Hounddog

Reading some of the reviews here, and elsewhere, it is clear that the reviewers haven't actually seen this film - unless there are lots of different versions out there. They didn't see the film I did, for sure. There is no gratuitous or graphic violence or sex, and the only bit of nudity comes courtesy of David Morse's behind. If anything, a little more sex or violence might have enabled more of today's jaded audience to actually get the point of this movie.

As I understand it, the story they are trying to tell (in my opinion, unsuccessfully but more of that later) is of an adolescent girl who over a short period of time, due to a sequence of unfortunate events, goes from expressing herself through the voice of Elvis, to eventually being able to express her true self with her own voice, with help from Charles (Afemo Omilami).

As a story it holds water, is certainly - unfortunately - true to life and the central role is played with much maturity and sensitivity by Dakota Fanning (bar her mandatory screaming-for-no-reason scene) who may or may not have over-egged her performance (I don't know what was and wasn't said by her) but she is the one carrying this film, and it is not her fault that through clumsy editing and a weak screenplay the story kinda gets lost in the overall dullness.

None of the supporting characters are particularly well described and just when we do think we're getting to know them ... cut to a completely different scene. It's almost as if this was a vehicle for a 12-13 year old Dakota Fanning, which is not doing her, her co-stars or the film any favours. It perhaps should have been longer, and less time devoted to the relationship with her father which isn't particularly relevant to the story I think they're trying to tell.

My advice is watch it and make up your own mind, but don't expect to be shocked, disgusted, or entertained. The brief glimpses of humour and happiness are lost amongst the monotony of dull sound and scenery. Where's the rock'n'roll, where's the blues? Where are all the characters that surely must have been in the story, in the south, in the 1950s?

A worthy attempt to tell a powerful story, but lacking in flair and direction.

The voter of 7 was mostly for Dakota and her excellent acting. The story was admittedly slow and plot fairly thin, but then it is a Chick Flick, which is all about emotions and relationships, so pace and plot is somewhat irrelevant. The acting was superb all the way around. I saw it based on Dakota being in it. Everyone else's acting was very good from David Morse, Piper Laurie and the Snake Guy. A better Southern Goth tale is Winter's Bone, but like my summary says "If you love Dakota Fanning then it is worthwhile." FYI - I did not hear about all the "controversy" about Dakota's character getting raped. It didn't influence me one way or the other. I have known that this has happened and showing it in context is not inflammatory, although if you were a victim and it still greatly messes with your mind, I don't think seeing it would help.

Shot in 2006 and released in 2007 this film has some good things about it. The acting is quite strong from Dakota Fanning, she does a very good southern accent. There's a nice yellow tint to it, colours look lovely, the production design very well recreates the 1950s rural southern poverty while the music of Elvis acts as a great soundtrack. The hot nights and church services and sense of reality is very much present in the film. It's a story of a girl who uses music to get through tough times and grow as a person. There's also a real loss of innocence that comes along too in the film and it can at times be quite grim. Religion is not well portrayed in the film either, it's fixation on rock and roll is shown as being ill thought through while one woman who prides herself as being a firm Christian is perhaps the most unforgiving character in the story. There's lots of snake imagery to it too. I also did wonder why nobody seemed to go to school.

The film is also quite slow paced, very much a slow burner.

12 years old is certainly old enough to understand what rape is. Dakota is by far one of the most intelligent actresses in her field today. She's probably smarter than most of the other actors she is working with. For anyone to blindly judge what she is capable of understanding is absurd. I would gather that is is highly certain that Dakota's parents were directly involved in every aspect of this film, and that the director and other film personnel understood that this was a very sensitive subject. However, I would believe that in this country we as a society have a responsibility to not only the children, but also ourselves to stop hiding these kinds of issues. Some of the reasons there are problems with people understanding issues of this nature (rape, drug use, etc.) is because all this subject matter is considered too "taboo" to put into a mainstream film. We sugarcoat everything to the point where it ceases to have anything real about it. Dakota is one actress who, thankfully, isn't afraid to put herself out there and let it fly. She did it in Man On Fire, and this is no different. Wake up America!

I saw the premiere back in 07 in Sundance yes some people booed and some walked out. Some people will fault the obvious metaphors but Dakota deserves a 10 for her performance like Morgan Freeman she can save movies and she does here. The 'controversy' was not founded in the least. I also believe it to be her best performance since man on fire I will of course not give a thing away about the film or what happens suffice it to say her character is someone you want to see win even with her flaws. One scene dares you to see her in a bad way but it never seemed to happen for me. The movie is set deep in the swamps of the south. The first scene in which Dakota's character propositions her friend was a shock for me to I wasn't all the way prepared for her slightly adult turn yet I realized that she was making a turn or step forward in her career.