So what would you say about someone recording themselves literally strangling a puppy, as a way to make society understand it is wrong to abuse animals?

There is a lot wrong with how we raise girls. I seriously doubt that this film is insightful. I will not bother to watch it as sexual exploitation doesn't need much of an explanation.

It must be like a lot of the sex crime TV shows. They are really for voyeurs in a sense. A normal person --whatever that is today - can see through it - if they are normal and after 60 years of leftism who knows anymore.

I didn't see it. I gave up Netflix almost 2 years ago - I don't have cable, haven't watched anything on my TV in almost 2 years. So. I will make the following observation: if you are going to make a movie about exploitation of children, don't have children IN IT. Just the still pictures I've seen are 'suggestive'. Pedo's get off on 'suggestive'. Giving them even the HINT for minutes in a movie is exploitive, is so close to the porno line as to be misleading.

I don't need to see it to offer an opinion - I don't have to commit murder to have an opinion, or to have an abortion to have an opinion. I don't have to feed my mind garbage to have an opinion of the stink.

Your attempt to suggest that the lack of seeing the movie warrants dismissal of the critiques of it is disingenuous, as are all such suggestions.

@PostUmbraLux is disgusting, virtue-signaling, and probably irredeemable.
Might have the honour of being the first I have ever blocked.

I have not seen the entire film yet, but have seen the twerking scenes which caused the most brouhaha. To be honest, I think it possible that Doucourre was trying to make a statement and went overboard. My biggest issue is the fact that from the beginning Netflix promoted the film using a "sexy tweens" still from the movie rather than the less inflammatory poster used at Sundance and in theatrical productions.

Doucourre's motivations may be questionable. Netflix was without a doubt trying to sell this film using images of scantily dressed 11 year-olds. They may have done this to stir up controversy, in which case they succeeded. They may have been appealing to the sorts of viewers who find twerking 11 year-olds sexy. But they can hardly be surprised that people assumed the film they advertised as a pedo wet dream wound up being treated as a pedo's wet dream.

I watched several minutes of the film. I stopped when I realized it was child porn.

I haven't watched the movie, so, what dd54 said. I don't have Netflix, gave it up along with cable 15 years ago.

You're obviously a pedophile and everyone knows it.

I wonder how much time they had those kids spend humping and jacking off the stage til they got it perfectly synchronized. How many takes did they have to do before they got just the right closeup shot of an eleven year old rubbing her cunt?

Go fucking die you pedophile.

The movie sexually exploits children under the cover of being against the sexual exploitation of children. I tried watching a clip but it was so repulsive that I had to shut it off after 3 seconds.

Some stories don't merit visual representation when that representation demeans children, and the whole idea of thousands of try outs exposing children to the same ... some might ask ... grooming ...

Putting children into situations where they portray activities of adults is not “normal” no matter how woke you want to imagine it.

Everyone's wrong about the movie throwing CHILDREN into sexually suggestive situations, eh? You do realize there are people reviewing this film, saying they got aroused while these CHILDREN were twerking, and that the movie tries you get you aroused at little girls, right? That is not an OK film in my mind. Tons agree.