Let's cut to the chase: the thing that has people up in arms over Dakota Fanning's rape in HOUNDDOG was best summed up by an exchange on HANNITY & COLMES a few nights ago. A guest tried to defend the movie and rape scene by saying "Well, I haven't actually seen it yet, but I hear its tastefully done so it's not bad to see" to which Hannity instantly replied in his best sarcastic manner "Oh, so you mean Hollywood's found a GOOD way to show 12-year old girls being RAPED. That's comforting to know. It's good to know that the creative brain trust in Hollywood put their minds to finally solving that problem." And whether you like Hannity or not, it's a valid question worth asking. DOES the world really need to see a 12-year old being raped? Is THAT what anyone is actually clamoring for in a movie these days?

That's what the debate really comes down to. But let's face it, the movie IS rather creepy for other reasons. In quite a few reports I've read today online -- now that HOUNDDOG has officially been screened -- many note that the rape scene IS undisputably unsettling. And while some female reviewers have tried to salvage the situation by arguing the movie should be looked at more as a "female sexual coming of age tale" so women should embrace it, on the other flip of the coin several male reviewers have simply noted (in short) "No, Fanning just comes off as a sexual tart looking for it, and that sets up all sorts of bad things." In particular many reviewers have also noted just how much Fanning runs around in either her underwear in the movie or very skimpily dressed, which means coupled with the rape this thing becomes a pedophile's wet dream.

And just to add to the fire, now there's even legal talk beginning to ripple outward about whether the movie does in fact violate certain laws and standards pertaining to Child Protection Acts that ARE legally on the books by showing such a scene, and whether towns and cinemas would now have the right to refuse showing it on those grounds -- or if in fact any company distributing the film would be liable for lawsuits and legal action against them for distributing such material in violation of Child Protection Laws.

Frankly, I don't know what's creepier. That (1) the writer/director sat around one day and lightbulb going off over their head suddenly felt the need to even make a movie about a 12 year old being raped... That (2) they creatively couldn't deal with a sexual coming of age story without needing to include an underaged rape scene... or that (3) Fanning, who is rather creepy herself being a 12-going-on-40 mutant herself, decided to star in this thing most likely because someone told her it was a sure fire way to get MORE career attention and maybe a future Oscar nod for being so "daring" -- which means on her end the rape scene wasn't about the story or art (the core reason for defending it) but was instead about whoring herself out onscreen, pandering very uncomfortably so she could win an award.

Truth be told, this movie is creepy on several fronts...

It doesn't show anything (except dakota's face, hands and feet) and is incredibly brief, according to multiple reports. People are blowing this way out of proportion.