Nudity in Film

But of course. Next to a "Basic Instinct" or a "Fatal Attraction", "A walk on the moon" looks tame. But I needed some illustration of movies I like and feel comfortable with even though they have some pretty intense sexual themes. "A walk on the Moon" was actually edited. It had at least one more sex scene which from pictures I gather it was tamer than the ones who made the cut. But really suggestive. The scene wasn't cut for ratings issues, though.

Thanks for explaining more about how ratings work, UM.

I think UM brought a great point (that I know Shr feels very strongly about) which underlines many people's thoughts on movie violence compared to nudity or less graphic love scenes. It's basically a cheap double standard that so much violence gets through and can get a PG-13 rating regardless.

But anyway, we have a ratings thread somewhere. I'll go dig it up to see if we can revive that interesting debate. :glow:
 
I haven't seen Schindler's List so I wouldn't know. But in a case like that, there would still be no need to show full-frontal nudity. You see them unbuttoning shirts (if they had them) and then filing into the "showers", that suffices. No need to linger.
 
I can hardly watch romantic-kissy scenes in movies with my parents let alone nude scenes!...It's so embarassing for me :lol:

As long as it's done with taste and is relavent to the scene/storyline it's ok.
 
Here is an interesting question:

Do you think nudity and graphic (depictions of) sex in a film like "Basic Instinct" is necessary to create the kind of atmosphere it was going for (decadant abandon) and tell the story it was trying to tell (a well-told murder mystery)?

I say, yes because a part of the story it is trying to tell and explore is the darker side of the human psyche -- the sexual psyche -- And that is part of the characters who inhabit the film and make them a lot more interesting as a result.

Also, I think the real "test" as to whether a scene of gratuitous violence of nudity is really gratuitous or not is for film makers to ask themselves...

Would the same, emotional effect of the story be felt if the scene(s) were not there?

A lot of film makers like to use this an excuse to always answer "no" so they can put gratuitious sex and violence in films...

But honestly, I am a firm believer in using this test as because if film makers really have a strong story that can stand on its own without them...

Then they shouldn't worry about this too much as these kinds of scenes will come naturally and as a bi-product of telling a realistic and compelling story versus trying to consciously build a shallow story around such scenes.

I speak from frist hand experience writing screenplays as well as getting paid by production companies to write screenplays as the general perception is more-is-better is what Hollywood lives by... But that doesn't necessarily make them correct ;)
 
honestly i am comfortable watching nude scenes but i can't watch really with my parents especially my dad
 
Depends on the movie.

Like in "Not Another Teen Movie" it was funny. And she was hot.

But when I walked in on "The Secretary" (work at a theater) and saw her nude at the end, ehh...not good. By the way, that movie made me laugh...I only saw 10 minutes in the middle and the end of it, but when he spanked her I couldn't help but laugh.
 
Eh, I grew up watching movies like Porky's as a kid, so who knows what any children of mine will get to watch. :lol:

Sasha
1062.gif
 
I watched this awful movie from the 70s on New Year's Day at the party I was at, called Invasion of the Bee Girls. We just watched it to make fun of it, but damn were there a lot of boobs. :lol: I generally don't care too much, but after seeing 7 or so different "Bee Girls" rip off their shirts and start feeling themselves up, I was like, "Enough with the boobs! NO MORE!" It was seeeeeeriously overkill.
 
I'm fine with it, as long as I'm not watching a movie with my parents. :lol:

No, seriously. I get where you're coming from. Sometimes nudity is not needed and it kills the scene, so to speak. If it is there for a reason, whether it be romance or whatever, then yay. But some of the time it's not necessary, and that can be a bit bothersome.
 
I was shocked when a good friend of mine (who's a European transplant to the US) wouldn't let her teenaged son see Chasing Amy because of the content, but had no problem with him seeing Grosse Point Blank, instead (while she saw the former in another theater).

Are you kidding me?

And she's usually so sophisticated about these things. But she decided the content was too adult.

PUHLEEZE!

Versus the mindless overkill that is GPB?

Don't get me wrong, I liked both films, but they are extremely different from each other and if I wanted my child to learn something about what it's like getting older and dealing with one's past, I'd definitely choose the former, not the latter.

I think the whole topic is extremely complicated but I'm frequently disturbed by gratuitous sex scens that are thrown into films for no reason (kind of like Caligula - a little sex, then some story...a little more sex, then some more story...), but equally (and possibly MORE) disturbed by gratuitous extreme violence that is added in just to make the film more "interesting."

Still, if it fits the story and is well advertised as being graphic, then I don't mind - I know it's part of the art form.
 
A Walk on The Moon is pretty tame when compared to other R and NC-17 movies ;)

The general rule is that for R and NC-17 films, sex can be very graphic, but it must be understood either visually or otherwise that the sex is simulated, I.E. no penentration is occuring.

This is what separates X rated (porn) films from just regular R or NC-17 films.

Also, a film can be rated X for extreme, graphic violence as well and nothing else.

For example, the first cut of Robocop (1986) was rated X for the graphic violence depicted in the film as it had absolutely no nudity whatsoever and had to be re-cut AFTER it had been released erroneously as an "R" -- This is why the urban myth of there being two cuts of the film being released is true ;)
 
If you guys want to see some graphic nudity and sexual content on film then you should watch Short Bus. It's a really interesting movie.
 
i don't mind nudity. however,,if i bring my mom or dad with me which rarely happens....i would feel alittle awkward. i would just pretend...like i didn't that was gonna happen. ;) :lol:
 
:lol: Your parents sound great.

I'm pretty sure most parents want their kids to walk out of the room on certain scenes even if they're 40. Hehe. Parents are cool like that. :D
 
Eek, Gia. That made me uncomfortable. I don't like when movies do it constantly for ratings, or at least seemingly so. The Scarlet Letter with Demi Moore was like that. They just showed her checking herself out naked in the mirror.

In some movies it is good though, and necessary. I'm not against it. I like what Majandra Delfino said about it. She said that in life, people are naked so in movies they should be too.
 
Haha. Your parents seem cool, then. I mean, there's certain stuff I'm sure they don't want you to see, but they do know that they can't flip out about every foul word or naked body.

My parents totally did. :lol: How awful. But then I had a tv and VCR/DVD in my room so, yeah.. :lol: I watched what I wanted. But still, it was good that they explained to me that movies/tv portrayed stuff that weren't suitable for me. I still FF explicit sex scenes, too much violence, etc, it's just not my thing. :)
 
Back
Top