Maïmouna Doucouré’s film is still in turmoil across the Atlantic. He is at the heart of a legal battle launched by a Texas prosecutor against the giant Netflix accused of promoting obscene images featuring children.
–
In our cinemas, cute has now been out for a year and a half…but in Texas its release continues to meet resistance. A prosecutor, Lucas Babin, launched several actions to convict Netflix, through the film by Maïmouna Doucouré. And all means are good.
Remember, in October 2020, cute held up a mirror to our society on the injunctions that weigh on girls and adolescents. The film captured with precision and without judgment the experience of these children torn between their desire for independence and the hypersexualization that weighs on them, through the central character of Amy, a pre-adolescent girl who does everything to integrate a group of particularly popular girls and who performs choreographies in order to participate in a competition.
And yes, and cute made us a little uncomfortableit’s good because it questions us about the way these young girls look and about all the emotions and contradictions they face.
–
An American controversy that is bogged down…
Released straight to streaming in the US as Cuties, cute had found itself at the heart of a media storm, in particular because of the poster used by Netflix for its promotion. cute was then accused of promoting child pornography and containing erotic scenes involving children.
If in the face of justice, the accusations brought by Lucas Babin have so far not been deemed admissible, the latter continues despite everything his crusade against Netflix to prevent the broadcast of cute and has just presented four new charges in court, for « sexual performance by a child ». He intends to demonstrate that the streaming giant intentionally promotes and broadcasts content that violates Texas law.
But Netflix has no intention of letting it go and has turned to a federal court to put an end to this legal harassment, on the grounds that Lucas Babin will again lose this case.
Why multiply the recourses, you will say to me? The issue is above all media and a means of attracting attention, according to this professor at the University of Texas:
“This case is made to draw attention to a magistrate in a small county who would have failed to make the headlines”judge the media specialist Amy Sanders. “There was a real cinematic quality to it, if you want to see it as a David vs. Goliath storyline. You have the big Netflix bad guy versus the little prosecutor who says he fights for the good of the community. It’s delusional. »
The arm wrestling is therefore not over… and it is cute who bears the cost.
Read also :
Spreading transphobic discourse by cajoling the LGBTQI+ public, Netflix’s balancing act
–
/i/2004980212.webp?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
