Hounddog (2007) User Reviews

There WAS a point.....

[davidfrazier42 · 7/10 · 9 April 2007]

To keep it brief the movie was just OK for me although there were a couple of decent performances. As a southerner I always hate it when I hear overly exaggerated Southern drawl. It's like fingernails screeching down a blackboard to me. In retrospect I quite liked David Morse' character. In my opinion he took far more risk than Ms. Fanning as the "addled" father. We also got a glimpse of the gifted singer Jill Scott.

What was the point? Simple. Music can be used as a conduit for healing when no other options exist AND that there is less difference between white and black than there is between rich and poor.

You had to watch the whole movie, pay attention and understand that the rape scene was part of the set up for the true message and not the point of the movie itself.

I could ramble on......but I won't.

If you love Dakota Fanning then it is worthwhile

[jeffreyjets · 7/10 · 9 June 2011]

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.

Dakota excellent again!

[joshsittre · 7/10 · 11 April 2008]

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.

Dakota is old enough to understand...

[trappercat2002 · 13 March 2007]

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!

Nice film about Jenny, but where's Forrest?

[hi_im_manic · 7/10 · 29 November 2011]

Cliché after cliché is revisited, and yet this film still holds a respectable place of its own. Think of this film as a prequel to Forrest Gump, and it could be named "Jenny's Story".

Here are just a few of the clichés to be seen, they are typical of a film set in the mid-late 50's, in a rural southern town: aggressive alcoholic cad of father who's always angry. Parents unmindful of children's well-being. Ramshackle homes in disrepair. Dirty, barefoot children left unattended. Kids buying and/or drinking beer. Over-zealous religious nut-jobs. Abused women who accept mistreatment. Trampy chain-smokers. Perverted pedophiles. Playing in the crick'. Soulful black people in oppression. Granny with a shotgun. Horrible homemade fashions. Blues and soulful music. Family love triangles. Home grown foods. Kids getting "whoopin's". Dangerous critters running amok. Pitiful characters. Creepy characters. Old myths and legends. Mutt gets shot. White plantation home. Corn fields. Sage older black man. Broke down rusted vehicles. A fiery church service... trust Me, I COULD keep going. It is through these devices that we get a real feel of the crude existence of some within our "civilized society" at different places and times.

At least they spared us the usual overworked southern accents, and graphic displays of domestic violence!

Let's face it. Some of these stereotypical clichés are completely necessary for a story of this type. You can't make biscuits without flour (southern pun). Fact is, many of these things were true fixtures at that time. My grandmother and aunts can testify as much.

Fanning's performance is the feature presentation here. It's almost award worthy, almost. Perhaps it could have won, if in a different movie. She is convincing and displays just the right amount of intensity in this serious role. She is bearing the weight of a time-period drama of a sensitive nature, and does so remarkably well for someone of her age and career experience.

Even when Lewellens actions are not wise, we understand that she's still a naive child full of hope and wonder. Lewellen is indeed precocious and independent but she's an innocent and ill-equipped to perceive why others will hurt and disappoint her.

Family support is non-existent. What family she has is threatening and harsh. Family kills her dog, abandons her on a whim, can't provide, can't offer comfort or affection, makes her feel guilt and isolates her from her friends. Her friends and peers aren't very good either, when they can betray her maliciously.

What Lewellen does have is music, a love for Elvis and his songs. Although such things are demonized by her grandmother, Lewellen finds a safe place to express herself within them. Performing Elvis' songs brings joy, a sense of pride, and something for which to dream in an otherwise depressive place.

We want to see Lewellen succeed and have some happiness, the audience cares for this character and her plight. We wish her predicament weren't so bleak and the people in her life weren't so utterly worthless (save one exception).

There was an ominous cloud lingering around the father during the whole movie, it was as if he may lose control at any moment and abuse his daughter. Every scene with the two of them together was uneasy, even though the daughter didn't behave apprehensively.

I thought the sets on this film were pretty good, so sure, they need some cinematic showcasing. There's reportedly some goofs (dealing with cars) but since I'm not an antique car expert, I was never distracted. The editing could have been better tailored, I can't quite pinpoint the specifics that could have been improved to make this film a classic... several production values are just "off" a little bit.

I did not find the snake imagery obtrusive. It conveyed the message of being strangled by sin, depravity, and shame. It represents the differing types of venom that poisonously consume a person... this message was depicted in various other ways throughout the film.

One could easily sift through this film for life lessons and spiritual significance, and not be disappointed. The films ends leaving you unsatisfied, but at least it ends on the appropriate note.

" There are places where you can hide, but your conscience is not one of them "

[thinker1691 · 6/10 · 3 October 2009]

In the hidden recesses of the South, there are many tragic stories which emerge about how brutal life is. Often such stories can make it to the big screen and illustrate how difficult it is to put it on film. 'Bastard out of Carolina' and 'Betrayed' are but two examples. Here is another which was purportedly so shocking few would be able to finish it. The movie is called " Hounddog " and relates the early life of a little girl named Lewellen (Dakota Fanning) who lives in a shabby, ram shackled house with her itinerant, slightly retarded father, (David Morse) who is scratching out a modest living as a farmer. Helping to raise Lewellen is "Grammie" (Piper Laurie) her Grandmother, a strict, overbearing and often religiously intolerant relative who keeps the family secrets and indiscretion records of all the "Sins" committed by the family. Lewellen has one close friend named 'Buddy' (Cody Hanford) whom she trusts and shares what little happiness there is in her life. Lewellen has one overpowering ambition and that is to imitate her idol, Elvis Presley (Ryan Pelton). To this end, she will do anything to see him in a live concert. So driven is she to her quest, she allows herself to be tricked and raped. The controversial scene is almost non-existent and nothing if transient. The editing, dialog, directing and script are poor and few scenes are given much depth. So much so, one concludes the story and it's integral film parts are juvenile, haphazard and often amateurish at best. One aspect of the movie should be noted and that is Lewellen's friendship with the neighboring black character called Charles (Afemo Omilami) who offers understanding, comfort, sage advice and medicinal education concerning snakes and the intention of enemies. The movie has gained little accolades aside from the controversy. In short, the movie is interesting, but little which will propel audiences to remember it. **

Beautiful film

[belindajmay · 6/10 · 7 July 2009]

Wonderful film. The actors are very convincing. The film takes place in the 1950's and everything about the film is just as I imagined it would be at that time. Dakota Fanning is such an amazing actress. The main character Lewellen lives such a tragic life very reminiscent of the main character in Bastard Out of Carolina. If you loved that film, then you'll probably love this one. Although this one is toned down a lot from Bastard Out of Carolina. Watching Lewellen fall from something so innocent into a tragedy is heartbreaking. I just kept wishing for things to get better for her. Some people may think that the main characters are stereotypically southern, but I come from the South and grew up in conditions not to different from Lewellens, and there ain't nothing' stereotypical about it. From the grandma with a shotgun to treating snake bites with whiskey. This is an amazing film. Give it a chance!

Ultimately very disappointing.

[MattD12027 · 4/10 · 24 January 2007]

This is a bad film. It is not really Dakota's fault, but to be honest I wasn't really impressed with her this time around. I felt like she was a little too much, a little too melodramatic, and definitely not as real as she is in her other films. The real problems with this film lie in the directing, the script, and the pacing. It's poorly filmed (though beautifully lensed), the script panders to too many stereotypes to even enumerate, and even though it's very short, it crawls along.

All the controversy about the rape is unfounded, too, because it actually is only a very small piece of the movie. You see her face twice and her hand once, and you hear her. I'd say it was 45 seconds. Maybe not even that long.

Anyways, color me disappointed. Definitely not worth all the hype, and I really wish Dakota could have found a better filmmaker(s) and film(s) during all the time she wasted as this film sat in preproduction. I hope this doesn't affect her career too much.

If it were French, Americans would be singing its praises

[fertilecelluloid · 8/10 · 24 September 2008]

If "Houndog" were French, it would be praised as a worthy study of a child on the brink of adolescence. But because it's American, it gets attacked (primarily) for its subject because the majority of Americans are uncomfortable with on- or off-screen sexuality (unless it's the crude "American Pie" kind) and uncomfortable with depictions of other Americans that don't adhere to their idealistic perceptions of themselves -- as winners.

Deborah Kampmeier's understated film is not about winners and losers; it is about finding a safe personal harbor. Dakota Fanning, who slips into the skin of her character and never sheds it, plays a precocious young girl, living in an impoverished Southern town, who is fixated on Elvis Presley and his imminent tour of the region. Unable to afford tickets to his concert, Dakota is given an opportunity to perform "Hounddog" for a local teenager in exchange for tickets. Instead, she gets raped. Three carefully chosen shots illustrate the act. None are explicit.

Laden with the weight of disappointment and betrayal, Dakota becomes solemn and depressed, but is gradually eased out of her state and into her safe harbor by the kind-hearted Charles (Afimo Omelami) and his love of blues music.

Of course, there is a lot more to "Hounddog" than what I've described. It is a gentle, understated study of childhood curiosity and exploration. Dakota's character is sexually curious in the way all of us (as children) once were. Her behavior and performance is natural and unforced. David Morse, who plays her father, is striking as man who journeys from aggressive deadbeat to passive simpleton after he is struck by lightning. Piper Laurie, playing an older, less extreme version of her Margaret White from "Carrie", achieves the perfect balance as Dakota's "Mother". Rounding out the cast is the subdued Robin Wright Penn as a woman whose grasp on life is tentative at best and the excellent Cody Hanford as Dakota's young friend, with whom she is testing the anxiety-ridden waters of adolescence.

The cinematography of the stunning Southern shantytown and some moody interiors by the ever-reliable Ed Lachman (and two other contributors) is excellent, as is the score by Meshell Ndegeocello.

Though this doesn't achieve the emotional resonance of similar films like the Czech "The Crow", the Japanese "Muddy River" or the French "Le Grande Chemin", it is a fine achievement that has much in common with European cinema and little in common with contemporary American cinema ("Lawn Dogs" and "Bastard Out of Carolina" excepted).

In The Pines, In The Pines...

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 7 May 2011]

I'm not sure but these regionally restricted Southern stories seem to divide themselves into two types. In the first type, we get a series of character sketches, anecdotes without much narrative glue to hold them together. Beth Henley's stories come to mind, and slightly melancholy tales like "The Heart Is A Lonely Hunter." In the other category fall stories like "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Streetcar Named Desire", dramas in which events unfold apparently in accordance with some greater cosmic plan.

"Houndog" has its feet firmly planted in Type Number One. We are witness to Dakota Fanning's tragedies and triumphs as the bony but spirited preadolescent grows up in rural Southern poverty. What sustains her through loss, betrayal, and rape is her love for the music of Elvis Presley -- "Houndog" in particular.

Southerners, like New York Jews, may be among our best story tellers. Both groups are still somewhat marginal, though much less so, and have a sharp eye for small characterological details. And they have a way with words.

When writers come up with a tale like "Houndog" it's sometimes possible to feel that you're watching, not so much a movie with a plot, but a cinematic tribal study. You get to know what they eat and how they prepare it, what they wear, what's in their back yards, what they consider normal and what's slightly bizarro. You see the houses they live in, mostly dilapidated shacks. You see the muddy but refreshing swimming hole. And in this film you get to see a lot of the snakes they have to contend with. (I think the snakes may "stand for" something but I don't know exactly what.) The snake before the opening credits is probably a rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta quadrivittata). The one that Fanning picks up by the cornfield looks like a southern hognose snake (Heterodon simus) but I wouldn't bet the turnip patch on it. At one point, the stereotypical avuncular black man skins a rattler preparatory to eating it but the skin he hangs up to dry looks like that of a southern copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix).

Sorry about all the snake stuff but they figure prominently in the movie and I found my mind dwelling on them during some of the story's longueurs.

Dakota Fanning is quite a skilled little actress. She's got the character of the tomboyish kid down pat. And despite her little-girl figure she's careless about modesty, always running around in a loose dress, recklessly but innocently showing the crotch of her underpants to a pimply older adolescent, who finally violates her.

Piper Laurie is good too. She's a lumpy, slow-moving, grandmother here, overwhelmed by her own piety. I wonder if she found it ironic that she once played Elvis Presley's girl friend in a 1950s movie.

David Morse, as Fanning's daddy, is saddled with a role no one should have to play -- a self-indulgent slob who shacks up with women he brings home. Well, he pays for his sins. Of course, we ALL pay for our sins but his premium is especially colorful. He's out in the field on his tractor during a thunderstorm. The machine is struck by lightning and Morse is lifted bodily out of the seat, twirled around in the air like a doll being flung, and turned into a good-natured zombie with the intelligence quotient of a long-leaf pine tree. He wanders around naked while the bad guys in the pool room jab him in the belly with their cue sticks and whack his toes. At the end, he gets bit by a rattler too. I'm telling you, the guy pays for his sins.

The fact is, though, that none of the acting falls short of being really good. But, alas, the script can't avoid its clichés. That black guy who gives such good advice and knows how to treat puncture wound and venomous snake bites. He even has a hypodermic syringe and, apparently, some anti-venom on hand. The victim he treats recovers far too quickly. At some point her pretty leg would look like a Smithfield ham. And the scene in which Fanning, after her rape and a period of illness and mutism, rediscovers her strength through singing "Houndog" at the black guy's urging, reaching "deep into yo' self" and singing it now not as an imitation of Elvis but in her own style. Okay, we get the message, but the camera lingers too long on Fanning's suffering features. At this point, the director rushes in from off screen holding a cue card that reads: "Cry." There are only two "good people" in the movie: Uncle Tom and a compassionate woman we hardly get to know. It's getting a little tiresome seeing young girls beaten down by men and religion without ever being defeated.

I've kind of poked fun at it but I watched it with interest from beginning to end, even as I managed to avoid the more obvious attempts at manipulation. It's by no means a "bad" or insulting movie and there's a lot of talent on display.

One of the most boring and sexually depraved films ever made

[hettyfarquar · 1/10 · 5 February 2007]

Hounddog must be one of the most boring and sexually depraved films ever made. For some reason, the people involved with production seem to think it's important and will raise awareness, instead of trying the art line, they are now trying the moral tactic. We are now supposed to see this film, because rape happens often, and happens to children often, and none of us are aware of it.

Is there any moral purpose of this film besides raising awareness? (Which one could get from a newspaper article anyway.) Apparently not. There is no message to rape survivors about how to survive, there is no closure or justice or even really the start of something better. In fact, this isn't really a film most people can relate to, given the unusual and irrelevant nature of Lewellen's life (no mother, idiot father, poor in the old-fashioned Deep South, and she is constantly behaving precociously - not because she thinks it is fun, as poor Fanning seemed to think, but because she is a wrecked, traumatized who doesn't really know any other). We are constantly treated to shots of Lewellen's underwear, Buddy shirtless and barefoot, and then there's the pointless scene where naked two children are tied together with a live snake and threatened at gunpoint. It makes you feel dirty just watching the film.

The behavior of Lewellen is disturbing, but there is this nasty sense that she is "asking" for the rape, given that she is constantly engaging in sexual behavior and then performs a striptease right before the rape itself. As this is not the most likely way in which girls aged 9-12 are going to be raped, the story seems silly, and with no relation to today. It is not something modern young girls would identify with (and is another reason why they shouldn't watch this film).

The film is cruel, it is strange, it is entirely about sex, and it is boring and badly-written and made.

A comment from someone who has seen the film

[rebelgyrl05 · 10/10 · 26 January 2007]

I just watched the final Sundance screening of this film earlier this evening. It was excellent. I found it to a highly emotional film with a very powerful message. Also, Dakota Fanning has a beautiful voice for someone who had never sang before filming began. Not beautiful as in technically perfect, but beautiful in the way it conveyed the emotions of the character at the time. Just to clarify for all of those who haven't seen it, there is no pornography in this movie. In fact, Utah's Attorney General watched it for himself, and said that it does not break any laws and contains no child pornography. Please withhold judgment until you have actually seen it.

The South, The Fifties, and Emergence

[gradyharp · 7/10 · 1 March 2009]

Deborah Kampmeier has written and directed an atmospheric film about life in the South (Alabama to be specific) in the 1950s, using this confused period of time to examine how a child can rise out of her squalid surroundings, replacing her disappointments in expectations of family, friends, and trauma with tenuous grip on the dream of becoming a performer like her idol Elvis Presley.

Fortunate for Kampmeier she cast the rather amazing young Dakota Fanning to inhabit the role of the feisty but abused Lewellen, a headstrong prepubescent girl whose mother deserted her at birth, leaving her to live with her abusive Lothario, worthless father (David Morse) whose current paramour is his ex-wife's sister (Robin Wright Penn) who leaves Lewellen also when the father's abuse and desertion overwhelm. Lewellen's sole friend is young Buddy (Cody Sanford) who shares show and tell games with Lewellen until a promise to find tickets for an Elvis Presley concert includes a 'favor' for Buddy's older friend (the rape sequence that is germinal to the film and all the more powerful for its lack of graphic detail). Lewellen's life crumbles: even her Bible thumping grandmother (Piper Laurie) can't console her, her only support comes form her old African American friend (Afemo Omilami) who is Lewellen's sole visionary source for Lewellen's gift for music and soul jazz. Some change comes when Lewellen's father is struck by lightning, ending his career of philandering and making him dependent on Lewellen for all his needs. How Lewellen rises out of all of this stagnation and arrives at an important life change forms the resolution to this story.

There is not a lot that is novel about this film, but the flavor of the missing connections is improved by the general feeling of the Southern situation in the 50s well captured by the camera work and the music. Dakota Fanning continues to show a remarkable degree of depth in her talent as an actress. Watching the film for her performance alone is worth the time. Grady Harp

Saw this at Santa Barbara

[bananapotato · 1/10 · 5 February 2007]

The crappy writing has probably been covered. One gets the feeling that Lewellen (Dakota's character) will go on to abuse others. Already she abuses mean to Buddy and Grasshopper. It's like Kampmeier - she too seems to be perpetrating the abuse cycle by using these children to act out all these sexual scenes. It reeks of exploitation, but ironically, the rape scene and Dakota's scenes probably less than all the others. Multiple underwear/undress images of all the children. The bad character (and rapist), Wooden's Boy, was just omically one-dimensional (as was the father, now I consider it). He didn't do anything, just was mean, then raped the girl. A few things don't seem to follow on with each other. There were a lot of scenes cut. Disgustingly, and although I tried not to think about it, Lewellen was a rather horrible character, even portrayed at times as deserving of the abuse, 'asking for it'. Sickening. It didn't seem like a rape victim advocacy movie. I think they just tried to bring that in after the fact. Oh, and exploitation aside - it was still bad. The audience didn't like it and I think there were even some walkouts.

Southern Gothic with lots of Symbolism

[johnkick · 23 November 2009]

Southern Gothic story abounds with lots of Pre-Raphaelite imagery, and too many snakes to shake a stick at. Dakota's character is filmed in many Pre-Raphaelite shots, and she has that sense of calm longing on her face that has been made popular by the Pre-Raphaelites. In contrast, two of her main antagonists, her Grammie and her father, appear as Medieval country bumpkins in their last scene with her. It's pretty clear, there is a sub-textual analogy to the Renaissance and the Dark Ages, here. During her rape, one of Dakota's hands are pierced with a nail. This obvious Christ-like reference is strengthened later, when she appears in bed, with her white underwear bunched and puffy, as if in swaddling clothes, or even a Christ mounted in contorted agony on the cross. Snakes infest her garden of Eden. They are everywhere. The only way to survive being bitten is too spit the poison out, which she does metaphorically, when she takes a deep breathe and belts out the Blues. Visually, this Southern eden is filmed claustrophobic-ally. Besides tall grass and bushes, even the very trees work together to obscure the sun. Some have praised the Blues players as the light in Dakota's world. One reviewer rightly suggests this is patronizing, a stereotype of the magical Negroes in Vagger Bance? In any event, they free Dakota from this wicked Eden. By the way, Dakota's character is no Saint but a survivor. She knowingly lets her father be killed by not warning him about a snake.

Decent movie.....

[NaughtyTempleton · 6/10 · 3 August 2009]

This was a decent movie, but I think Deborah Kampmeier's symbolism got lost in translation.

I really enjoy watching Dakota Fanning, but was unsure about seeing this film due to the highly publicized rape scene. Once I read the reviews that stated the rape scene was not graphic, I decided to go ahead and see it.

The story is okay. It's nothing special and has been done before....Bastard out of Carolina comes to mind when watching this film (and Bastard was a much better film). You basically have a young girl (Lewellen) who pretty much seems to run around in the deep south. Her family doesn't seem to have money, her father is an alcoholic and has a new girlfriend who he is beating (you later find out that his girlfriend is Lewellen's aunt), she has a grandmother who seems to have some sort of physical custody and is a stereotyped holy roller, who thinks everything is a sin, etc.

Lewellen is 12 and is obviously curious about sex; she has a little boyfriend and trades a kiss to see his "thing." Interestingly enough, I have read reviews that state Lewellen's character is overly sexual and a spoiled brat. Somehow, I do not get this from Fanning's portrayal. She just seemed like a little girl who was comfortable in her body, but not trying to be sexual.

Lewellen is obsessed with Elvis and I think part of the point of the movie was that she uses Elvis' music to find her own voice, but as I said before....I don't feel this translated well. Lewellen does get raped; Dakota did not play the scene well, which I actually consider a good thing since she shouldn't really know how to act a scene like that out. I have also read reviews that Lewellen's character "asked for it" and I don't see that either....she was simply a naive child who was taken advantage of by a teenage boy (played by Christoph Sanders, who is quite creepy in the role).

In the "Making of" feature on the DVD, Kampmeier talks about this being a coming of age story and all the snakes in the film symbolizing the church's oppression. To me, that was far fetched. I didn't really feel it was a coming of age story....as far as the symbolism, what lost me was after Lewellen is raped, she more or less withdraws into herself and stays in bed half asleep. All of these snakes are seen slithering and coiling on her (her imagination). The child is going to withdraw and feel terrible after a rape and the church has nothing to do with it.

I feel there were things missing from the movie as well....I am not sure if it was edited before DVD release or not, so maybe the flow would have been better before editing. I would be interested in seeing an uncut version if one exists.

It's the way people treat you that makes you a n*gger. The way people put you down, call you names, spit on you, mess with you.

[lastliberal · 6/10 · 17 May 2009]

There are a lot of well worn Southern clichés in Deborah Kampmeier's film - rusty trucks in the yard, bare feet, the drunk no-count daddy, the old swimming hole, and the rise of Elvis using Black Southern music as his own. They are dear and familiar, and provide a good framework to a movie, but it's all a framework. There isn't anything inside to make this film worthwhile.

I imagine that most people are watching and waiting for the infamous rape scene with 12-year-old Dakota Fanning. It requires a lot of slogging through a film that really isn't more than a young girl's obsession with Elvis. It is that obsession that gets her in trouble.

I remember David Morse from "House." I hated him, but he played the character extremely well. Here he is reduced to a drunk that gets hit by lightning and becomes even more of an intellectual cripple. He goes looking for Lewellen (Fanning) one night without a stitch on. Not a good role for a gifted actor.

There are two good messages in this film, and they both come from Afemo Omilami as the kindly black man (another Southern cliché). He shows that the differences between black and white is not related to race, but to class, and he helps Lewellen heal with music. She just spit out words before the rape, and now she can sing with real feeling.

A stranger (Robin Wright Penn) arrives to relieve her of her miserable existence, but there is a cost that I don't think Lewellen realized.

To those who think there might have been too many renditions of Hound Dog in the film. I was in the first grade when that song came out and I remember my babysitter playing it over and over. I certainly heard it more times than it played in the movie.

It was good to hear Jill Scott as Big Momma Thorton, the person who originally recorded Hound Dog.

Return To Sender

[valis1949 · 6/10 · 30 May 2009]

HOUNDDOG is a film which ambitiously attempts to be 'heartfelt' and 'honest', but ends up foundering in cliché. The film is a Female Coming Of Age story set in the rural poverty of 1950's era American South. Dakota Fanning plays Lewellen, a scrappy preteen who grapples with her nascent sexual identity by mimicking the pop-swagger of Elvis Presley. She lives in a rundown shack which she shares with an ineffectual and alcoholic father. And, just down the holler lives her bible-thumping grandmother. Neither of these characters provide any realistic parental guidance or authority. The plot unfolds through a series of events which are not so much 'foreshadowed' as 'telegraphed'. In spite of her hardscrabble existence, Lewellen remains upbeat and optimistic, until she is raped by a local teenager. Then, she becomes withdrawn and comatose, discovers the healing nature of The Blues, and is saved by Stranger Lady. Along the way she encounters many snakes, idyllic swimming holes and halcyon copses, a wise and caring black man, a puppy, and more and more snakes. The character of Stranger Lady (who is Lewellen's aunt) is played by Robin Wright Penn, and is one of the relative high points in the film. Dakota Fanning's performance comes off as a bit empty, however one can see that she is destined for far better roles than this one. In the end, HOUNDDOG is revealed as sepia tinged hokum which does nothing to advance the Southern Gothic Genre, or provide any new insight into the sexual awakening of adolescence.

Amateur rubbish

[jenjefk · 1/10 · 4 February 2007]

I saw this film at the Santa Barbara Film Festival and was very, very disappointed. First up let me say the rape scene was completely irrelevant to the rest of the story - it seemed very much out of place and like it was just inserted to generate controversy. The film had some tolerable aspects - I like parts of the cinematography - but the music seemed badly chosen and there were a few scenes where the editing didn't seem right - it seemed choppy, done in a hurry (maybe to cut out bits which would have been offending, and pretend they were never shot). Dakota is an astounding actress, but this was one of her weakest roles yet, probably because the inexperienced director was unable to guide her performance. (I thought the same about Robin Wright Penn.) The other child actors appeared to have been equally badly guided, and they don't have the experience of Fanning to be able to give good performances. It was horrible watching some of the scenes they had to do. The worst part of the film was the boring, long and pointless storyline. It was degrading. There was no triumph over adversity, definitely no escapism, no big moral issues that seemed to have been dealt with. This is an over-hyped, amateur hack film that should not be seen by audiences anywhere.

(Oh, and the Q&A was terrible. I hadn't known there would be one, yet it seemed suspiciously staged with audience plants - yes it really did seem like that. Also a nasty dig at Abigail Breslin, who seems to have done much better this year than Dakota.)

Great movie not pointless at all not gross

[danarox14 · 10/10 · 28 September 2008]

This was really an excellent movie. Anyone who says this movie was pointless or boring I don't have any idea why. This movie was the complete opposite, I think it was the first movie I've seen in a long time that had a point and was not mindless or boring.

I'm a fourteen year old and the movie was great, it was very relatable even though I haven't been through any sexual abuse.

If a movie can relate to me so deeply even though I didn't grow up in that time period, grew up in New York City, and did not go through some of the things she went through then I really think it's an excellent movie.

The content was not disturbing to me at all in a sense most people say. I think most people who say it's disturbing haven't seen the movie because yes, it is very real and true but not gross. I think it's great the director/writer touched on the subject of sexual abuse in such a great way because that subject is not brought up often in our society but it's something that is happening.

I was not sure of seeing this movie-not because of the rape scene because I knew people were making such a big deal of it but because of the other comments about how the movie wasn't going anywhere or was pointless. But I was so surprised that they were so wrong and that for me and from what I could see in the audience it was the complete opposite of pointless.

Bottom line if you haven't seen the movie already and aren't sure if you ant to go and see it, go and see it. I wasn't sure if I should see this movie either but it turned out to be one of the best movies I've seen in a long time with great writing, directing, and acting. Very real but not gross or disturbing and a story that needed to be told.

It is not so bad but could be better

[cfilho5310 · 6/10 · 26 February 2009]

Judging by the criticism, hoping that this Hounddog was one of the worst films of the year, but just surprising to me. History could be better told and the film would be totally forgotten, not the scene of the rape of the character of Dakota Fanning (By the way, a scene that generated many comments but in the end is not so strong), but can be drawn a lesson at the end of the movie is good or not. Dakota holds the film and delivers a great performance, but nothing that deserves the award or an indication of the academy. Hounddog in the end ends up being a film only correct and should disappear from your head and soon. Dakota deserved more. 6 / 10

As a survivor.....

[ihearthuckabees_88 · 1/10 · 14 February 2007]

I don't find films like this to be at all interesting. A friend thought I might be interested in this one and boy was she wrong. It's bad enough rape happens to real children, why get others to have to act it out? I don't think it's helping anybody. Certainly it didn't help me come to terms with my own trauma, I found it excruciatingly difficult watching the film which is why I walked out. I have spoken to a few others in the same situation as me and none of them are even interested in seeing it, let alone using this film to magically fix their situations, or make them aware that they suffered. It's not suitable for child viewing, and it's so completely unrealistic (the line about the father getting struck by lighting was awful) that I don't think anybody will be identifying with parts from it. There was a strange anti-sex theme that I seemed to pick up, as well as some kind of lesbianism/feminism and anti-men theme. Oh and the snakes was probably the worst imagery I have seen yet in a film.

Fails to convince

[Cedric_Catsuits · 8/10 · 14 June 2011]

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.

Dakota's friend 'Buddy' (Cody Hanford) is the most interesting character of the film

[kwugboots · 6/10 · 14 July 2009]

I have to give this film a 7 because it really got me thinking, particularly the character "Buddy" that Cody Hanford (a fantastic actor) played. I didn't fully buy the radical character change that Buddy apparently went through half way through the film, the director did not really show any gradual change in Buddy, and we are left wondering how such a caring, sweet boy can behave so callously and maliciously. I think that the film-maker portrayed Buddy far too simplistically, and this was a failing point of the film because to me Buddy's complex character and actions - and guilt - were the most interesting parts of the film. Although Buddy's character change seemed too extreme (or at least too unexplained)to be believable, Cody Hanford did a great job and his character really interested me. I keep thinking about the guilt that a young sensitive 10-ish year old boy would have to deal with and live with, after acting the way that he did. He was trying to fit in with the cruel older guys, and supported them after the rape rather than Dakota even though he clearly felt guilty for making a deal with the milk boy (rapist). Part of Buddy's harsh treatment of Dakota after the rape was probably because he felt so guilty.

SPOILER: Buddy is a sweet and very sensitive, caring 10ish year old boy who is best friends with Dakota early in the film. His dad beats him up. He doesn't seem to have other friends. He almost drowns in the lake, Dakota rescues him, and he makes her promise not to tell anyone that he can't swim. Buddy later sees Dakota crying because she has no money for Elvis tickets and he begs Dakota, "don't cry, please don't cry. 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 her those tickets.

Buddy makes a deal with an older teenage boy, who promises to give him 2 tickets if he can get Dakota to do her 'Hounddog' song in front of him, naked. Dakota agrees to do this in exchange for a 'Hounddog' ticket, but the teenage boy rapes her (in front of a shocked/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 new girlfriend tells Dakota that she and Buddy are going to go see Elvis perform that night. Buddy looks guilty & ashamed. Later that night, Dakota watches them exit the Elvis performance. Buddy waves goodbye to his girlfriend and hops happily into the truck of the older teenage boy who 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 impaired father wanders into the room naked and the boys poke him with pool sticks; Buddy is terrified & hides under the table, indicating he has been traumatized from watching Dakota's earlier rape).

Dakota is very ill & Buddy overhears her grandmother worry that Dakota might be dying. In the final film scene that involves Buddy, Buddy brings up his worries with the teenager who raped Dakota, saying "if she dies, it will be our fault" and "you might have broken something inside of her". His fears are dismissed by the older teenagers who just joke about the rape. Buddy clearly feels guilty about betraying Dakota.

I think that Buddy changed far too drastically in the film, and with no warning. How could such a sensitive, caring boy turn into such a revenge-seeking callous child?

There should have been a scene showing Buddy hanging out with the older boys after Dakota refused to play with him (before the rape) as the boys talked about sex/drank beer (we needed a pre-rape scene showing that Buddy was becoming friends with the older boys, and moving his loyalty from Dakota to them instead).

Also, Buddy should have seemed more worried/guilty/afraid when making the 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 responded to what the milk boy did. All we see after the rape is Buddy hanging out with & having fun with the milk boy. We know that Buddy feels very guilty and ashamed for his part in the rape, but he never turns his anger/hostility/fear onto the milk boy.

Is This Being Responsible?

[ccthemovieman-1 · 3/10 · 3 May 2009]

Curiosity got the best of me and I finally saw this controversial film recently on DVD. The controversy centered around a rape scene and whether an 11-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.

What I found a little different than most reviewers here: 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 being seen maybe a third of the time in just her underwear, with a lot of closeup shots of her. Man, how perverse and 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 giving us the rape scene and 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. There is much more nudity involving several of the kids. Kampmeier is an example of liberal extremism run amok to the point of being really irresponsible. She sees this all as "sexually liberating" women from an early age. That isn't just my opinion; the woman talks about it at length on the interview part of the DVD.

The real shame is not the movie but that Fanning's parents think it's cool for her daughter to act in films like this, showing so much skin, at a very young age, all in the name of "stretching her acting talents." Wow. And they lambasted "Mommie Dearest?"

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. It just winds up being a mess.

Kampmeier also hates "the church," as she explains on the DVD bonus feature, calling it "opressive" and "repressive." You see that in the film with the girl's "Grammie," played by a bitter-looking-and-talking Piper Laurie who shows only a nasty side....while being a church-goer and Believer, of course! In today's entertainment business, this kind of consistent bigotry is not only condoned but encouraged. "Hounddog" is just one more example of it. Kampmeier's previous film also has the same bias.

By the way, if you were wondering why all the snakes, Kampmeier they represented "the church." Thankfully, the public isn't in tune with her radical views and the film has been pretty much ignored.....and we only saw the much-edited "tame" version!