MovieChat Forums > Little Darlings (1980) Discussion > Little Darlings = Child Porn?

Little Darlings = Child Porn?

posted 17 years ago by A1Matty
36 replies | jump to latest

This is a message from jhutchi63 in response to my claim on the TEACHERS board from a few months ago that music rights may have played a part in why the (TEACHERS) DVD hadn't been released (note that it was released last month). It has to do with his (or her) feelings why LITTLE DARLINGS has and will never be released on DVD:

I keep seeing Little Darlings brought up as an example of how music rights may be to blame for it not being released... Little Darlings is a very poor example to use... Do ya think maybe the reason Little Darlings isn't on DVD might have something to do with... ummm.. because the whole plot revolves around two 15 year old girls competing to see who can get laid first? I mean c'mon... get real... Little Darlings will NEVER see an official USA release... now maybe in a country where movies about screwing underage girls is acceptable you might see one....

Jeez....

Never mind that films already on DVD liken ANGEL and SIXTEEN CANDLES debunk his theory.

I responded to this poster not only by explaining that he/she was a right-wing idiot and debunking his senseless theory, but also by challenging them as to their assertion on the TEACHERS board (the poster claims its because I brought the movie up on the LITTLE DARLINGS board, which is true, but carries no validity to the central argument he/she brought up which has nothing to do with TEACHERS. I challenged the poster to bring his/her thoughts onto the LD board for a true discussion on the matter. However, Since jhutchi63 feels that is not necesary, I will take the incentive and present the argumenat here. If you wouls like to see the rest of the tete-a-tete, please click here:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0088242/board/thread/15102684?d=84297572&p=3#84297572

And please, if you have any input, by all means share them.

Thank you.

reply

[–] nycruise-1 13 years ago

It isn't porn, but it certainly is one of the most sexually-provocative movies ever made featuring young teenage girls that was commercially-released with major stars.

What it really is is a frozen moment in time from the pre-AIDS era: sex has emotional consequences (major ones) but otherwise it feels good.

This movie could not be made today because the sexual freedom and loose attitudes about about hooking up have since been drastically-altered in the wake of AIDS.

Also, there's a lot of "bad behavior" shown (drinking, coming on to adult males) that never gets corrected.

Sure, some of these have been shown in other films, but not to the degree that they are depicted in this movie (Tatum O'Neal rubbing up against Armand Assante in the pool!), or else there is a historic disconnect that allows the viewer to think "that was then, this is now" (e.g., "Pretty Baby" and "Lolita"). This film, on the other hand, hits too close to home: pop music, clothes that are the same as today, etc.

About the only thing in the film that really betrays its age (other than its open sexual attitudes of course) is its lack of racial diversity: all the girls at the camp are white - which of course would never occur in a film of today.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

[–] knight-in-black-leather 13 years ago

The subject matter of "Little Darlings" has no bearing on why it isn't released on DVD. There are films that are so much worse in this regard, that are out on DVD...such as "Kids" and "Thirteen".

Peace to all

"This is a faithful saying...Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief."

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rascal67 12 years ago

So it's not actual porno...................but it does have a bunch of sex-obsessed tweens busting open a condom machine like a piñata.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Fapskeet, I am not quite clear on the point you are making on part of the comment you posted. As far as I am concerned, it's not porno or acutal porno by any means. The scene you are referring to, shows that the girls were aware of safe sex and moreover didn't want to get pregnant if they succeed. It was a humorous situation, keeping in context with the films plot and comedy aspects.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rascal67 12 years ago

Fapskeet, I feel that you are reading way too much into it and making unfounded assumptions as to how you feel some people may perceive this film. Your take on it from my perception, is like you have seen a totally different movie to what I experienced. The young actors in the film were mid teens or late teens. They would have been counseled along with their parents and with the 2 main leads—who were already established actresses and no doubt would have been mature beyond their years—the sexuality themes would have been of no real detriment or consequence to them. Cynthia Nixon and Matt Dillon have since gone on to have more established careers than Oneal or McNicol.

I was 13 when this was first released. I was about to commence high school and how some of the girls carried on in this film and talked, was really no different to how some of the girls in my high school acted. For my era, it was somewhat accurate. It would only be perceived non PC by today's morals about what is right and wrong in our society. I see the film as a coming of age rite of passage from a female perspective and a darn sight better than the idiotic coarse rubbish that was made around the same time about boys wanting to get laid.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cooljoebay2 12 years ago

Any movie can see a DVD release. If it isn't highly marketable (and this one isn't), then it won't in the USA because $MONEY$ is the only thing Americans care about. But it might in Japan since they love everything about America that even America no longer loves. And I am speaking of American corporates, not people like you and I. I mean, I grew up with Greatest American Hero and waited patiently for its release. It came out and bombed because AMERICA decided it wasn't worth the money to keep the songs. I promptly downloaded a pirated DVD set that came from a Spanish country that actually had the music!! Now you tell me how a seemingly poorer country gets the music rights, but America cannot? Seems to me we have a lot of tight azzes in the USA!!

On a different note. I was 8 years old when this movie came out. I saw it many times, mainly because I had the biggest crush on Tatum O'Neal my whole childhood. I am 40 now and still am fascinated by her today. But as much as I would like to encourage my 13 year old daughter to see this movie, I would be a bad parent to do so. In reality, kids will be kids. But in reality, parents don't go around encouraging kids to "be kids" by trying to lose their virginity like its fun.

My parents didn't give a damn what I did and that's probably why I spent a good deal of my life picking up the pieces. Just because Little Darlings is part of your childhood memories, don't screw up your child by pushing them towards it.

reply

[–] rascal67 12 years ago

But in reality, parents don't go around encouraging kids to "be kids" by trying to lose their virginity like its fun.
____________________
No! I should hope not.

This film isn't about parents encouraging their teenage children to go around losing their virginity though, like it's fun. It's about the naivety and innocence of some teenage girls, who think that losing their virginity is one of the most important and grown up things that they can do and not that much of a big of a deal. They learn otherwise by the films end about the scared nature of sexual intimacy.

_________________________

My parents didn't give a damn what I did and that's probably why I spent a good deal of my life picking up the pieces. Just because Little Darlings is part of your childhood memories, don't screw up your child by pushing them towards it.
___________________________________
I don't have children, but I wouldn't recommend this film be watched by any child who isn't a teenager. I hardly think that watching 'Little Darlings' though, would be enough to screw one up; even if they were under 13. It has much charm and sweetness about it. This film is very much a time capsule from it's era anyway and many youngsters today would probably see it as a little dated and innocent in the presentation of the material.

There is stronger and more violent content in PG13 movies that are released today, that many youngsters have easy access too.

reply

[–] Felixthecat34213 11 years ago

I thought this film was incredibly tame for its era, didn't Jodie Foster frequently play very adult roles?

Little Girl down the Lane
Foxes
Taxi Driver (she is a prostitute....but it's lauded as a masterpiece)

I thought Little Darlings was cute, some moments were a bit heavy but if you're a 15 year old you're ready for these themes.

I also thought this was a much better portrayal of teens than anything I've seen. Normally with these films you tend to get an adult's perspective of what it's like to be a teen, but it never actually feels authentic. I thought the characters in Little Darlings came off as authentic teens, where they're still sort of girls but you can tell they're growing up.

reply

[–] rascal67 11 years ago

I thought this film was incredibly tame for its era.......
_________________
Yes it was. It is just the PC police getting on their bandwagon. Anyone who can't see the charm, innocence and pathos behind this production, probably have personal issues that go deeper than anything subversive or corrupt that they possibly think this film is about.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] litcity 9 years ago

People who say crap like that should have their tongues torn out and nailed to their foreheads so the rest of the world can plainly see they're idiots.

reply

1
2