Many posters here are being deliberately blind, because the truth is too uncomfortable.
The film is child pornography. That's its purpose, that's what it was made to be. It's not an accident. The sexually explicit dance scenes, the child nudity and other sexual scenes involving children - these were shot as masturbation material for paedophiles, and will certainly be used by paedophiles for that.
The other purpose of the film is to normalise the sexualisation and eroticisation of young girls. Hence it is not just masturbation material for paedophiles, it is propaganda for them too.
The black female Muslim director is a cover. She was hired as the 'face' of the film, just as the supposed 'exploring female empowerment and culture clash' storyline is a cover for showing lots of scenes with young girls nude or partially nude and acting out sexual situations.
Seriously, how dumb are people? So many people parroting 'the director is a black Senegalese woman' blah blah blah. As if that makes it OK to release a film that shows close-ups of little girls' crotches while they mime sexual acts. Of course the director is a woman. As if they'd hire a man to front this film. He'd be rumbled in a second.
If you ignore what people are telling you the film is about, and instead trust the evidence of your own eyes, this is plainly obvious. There is no non-nefarious reason to shoot the dance scenes in the obviously pornographic way they have been shot. it's not an accident that the scenes were shot that way. It's the purpose of the scenes. If you were revolted by the footage, it's not because you're too unsophisticated to get the director's vision, or because you are too prudish. It's because you're not a paedophile. You are not the audience for this.
BUT this is being released on Netflix to see how much you will tolerate. How far can they push the public with this material? If they get away with 'Cuties' (again, the title proves how much of this is IN PLAIN SIGHT), they will keep pushing the boundaries on how openly children can be eroticised in this culture. As well as the legal boundaries of what children can be directed to do or have done to them on film.
If a child can’t consent to sex acts, they shouldn’t be able to consent to pornography- especially giving the permanent nature of film.
Yes. This film is designed to push those boundaries, among others.
It's interesting that this film comes out in the same year as an Austrian film about a man who builds his own child sex android. That film has implied sex scenes, with nudity, between the man and the 'android', who is played by a real child. The child actress was required to film those scenes with the adult actor for that film, which was also (supposedly) conceived and directed by a young woman.
www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/melbourne-international-film-festival-dumps-android-child-sex-film-20200725-p55fdr.html
I think we will see more films of this nature in coming years. And every one of them will be directed by young women. Young female directors are the obvious cover for paedophiles to push this stuff into the mainstream.