@boredwan I don't think the issue is with the makeup. It was banned because of the sexual connotations implied a young girl (who LOOKS under the age of consent) holding an oversized bottle between her legs which looks like a flower opening. IMHO it's not hard to see why this is wrong.
Marc Jacobs even says in the end of the video that they picked Dakota specifically for her young image and the fact that she's very knowing though young... The whole thing seems so creepy to me
This is my new favourite perfume, it is gorgeous and lasts for hours and hours! If you want a girly, floral and fruity scent without it being too sickly sweet then this is for you. Also the bottle is stunning and I love the campaign photos aswell, it's all a little Lolita-esque :)
I love her makeup... I always love the light pink lips and slightly smokey eyes it's so soft :) I don't think this advert is racy her dress is very pretty. It's not as if she's dancing around in sexy lingerie. I love the perfume bottles I'm definately considering buying this :D
@bluesgurugod AND BY THE WAY MICHAEL JACKSON IS NOT A PEDO , HE IS A WELL RESPECTED ARTIST ENTERTAINER AND LEGEND WHO HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG EXCEPT FOR BEING AN AMAZING GENEROUS PERSON
@imrealllllygood Your first statement is correct. It was banned for that reason and I understand that reason but your second one is wrong. Most of the people arguing here are arguing how pornographic this is.
@garysquirrelreviews it's not that it's sexual. It's that it is believed that things like this are the cause of girls becoming sexual. Same as how violence is somehow related to video games despite the fact that they've been around for years with no adverse effects.
I dont think its overly sexual at all...sexual is the BS that Abecrombi puts out for ads or their childrens clothing (lets not forget the push up bikini's and thongs for kids people that A&F had) however something about Marc Jacobs and what he was saying kinda gave me a weird vibe.... I can kinda understand where people say its sexual but not really its nothing new and there's worse things on disney then in this ad. she isnt showing anything its not porn its not a sexual face overall its nothing
@dianemerq I said that what dakota has done is not pornographic and, therefore, not shameful. I also said that what miley cyrus did was shameful. You took that to mean that I was saying that they are both being shameful. If you were to take out that privacy thing about messages then I'd be more than happy to continue this conversation away from these people with the ability to see that you're completely ignorant of my comments.
@way2jaded1 Lolita isn't a film. It was a book first. A very good book. This is a gorgeous perfume too. It does encapsulate young, vibrant, female sexuality. Which by the way is nothing to be ashamed of (Dakota ws of legal age in this campaign and holding a bloody flower - Hilary Duff and Myley Cyrus can show their tits to the world and that's fine but THIS gets critisied?!) Lola is a name, that's all. Marc Jaobs has made no connections to Lolita with his perfume.
@Browncoatt22 your ignorance astounds me. I was well aware Dakota was of legal age for the add campaign. And agree that the film is of literary interest. However thanks to that film the name is no longer just a name and Dakota's film history just impounds this. If this was not the case adverts would not have been banned because as you say nothing is obviously wrong with them until you look at them in a much larger picture. If miley or duff get there tits out it is obvious this is insidious.
is that it… Please there have been far worst adverts, but I must agree that it is inappropriate she just teenager who looks a lot younger, but draw you own conclusion. I had to watch this with the sound muted as the music was offence to my ears.
@MsYasi95 Gosh, I don't know, I think people are just picking at anything these days! And I put my a load of things in my lap like that and I don't get called sexually provocative. XD
@83redrose83 i thought so, you beeing from the US. The only western country where its a scandal when a 17 year old is dressed. And yes. She looks young. But she looks young no matter what she does. Is it her fault that everybody is so shallow just to judge by looks nowadays?
Why is everyone over reacting. I've seen much worst on TV. In my opinion, the show Toddlers and Tiaras is MUCH worst than this ad. Dakota is of consenting age so I done understand the controversy over the ad. She is old enough to have sex but not old enough to hold a perfume bottle between her legs. Yes, it is suggestive, but it's not bad enough to get banned. Come on people!!
She's like a less pretty amanda seyfried. But the ad isn't a problem, i dont think its v sexual and she doesnt look too young. emma watson luks much younger, i feel a little uncomfortable when i see emma watson posing sexy in mags cos in sum shots emma watson luks 15
@dianemerq what you're saying has nothing to do with my arguement. What on earth is a "botton" in your dictionary? I had read read your page. I was replying to whoever made the comment (your son). Since you agree with him then my comment applies to you too which means I do have a clue what I'm talking about. There are 14 year old kids taking pictures like that and worse all over the earth. Have you not heard of miley cyrus and her ilk? Those were shameful. This is what's called "elegant" today.
@revengeoftheseth Yeah Seth you know how bad she hates objectification of women? So much that she went on youtube and typed "Dakota Fanning Racy Ad" haha. Diane is just jealous no one ever wanted to make an object out of her.
So Marc Jacob wants to popularise the relationship of under aged girls having a sexual relationship with much older men, The message is very strait forward and he likes it. Don't believe me google Lola and watch the film Lolita then watch this video again. This only works because of the product name without that it would be innocent with it it's really sick.
@dianemerq you can't write in english despite the fact that english is your first language. You believe in god, a being which, if this being exists and all the bibles stories are true, created us all equal and naked. If anything I'd agree that she should be ashamed if I were christian. She wasn't naked and is therefore covering up what god created for her. If you argue that then you're arguing that what god creates should be hidden. I personally don't believe that. It was hypotheticals.
![NoCap - Yacht Party [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rm_lvDln8kE/mqdefault.jpg)
@boredwan I don't think the issue is with the makeup. It was banned because of the sexual connotations implied a young girl (who LOOKS under the age of consent) holding an oversized bottle between her legs which looks like a flower opening.
IMHO it's not hard to see why this is wrong.
she's such a natural beauty
She's so cute, I love this photoshoot.
Marc Jacobs even says in the end of the video that they picked Dakota specifically for her young image and the fact that she's very knowing though young... The whole thing seems so creepy to me
Why is creepy???
@@JebusGabriel choosing someone to put in a provocative ad because she looks young doesn't seem creepy 2 u??
In a word..... Flawless.. She will always be an Amazing Talent!! Love ya...Xo.
This is my new favourite perfume, it is gorgeous and lasts for hours and hours! If you want a girly, floral and fruity scent without it being too sickly sweet then this is for you. Also the bottle is stunning and I love the campaign photos aswell, it's all a little Lolita-esque :)
When he calls her an old soul, that makes me think of an excuse a pedophile would make. Yeah, she's 14, but she's a very old soul, so it's okay.
I loved that perfume
Dakota is so delightful
News of the ban brought me here :)
Close. He's using a Contax G2 film camera.
how does she not blink with all of these flashes!
All three of the Marc Jacobs fragrances: Daisy, Lola, and Dot are all very youthful.
she's the best
the MASTER
she's 18 now but she was 17 when they shot this. her sister is the one that is 14.
I was waiting for her hand gestures to knock the bottle of the table lol
hermosa
where's the ad itself? Why are there only the behind-the-scene footage available?
what camera is that?
I honestly don't see nothing wrong with this video!!!..She's just posing, she's not naked or half naked. She's just modeling
@IridescentCosplay ITS AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR PERFUME! Not an advertisement for underwear or... god knows what else
I love her makeup... I always love the light pink lips and slightly smokey eyes it's so soft :) I don't think this advert is racy her dress is very pretty. It's not as if she's dancing around in sexy lingerie. I love the perfume bottles I'm definately considering buying this :D
@bluesgurugod AND BY THE WAY MICHAEL JACKSON IS NOT A PEDO , HE IS A WELL RESPECTED ARTIST ENTERTAINER AND LEGEND WHO HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG EXCEPT FOR BEING AN AMAZING GENEROUS PERSON
@IridescentCosplay No, whats stupid is that the age of consent in most countries is 16, yet a 17 year old isnt allowed to be shown in a PERFUME AD?!
@imrealllllygood Your first statement is correct. It was banned for that reason and I understand that reason but your second one is wrong. Most of the people arguing here are arguing how pornographic this is.
WHATS THAT SONG????
ooo the raveonettes
@TheEvanescent1994 ehm..Dakota will turn 18 NEXT year(2012) cause shes born in february 23 1994
@ChaseTechnoBoy professional modelling ability or ALIEN!!!
I LOVE DAKOTA FANNING!!! SHE IS BEAUTIFUL WITH LITTLE MAKE UP!!!!!!!!
u don't say
@garysquirrelreviews it's not that it's sexual. It's that it is believed that things like this are the cause of girls becoming sexual. Same as how violence is somehow related to video games despite the fact that they've been around for years with no adverse effects.
She's part alien. And one of the overlords at that.
just to clarify. this is not music. Gods.. my head >.<
I dont think its overly sexual at all...sexual is the BS that Abecrombi puts out for ads or their childrens clothing (lets not forget the push up bikini's and thongs for kids people that A&F had) however something about Marc Jacobs and what he was saying kinda gave me a weird vibe.... I can kinda understand where people say its sexual but not really its nothing new and there's worse things on disney then in this ad. she isnt showing anything its not porn its not a sexual face overall its nothing
@krazykez97 Its just you.
@mynamesforest I read this today and I was wondering for weeks when someone is gonna SAY SOMETHING about this ad! it's really disgusting!
@dianemerq I said that what dakota has done is not pornographic and, therefore, not shameful. I also said that what miley cyrus did was shameful. You took that to mean that I was saying that they are both being shameful. If you were to take out that privacy thing about messages then I'd be more than happy to continue this conversation away from these people with the ability to see that you're completely ignorant of my comments.
she's 18 now, so she isn't a child now :P
why was this band????
@way2jaded1 Lolita isn't a film. It was a book first. A very good book. This is a gorgeous perfume too. It does encapsulate young, vibrant, female sexuality. Which by the way is nothing to be ashamed of (Dakota ws of legal age in this campaign and holding a bloody flower - Hilary Duff and Myley Cyrus can show their tits to the world and that's fine but THIS gets critisied?!) Lola is a name, that's all. Marc Jaobs has made no connections to Lolita with his perfume.
she is soo pretty,,,i dont mind "sexual" ads from her
@Browncoatt22 your ignorance astounds me. I was well aware Dakota was of legal age for the add campaign. And agree that the film is of literary interest. However thanks to that film the name is no longer just a name and Dakota's film history just impounds this. If this was not the case adverts would not have been banned because as you say nothing is obviously wrong with them until you look at them in a much larger picture. If miley or duff get there tits out it is obvious this is insidious.
@ShaneKarma376 lol dude your first comment was funny ...... But so true....
is that it… Please there have been far worst adverts, but I must agree that it is inappropriate she just teenager who looks a lot younger, but draw you own conclusion. I had to watch this with the sound muted as the music was offence to my ears.
It doesn't get much hotter than this.
@MsYasi95 Gosh, I don't know, I think people are just picking at anything these days! And I put my a load of things in my lap like that and I don't get called sexually provocative. XD
Esp when shes wearing granny dress..
How did that get banned for child pornography
бесят барыги которые просят звезд продвигать свою продукцию
@83redrose83 i thought so, you beeing from the US. The only western country where its a scandal when a 17 year old is dressed. And yes. She looks young. But she looks young no matter what she does. Is it her fault that everybody is so shallow just to judge by looks nowadays?
Why is everyone over reacting. I've seen much worst on TV. In my opinion, the show Toddlers and Tiaras is MUCH worst than this ad. Dakota is of consenting age so I done understand the controversy over the ad. She is old enough to have sex but not old enough to hold a perfume bottle between her legs. Yes, it is suggestive, but it's not bad enough to get banned. Come on people!!
I fail to see how its "racy" or "sexual"
That is not right
She's like a less pretty amanda seyfried.
But the ad isn't a problem, i dont think its v sexual and she doesnt look too young. emma watson luks much younger, i feel a little uncomfortable when i see emma watson posing sexy in mags cos in sum shots emma watson luks 15
@83redrose83 "only"? She is allowed to have sex but not allowed to make pictures with her cloths on?
@dianemerq what you're saying has nothing to do with my arguement. What on earth is a "botton" in your dictionary? I had read read your page. I was replying to whoever made the comment (your son). Since you agree with him then my comment applies to you too which means I do have a clue what I'm talking about. There are 14 year old kids taking pictures like that and worse all over the earth. Have you not heard of miley cyrus and her ilk? Those were shameful. This is what's called "elegant" today.
@revengeoftheseth Yeah Seth you know how bad she hates objectification of women? So much that she went on youtube and typed "Dakota Fanning Racy Ad" haha. Diane is just jealous no one ever wanted to make an object out of her.
If this is sexual....Wont that make "Porn sites" illegal?
Oh dear she's in a perfume ad, suddenly all teens will start fornicating in public! You people can not be serious.
Allowed to have sex at 16
Not allowed to show 'sexual' ad.
lol well done society.
sooooo hows this too sexual for the uk?
Over sexualising young girls? If anything I think she looks older - I never realised how much she looks like Kate Hudson :P
So Marc Jacob wants to popularise the relationship of under aged girls having a sexual relationship with much older men, The message is very strait forward and he likes it. Don't believe me google Lola and watch the film Lolita then watch this video again. This only works because of the product name without that it would be innocent with it it's really sick.
I think they should have used someone younger, then it wouldn't have looked so...
@dianemerq you can't write in english despite the fact that english is your first language. You believe in god, a being which, if this being exists and all the bibles stories are true, created us all equal and naked. If anything I'd agree that she should be ashamed if I were christian. She wasn't naked and is therefore covering up what god created for her. If you argue that then you're arguing that what god creates should be hidden.
I personally don't believe that. It was hypotheticals.
I WISHD MY GF. LADYFRIEND. WIFE LOOKS LIKE HER
Oh my f*cking god she's so sweet... wish she was my girlfriend
She's yummy
I WISHD MY GF. LADYFRIEND. WIFE. MISTRESS. LOOKS LIKE HER