
wow. I don't watch old movies but I had no idea they were so fucked up even back then. The way they added sexual themes and innuendos was disgusting
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 88 | October 12, 2018 12:30 AM |
That was fascinating, stunning and greatly creepy.
by Anonymous | reply 1 | November 24, 2017 10:35 PM |
Malarkey. Reading wayyyyyyy too much into it.
by Anonymous | reply 2 | November 24, 2017 11:16 PM |
The author could be projecting.
Shirley Temple's phenomenon was probably not that different from the Little Miss Sunshine/ Jean Benet Ramsey / kiddie beauty pageant stuff.
But it's all still inappropriate and too sexual for little kids.
by Anonymous | reply 3 | November 24, 2017 11:52 PM |
Total bullshit. Do not watch this.
FF OP.
by Anonymous | reply 4 | November 25, 2017 12:03 AM |
That author puts my movie title 'The Little Princess' up for grabs. There was no 'Wee Willie Winkie' going on.
by Anonymous | reply 6 | November 25, 2017 12:12 AM |
This is not over-reading. Google Shirley Temple Burlesk and there is your evidence. It's sad. Many references were borrowed from Nabokov's Lolita. Google the lecherous navy men passing Shirley around like a small hog in a frou frou dress as she sings the good ship lollipop
by Anonymous | reply 7 | November 25, 2017 12:14 AM |
Most of those child p*do Hollywood exposes are posted by Fundies and Pizzagate loving conspiracists, so take that for what it’s worth.
by Anonymous | reply 8 | November 25, 2017 12:15 AM |
Not advocating, by any means . . . Nabokov's "Lolita" as originally published in 1955.
by Anonymous | reply 9 | November 25, 2017 12:25 AM |
Culture was different then too. A lot of people didn’t use birth control, there were small children in every household, and men were more familiar with living with and handling little kids. Most people grew up in a big family so there were always a lot of kids around growing up too.
Maybe some weirdo that wrote these movies was a pedophile, but it went right over the heads of the average audience. All they saw was a bunch of cute little kids cutting up. “Baby Burlesk” was like “Bugsy Malone” to a later generation.
Here’s Jodie Foster, age 14, in Bugsy Malone. They probably got this idea from Baby Burlesk.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 10 | November 25, 2017 12:30 AM |
Here’s the full movie Bugsy Malone if you’re interested.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 11 | November 25, 2017 12:31 AM |
Most of the "expose" videos posted on Youtube are created by complete nutcases. They'd be funny if they weren't so pathetic.
by Anonymous | reply 12 | November 25, 2017 12:32 AM |
Stupidity. Not camp, not funny. The movies were developed with the understanding that children were both human beings and in a protected class. Every one of her movies set things up so that bad people would do mean things to Shirley but love always prevailed. The fact that cunts are capable of reading their victim shit into every situation tells us about them not Shirley Temple movies.
by Anonymous | reply 13 | November 25, 2017 12:34 AM |
A reminder that Lolita was long after these movies so they were not borrowed from it. I always thought the the adult portrayal of children like in child beauty pagaents is very creepy. However, these shorts had all children as the ones play acting as adults which seems different. But let’s banish Annie while we are at it. Only because it’s insufferable.
by Anonymous | reply 14 | November 25, 2017 12:38 AM |
Any film scene that depicts a little girl portraying a sexual tease, as some of these Shirley Temple scenes shamelessly do, is totally being marketed to pedophiles. They got away with it because issues like pedophilia and incest were too deeply taboo to be raised.
by Anonymous | reply 15 | November 25, 2017 12:42 AM |
Ironically though, Shirley Temple said the roles(Baby Burlesk) she had when she was three were the most fun out of any role she had. I think it was pretty obvious she never really though the roles were sexualized in any manner but she was well aware though of the sexual abuse that went on behind closed doors. It happened to her as she got a little older, when an executive shower her his penis. She laughed at it and he threw her out of his office.
by Anonymous | reply 16 | November 25, 2017 12:44 AM |
Shirley got to use the executive shower? If I’d known, I’d have given Louis a good talking to.
by Anonymous | reply 17 | November 25, 2017 12:53 AM |
These films were popular to millions of people during the era and that's who they were marketed to. You hardly needed the pedophile market for them to have been successful.
People thought pictures of naked small children were cute. Do they still take pictures of baby buns on bear skin rugs?
by Anonymous | reply 18 | November 25, 2017 1:05 AM |
The Baby Burlesk stuff was wish fulfillment for men who wanted their women to be more childlike, therefore less challenging (or so they thought) and more malleable. This desire was also expressed in the infantilized personas of popular female stars like Harlow and, later, Monroe.
by Anonymous | reply 19 | November 25, 2017 1:15 AM |
Tennessee Williams explored the phenomenon in Baby Doll.
by Anonymous | reply 20 | November 25, 2017 1:16 AM |
Did she write a letter to daddy?
by Anonymous | reply 21 | November 25, 2017 1:35 AM |
Temple movies are wildly inappropriate through today's sensibility. All of that is true. NONE of that has anything to do with his cockamamie theories about Nabokov's references.
by Anonymous | reply 22 | November 25, 2017 1:38 AM |
I am supremely offended by this thread. Shirley Temple is sacrosanct. Case closed.
by Anonymous | reply 23 | November 25, 2017 1:57 AM |
Poor Little Rich Girl is a very entertaining fun film.
But the Italian organ grinder character needs to be cut from all prints because it is wildly offensive.
by Anonymous | reply 24 | November 25, 2017 2:18 AM |
People saying that the men are perving over ST when she sings The Good Ship Lollipop are out of their minds. She was a cute little kid, and they were being affectionate. Her dress was the same style dress that most little girls wore in the thirties. You know why? Because people didn't think a child's bum or underwear were erotic. Our culture has so sexualized everyone and everything that we can't even watch a sweet children's movie from the 1930's without seeing subtext and pedophilia. It's bonkers.
by Anonymous | reply 25 | November 25, 2017 3:10 AM |
It was quite common for people to take pictures of their kids taking baths. Horrors.
by Anonymous | reply 26 | November 25, 2017 3:36 AM |
You DO realize this is an attempt at humour. It's called parody.
by Anonymous | reply 27 | November 25, 2017 5:33 AM |
Shirley sure grew up ugly. Here she is with Larry King
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 28 | November 25, 2017 5:43 AM |
This must be the 10th thread about this video posted this year. Enough.
by Anonymous | reply 29 | November 25, 2017 5:58 AM |
R28 no, she was cute and never turned into a pretty adult, instead she stayed...cute. Which is fine but doesn't make for a good movie star.
Not ugly though.
by Anonymous | reply 30 | November 25, 2017 9:42 AM |
It's a fact that these films were criticized even IN THEIR DAY for being pedophiliac-leaning. It was widely said AT THE TIME that they were meant to appeal to that element of the adult American male. They were not innocent nor were they believed to be.
by Anonymous | reply 31 | November 25, 2017 10:10 AM |
There’s a lot of pictures of Shirley as an older woman because she was an ambassador. But she was a pretty young girl in her twenties.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 32 | November 25, 2017 3:13 PM |
This is disturbing... she is photographed like a child being spanked by her father but now, being older, the image becomes a sexual one.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 35 | November 25, 2017 3:17 PM |
I could never stand that little bitch. I always knew she'd grow up to be a fucking Republican.
by Anonymous | reply 36 | November 25, 2017 3:54 PM |
R35, there were a lot of images of grown women being spanked in that era and it wasn’t sexulalizing them as much as it was infantilizing them.
The masterly husband or father punishing the foolish, childish little woman who was too stupid to understand how to behave and had to be “corrected” (who was a grown woman, and usually a housewife with kids).
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 37 | November 25, 2017 4:10 PM |
Here’s a lobby card for the 1957 movie My Man Godfrey, Starring June Allyson and David Niven. Yes, this really was a thing back in the day.
Look at the picture - sophisticated man Niven spanks ignoramous woman, Allyson, who was then known as the epitome of wholesome wife and mother in films.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 38 | November 25, 2017 4:21 PM |
[quote] spanks ignoramous woman, Allyson
After that spanking she had to start wearing Depends.
by Anonymous | reply 39 | November 25, 2017 4:30 PM |
What insane frau finds eroticism in Shirley Temple movies? R25 is spot on. Viewing old movies from the oversexualized lens of today's culture is moronic and destructive.
by Anonymous | reply 40 | November 25, 2017 4:38 PM |
Even being the de facto Mrs America wasn’t enough to stop her from being spanked into incontinence, R39.
Men were harsh back in the day.
by Anonymous | reply 41 | November 25, 2017 4:40 PM |
I think Shirley Temple might have been better looking as she aged if she had a better hairdo.
R38 June Allyson ruined the remake of My Man Godfrey. She deserved to be spanked.
by Anonymous | reply 42 | November 25, 2017 4:58 PM |
Those who see pedophila in everything around them are just pedophiles themselves. Just like those who see racism in everything around them are just racists themselves.
by Anonymous | reply 43 | November 25, 2017 5:46 PM |
no, r43.
Pedophilia and racism are finally being exposed. They are real, and have been around forever.
Most people are emphatically rejecting white supremacy and sexual assault.
People like you, however, want to protect dirty secrets....so they’ll continue.
Why would someone want white supremacy & sexual torture to continue....? Hmmm. I wonder....oh, yeah....white straight men like it. That’s why. And whatever they think is acceptable, is accespted. They decide everything.
by Anonymous | reply 44 | November 25, 2017 6:18 PM |
It’s too bad the studios lost interest in her. I don’t think her teenage movies are bad, she was good in “The Bacherlor and The Bobby Soxer”
Was she a fiscal Republican or the evil kind?
by Anonymous | reply 46 | November 25, 2017 6:25 PM |
r28
If you didn't watch the Larry King interview she says when she quit FOX and went to MGM, on her first day there she had a man expose his genitals to her. After her mother got out of a meeting with Louis B Mayer, she told her mother about it (she was 12) and her mother told her while she was getting flashed, Mayer was making a pass at her mother.
by Anonymous | reply 47 | November 25, 2017 7:01 PM |
R44 - finally exposed? Have you been living under a rock?
R14 - whoever it is that made these videos isn't claiming the Shirley Temple shorts/movies borrowed from Nabokov bur the other way around. He or she has clearly combed through Lolita to fabricate references to the Shirley Temple shorts/movies.
The idea that Nabokov either found copies of these movies twenty plus years after release to study and draw from just a ludicrous as the idea that while living in Germany he was finding Shirley Temple shorts/movies to watch and study. Not to mention none of these crackpot theories surfaced when the book was published.
by Anonymous | reply 48 | November 25, 2017 7:11 PM |
What will the Democrats do with creepy Joe Biden? His paws are all over those little girls.
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 49 | November 25, 2017 7:13 PM |
Well, R40, Graham Greene wrote a newspaper article discussing the not-so-latent pedophilia of Shirley Temple films and was prosecuted and I believe banned from reentering the USA. He discusses this in his excellent autobiography, Ways of Escape.
by Anonymous | reply 50 | November 25, 2017 7:15 PM |
I really can't believe some posters here are defending the clips from her movies. It's certainly not Shirley's fault and maybe the audience wasn't aware but the themes are undeniable. I'm not a religious right wing nutjob either. I'm very liberal and atheist. That doesn't mean that hollywood is innocent.
by Anonymous | reply 51 | November 25, 2017 7:24 PM |
This thread is crawling with fundie trolls, or Russian troll farmers. I’m sure of it.
Hi Boris! Hi Oleg!
by Anonymous | reply 52 | November 25, 2017 7:37 PM |
R52, who are we supposed to believe, the VIDEO of Joe Biden feeling up little girls or your petty name-calling defense of his sexual harassment?
by Anonymous | reply 53 | November 25, 2017 7:44 PM |
R7 complete bullshit. The Nabokov thing is completely insane. There might be an interesting doc to be made about Shirley Temple, but this ain't it. This doc is Alex Jones pizza gate bullshit.
by Anonymous | reply 54 | November 25, 2017 8:07 PM |
FF R43 for gas lighting.
Those who see pedophilia see pedophilia. From Shirley Temple to Britney Spears to that “Stranger Things” girl. People finally have the eyes to see it as it is, and call it out.
Child abuse is not a recent phenomenon. It’s in our blood. And just because our ancestors hid it, doesn’t mean it didn’t exist.
The movie screen is like Perseus’s Shield: it shows us what we can’t see directly. Our ancestors had an unhealthy and abusive way of thinking about children. They made kids do hard labor. It’s how Judy Garland got addicted to pills. So she could work long days. The Little Rascal kids were financially exploited and abused. All the kids from Diffrent Strokes had fucked up lives.
by Anonymous | reply 56 | November 25, 2017 8:30 PM |
R53 = right wing Trumpkin on a homosexual message board. What would your wife think?
#maga
by Anonymous | reply 57 | November 25, 2017 9:39 PM |
R50 - Greene wrote a review of the Temple film Wee Willie Winkie for the British publication Night and Day. He made the accusation that the fans of the movie were pedophiles, and trying to attract this crowd was intentional on both the studio and Temple's part. The publication was successfully sued for libel in Britain. Greene fled England for Mexico to avoid being prosecuted.
He was not banned from either Britain or the USA. Of course Greene wrote The Power and the Glory during this self imposed exile.
by Anonymous | reply 58 | November 25, 2017 9:56 PM |
[quote] Of course Greene wrote The Power and the Glory during this self imposed exile.
So it turned out quite well for him.
by Anonymous | reply 59 | November 25, 2017 10:12 PM |
Some of you have absolutely no historical imagination. You can’t interpret old movies from the perspective of today, without historical context.
In the 1930s, when Shirley Temple became a star, there was almost 30 percent unemployment. If you had no money you tried for help from private charities but they had no money either. There was no welfare, no Medicare, no general assistance. People were desperate and afraid. There was no hope for relief
There was no TV. There were no books. In such unrelentingly grim circumstances, people loved and needed the optimism Shirley Temple movies allowed them to feel.
Try to understand a viewpoint and history that is different from your own.
by Anonymous | reply 60 | November 26, 2017 4:34 PM |
R60 - there were no books in the 1930s?
by Anonymous | reply 61 | November 26, 2017 4:46 PM |
R61, I think R60 meant that the common man could not afford books.
by Anonymous | reply 62 | November 26, 2017 5:38 PM |
Deny all you want, but that Biden compilation is really creepy. And with all those instances can't be chalked up to "coincidence"
by Anonymous | reply 63 | November 26, 2017 5:55 PM |
R62 - there were public libraries. Also people who could afford a movie couldn't afford a book? More to the point the appeal of Baby Burlesks probably wasn't a response to difficult economic times. The popularity of all children casts goes back to the Our Gang movies. Which started in 1922.
What there is absolutely no evidence of is the movies were made to turn on pedophiles.
by Anonymous | reply 64 | November 26, 2017 6:13 PM |
R60 here.
Shirley Temple was born in 1928. Bankers and financiers started throwing themselves from windows the following year, in late 1929. So no, she wasn’t in any Baby Burlesks before she was born. And yes, even in the Depression, people who could afford a nickel to go to a movie (which wasnt everybody) were cheered by her films. (Our Gang was in the 30s and 40s.)
Do some of you not really not know when the Depression began, how long it lasted, and how awful conditions were back then, for most ordinary people?
by Anonymous | reply 65 | November 26, 2017 7:56 PM |
r45, what are you going to do about the misogyny and hatred of women in the hip hop black community? You going to put that down to 'white supremacy' as well?
by Anonymous | reply 66 | November 26, 2017 8:05 PM |
R64, a movie was nickel and people were buying a double feature and maybe a short or newsreel, plus in the old days, once you paid for your ticket, if the theater wasn’t too full, a lot of places would let you stay and watch it again. So you were really getting a lot of entertainment for the money.
Also, there were a lot of serial movies being cranked out, westerns, The Little Rascals and other genres. So you could see the next installment pretty quickly, those films were shot very quickly.
by Anonymous | reply 67 | November 26, 2017 8:23 PM |
R67 - I'm not disputing the price or availability of movies. I'm simply pointing out how ludicrous the statement "There were no books." is. I find it incredible anyone would defend this statement.
Also R60 what on in my post at R64 even suggests I don't know when Temple was born or when the Great Depression started? Our Gang was a very successful franchise that started in 1922. This idea of comedies that featured all children casts predates the Great Depression. Since the concept upon which Baby Burlesk is based was successful prior to the Great Depression, why speculate the success of Baby Burlesk was tied to the Great Depression?
by Anonymous | reply 68 | November 29, 2017 4:10 AM |
In one of Shirley’s famous movies, I think it was Wee Willie Winkie, the last scene had Shirley SMOKING a peace pipe. She was about 7. This really shocked me. I had watched that movie a million times as a child and never even thought that was weird. Now, it seems highly inappropriate for a child.
by Anonymous | reply 69 | November 29, 2017 7:00 AM |
As a child (born in the early '60s), I loved Shirley Temple and watched all her films when they were on the tv. My mum loved them too. She didn't see anything 'bad' in them.
A couple of weeks ago I saw the clip in the 'Baby Burlesque' thread and I was horrified. I'd never realised how many 'cum shots' were in those films. But the person who put them in the film certainly knew. All of those shots aren't there by accident.
It's like the last scene of 'North by Northwest' where the train is going into the tunnel. Hitchcock did that as a 'joke'. It represents the main characters shagging. He found it very amusing that the film censors never noticed. Of course he wasn't using kids.
by Anonymous | reply 70 | November 29, 2017 8:45 AM |
Yes, there are some disturbing images in those old shorts. However, this "documentary" is batshit insane. As is the person who keeps posting it.
by Anonymous | reply 71 | November 29, 2017 11:18 AM |
Uncle Joe Biden is a fucking creep, too. I cannot believe people haven’t come for him yet. I guess his son dying is his cover.
I’m not a Russian troll. I’m a middle-aged liberal American woman who has been on the receiving end of Uncle Joes my entire life and I don’t care what side of the aisle they’re on. It’s fucking gross and it needs to stop.
by Anonymous | reply 72 | November 29, 2017 11:50 AM |
What the fuck has Joe Biden got to do with any of this? R72 is a fucking nut case.
by Anonymous | reply 73 | November 29, 2017 3:11 PM |
Bump.
Yep, R67, a double feature, newsreels, and a serial like "Flash Gordon."
Plus an ice cream cone.
by Anonymous | reply 74 | October 9, 2018 7:24 PM |
And a cartoon! All of the classic WB cartoons started out as featurettes before the main film.
by Anonymous | reply 75 | October 9, 2018 8:33 PM |
[quote] Uncle Joe Biden is a fucking creep, too. I cannot believe people haven’t come for him yet. I guess his son dying is his cover.
Now that Biden is considering a run for the presidency, the GOP trolls are already working overtime
by Anonymous | reply 76 | October 9, 2018 8:39 PM |
R76, you have to admit that Biden's behavior is a tad bizarre?
by Anonymous | reply 77 | October 9, 2018 9:20 PM |
"The Little Rascals" started out as "Our Gang"!
by Anonymous | reply 78 | October 9, 2018 9:22 PM |
R75, right, my bad. Forgot the cartoons!
by Anonymous | reply 79 | October 9, 2018 9:30 PM |
People don't realize how much double entendre featured in films from the 1920s and 1930s. They just don't expect it.
Most people who watched these films didn't catch on, but quite a few did. TCM used to do short documentaries to show between movies, and one was specifically about Shirley Temple movies and their implications; I recall a scene of a boy dropping ice cream down Temple's overalls, which she wore without a shirt. The docu went on to say that much of this innuendo was dropped when she went to another studio soon after.
All that said, I'm guessing these threads were only posted as stealth alt-right threads to bash Democrats.
by Anonymous | reply 80 | October 9, 2018 9:39 PM |
Everything in our pornified culture cums off as creepy now.
by Anonymous | reply 81 | October 9, 2018 9:57 PM |
^SAY 'HELLO" TO MY LITTLE FRIEND!
Offsite Linkby Anonymous | reply 84 | October 9, 2018 10:56 PM |
R80, yes indeed.
The Hayes Code was instituted in 1934, and if you look at Hollywood movies from that period, you will notice lots of double entendre, shots of women's butts, etc.
I recommend the WB musicals Footlights, 42nd Street Gold Diggers of 1933, and Dames.
With that said,
by Anonymous | reply 85 | October 9, 2018 11:50 PM |
This wasn't innocent. Some of those Hollywood big shots were messing around with little kids. Of course, they were. There were Bryan Singers at that time, too.
They didn't hide it back then because they didn't have to because they were so powerful. They knew females couldn't talk about that stuff.
by Anonymous | reply 86 | October 10, 2018 12:01 AM |
R86, you are reminding me of a pedo scene in the book " The Godfather" that was mighty disturbing.
I am not sure if they kept it in the movie.
by Anonymous | reply 87 | October 12, 2018 12:24 AM |
Arthur Freed exposed himself to Shirley. She had never seen a penis before and it made her laugh which infuriated Freed.
by Anonymous | reply 88 | October 12, 2018 12:30 AM |
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7pa3TmqOorZ6csm%2BvzqZmraCimq6le5FpZ29vaGaBbq%2FRnpypsV2lsqW7jK2fnqWVmXq0tMiro56xXamyrrzLnmSsm5WjsrR5wKeYpbGqmrE%3D