MovieChat Forums > Hounddog (2007) Discussion > Rape scene was unnecessary

Rape scene was unnecessary

posted 15 years ago by vexx-2
40 replies | jump to latest

**SPOILER ALERT, DO NOT READ BELOW IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS MOVIE***

I'm horrible at names so you'll have to excuse me on that but it really seemed to me that the rape scene was only added for shock value so it would stir up controversy and nothing more. I'm not against rape scenes in movies -- rape is a very powerful issue and many movies that use it do a good job of it. This movie doesn't.

It honestly felt that it was just tacked on. You had the plot developing fine, a typical kids slowly falling in love story. Then when they introduced the rich girl, I thought for sure that the dakota girl would get her heart broken. Really, the whole scene of the rich girl being introduced to dakota and her 'boyfriend' plays out like the typical genre.

So I figured that this boy would somehow betray dakota and become friends with the rich girl. I never expected that instead the boy would bring dakota to be raped by the milk boy o_O The whole scene was crude and utterly useless. The movie could have had the same affect if it was her heart being broken by the boy by him giving the ticket to the rich girl and taking her, as it happened in the movie, without the movie having the rape scene to 'break' dakota's spirit.

Does anyone else agree? That the rape scene was useless and was added for shock value only?

[–] PDX_Dave 9 years ago

I agree the rape scene could've been shot a little "better" though I don't have any specific suggestion, but it was integral to the plot and so therefore I think necessary. For her age at the time I think Dakota Fanning did a great job with that scene, and really the movie in general.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] prplayer 8 years ago

i'm not with you there, having your heart broken and being raped does not have the same effect

so many movies, so little time

[–] Howlin Wolf 8 years ago

Being passed over romantically is an almost universal experience - which thankfully can not be said about rape... so no, I don't agree; it added an extra level of tragedy which made her childhood that much more potent.



"Your mother puts license plates in your underwear? How do you sit?!"

[–] loser (328) 6 years ago

I think this movie aimed at pedophiles (12 year old girl running around lightly dressed all the time, asking boys to show her their reproductive organs and, then, kissing them) although the creators will most likely never admit it. In any case, to please their actual audience, they had to include at least one child sex scene.
But I agree with you that the rape was an unnecessarily cruel scene. The sex could be a consensual act between Lewellen and Buddy. I mean, at some point, it seemed they were making out in a barn (right after the scene a man was struck by lightning) and, if the girl's grandma had not interrupted them, they would probably have gone all the way.
The plot could have gone towards that direction. Why not? Lewellen feels confused after losing her virginity and, to make matters worse, Buddy finally prefers the rich girl.