Kite Runner rape scene worries boy actor
http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/15747908.html
highlight
Ahmad Khan was paid $10,000 to portray Hassan - a hefty sum in Afghanistan where teachers earn only about $70 per month. But the boy with an endearing, crooked smile said he would never have taken the role had he known Hassan is raped. The family said they found out about the scene only days before it was shot.
"They didn't give me the script. They didn't give me the story of 'The Kite Runner.' If I knew about the story, I wouldn't have participated as an actor in this film," he told the AP.
The father and son, backed by other Afghans on the set's location in China, argued with the filmmakers, and the boy refused to act out the scene.
Mahmidzada said the director told him: "'The film will be a mess without this part.'"
"But I told him 'I'm not thinking about your film. I'm thinking about myself,'" he said. "We are Afghan, and this is not acceptable to us at all."
When the filmmakers wanted his son to take off his pants for the shooting, Mahmidzada refused to let him do it. The scene was instead shot with Ahmad Khan wearing his pants.
The parents are concerned that Afghans will harass Ahmad Khan if they find out his character is raped.
ohnotheydidnt
source
1. It is tragic as usual, that it is the victim, or those cast into the victim role, that would have to worry about the stigma, and not the actual, willfully malicious perpetrator.
2. It was shady for the filming company to not fully inform the boy, and his family, as to the disturbing nature of the film. Such a film would do good, the first part of addressing such festering social ills is to end the silence, but it should not come at the expense of the child and family's life and health.
Realism be damned, care must be taken where minors are concerned, even if the scene would have done better with nudity, if he's not comfortable with it, which is very understandable, and even if he were, it should have been avoided. The scene can be accomplished with disjointed POV shots of hands gripping a wrist, an ankle, the back of the head against the ground, the sky, etc.
I wish I can be surprised by the numerous comments made regarding the parents' lapse in not knowing what the book is about. Imperialist much? I'm in Toronto, Canada, and I have never heard of the book before, have they heard of Margaret Atwood or Pierre Berton? The parents were offered money but given no script.
...and as the boy is one of the main characters, his paid is much too low, it's a high sum considering his background, but peanuts in Hollywood, the company is really being unfair, and really, really, horrifically shady in how they spring that assault scene which required his nudity upon this child.
highlight
Ahmad Khan was paid $10,000 to portray Hassan - a hefty sum in Afghanistan where teachers earn only about $70 per month. But the boy with an endearing, crooked smile said he would never have taken the role had he known Hassan is raped. The family said they found out about the scene only days before it was shot.
"They didn't give me the script. They didn't give me the story of 'The Kite Runner.' If I knew about the story, I wouldn't have participated as an actor in this film," he told the AP.
The father and son, backed by other Afghans on the set's location in China, argued with the filmmakers, and the boy refused to act out the scene.
Mahmidzada said the director told him: "'The film will be a mess without this part.'"
"But I told him 'I'm not thinking about your film. I'm thinking about myself,'" he said. "We are Afghan, and this is not acceptable to us at all."
When the filmmakers wanted his son to take off his pants for the shooting, Mahmidzada refused to let him do it. The scene was instead shot with Ahmad Khan wearing his pants.
The parents are concerned that Afghans will harass Ahmad Khan if they find out his character is raped.
ohnotheydidnt
source
1. It is tragic as usual, that it is the victim, or those cast into the victim role, that would have to worry about the stigma, and not the actual, willfully malicious perpetrator.
2. It was shady for the filming company to not fully inform the boy, and his family, as to the disturbing nature of the film. Such a film would do good, the first part of addressing such festering social ills is to end the silence, but it should not come at the expense of the child and family's life and health.
Realism be damned, care must be taken where minors are concerned, even if the scene would have done better with nudity, if he's not comfortable with it, which is very understandable, and even if he were, it should have been avoided. The scene can be accomplished with disjointed POV shots of hands gripping a wrist, an ankle, the back of the head against the ground, the sky, etc.
I wish I can be surprised by the numerous comments made regarding the parents' lapse in not knowing what the book is about. Imperialist much? I'm in Toronto, Canada, and I have never heard of the book before, have they heard of Margaret Atwood or Pierre Berton? The parents were offered money but given no script.
...and as the boy is one of the main characters, his paid is much too low, it's a high sum considering his background, but peanuts in Hollywood, the company is really being unfair, and really, really, horrifically shady in how they spring that assault scene which required his nudity upon this child.