A state senator from North Carolina wants to take a bite out of "Hounddog." The Dakota Fanning film depicts the rape of young girl. "The movie tells the story of Lewellen, a girl played by 12-year-old Fanning, who is growing up in the 1960s South," writes Mark Schreiner.
Schreiner's story for the Wilmington Star-News outlines the beginnings of the debate.
The story resurrects the argument about the artistic merit (and definition) of obscenity. More interestingly, though, the senator wants to take away the incentives from movies deemed "objectionable," not just obscene.
What are you thoughts? What if Louisiana's tax incentives were limited to projects deemed "unobjectionable?"
Below is an excerpt from the story.
Republican: Scripts need reviewing
Movie prompts lawmaker's film incentive idea
By Mark Schreiner
Raleigh Bureau Chief
"Citing the controversy surrounding the Dakota Fanning film 'Hounddog,' the leader of the state Senate Republicans says he wants the government to review scripts before cameras start rolling in North Carolina.
"That system, said state Sen. Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, would apply only to films seeking the state's lucrative filmmaker incentive, which refunds as much as 15 percent of what productions spend in North Carolina from the state treasury.
"'Why should North Carolina taxpayers pay for something they find objectionable?' said Berger, who is having proposed legislation drafted."
To read the full story, click here.