Protraph Lack of good storyline.

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

sandowl I watched this film and it provides a premise of pedophilia as a sexuality rather than an illness. It wants acceptance in mainstream society of pedophilia, rather than intense medical treatment.Let's get this straight - some true facts about this issue; 1.Paedophiles are those interested in prepubescent children 2. Child Molesters are those interested in pubescent children. Both of these categories are composed entirely of under age children, not capable of consenting to any type of sexual relationship.Paedophiles have a choice to act out their sexual perversions on children, or to not act out. This film wants people to 'open their minds' to the fact that pedophilia was happening back in ancient Greek times and not considered odd or wrong, so why is it now? {In ancient Greek times, older men would have a relationship with younger men in the form of a mentor-ship. This mentor relationship often had sexual activity involved. To the ancient Greeks, prepubescent boys were off limits}I would like to address this - Humans evolve over time and we now know, without a shadow of a doubt, pedophilia damages children. It damages children, families, communities and society as a whole. It ruins lives - abilities to have relationships with self and others, intimate relationships with friends, partners and children.While I do not dispute the rarest possibility of non-active pedophiles, who do not act out, I have no doubts about the abhorrence of child rape perpetrated by active pedophiles.The film talks about shame caused by societies views of pedophiles. It IS a shameful act. Raping children is shameful full stop. A pedophile who is not raping a child, yet uses media (photos, video, Internet) to observe young children in sexual acts - or indeed sits around parks/schools where young children congregate in order to gain some stimulation for private sexual gratification - is, actually, an active pedophile who is acting out. Children are entitled to be free from sexual objectification. A pedophile sitting on a bench in a park, as one does in this film, watching children walking by in uniforms and such, stating he does not 'act out' on his feelings, is being untruthful. As said above, deliberately sitting in a public place, at times when children are particularly known to be present, (or a children's park/playground etc) IS 'acting out'.This film reminds me of the group NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Association) which promotes pedophilia, lowering of age limits and believes children have an ability to make decisions appropriately regarding older adults sexually penetrating them.It is now common knowledge that the human brain does not fully develop it's fear and cognitive abilities until around the age of 25 years old.No child is able to determine and decide for themselves, to have a sexual relationship with an adult.This film, in my opinion is nothing short of trying to normalize pedophilia and make it acceptable in society. Trying to liken it to homosexuality and not the heinous crime it actually is. Paedophilia is an illness, whether a person acts on it or not and needs to be treated as such. There may be some people who watch this and fall for the bull%^&t contained within - no matter how you dress it up, pedophilia is still child rape and abuse. This includes the support, exchange and creation of child pornography, sexual objectification of minors while they are carrying on their normal days and anything else which violates their sovereign selves.I completely give this film a 20,000 thumbs down.I am an informed person regarding pedophilia and I find films such as these quite frightening, as they have the power to influence the minds of those not so informed and those vulnerable to manipulation.If by chance any children read these reviews - If someone older than you is asking you to do things that involve your private areas or their private areas, please tell someone- these people are sick and very dangerous. Tell someone you feel safe with. Tell your parents, or a policeman or policewoman, or a teacher at your school, or your doctor. No matter what, keep telling people what is going on until someone helps you. It is NOT your fault. You are NOT bad. You did NOTHING wrong. You do NOT deserve to be hurt. You DO deserve to be listened to and believed. You ARE important. You DO matter. *hug*Addendum Feb 2017: The clarification of differences between pedophiles and child molesters can be extremely confusing. Please visit the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault. This site has links to information regarding these topics and definitions. Another site, with clinical study results is the Child Molestation Prevention .org website.

djkoz78 I don't review many films on IMDb bc to me it's tedious and time consuming. For me I forget a lot of what I want to write about to begin with. So I'm not a very good writer. I can rate the hell out of something though. Anyways I wanted to come here and write a little about the film and what I thought, but more about what 1 reviewer wrote and rated the movie. This person gave it a 1 out of 10. Why? Because It brought up the Japanese Lolita Fashion or Loliicon and how it is directed at men for underage girls. This reviewer claims that the Lolita Fashion purposefully tries distance itself from any sexuality about underage girls attracting men & maybe it does. Yet the name Lolita is in it's titled a book written by Vladimir Nabokov about a literary professor named Humbert Humbert who is lusting after a young girl of 12 years old named Lo who he nicknames Lolita. Who if I am not mistaken he ends up having a sexual relationship with.Anyways the reviewer clearly based him/her opinion not on what the film was trying to convey, but because this person is clearly a fan of Lolita Fashion. I recommend you watch the documentary for yourself and you decide. Another reviewer said that the creator has an agenda. At first I thought that as well & still do to a degree, but the as the film progressed I see that the lines are not so easily black and white. I see what the creator was trying i think to convey. He was trying to show how the pedophilia hysteria specifically in the west has become outrageous. That the media is spreading so much fear while simultaneously society and the fashion industry is promoting young nubile models in erotic or provocative clothes or poses. And if the underage model shows nudity bc it's in a magazine it's not child porn it's "Artistic". The hysteria and fear has become so ridiculous that laws are being written to arrest children to "protect" them from the pedophiles. Or teenagers sexting each other are being tried as adults for having child pornography on their phones. I had a friend who is married woman who used to babysit her friends 13 year old daughter who was sending sexually explicit photos online to different boys. Now if she hadn't found out and told the girls mother what she was doing and someone found those photos and reported it to the police. Do you think they wouldn't arrest the woman or her husband even though they had nothing to do with it? More so the husband I think. Which is another point the film tries to make. I believe that there is a huge problem and a backlash happening because of this hysteria and fear. Mainly that every single man on the planet earth is a sick and twisted pervert. That we all think about sex and if we can't get it consensually, then we will take it by force. Which simply isn't true. There is a very small percentage of people who are like this. Yet this is what I mainly found interesting. It's a scary issue bc fathers are afraid to show affection, bathe, go to the park alone or change the diapers of their own children for fear of being accused a pedophile. Or men are being barred from entering nurseries even if your a 16 year old boy coming to pick up his siblings or their own children. Boys are being told in school that men are sexual predators and that they might or will in fact grow up to be one themselves. 99% of all teachers are women now bc men just don't want their lives ruined for being accused. How many people have seen some man on the news being accused of being a pedophile yet never hear if he is found not guilty? Because the news only wants you to see him accused and you to hear the guilty verdict, but if he's acquitted not a peep from the news. The film also brings up the glaring double standard about women being sexual predators as well, but are rarely convicted for sexual abuse or even brought to trial. Or if the woman has sex with an underage boy because she's a woman the media uses terms like "relationship". So women get leniency not just from the peers, but from judges as well especially if she's an attractive woman. I believe the film also tries to distinguish the difference between men & women who are attracted to physically and sexually mature girls/boys versus men & women who attracted to prepubescent boys/girls. That if you have ever been attracted to a younger girl/boy 16-17 years old that looks like a man or woman physically then it's not pedophilia it's hebephilia/ephebephilia. That pedophilia is used a wide very general term. The term pedophilia means that a person is attracted to a boy/girl between the ages of 5-13. I don't agree with the entirety of this film b/c I think being attracted to underage girls/boys is wrong, gross, and creepy. I do agree that the media over saturates and perpetuates fear and I think sometimes they do it at the behest of the government. This was a very difficult film to watch but I think people should watch it because where does the hysteria & fear stop? Do we start chemically castrating men? Do we start locking up children to protect them from potential threats or from themselves?

dearestdarlingamae I am very disappointed in this films choice to involve Lolita Fashion in an implication that it is a fetish. The cover features a girl in the Japanese street style Lolita on the cover but then shows the style in the film with no explanation as to what it is. This leads me to believe that the producer did no research on the fashion or its values, which anyone could very easily find out through a quick google search, are directed twords modesty (blouses, long skirts, bloomers under dresses, buttoned up collars, no cleavage, no shoulders, no midriff, small amounts of visible leg) and are not at all directed to fetishes or sexual content. The style takes inspiration from Rococo Era french clothing and Victorian Era fashion. The general Lolita Fashion community tries to distance itself from the misconception that this style is a fetish or sexual costume, so it is evident how this film could help perpetuate this ignorant stereotype of people who wear the clothes. This was disgraceful to the people who participate in this fashion and also shows how little thought was put into the details of this documentary.

fayromptony That is the question posed by this new Documentary by Jan-Willem Breure focusing on adult-teenager intercourse, and the lines between finding a younger girl attractive or not. The poster for the flick features an attractive chick…who is 14. Or, if you find her attractive, it makes you a pedophile I guess.In my opinion, saying this girl is attractive is fine. Your average adult male is not thinking about going and diddling her, she's just good looking. After all, she is a model. The movie was actually inspired by Breure's attraction to teenage girls. He is 23. And he wanted to investigate whether this was pedophilia or not. They base theories on younger girls in the past getting married. Even, as you'll see in the trailer below, they discuss the age of the Virgin Mary when she may have been impregnated with Jesus. They talk about our age laws here in North America Vs. other countries around the World. Personally, I think the laws make perfect sense her. Girls and boys are raised differently here. We are still immature and don't quite understand consequence until a later age. Our society reflects this perfectly. Whereas somewhere in a third world country where you are a "man" or "woman" no longer a boy or girl, at the age of 13, it's completely different. Even then, the idea of an adult male, say 33, having intercourse with a teenager is simply wrong. Definitely a provocative sounding documentary. What do you think? Matt Berry - x929