A drama set in the American South, where a precocious, troubled girl finds a safe haven in the music and movement of Elvis Presley.
|Hounddog Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 624x352 px||Total Size: 692 Mb|
|Hounddog Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x272 px||Total Size: 278 Mb||
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) Why do I rate a film 3 that I really liked? If you have read my other reviews you know. There are no subtitles or closed captions. Every film that is released with out one of these is a slap in the face to everyone that has any sort of hearing difficulty.People have angrily disagreed with me on this policy. The fact is, I don't care so don't waste your time. There is no excuse for a major film to be released on DVD with eith Subtitles of Closed Captions.Otherwise what I could hear of the film was quite good. Ms. Fanning was just born to act.
As I think about the brief career of Dakota Fanning there is a certainsadness that she is no longer a child and now has to begin acceptingyoung adult roles. Just 2 weeks ago I saw her in "The Secret Life ofBees" where she was clearly into adolescence. But here she appears tobe only 11 or at most 12 during filming and still looks like a child.The reason I mention all this is the role here forces her to grow uprather quickly because it involves adult themes of rape and borderlineincest. I am not worried about young Dakota, I am sure she is smartenough and wise enough to separate role-playing from real life, but itis still a little bit sad to see her having to grow up. But she appearsto have a good shot at a brilliant career as an actress.But the movie itself is not as superb. You have to view the DVD extraon the "making of" to really understand the motivation of thewriter/director, who a few years earlier made a movie called "Virgin."The two movies have a common theme, the violence towards a largefraction of girls growing up, and also what she perceives as thenegative influence of "religion." In essence her movies are put outthere to champion a cause, which is a worthy one, but she uses a sledgehammer to get her own points across.The movie is set in the 1950s during the early popularity of ElvisPresley, in rural Alabama, where almost everyone is related to everyoneelse. Dakota Fanning is Lewellen, and is mostly being raised by PiperLaurie as her Grammie. David Morse is her Daddy and he lives nearby,but isn't really the "daddy" type. When he has an unfortunate accident,getting struck by lightning while plowing one day, he really getsstrange and often approaches his young daughter as if she were a hussyfor his pleasure. Fortunately the script does not develop that idea andit remains fairly tame. But it was clear to me the writer was making acomment on dads who may lust after their daughters.Robin Wright Penn plays a curious character who young Lewellen findswith her dad. Only after the movie plays out a bit do we figure outthat she is also the daughter of Grammie, and in fact was Daddy'sgirlfriend before he impregnated her sister, who became Lewellen's mom.So Penn plays a role that in actuality is Lewellen's aunt.The movie is dark and unhappy for the most part, as it seeks to preacha message of warning of violence against young women. Plus thedirector's own prejudice against organized religion. I found itinteresting mainly for the superb acting of young Dakota Fanning, whoplays a carefree girl who doesn't understand that she is becoming anattraction to men.SPOILERS: The title is a reference to Lewellen's fascination withElvis. He is coming to do a concert and she desperately wants a ticket.She is told she can have one, all she has to do is take off her clothesand show herself to a local teenager who also delivers milk to therural houses. But the boy has other ideas, and he rapes Lewellen whodoesn't really understand what is going on. Dad remains a blitheringidiot after his encounter with lightning, but an old and wise localblack man befriends her and helps her see a light at the end of herlong tunnel.
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) I dunno what the critics said about this film and i could care less. Dakota Fanning plays a young girl in the south who's growing up and learning about this and that and is clearly mad over Elvis. She sings Hounddog many times in the film so now the song is stuck in my head for eternity. I think this is the first time, Dakota does a rape scene and I say she pulled it off really well. You can tell she's a great actress and is not afraid to go certain areas. I know some people were anal about the scene and i wasn't wild about it, but if you going to watch a film, you have to be open-minded about what you see and just enjoy the film as a whole. And finally, Piper Laurie and David Morse also played their roles just as good.
I really enjoyed this movie. It was very interesting and the acting ofDakota was very good. I watched it twice to really get the feel and thepoint that this movie was trying to present. I have always been a fanof Dakota and her acting in this movie was not a disappointment. The"rape scene" was well done so as not to look too offensive. The moviewas showing the life of an innocent girl in a small town and how shelived playfully and without any kind of guilt or fear of anything.Kudos to the director and all the actors of this film. This is a moviethat shows how encouragement and determination can help a person tostand up again after falling and being an unintented victim ofsomebody's evil desires.
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) I'm generally with the 'positive' crowd concerning the film. I give zero stars to the feminist claptrap peddled by Director Kampelmeir in a mostly worthless "making of" bonus.
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) Great movie!Dakota Fanning and the whole cast are just fantastic.A bit controversial to some people, but nothing else than real life cinema.
If anyone, anywhere, reads this and possibly wonders "why?" I writethis for them...I compulsively scour the world for information on this topic. Quietly.Privately. With a deep personal sense of shame and regret for a lifesquandered by others for no other reason than their apparent glee intorturing children. I have some need, driven by my own personalnightmares, to find that I am not alone; that there might be just onehuman being out there who cares, who understands, who wants to helpmake things better. Perhaps Deborah Kampmeier understands . . .Something certainly had to compel her to write this script. Yes,perhaps she is one.What I don't understand is the simple-minded tyrant mentality of thosewho can't live peacefully enough in their own brains to allow otherpeople to try to understand. They want to impose silence and ignoranceof the rest of humanity because it might somehow make them feelartificially more secure; or less uncomfortable. That sense of comfortthey seek is a lie as long as the real world lives to mock them, theirsecurity a fantasy.But pretending it doesn't exist doesn't make it actually go away. Ifdoing that would, my own world would be so much different, so much morepeaceful today that it is. I would not have had to spend more than thelast 10 years in therapy to try to find a way to allow myself to livein my own skin; to feel less self-loathing and disgust over the imagesand sounds and the memory of smells I can never erase from my head. Iwouldn't fear going to sleep every night because I was terrified of thedreams that would return to haunt me.Unfortunately, I don't have to see a film to know what it's like to bea child and be abused. I have too many of my own real personal memoriesof what it's like to be beaten; to be raped; to be reduced in value tothat of a used rag, discarded, tossed carelessly into some dark, dankcorner, to be forgotten. God forbid that I should find an iota ofsolace by sharing the experiences - my experiences - with the others bywatching similar things on the screen. God forbid that any actor oractress should even want to bring that kind of peace, that degree ofcomfort to anyone else through the vehicle of their talent.Perhaps the same kind of people who world do those things to others arealso the ones who would scream the loudest to prevent other people fromseeing it. Or maybe they are the sort who can't stand the fact thatthey might find themselves sitting alone in a dark theater, sharing asmidgen of emotion with others that might actually make them want totake some sort of action in real life to help those like me, orespecially, to help the young. God forbid that anyone should actuallyfind help, or compassion, or love, or understanding in such a film asthis. What kind of a world would we have then if that tragedy happened?Yes, by all means possible, ban it.Or you might consider the great good it might do. This film is aninanimate object. It cannot corrupt or debase us without ourcooperation by simply existing and expressing ideas. It can, however,serve as an example of a very real evil; that we can learn from, butonly if it exists and is seen.My warmest regards Ms. Kampmeier, I hope I might be able to see thisfilm of yours some day, Bruce L. Jones
Apparently there is a controversial rape scene in this movie, I wouldn't know because the movie is so bad I had to turn it off before that scene.
To keep it brief the movie was just OK for me although there were acouple of decent performances. As a southerner I always hate it when Ihear overly exaggerated Southern drawl. It's like fingernailsscreeching down a blackboard to me. In retrospect I quite liked DavidMorse' character. In my opinion he took far more risk than Ms. Fanningas the "addled" father. We also got a glimpse of the gifted singer JillScott. What was the point? Simple. Music can be used as a conduit for healingwhen no other options exist AND that there is less difference betweenwhite and black than there is between rich and poor.You had to watch the whole movie, pay attention and understand that therape scene was part of the set up for the true message and not thepoint of the movie itself.I could ramble on......but I won't.
Superb performances, top-notch production values, edgy material... all critical elements to making "HOUNDDOG" one of the best indie dramas in years!
I am giving Hound Dog 4 stars because of the storyline, a cultural setting, and acting. Dakota Fanning can save just about any movie. The toughest thing about this movie is it is dark and quite a bit depressing. So if you are looking for a feel good movie....this is not it. If you want a very deep and dark movie then I recommend this to you. Dakota Fanning keeps amazing me of her ability to bring out the character with such clarity and feeling.
OVERALL: A disaster. 1/10 (There's no 0.) PLOT: 1/10 - the story isabout a troubled girl living with her father and grandmother in aroundthe 1960s in the South of the USA. She is rather wild. The story isabout all her sexual experiences including a rape, and if she canovercome them. She loves Elvis and is very excited that he is coming toher town. She believes he will take her away from her miserable lifeand make her a famous singer.STORYLINE: 1/10 - not enjoyable to watch. Not easily believable. Notinteresting. Not engaging and no nice characters. Even the protagonistwas easily hated.ACTING: 3/10 - there were some good bits. Fanning had some good bitsand a couple of other scenes by the other actors, both unknown andwell-known. Morse was a bit blunt. Hanford was over the top in most ofhis scenes, as was Laurie. Fuhrman was nothing special, but okay.Nothing remarkable from Wright Penn either.CINEMATOGRAPHY: 2/10 - mediocre at best, but at least it was watchable,no silly gimmicks that made you feel seasick.MUSIC: 2/10 - some nice ideas but often poorly chosen.MESSAGES: 1/10 - none. This film didn't give any messages about rape.But did it have to? Well, no. But seeing as the people involved aretrying to pretend it does have messages, then it should have.
This is the little girl who played scared in War of the Worlds with TomCruise. It looks like she has been pulled out of that film as the samecharacter, as anemic and ill as ever, bullied, and then raped. Its astupid rape scene that lasts for a few minutes and as I watched it Iwould only think of the director and the cameras as it seemed sostaged. The story is nothing new, and the acting is terrible. The musicis badly chosen and more importantly it does not deliver. I think thatthe only hope the producers and actors have is that the bad publicitythat the film has brought from the Catholic Church, may get a fewperverts into the cinema. Save your time and watch something biggerbudget.
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) Amateurish writing and directing. The plot was totally unconvincing, and full of holes. It just sort of rambled along making little dramatic sense. I guess anyone can make a movie these days. Dakota Fanning wandered through the film seemingly lost and looking for a plot, but did the best she could with the poor material, but it was hopeless. Don't waste your time or money with this disaster of a flick.
Just watched this dreck, forcing myself to persist through its blessedend (more blessed had Lewellen been fatally bitten by a rattler as shewaltzed away). The good news is that the film's well shot and somewhatevocative of the South, albeit with typical stereotypes firmly inplace. Lots of heavy-handed symbolism, too, the most obvious being thesnakes.Also, most of the actors are top-notch, though they've all been betterthan in this morass, likely thanks to superior scripting and directingin other properties. David Morse is always great and stands out herefor maintaining a little integrity within the story's confines;actually, I think he'd make a great "Simple Jack" if the producers of"Tropic Thunder" decide to greenlight that project. Piper Laurie isgood, too, though her role's small and one-dimensional. GranoldoFrazier's a very appealing screen presence with great gravitas despitehis role being largely a clichÃ©, the so-called 'Magic Negro' visible ina plethora of films running the gamut from "The Shining" to "The Toy"(not a hallmark of BAD films, necessarily -- many such films are verygood -- but undeniably a stock clichÃ© so venerable that if you're goingto add to the subgenre you'd better make it a good one).Dakota Fanning is hard to take here. I remember being taken aback byher competence as an actor in earlier films, and NOT just in light ofher extreme youth. But in "War Of The Worlds" she was just terminallyannoying. To be fair, any little kid and most adults facing invasion byaliens that nasty would probably spend a good deal of the timescreaming and collapsing into gibbering heaps of protoplasm, but itwasn't the situational reactions of her character that bothered me somuch as a very tangible sense that, somehow, throughout she's just alittle too CONSCIOUS that she's acting, and it shows. It seemed, to me,that she's basically screaming with every line and every look "LOOK!I'm an ACTOR! And I'm a REALLY GOOD ONE!!" In this "Hounddog" fiasco Iget exactly the same feeling, and it both distracts and undermines thefilm, or WOULD undermine the film if the film wasn't flawed fatallyfrom the outset. Actually, I thought that young Cody Hanford, as Buddy,was far more convincing and natural in his role and how he played it.The film is badly directed. The story's pretty stultifying, anyway.There're a few places where things aren't too clear; the one that hadme most adrift was when Robin Wright Penn's character has her car towedand leaves. There're some true Whiskey Tango Foxtrot moments, too, likethe caretaker having Big Mama Thornton ensconced in his hayloft andapparently being familiar with the process for making snake antiveninfrom scratch (okay, that one's slightly more plausible).I'm a big-time Elvis fan and student of the man's career and so, ofcourse, this film's LOADS of fun for me, or would be if I actuallyENJOYED running across rampant and unnecessary inaccuracies. This sortof thing is standard in film but in this case you're talking about aman whose OBSCURE songs are familiar only to a few MILLION and theerrors in this film were totally avoidable; correcting them wouldn't atall have diminished the integrity of the piece. First, I find itreally, really hard to believe that Lewellen, of all people, wouldblissfully ignore the fact that the volume was turned down on Elvisduring his controversial airing of "Hound Dog" on Milton Berle's TVshow and even harder to believe that she'd turn her back to the silentscreen while performing her imitation (an imitation based on that verybroadcast). Okay, cinematic license but, still... Regardless, giventhat even the richest families in the '50s didn't have VCRs or Tivo,this scene sets the date as June 5, 1956. It's hard to figure whattime-traveling magic allows Lewellen to buy a copy of "Peace In TheValley" (that Elvis recorded in January, 1957) and go even further intothe future to learn the lyrics to Elvis' 1961 movie song "Can't HelpFalling In Love." Just to add to the fun, when the big night of Elvis'show arrives he can be heard singing "Love Me Tender" with the '70sarrangement, another totally unnecessary and conscious goof. Further,and here I realize that artistic license trumps all, Elvis didn't playanywhere in Alabama during 1956 (or 1957); his final concert in thestate, until he returned on tour in September of 1970, was inMontgomery on December 3, 1955. The same error's present in "Heart OfDixie." Still, these anachronisms are not as bad as the execrable"Cadillac Records," a nicely shot and dressed film with great music andgreat acting that falsely and terribly accuses a real living (well,dead, now) person of outright murder and, admittedly not quite as bad,shows Elvis in 1956 film footage dubbed to a 1969 performance of "MyBabe" on TV and shows jail-bound Chuck Berry looking at (if I recallcorrectly) Army footage of Elvis, proclaiming something about thisbeing the new King, and all of this AFTER the Rolling Stones and BeachBoys entered the narrative, leading me to the obvious conclusion thatElvis Presley, influenced by the Rolling Stones, Beach Boys, and thatfamed gunslinger Little Walter, didn't begin his professional riseuntil about 1968 or 1969.People, when you insert one of the most famous and scrutinized peoplein HISTORY into your films, be ready for some nitpicking. Do it welland we'll forgive you. Do it badly, or in a bad film (like this one),and we'll call you on it.In the end, the only part of this film worth a damn was in the trailer:Elvis (impersonator Ryan Pelton, who manages a good likeness) blowingthe kiss to Lewellen. That was pretty cool.
I have to give this film a 7 because it really got me thinking,particularly the character "Buddy" that Cody Hanford (a fantasticactor) played. I didn't fully buy the radical character change thatBuddy apparently went through half way through the film, the directordid not really show any gradual change in Buddy, and we are leftwondering how such a caring, sweet boy can behave so callously andmaliciously. I think that the film-maker portrayed Buddy far toosimplistically, and this was a failing point of the film because to meBuddy's complex character and actions - and guilt - were the mostinteresting parts of the film. Although Buddy's character change seemedtoo extreme (or at least too unexplained)to be believable, Cody Hanforddid a great job and his character really interested me. I keep thinkingabout the guilt that a young sensitive 10-ish year old boy would haveto deal with and live with, after acting the way that he did. He wastrying to fit in with the cruel older guys, and supported them afterthe rape rather than Dakota even though he clearly felt guilty formaking a deal with the milk boy (rapist). Part of Buddy's harshtreatment of Dakota after the rape was probably because he felt soguilty. SPOILER: Buddy is a sweet and very sensitive, caring 10ish year old boywho is best friends with Dakota early in the film. His dad beats himup. He doesn't seem to have other friends. He almost drowns in thelake, Dakota rescues him, and he makes her promise not to tell anyonethat he can't swim. Buddy later sees Dakota crying because she has nomoney for Elvis tickets and he begs Dakota, "don't cry, please don'tcry. I will get you those tickets, I promise". She is mean to him &tells him that she doesn't have time to play with him until he gets herthose tickets. Buddy makes a deal with an older teenage boy, who promises to give him2 tickets if he can get Dakota to do her 'Hounddog' song in front ofhim, naked. Dakota agrees to do this in exchange for a 'Hounddog'ticket, but the teenage boy rapes her (in front of ashocked/traumatized Buddy). In church soon after Buddy looks at Dakota then whispers to his new(girl)friend, and they both laugh at her. After church Buddy's newgirlfriend tells Dakota that she and Buddy are going to go see Elvisperform that night. Buddy looks guilty & ashamed. Later that night,Dakota watches them exit the Elvis performance. Buddy waves goodbye tohis girlfriend and hops happily into the truck of the older teenage boywho raped Dakota, who drives him home. Buddy plays pool with the older teenage boys later that night,including the rapist, and seems happy (until Dakota's mentally impairedfather wanders into the room naked and the boys poke him with poolsticks; Buddy is terrified & hides under the table, indicating he hasbeen traumatized from watching Dakota's earlier rape). Dakota is very ill & Buddy overhears her grandmother worry that Dakotamight be dying. In the final film scene that involves Buddy, Buddybrings up his worries with the teenager who raped Dakota, saying "ifshe dies, it will be our fault" and "you might have broken somethinginside of her". His fears are dismissed by the older teenagers who justjoke about the rape. Buddy clearly feels guilty about betraying Dakota. I think that Buddy changed far too drastically in the film, and with nowarning. How could such a sensitive, caring boy turn into such arevenge-seeking callous child? There should have been a scene showing Buddy hanging out with the olderboys after Dakota refused to play with him (before the rape) as theboys talked about sex/drank beer (we needed a pre-rape scene showingthat Buddy was becoming friends with the older boys, and moving hisloyalty from Dakota to them instead). Also, Buddy should have seemed more worried/guilty/afraid when makingthe deal, or when telling Dakota what she had to do to earn her ticket. I think there should have been a tense scene of Buddy & the milk boy(the rapist) interacting after the rape, exploring how Buddy respondedto what the milk boy did. All we see after the rape is Buddy hangingout with & having fun with the milk boy. We know that Buddy feels veryguilty and ashamed for his part in the rape, but he never turns hisanger/hostility/fear onto the milk boy.
This review is from: Hounddog (DVD) just a quick note to say the story was wonderful and great to see how she dealt with her tragic life.I was not the least be offended or anything like that. This should never have been baned. I was totaly tasteful.
I'm baffled as to how this is rated so high on IMDb. As you may or maynot have noticed, the dust has finally settled and this movie wasreleased. The controversy has died down over one stupid rape scene andnow we can watch a movie. So because this movie has DF taking on a moremature role, it's automatically a good movie, right? Wrong.THis movie was ridiculous. It's thinly veiled child porn at its mostobvious.About the rape, it's NOWHERE NEAR as bad as what everyone's making itout to be. It just felt thrown in there to shock the audience. It'sdiscussed in talks, as for the actual rape scene itself is ridiculous.It's NOT AS BAD AS EVERYONE'S SAYING. It's like 12 seconds long. Yousee her face and hand in closeup.Even more so about the rape, what follows is just ridiculous. Shepretty much becomes a zombie. I've seen movies where people DF's agewhere they go through worse and they don't act as bad as she does. And"Elvis' music is evil"? Weird.Seriously, there's not a single memorable moment in this. It's justthinly veiled child porn. Avoid.Oh, and I am completely disgusted with the director and her agent.After the rating fell into the 5 zone, and almost all the reviews begancommenting on the same negative attributes, all of a sudden the reviewpage is filled with 10 star reviews with the same comments. SHame onthe director for not letting a product stand on its own, and evenfurther, shame on her for telling her audience that their opinions areas worth as much cheaply bought plastic.
Curiosity got the best of me and I finally saw this controversial film on DVD in late July of 2009. The controversy centered around a rape scene and whether an 12-year-old girl should be acting out scenes like that. Well, when you're Dakota Fanning and your parents have already placed you in R-rated movies beginning at the age of seven or eight, I guess this is no big deal to them.Actually, I thought the story was interesting - not boring; the acting decent (Fanning is always good), and the photography good.What I found objectionable were way too many scenes with the thin 12-year-old (when the movie was made) Fanning in just her underwear, with a lot of closeup shots of her groin area. Man, how stupid can filmmakers be? This must be a favorite film of pedophiles. In this day-and-age (or any age, for that matter), do you really think it's a good idea to do that? Director/writer Deborah Kampmeier, apparently sees nothing wrong with it, along with having the young girl walking around with her totally naked dad, played by David Morse.Also, if you read discussions on the film from people who saw the movie at the theater, there were several more very shocking scenes that were not even in this DVD version. Kampmeier is an example of liberal extremism run amok. She sees this all as "sexually liberating" women from an early age. That the woman talks about at length on the interview part of the DVD. She also likes to bash Christianity. It figures.In an era of Internet child porn, is it any wonder few theaters would show this movie, and that many people walked out of the theaters during screenings of this film (which were far more explicit than what's on the DVD)? The only thing is, all the editing that took place for the DVD, it made the story way too confusing with no answers on several key issues. Overall, it turns out to be a mess of a film.
I actually thought the film was pretty good. I read several reviews andit seemed like it was going to be terrible. A lot of people also saidthat the acting was bad, specifically Dakota Fanning's performance. Ithought Dakota did a great job at the role, alright some parts were abit rough around the edges. I don't know what people were talkingabout.The film had a good storyline. The only thing I would've changed wasthat the children in the movie seemed a bit young for the things theywere doing. I know it was supposed to be set in a different time, butthey should've been at least 12 or 13, instead of 8 or 9 like theyactually were. Overall I did like the film. I'm 14 and I was a bit nervous watchingit, but it really isn't anything bad unless you can't handle emotionalmovies. A job well done!