Yet the haters persist. WHY? I’ll tell you in a single word: Jealousy. Just what are some of the Dakota Fanning haters saying? “Dakota Fanning is like in every single movie involving children ever.” This common accusation is obviously as stupid as it is un-true. A variation on this theme is that Dakota Fanning is the “Go to” child actress, that she is the mastermind behind a vast Hollywood conspiracy and she diabolically usurps or “steals” roles from every other (and presumably more deserving) aspiring young actress in Hollywood. That argument amounts to nothing more than sour grapes. It seems that I recall Annasophia Robb was cast in Because of Winn Dixie (2005). Abigail Breslin managed to land the role in Kit Kittredge: American Girl (2008), and Nim’s Island (2008), so much for that steaming load of bunk.

      One of my favorite criticisms and the one the “haters” seem to feel has the most traction: Dakota’s perceived obnoxious screaming in War of the Worlds (2005).  One poster summed it up thusly: “Dakota Fanning has to win for worst child actor. Between this and her screeching ear splitting screaming in War of the Worlds, I would prefer not to see the movie she is in. She overacts and thinks histrionics means good acting.”  All I can say is, if the Martians ever did invade planet earth . . . I’d probably pee my pants and scream like a little girl too.

      “Dakota acts too mature, in every interview she behaves like a miniature adult.” This  common criticism is a case where the haters want to have it both ways. I can only imagine the hue and cry if Dakota were perceived as bratty and spoiled and immature.  Dakota has always possessed a precocious propensity to behave beyond her years. I think for me that was part of her allure, her charm so to speak. Even at eight-years-old, Dakota was poised, a charming and intelligent guest. It was a marvel to watch her hold her own in a conversation with venerable talk-show host Jay Leno. Jay was smitten, and so were we. I know children, I work with children everyday and it is an exceptional child who speaks plainly, a child who is both polite and intelligent is a rare delight and one to be treasured, not derided for their precociousness.

      It’s a cruel fact in Hollywood, that producers, directors and screen-writers like their kids young and cute. Somewhere in the age range of eight to twelve, that is the golden age for child actors. Much beyond that age limit, unless they go to Disney or Nick there are just not that much opportunity for early teens. To make matters worse, when producers DO cast those parts, they usually go with actors much older, playing younger than their years. For example, Jennette McCurdy is 19 playing a 15 year-old! This has many advantages, not the least of which directors are no longer fettered with strict shooting hours for minors. When Dakota shot The Cat in the Hat (2003),  the director would set up all the shots, shoot Mike Myers in total, and only then would the clock start, they’d zoom the kids on set and frantically shoot Breslin and Fanning close-ups, stop the clock, whisk the kids off set.   Set up for the next shot  . . .     
     This brings us to the most scurrilous charge and the one that makes me the angriest. A lot hay was  made a few years back about Dakota and her management and the movie Hounddog (2007). The big lie is that Dakota only took on the role because she “thought” it would garner her Oscar nomination, that Dakota appears naked on screen  and touches a boy's privates.  There is absolutely NO truth to any of this.  A BIG lie, hatched by the "haters" themselves as part of a smear campaign against Dakota in an attempt to sabotage Hounddog.  The miss-information surrounding this movie was  so clouded by preposterous preconceived prejudice and hate-mongering that this little independent film was never able to  secure a national distributor. The facts are, this lie was hatched by people who were influenced by Blue Line Radio who told an equally big lie about Dakota and the final screen content of Hounddog.

      It is true, somewhere between the years 2003-2006 Dakota was as they say the Hollywood "IT" Girl. Time passes, children grow up, and Dakota is for practical purposes an adult. I'm starting to see numerous posts from people who think she’s a thing of the past, a dinosaur like the Olsen twins. Dakota has made choices that weren't as career-propelling as other actresses in her age range. Saoirse Rohan has made some better choices. I don't think this puts Dakota out of the game. Yet I see many posts from people who think she’s over and done with because of a 2-3 year slump in her transitioning phase.

      The awkward years, no longer a cute child, not yet an adult, this is a fearful perfect storm that oftentimes is disastrous undoing to any former child star’s career (Dana Plato comes to mind). Even a venerable child actress of the stature of Jodie Foster was not immune.  Poor Jodie got fat, suffered the unwanted publicity of John Hinckley and then suffered the ultimate humiliation of actually having to do a screen test to land the part of Clarice Starling in Silence of the Lambs (1991). Jodie had the last laugh and went on to win an Oscar.

     Dakota needs a movie, a big movie. She was wonderful in her breakout performance I am Sam (2001) Man on Fire (2005) and Charlotte’s Web (2006). All that success is in the past. Dakota is seventeen now, in a few short months she will be eighteen and free of Hollywood’s self imposed (indeed) all of societies arbitrary restrictions on minors. Dakota will truly be able choose her own path as an adult actress. I personally see nothing but great things ahead for this fine young actress. Dakota will bounce back. Not necessarily as the “it” girl compared with her contemporaries, but undoubtedly she will continue to act all she needs is the right script the right vehicle. Sandra Bullock, Kirsten Dunst and Kiera Knightley will need to move over because Dakota Fanning is in the house!

O Tessa, wherefore art thou Tessa?

I BEGAN THIS DAY not knowing what to write. They say in writing, the blank page is the scariest of all demons. That has never been my problem, give me a blank page and a subject and I can whack out 4000 words about nothing easy.  It wasn't that I was scared, my problem was I had this  crawling sensation in the back of my head,  I knew exactly what it was I wanted to write. I rejected the idea out of hand, I didn't  want to write that!  I took my dog for a walk, hoping that I'd come up with a brilliant  new idea.  Nothing came. I knew sooner or later I had to write something, after all I’m a writer and writing is what I do.  

      I have what you might call a confession to make.  I don’t know whether to chalk it up to happenstance, coincidence, or foul chance. These are the kinds of things that only happen to me. I mean what are the chances?  I could get struck by lightning twice and still not have another swipe at such a foul turn of events.
     Growing up; my brother David and I would play marathon sessions of Monopoly. I remember one game in particular. I was winning; David was on the ropes, down to one property, Boardwalk with hotels.  A wounded beast is the most dangerous foe, but I was sitting pretty, I knew it was only a matter of time before I crushed him. All that changed when I landed on Boardwalk. It took all my cash reserves, I was forced to mortgaged all my available minor properties and hand over the two-thousand dollars rent. My railroads were gone, my utilities in hock.  I tried to convince myself that this represented only a minor set-back; I still had hotels on the reds and the greens. I was cash poor but I was still winning; it was only a matter of time. What I hadn’t counted on, was that I had rolled doubles, which means you get a second turn. This normally is a good thing, however in Monopoly, in the late stages of the game, strategically, this is a bad thing, the more turns you take, the more opportunity you have to land on the other guy's property.  I wasn't worried, I was free and clear, nothing but undeveloped purple, light blue and orange.  I rolled the dice with smug confidence, not knowing just how bad my luck was.  The dice came  up three. One, two, three, pass GO, collect two-hundred dollars, all right so far. Three landed me on CHANCE . . . no worries, maybe I'd win a $10  second prize in a breauty contest. I drew my card and in an instant I knew I was ruined!  ADVANCE TO BOARDWALK.

     What sort of evil karma must I possess to bring me to such ruination?  In one throw of the dice, I was bankrupt! There was no way I could come up with two-thousand dollars a second time.  As strange as it might seem, this was a life changing moment for me. It was in that moment I had an epiphany of sorts. That’s a long story and quite the round about way to make my point.  This is why I never play the lottery or go to the casino.  At just ten-years-old and I knew in that moment I was forever cursed with abysmal bad luck. 

    *Sigh* This was bound to come out sooner or later, so I might as well be upfront about it. I still can’t quite believe it myself. Just what is this post all about?  I'll tell you, Dakota's new movie,  NOW IS GOOD (2012).  Dakota Fanning  plays a girl dying of leukemia who compiles a list of things she'd like to do before passing away. Topping the list is her desire to lose her virginity . . . alright so far.  Okay, here comes  the bombshell, are you sitting down? The name of Dakota’s character is Tessa Scott! Could this be any worse? What am I supposed to say? How am I supposed to respond? To make matters worse, Dakota has her hair cut short and she looks like a boy! I guess it could be worse; her name could be Tessa Claiborne.

     In 2006 I began work on what was to become my first novel,  RUFF STUFF.  A story about a  private investigator Lea Swift and her sometime tumultuous relationship with  her grandfather, a war criminal, a Nazi hunter who also turns out to be a shape shifter. These stories represented   just a  compilation of tales of my past characters from previous role-playing games turned into a novel.
      In '07 I began work on a new novel, an origial  novel about a subject I was passionate about. A story I wanted to tell. Set against the backdrop of nineteenth century British imperialism, TESSA CLAIBORNE tells the story of a young Welsh girl who escapes poverty and indentured servitude. Tessa disguises herself as a boy joins the army, where she finds herself in Africa, inexplicably intertwined in some of the greatest colonial battles in history. Tessa Claiborne is an historical novel, a hero’s journey about love, loss and ultimate redemption.

     Well, that's all I got to say about that. It's impossible to know whether to call it foul coincidence or cruel happenstance! You can be the judge yourself who came first, Tessa Scott or Tessa Claiborne.  Here's the link to my web page  TESSA CLAIBORNE.COM   Where you can watch the book trailer. You can read my a preliminary draft of my novel on Wordpress @  TESSA CLAIBORNE the novel .

MAN ON FIRE

MAN ON FIRE (2004)─In Mexico City, a former CIA assassin swears vengeance on those who committed an unspeakable atrocity against the little girl he was sworn to protect. Directed by Tony Scott from the novel by A.J. Quinnell, screenplay by Brian Heigeland. Man on Fire stars Denzel Washington, Christopher Walken and Dakota Fanning.

 

     After a wave of kidnappings sweeps through Mexico City, there is a growing sense of panic among the wealthier citizens, especially parents. In one six-day period, there are twenty-four abductions, leading many to hire bodyguards for their children. With this back story established, we first meet John Creasy (Washington), a burned-out ex-CIA operative, who has given up on life. Creasy’s friend Rayburn (Walken) convinces him to give it one last try and come to Mexico City to be a bodyguard for nine-year-old Pita Ramos (Fanning), daughter of a wealthy industrialist. At first Creasy rejects the idea out-of-hand, he’s not interested in being antibody's bodyguard, least of all to a little girl. After some convincing, he accepts the assignment. At first Creasy keeps his distance, barely tolerating the precocious child and her pestering questions about his dark past. But slowly, Pita works her wiles and begins to chip away at his rough façade The two learn to trust and the pair become bona fied friends, there exist a genuine chemistry, a bond between the little blonde white girl and the damaged black man with a deadly 9mm Glock. For Creasy, his new found relationship is redemption, then in one catastrophic instant his friend, his charge, Pita is kidnapped.

     I recently watched a broadcast of Man on Fire on Spike TV, I hadn’t seen this movie in five years and everything that I ever loved about Dakota Fanning suddenly came flooding back. What an absolutely wonderful performance. Dakota was at the height of her prowess, after a disastrous turn in the god-awful Cat in the Hat (2003) Dakota was back, a vulnerable wispy mercurial waif, with baby teeth intact. I don’t know if he knows it or not, but Tony Scott needs to get down on his knees and thank God that he cast Dakota Fanning in this movie! Dakota is awesome, she more than holds her own against the venerable Washington and even steals the show.

 

     Man on Fire is not an easy movie to like, it’s also a hard movie not to like. This is not what you call a perfect film, principally due to Tony Scott’s penchant for schizophrenic direction and head-ache inducing herky-jerky camera work. Man on Fire fails mostly in part as an action movie owing to its fragmented construction. When the movie works it works well.  One thing that does work well is Harry Gregson-Williams’ south-of-the-border Spanish guitar score is enhanced by soundtrack splashes of Chopin, Debussy, and even the Linda Ronstadt classic 1977 country-rock version of “Blue Bayou.”

       Man on Fire is really three movies in one. The first third of the movie is your basic introduction, the “set-up.” We are introduced to Denzel Washington’s character the hired bodyguard of little Dakota Fanning. This is the best part of the movie, the unfolding relationship between the little girl and the assassin. To Tony Scott’s credit, he takes time to develop this relationship, there’s no 30 second montage of Dakota and Washington frolicking on the beach and then *bang* you’re dead . . . 30 seconds is not enough time to invest in the characters and Scott understands this. No, the movie devotes some serious screen time to develop the quiet and intimate relationship between the gruff assassin and the little girl.  Washington and Fanning are wonderful together and establish a screen rapport that reaches the level of Hepburn and Bogart.  This sets the stage for the tragedy yet to unfold.  I personally, really enjoyed the Dakota sequences; the scenes with Dakota and Denzel are so good and so strong that I caught myself wishing the entire movie was about their relationship. Seriously folks, not since Ryan and Tatum O’Neal have I seen a movie about a relationship between an adult man and a 9-year-old girl that was this good.

 

     Sadly, the Washington-Fanning relationship was less than a third of the move. The second act of the film is about Pita’s kidnapping and Creasy’s obsession to exact revenge on her abductors. It's in this second act that the movie goes haywire. You tend to feel, with all the camera tricks, captions with a mind of their own, and jerky, over-the-top direction that the director was trying to obscure the fact that he didn’t know how to tell the story in this part of the movie. Scott calls attention to himself much too often his advant-guarde directing style. The middle part of the film lapses into cliché. I thought I was watching Charles Bronson in “Death Wish,”  about a character hell-bent on seeking revenge.  This only serves to drag the movie down. The third act of the film is more of a mix of the first two parts. There are some good moments, and some not so good, when it works, it works well, and when it doesn’t, it doesn’t work at all.         

    One of my favorite Dakota Fanning stories is a classic. Dakota is invited to appear on the TONIGHT SHOW with Jay Leno. Dakota’s comedic talents are greatly underrated. She told this story . . . On a day trip to the Aztec pyramids during the filming of Man on Fire. Dakota and her family, including her grandmother Mary Jane, took a bus tour to visit the ancient sites. Apparently, Mary Jane is very talkative. All during the time the tour guide was trying to explain some of the more important aspects of the ruins; Mary Jane kept up a constant chatter. Finally, in frustration the Mexican guide turned to Mary Jane and said (in his not-too-good-English):

“Mary Jane, if you would just shut-up a little, you can hear the jaguars.”

     Dakota tells it better than I─

Man on Fire (2004) ** ½

      

    

    

THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM GORDON

“♪♪ Who do you call when your windshield’s busted? ♪♪” Trisha sang softly.
“♪♪1-555-54-GIANT. ♪♪”

THE GIRL WHO LOVED TOM  GORDON by Stephen King © 1999 Scribner. When  ten-year-old Trisha McFarland gets lost in the woods, she has only a boiled egg, a tuna fish sandwich and her Sony Walkman for comfort. She is a huge fan of Tom Gordon, a relief pitcher for the Boston Red Sox, so she listens to the games and he becomes an imaginary character in her mind. I found this book to be a thoroughly enjoyable read and I highly recommended it. Since I pictured Dakota in my mind as the little girl Trisha McFarland, it was a little bit like having a new Dakota film playing in my head. The novel is part spook story and part survival story, with the baseball subtext woven into the fabric of the narrative so cleverly that the imaginary Tom Gordon becomes an integral character. As Trisha becomes more lost and her deprivation becomes more severe, the little girl’s misery descends from tears into abject terror―baseball itself becomes a metaphor for Trisha’s very survival. TOM GORDON is really a lot less of a scare novel than it is a coming-of-age story similar to King’s Stand by me.

     I should preface all my comments by stating emphatically there is no movie there never was any movie and all comments made here are merely the musings and reminiscence of the wishful author.

     In the spring of 2004 there was a substantial rumor that Dakota Fanning was going to be cast in a movie called The Girl who loved Tom Gordon. At first I was horrified, Stephen King, didn’t he write ghost stories and movies about teen-age proms drenched in buckets of blood? Besides, what an absolutely clunky, unmanageable title, I had serious flashbacks to the ‘70’s and another clunky title, The Little Girl who lived down the Lane. There was the cool poster with the little girl beside the grave and spade, it was all spooky. Unfortunately, for Jodie Foster the movie tanked.

     As far as The Girl who loved Tom Gordon, it’s a quick read and comes in at slim 260 pages. The baseball theme is incorporated so seamlessly, so exquisitely that to separate the two would be impossible. I was instantly transported back to my glorious baseball youth: “THE ROAR OF ’84.” The year the Detroit Tigers won the World Series. I truly do remember the power and glory of Milt Wilcox, Alan Trammel and Jack Morris. Who could forget Kirk Gibson’s climatic home run? Baseball has that effect on people. After reading the book, all my childhood baseball enthusiasm came flooding back to me. Stephen King has somehow transformed baseball into the perfect metaphor for Trisha McFarland’s survival. I don’t know how he does it. I guess that’s what great writing is all about. A little girl lost in the woods all of a sudden comes down to a three and two pitch in the bottom of the ninth. I’ve read In to Thin Air, a great survival story if there ever was one. The Girl who loved Tom Gordon  is not so much a great survival story as it is a great baseball story. I’m not a big fan of George Romero. Maybe he’s matured. Maybe this is his own personal coming-of-age picture after reading the book, after reading the book I could think of no other title better than The Girl who loved Tom Gordon.

     The Girl who loved Tom Gordon represents one of the greatest could have been, what if, casting missed opportunities in movie history. Dakota would have been absolutely perfect for the part. At the time, Dakota was ten-years-old, exactly the same age as Trisha the girl in the book. The part of Trisha is very physical, and the scares mostly psychological. Since a great deal of the story’s narrative takes place inside the girl’s head, it was a chance for Dakota to flex her considerable narration skills. Little girl as action hero?  If you think about it, how often are ten-year-old girls really allowed to be brave? Certainly not Penny Robinson, every time a shambling bush monster appeared out of the woodwork all she ever did was scream, run away and fall down. I think that's what I like most about this story, Trisha McFarland is brave. The part of Trisha requires Dakota to hike, climb, and sing. “♪♪ 1-800 GIANT ♪♪” and get slathered in mud (you got to love a girl covered in mud)! Aside from the imaginary Tom Gordon, Trisha McFarland is principally the only other character in the novel. The whole weight of the film was to be on Dakota’s shoulders. I think she’s could have done well in this part.

     There was some controversy about the part. Trisha does indeed resort to some profanity during her ordeal lost in the woods. The obscenities come first during the middle act of the narrative when things for our heroine have gone from bad to worse (what could possibly be worse?) Trisha looses her shoe in the mud, and is desperate to retrieve it. The cursing is well within the context of the story and comes not without moral compunctions. Trisha stands up, still holding the rescued sneaker in her hand, and looked ahead.

“Oh fuck!,” Trisha croaked. It was the first time in her life she had said that
 particular world out loud . . .

     I consider the ramifications of the fact that our ten-year-old Dakota was going to have to use some very naughty words in her screen portrayal of Trisha McFarland. However I feel within the context of the story the dialogue is well justified and not gratuitous. This is not a case of the use of profanity for profanity sake. Trisha is essentially a very good girl. Under normal circumstances she would never talk that way, but Trisha’s circumstances are anything but normal and her use of bad language is used by King to illustrate the profound depth of her decent into misery and despair. The cursing comes at a time when Trisha comes to the full realization of the dire straight in which she finds herself.

     We will never know why this project failed. I suspect that perhaps the director was wrong, George Romero. When it was announced that Dakota was pulling out of the project, the movie remained with out a Trisha and ultimately was never filmed.  I’ve always felt this to be one of the great missed opportunities in movie history.  It is still a great story, a great book and I sincerely hope it is made one day, sadly, just not with Dakota.

(Let me organize a few pitchforks and torches) . . .

WAR OF THE WORLDS

WAR OF THE WORLDS (2005) Not what you might call a great movie.  My expectations entering the theater were extremely high and my anticipation was nearly insatiable. My trepidation was equally inconsolable. I felt really nervous for the success of this picture. After suffering a string of less than sterling movies over the past three years ranging from unmitigated failures of Cat in the Hat (2003) to Hide and Seek (2005), I felt desperate. Dakota really needed this movie. I knew that Dakota had done her best, but I felt she was being sabotaged at every twist and turn by idiot directors, producers, and worst of all co-stars. Case in point: Tom Cruise’s crazy romantic antics coupled with his spooky Scientology hokum. I felt that Tom had done the promotion of WOTW a huge disservice by creating a spectacle that shifted the focus of media away from the movie and on to Tom Cruise jumping on the couch.

     Dakota herself has never failed to deliver; she always managed to elevate what ever project she is attached to from what amounts to mediocre hack, to something special. I don’t think the poor girl knows she is surrounded by idiots. However it is enough to say that a couple of Dak’s past movies have missed the mark. I felt this WOTW was a make or break affair. If WOTW tanked, well . . . I wasn’t really prepared to contemplate failure.

     This is a movie doesn’t fool around, after a brief introduction to Ray the worlds shortest Newark dock worker, dead-beat-dad with the automobile engine in his living room. The action starts. Dakota is absolutely adorable on her arrival with her little zebra backpack and toy horsies. The visibly real-life pregnant Miranda Otto does well establishing the good and caring mom vs. the motor-head New Jersey Dad. Then the lightning comes and it is truly terrifying. At first amused by the spectacle, Ray beckons Rachel outdoors to view the unnatural phenomenon. Dakota delivers a chilling understated line: “I want to go inside.” She is convincing as a girl who wants to be with her dad but instantly recognizes that this is scary stuff. The lightning it turns out is only a precursor to further death and destruction as a massive electro-magnetic pulse renders (most) electronic devices useless.

     The Martians are truly terrifying, with their monstrous walking-machines, flailing tentacles and fog-horn calls of destruction that seem oddly mono-syllabically reminiscent of the five-note melody of universal harmony from CLOSE ENCOUNTERS. Instead this time the sound is malevolent: “I am going to kill you.”
      So what about Dakota? Dakota is absolutely superb. Who can resist a girl covered in mud? She doesn’t have a lot of time in the opening moments to establish character but she does the most with what precious few seconds she has. When she orders humus from the health food store or when initially she balks at getting into a strange car I could hear echoes of her suburban perfect I’ve-finally-married-up mother: “Whose car is this? Whose car is this?”
     Dakota manages to covey terror so convincingly it’s almost painful to watch. The sheer terror and confusion created when Ray tells her to wait by a tree while he goes to confront her brother. The kindly misguide couple who try so hard to abduct her for her own well being and half-realizing that he’s loosing his daughter but absolutely certain that he will loose his son. The total terror of Ray knowing that he can’t save both children at the same time and having to choose who to save. This is one of the movies most powerful scenes. Then there are the quiet scenes of terror when Dak wipes the spider from her face. The quiet, sweaty close-ups of her with a blindfold, while she knows full well her dad is going to kill the strange man who is up to this point has been their benefactor. Soon enough Dak is confronted with the hideous mechanical eye of the alien and she emits what has to be a modern classic movie scream to rival Janet Leigh in the shower. So good, infact she was ask to re-inact it on the TODAY show!
     I don’t have nearly as many problems with the ending as many of the movie critics to review this movie before me. I really can’t say that I liked the ending or it was satisfying in the same way that the last line of MASTER AND COMMANDER was perfect: “After all Steven, it is a flightless bird . . .”  I really can’t say I hated the ending. It was pretty much the way the book ended and the 1953 movie ended. The Martians die of the flu. It could have been more poignant, I think I might have like it to be a little bit more pan-dramatic, and as this was WAR OF THE WORLDS. Instead, Steven Spielberg chose to keep it intimate, one family’s reunion. Sure it was sappy, but I don’t go to the movies to leave feeling bad.

  

     H.G. Wells, an Englishman, a founding father of modern science fiction writing was considered in his day a left-wing radical who wrote his 1898 novel of Martian invasion as an indictment of English imperialism. Ironically, Orson Wells chose to update this theme for his 1938 audience as a warning of the coming of Nazis. Again in the 1953 movie, the bad guys were harbingers of the Russians and the Cold War. Spielberg has followed his predecessors and once again updated this theme when Dakota ask: “Is it the terrorist?”


WAR OF THE WORLDS  (2005) ** ½

UPTOWN GIRLS

UPTOWN GIRLS (2003) It doesn’t seem possible that eight years have gone by since Dakota made this movie. Uptown Girls was the first movie Dakota made after becoming what you might call a bona fide movie star. It was the first movie she made that I waited for in anticipation, stood in line, and bought my ticket solely on the basis that it was a “Dakota Fanning movie.”
     My road to Dakota Fanning “fandom” was one fraught with happenstance, luck and fate. I saw my very first Dakota Fanning movie quite by accident, sometime in 2001. These were the days before Netflix and DVDs, on the weekends I would walk up to the local video store and rent a movie. By chance I picked up I am Sam (2001), a movie I rented on the basis of the strength of the two stars Sean Penn and Michelle Pfeiffer. A story about a retarded man and his struggle to retain custody of his six-year-old daughter. I remember enjoying the movie, at the time I distinctly remember thinking to myself, How absolutely utterly adorable the little Blonde girl was who played Lucy. Cute little girls come and go and I simply can not be preoccupied with every cute little girl that ever graced the screen. Needless to say this particular cute little girl was quickly forgotten. As was my custom back then, I lent the movie to my mother.    

     I never gave the movie or that little girl a second thought.  All that changed in the fall of 2002 when a  then fledgling Sci-Fi channel presented an original mini-series Taken, produced by Stephen Spielburg, something about alien abduction. I took no notice and didn’t even watch it.  That was until Mother said to me, “Have you been watching Taken?” I said no.  Mom said to me, “I think you should, you’ll like it,  I think you might be pleasantly surprised . . .” I didn’t know it at the time, but Mom wasn’t talking about the movie.  It must be the “Norman Bates” in me, but I set my VCR and dutifully recorded Taken and settled in to watch the movie. I was immediately captivated. Not just by the intriguing science fiction tale which was excellent, but what really caught my attention was the narration. There was this voice, a lilting sing-song Southern voice. It was the voice of a child, a voice that was familiar. At first I was baffled and the Sci-Fi network did nothing to untangle my intrigue. I had heard this voice before of that much I was convinced. But for the life of me I couldn’t figure out why I was so suddenly drawn into the narrative of this story by this unseen narrator. It wasn’t until episode seven, "Dropping the dishes,"  that I suddenly had a face to put to that voice. Remember the adorable little blonde girl from I am Sam?  It was of course Dakota Fanning, and I was at once completely captivated. Here was an eight-year-old girl who totally carried this made-for-TV movie. This was a fresh face, a new talent as sassy and precocious as Tatum O’Neal or Jodie Foster . . . I had waited twenty-five years to discover such a girl!  So believe me when I say,  I don’t make such comparisons lightly.
     Uptown girls, directed by Boaz Yakins, from a script by Allison Jacobs. Stars Brittany Murphy as Molly Gunn, the feckless freewheeling daughter of a deceased rock legend, who is forced to get a job after her manager steals all her money. Molly takes a job as nanny for precocious enfant terrible Ray (Dakota Fanning), the oft ignored daughter of a music executive. Molly inadvertently learns what it means to be an adult while teaching Ray how to be a child.

     Dakota was just nine-years-old back then and she reminds us of why we love her so much. She is super cute, with baby teeth intact. Precocious to a fault, a 29-year-old woman in the body of a nine-year-old. Dakota is a funny girl, a natural comic with a “rubber face,” and impeccable timing. She excels at the art of the dead-pan delivery, “Swinging door” was perhaps the funniest line in the whole movie. I wish Dakota made more comedies, she could easily be the next Lucille Ball.


Uptown Girls (2003) ** ½

WALKABOUT, 40 years later

WALKABOUT (1971)─Two young children, a boy (Luc Roeg) and a teen-age schoolgirl (Jenny Augutter) are stranded in the Australian outback.  Their father drives them far into the desert, where they stop for what they expect to be an idyllic  family picnic. Suddenly, without warning, their father begins shooting at them. When the two children run for cover, he sets the car on fire and kills himself. The boy and the girl are now completely lost and alone.

 

      By dawn the next day, both children are weak from exposure. Discovering a small pool with a fruit tree, the boy and the girl unashamed, take off their clothes and spend the next few hours blissfully  playing and bathing naked. Next morning, the pool has dried up, just as they are about to despair, they meet an Aboriginal boy on "walkabout," a ritualistic journey where he must leave his tribe, live off the land, and prove his manhood. The young Aboriginal boy (David Gulpilil) and the girl cannot communicate, but across the void they make a connection, a universal understanding of humanity.  With the Aboriginal boy as their guide, the two white children learn how to survive in the outback.

 

      The three children travel together for several days, with the Aborigine boy sharing food he has caught hunting. Together they learn to communicate using words and gestures. These characters have no names, yet in their anonymity, they represent us.  At one point the Aboriginal boy and the girl notice each other’s naked bodies, there is a definite spark of chemistry between them that transcends the 40,000 years of primordial human existence that separates a common English Schoolgirl and the black Aboriginal boy. The girl is naked and the boy watches as she swims in a deep pool.

 

      Walkabout is about many things, but is known for principally only one thing: Jenny Augutter’s nude scenes. Jenny Augutter was just 16 years-old at the time of principal photography was for Walkabout. I think there is something  missing in the discussion when we consider the morality of the depiction of a young girl's naked body. The the film is about the natural world, being naked is a natural state. The two children are dying, dehydrated, the water in the pool represents life. The scene represents the most honest reaction in the world, to take off ones clothes and immerse oneself in the life giving water. A brother and sister naked together?  I for one don't have a problem with that. First of all the human body is beautiful, and secondly lets be upfront and honest, Jenny Augutter is one beautiful girl! The overall undertones of child pornography are nothing more than the egregious western prudery.

 

     Although this is a sound film, and the characters talk to one another, this film has no real meaningful dialogue, it is a purely visual film, yet it speaks volumes.  Director Nicolas Roeg’s (“Don't Look Now”) cinematographic skills are clearly on display, he has a special admiration for the sweeping vistas of Australia’s awesome scenic landscape as well as the sensuality of Jenny Augutter naked body.  The whole effect is embellished by John Barry’s sublimely magical score. This is perhaps the most naked movie ever filmed without a hint of sexuality.

     
Walkabout *** ½

VIOLETTE NOZIERE

VIOLETTE NOZIÈRE (1978)─Is a French crime film directed by Claude Chabrol adapted for the screen from a novel by Jean-Marie Fitère and starring Isabelle Huppert. The film, is based on a true French murder case in 1934, Violette Nozière is a fourteen-year-old French school girl who secretly works as a prostitute while living with her unsuspecting parents. 

     Rebelling against her mean spirited and petty petit-bourgeois parents, her father Baptiste (Jean Carmet)  and mother Germaine (Stéphane Audran). Violette falls in love with a spendthrift young man Émile (Jean Dalmain).  Émile’s careless and wanton spending habits eventually cause Violette to hand over increasing amounts of money from her prostitution earnings soon she resorts to stealing from her parents to support her lover.

     After contracting syphilis from sex with multiple partners, Violette's double life is scandalously discovered.  She conspires to poison her parents ostensibly to get her hands on their money. She plies them with glasses of barbiturate-laced “medication,” which she claims has been prescribed to them by the family doctor; her father dies, her mother barely survives.

   Overnight, Violette’s  lurid act of “double parricide” became the most sensational crime of the French interwar era—At trial, her defense claimed her father raped her. All to no avail, the verdict of the court was guilty, the sentence, death by guillotine. Violette’s sentence is eventually commuted.

     The film was entered into the main competition at the 1978 Cannes Film Festival, where Isabelle Huppert won the award for best actress.  VIOLETTE NOZIÈRE represents one of my great "lost" quest movies of the seventies.  Just twenty years-old in 1978, I found myself thoroughly  in awe of Isabelle Huppert's smoldering sexuality. Her Frenchness alone made her seem very exotic and the very fact that I had never seen Violette, elevated the film at least in my own mind to virtual mystical status. Hard to find, the film is now available on Netflix.

Violette Nozière *** ½     

PRETTY BABY, a retrospective

PRETTY BABY (1978)─Directed by Louis Malle from a screenplay by Polly Platt. The year was 1917, the year the United States entered World War I in the waning days of legal prostitution in the infamous red-light district of the Storyville section of New Orleans. Hattie (Susan Sarandon), a prostitute working in an elegant brothel run by the Madame Nell, has a twelve-year-old daughter Violet (Brooke Shields). Introverted photographer E.J. Bellocq (Keith Carradine) comes calling with his camera.
    Bellocq asks permission to take photographs of the women. Madame Nell agrees, but only if he pays. Peculiarly, Bellocq chooses only to takes pictures, he never has sex with any of the women.  His sole passion is photographing whores. His particular favourite subject is Hattie, as he photographs Hattie, we come to understand that the camera, the act of taking pictures has somehow become a surrogate extension of Bellocq's repressed sexuality. His strange demeanor and odd mannerisms fascinate Violet, whom he initially regards as a pest.
     The character of E.J. Bellocq is based on a real photographer who captured on glass plates of silver nitrate the real prostitutes of Storyville. Though the specific story built around him in the movie is fictional. The real Bellocq photographs are used to create a sense of the time and place and evoke the movie with authenticity.
     Over the next few months, Nell decides that Violet is now old enough for her virginity to be auctioned. At the auction Violet is bought by an apparently quiet customer, but her first experience of sex is brutal. Hattie, meanwhile, aspires to escape prostitution. She marries, and abandons Violet, leaving her daughter behind to face a life of prostitution. Bellocq continues to spend time with Violet, entranced by her beauty, and photogenic face. When the brothel closes, Bellocq marries Violet, ostensibly to protect her from a dangerous world; however there are some who question his motives.
     At the beginning of this film, there's a tight shot on Violet’s strikingly beautiful face. She appears to be watching something with great interest and we hear a woman moaning off camera. Since Pretty Baby is a movie about prostitution, one might naturally assume that the child is watching some sexual act. Actually, it’s just the opposite; as the moans turn to cries of pain. We realize with a wink and a nod that Director Louis Malle has tricked us. We see that it’s not a woman in the throws of ecstasy but rather a woman in labor, and that Violet is witnessing her baby brother being born.

     Pretty Baby is famous for one thing and one thing only: twelve year-old Brooke Shields get'n nekid. Brooke has four separate nude scenes, including one scandalous scene where she is seen completely naked lying in repose on a couch, while Bellocq takes her photograph. Apparently child nudity, any child nudity has been deemed too much for our modern American twenty-first century sensibilities.  If you view the new politically corrected  DVD version of Pretty Baby, be forewarned, the movie has been censored by re-framing the original scenes. This was done to avoid any naughty shots of Brooke’s pubic area or her baby buttocks.  If you want to see the original theatrical movie as shot, cut by Malle, you need to find  a VHS version.
     On the other hand, if all you want is to see nekid pictures of  Brooke Shields, the nudity in Pretty Baby is pretty tame by comparison to the Gary Gross photo shoot.  Two years earlier, before the hue and cry over Pretty Baby, Teri Shields, the consummate stage-mother allowed her then ten-year-old Brooke  to pose for photographer Gary Gross WARNING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE EXPLICIT.  Brooke Shields by Gary Gross.  *Whew* Brooke poses completely nude in  a bath tub,  we’re not talking baby’s first bath pictures here. Brooke is posed, tarted up, oiled down, in all her full frontal prepubescent glory. No higher authority than the U.S. Supreme court ruled these pictures "art" and not child pornography.  Art or not, they are way too controversial to post on this blog.  Pretty Baby remains a testament to the fact that the 70’s were a vastly more liberated time, at least when it comes to issues of a naked child's sexuality. No American studio could (or would) make this film today.

Pretty Baby (1978)  ** ½

Prom picks with Dakota Fanning

     A prom isn’t the same without the perfect prom dress, as anyone knows who’s ever been horrified at past prom Polaroids or watched “Pretty in Pink.” Dakota Fanning wore a blush Hervé Léger mini to her prom at Los Angeles area private school Campbell Hall. And she sifted through four racks stuffed with 100 BCBG Max Azria dresses at Children’s Hospital of Orange County to help 35 teenage cancer patients and survivors pick their favorites for the hospital’s annual prom.

     “Do you want a long one? Do you want a short one? Do you want color?,” asked Fanning of the girls, who were treated to jewelry from Forever 21, and makeup and hair consultations from Stila and Frederic Fekkai as well as the BCBG dresses.

     After trying on three dresses, 17-year-old Danielle Knowlton chose a short black cocktail number. Emily Justiniano, 15, rejected nine dresses on the way to settling on a long, tiered silvery blue dress.

     “I got to meet Dakota Fanning, and she is so cool,” beamed Justiniano, while getting makeup tips on eyeliner application from a Stila makeup artist. “She is so much like a regular person.”

     Up next on the regular person agenda for Fanning is graduating high school and heading to college in the fall with plans to study psychology. Less regular is Fanning’s summer job working in London on the upcoming movie “Now is Good” in which she plays a leukemia sufferer. After “Now is Good,” Fanning, who won’t take a hiatus from acting for college, starts shooting another movie in New York in September. “The school is allowing me to be flexible. I don’t want to stop working for four years,” said Fanning, who also will be seen in “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2” next year.

by Rachel Brown

posted 05.27.11

on wwd.com

Dakota is a "VERY GOOD GIRL."



Dakota Fanning is in talks to star opposite Elizabeth Olsen (infamous little sister of the titular Mary-Kate & Ashley) in Naomi Foner's  “Very Good Girls.” The rest of the cast is no less stellar and includes the talents of  Peter Sarsgaard, Dustin Hoffman and Sissy Spacek.


     Written and directed by Naomi Foner (Loosing Isaiah),the storyline revealed thus far: “Very Good Girls” follows two teenage girls through the New York City summer after they graduate from high school and decide to lose their virginity. When they both fall for the same charismatic street artist, their friendship is tested and they have to find their way through a tangle of lies and complicated intentions to discover what real love is.  Producers Gale Anne Hurd and Hawk Koch head production; filming is expected to start in September.

     Excuse me, am I missing something here?  Haven't we seen this all before?  I may be a bit old fashioned, behind the times, but it seems to me that a race to loose one's virginity doesn't  rank as one of life's most decorous,  unachievable, not to mention exemplary behaviors . . . I think the word we're looking for here is SLUT. 

     "Get off the table Mable, that money is for the waitress!"  I may be having a Déjà vu moment, but it seems like  we've seen this all before from from the pure at heart, Barnaby and Cornelius . . .  ♫ Out there, there's a world outside of Yonkers . . . ♫  in HELLO DOLLY to the raunchy and debased PORKY and dishonorable mention AMERICAN PIE. Who can forget the unfortunate pairing of Kristy McNichols and Tatum O'Neal in LITTLE DARLINGS, that vacant vapid vacuous 80's summer camp movie, in a race to loose their own virginity.  Yeah, been there, done that.
 

     I for one remain very disappointed in Dakota and her management, that she is unable to find any better material than this.  Saorise Rohan at least got herself cast as an Elf  maiden in "The Hobbit." I might be a little old fashioned, but the last time I checked, getting your cherry popped doesn't exactly rank up there with the achievement of discovering plutonium.

 

Dakota you could do so much better.

HANNA

Sunday

April 10, 2011

HANNA (2011) Okay, let’s be upfront about this, get our cards on the table. I’m a huge fan of girls with guns, I can’t help myself; I just love 'em!  Whether it's the Japanese graphic novel Gunslinger Girls, Natalie Portman in The Professional, or a gun toting Dakota Fanning in Push.  Most recently we were treated to the titular pint-sized foul mouth assassin Chloe Moretz in Kick Ass.  I think it’s safe to say that Hanna will join the pantheon of my favorite tough-girl films.

     Saorise Rohan is Hanna a 16-year-old girl raised in the wild arctic tundra of Finland by her "father" (Eric Bana) an ex-CIA agent.  Trained to be the perfect assassin, young Hanna is sent into the world by her father on a mission, Hanna cuts a swath of dead bodies across Europe all the while eluding agents dispatched after her by a shadowy ruthless intelligence operative with secrets of her own (Cate Blanchett).

      This is Bourne Supremacy meets the brother's Grimm fairy tales, an intense techno-action fable about a teenage girl groomed to be the ultimate assassin. The plot is confusing at times and not enough is explained which makes the whole chase sequences a lot less interesting. Even after the end of the film I still had questions as to the story and the reasons why things happened. There are some obvious plot holes, why does Eric Bana have a big red button, and why does Hanna feel compelled to push it?

     Some of the bad guys have a tendency to spend far more time brushing their teeth and cackling about how "evil" they are than they do developing character.  It seems the bad guys profess far more malevolent vengeance than the thin plot can justify. For her own part, Hanna is capable of bring down a bull moose with a bow and arrow, yet she is naive and sheltered, she's never seen an electric kettle or a ceiling fan, nonetheless, at one point in the film she effortless sits down to a computer and easily Goggles her way into solving the story’s central mystery. These kids now days . . . At this point I gave up trying to keep track of the plot and spent more time wondered, just what in the Sam Hill is going on here?   That’s not to say Hanna is not entertaining, there’s one pulse-pounding chase sequence through a maze of air shafts of a military installation . . . note to self, next time when designing impregnable underground military installation, do not install random unguarded manhole cover.  There is another pursuit through an impossible jumble of shipping containers, owing much of its excitement less to the compelling plot, and more to the pounding beat of the Chemical Bros. techno, trip-hop electronic soundtrack.

     Joe Wright (Atonement) makes very good character-driven movies that are often visually stunning.  This movie is interesting in the way it was filmed. There are parts which seem more like a music video, and then other moments that are sensitive and unexpected. 
      More than a few people have devoted far more time than they should to conjuring up or otherwise fabricating a non-existent rivalry between Dakota Fanning and Saorise Rohan.  I for one don't see the connection, what is clear to me is why Joe Wright chose to work with Rohan again.  Rohan is an absolute star!  This girl has a face the camera loves, with stunning blue eyes and a smattering of girlish freckles,  Saorise is beautiful in that "girl-next-door" sort of way——she possesses a charisma and worldly-wise magnetism that transcends her scant sixteen years.

HANNA (2011) **1/2

"Oh Lola" Oh Dakota!

Sunday

27 March 2011

 

DAKOTA FANNING'S modeling career appears to be on the fast track. Dakota is to be the new cover girl for Marc Jacobs’ new fragrance “Oh Lola.” The campaign was shot by Juergen Teller, who as you may recall is the photographer who shot Fanning’s first campaign for Marc Jacobs back in 2007 when Dak was 13.

     Dakota is beautiful; the photos are however more than a little bit provocative. Fanning is older now, she turned 17 in February, so I guess that's to be expected.  Still one has to question who made the decison to have her pose with a perfume bottle stuck in her crotch. What were they thinking?

On Dakota being naked, redux

Saturday

12 March 2011

ON FEBRUARY 9th, 2007 I wrote an essay titled On Dakota Being Naked. This has proved to be my most popular article on this blog, receiving on average of fifty page requests per day. I stand behind this article and do not retract a single word written—However, it does trouble me that in lieu of the numerous other enlighten articles to appear on this blog—that the apparent prurient nature of this single essay  attracts so much attention.

     It was never my intent to be salacious or provocative. You should understand, this article was written in the days before the movie HOUNDDOG was even released. A great deal of the information was based on a news release by BLUE LINE RADIO based on purported script excerpts from Deborah Kampmeier’s original script. Much of the most inflammatory and licentious aspects of the script never made it to film, viz. The up skirt shots of a then nine-year-old Isabel Fuhrman ORPHAN (2009). Lewellen forces Buddy and Grasshopper to strip naked and she ties them together forcing them to touch each other. A scene where Lewellen stands in front of the full length mirror takes her clothes off and looks at herself naked in the mirror. Daddy sneaks into Lewellen’s bedroom as Lewellen lays in bed in her underpants. Later on he climbs in her bed nude. Daddy wants Lewellen to sit in his lap, Lewellen asks why and he smiles and says because it “feels so good.” None of these scenes ever happened, and if they were in a draft of the script, they never made it on screen.

     In the context of February 2007 we were faced with the very real prospect that  "Fern,"  our fresh faced pig-tailed Fern of CHARLOTTE’S WEB (2006), was about to take off her clothes in front of the camera. That Dakota Fanning, the most prolific and influential young actress of her generation was on the cusp of doing a nude scene. For the record, Dakota NEVER appears nude; Dakota does however spend a considerable amount of screen time, cavorting about in her underwear.  Go figure.

     So where does that leave us?  No where really, underage girls have appeared naked in American film before.  Keira Kightley was sixteen when she took off her top and exposed her boobies in THE HOLE (2001).  Brooke Shields, although no where near as famous as Dakota at the time, does appear nude, lying in repose, on a couch in Louis Malle’s PRETTY BABY (1978).  Jenny Agutter who was a little bit older, but decidedly under age when she appeared nude in Nicolas Roeg’s WALKABOUT (1971). I don’t see anything wrong with the decision by Jenny to appear nude in this film. Jenny was beautiful, the film was poignant and the nudity was crucial to the story.
 

     The first amendment absolutely protects the depiction of a child nudity on the screen. Even full frontal nudity, is protected as long as the child is not depicted in a salacious or overtly sexualized situation. I think the biggest misconception in the public mind is that child nudity, even full frontal nudity is somehow analogous to child porn. I don't think its so much the actual depiction of  a naked child on screen that upset the public, African children appear naked on National Geographic, on Discovery channel all the time without any discernible outrage. No, I think it's more the idea of a famous child appearing nude, that's what really got the public's knickers in a twist! In February of 2007 we suffered credible reporting that Dakota Fanning was prepared to do a nude scene. This absolutely did not happen, and I apologize to my readers for even the appearance of purporting, perpetuating, or otherwise propagating this rumor as it is patently untrue.
 

 

      Our Dakota is no longer a child, she is a young woman, when I recall the tight little black dress Dakota famously wore on the Tonight Show, I get the distinct impression that  Miss Fanning isn't what you might call a particularly shy girl,  (she knows she looks good), she defiantly doesn't mind us "looking." Dakota turned seventeen last month, whether  or not Miss Fanning chooses to take off her clothes on screen anytime soon is entirely her choice.