Nudity in films

[Batman1980]

Yes?
No?
Maybe?
I think as long as it's not nudity just for the sake of nudity it's fine. Looks like the rest of the world agrees too since kids 5 and over in Europe and Asia see stuff you can't see in PG-13 movies over here.

[Maswov]

Nudity is just fine in movies. BTW where is the porn on blu?

[Batman1980]

See I would consider porn on blu but 2 things -
My nieces go through everything in my room
Porn costs a lot on DVD, on blu-ray it's gotta be like $49.99+ for quality porn, pass.

[Maswov]

Maybe your right, I'll just save $$ for anther tip to Thailand.

[matthieuxdetoux]

Originally Posted by Maswov

Maybe your right, I'll just save $$ for anther tip to Thailand.

[quexos]

said it before: nudity is natural, clothes are artificial. Don't know why society lost its touch over time with nature to the point of pointing out nudity as some sort of sick perversion, but nudity is normal, natural and if it's slowly coming back to acceptance then fine.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Porn costs a lot on DVD, on blu-ray it's gotta be like $49.99+ for quality porn, pass.

Isn't that an oxymoron?

I have zero problem with nudity in movies. It can be funny (e.g., Airplane!), romantic, etc. I can't really think of a specific movie/scene that was tasteless and offensive to me.

[thedarkangel1975]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

Isn't that an oxymoron?

I have zero problem with nudity in movies. It can be funny (e.g., Airplane!), romantic, etc. I can't really think of a specific movie/scene that was tasteless and offensive to me.

A rape scene can be offensive, but I understand why nudiity is there.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by thedarkangel1975

A rape scene can be offensive, but I understand why nudiity is there.

Good point. I guess I wasn't thinking of it like that (in terms of rape), but you're right.

[SexyFatManSmellsGood]

Originally Posted by thedarkangel1975

A rape scene can be offensive, but I understand why nudiity is there.

Similarly, a murder scene can be offensive, but I understand why the gore is there.

[TheMerge]

Rape is an act of violence and not sex. It is about control. Rape in a film is usually necessary to the plot. I don't think I've seen a film use rape to titilate.

Originally Posted by thedarkangel1975

A rape scene can be offensive, but I understand why nudiity is there.

[Ataneruo]

Actually, for those of you who keep on nudity is NOT the natural human condition: PRIVACY is. It is part of what makes us human, just as we as a species don't eat our own young unlike many other species. Privacy and modesty protect women, children and families and this is part of the reason why all human cultures have adopted some form of clothing (beyond mere utilitarian and protective reasons for doing so). Clothing is a 100% artificial creation that is far better than the natural alternative, just as eating utensils are a far better artificial means of consuming food than the natural alternative.

I have seen many movies but I have yet to see a SINGLE movie in which any blatant nudity was the slightest bit necessary. It simply isn't. You can choose to enjoy nudity in your movies but don't pretend that it is necessary, because if you think so it simply means that you (or your preferred director) wasn't creative enough to imply nudity without actually showing it.

I saw Watchmen with some friends and we all agreed that the nudity was very uncomfortable and unnecessary. Not so much the male nudity but the virtually X-rated sex scenes. My friends are the sort that enjoy nudity in films (and real life) but they all recognize the inappropriateness of displaying such a private thing in public on a screen for thousands or millions to see.

For those who tiresomely bring up violence in movies and hold it up as a double standard against sex: there are many studies showing that violence in media may make aggressive people slightly more aggressive but it doesn't make anyone go out and kill people, whereas, sexually suggestive music or movies DO cause people to engage in more sexual activity. That's real great for society, more pregnancy, disease and broken families.

Lastly, when you see violence onscreen at the movies, no one is actually dying or even hurt, whereas when you see nudity in movies you know that someone had to get naked.

[toef]

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

Actually, for those of you who keep on nudity is NOT the natural human condition: PRIVACY is.

Well said (the whole thing, I just deleted most of it to cut down on space).

A distinction has to be made between nudity and sex. People are constantly bringing up the double-standard of nudity vs violence, but that's not the best comparison. The better comparison is sex and violence.

Sex can be shown on screen without nudity, just as violence can be shown on screen without actually killing someone, and -- surprise! -- we can still get the point of the scene within the story.

[cynatnite]

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

Actually, for those of you who keep on nudity is NOT the natural human condition: PRIVACY is.

Nudity is the natural human condition...freezing our butts off...is not. This is why caveman Dave saw the hairy animal and lusted after his fur.

[Hep]

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

Privacy and modesty protect women, children and families and this is part of the reason why all human cultures have adopted some form of clothing (beyond mere utilitarian and protective reasons for doing so). Clothing is a 100% artificial creation that is far better than the natural alternative, just as eating utensils are a far better artificial means of consuming food than the natural alternative.

Visit your local natural history museum, ask some questions about the origins of clothing; in every culture the genesis of clothing has been utilitarian. The cultural applications (such a jewellery and ceremony) follow naturally.

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

I have seen many movies but I have yet to see a SINGLE movie in which any blatant nudity was the slightest bit necessary. It simply isn't.

I will take a single example of a movie I have recently viewed, A History of Violence. The only scene with brief nudity was a significant signal to the audience about how people conceal secrets, big and small. If you can tell me how that is a gratuitous aspect of the story I am listening.

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

I saw Watchmen with some friends and we all agreed that the nudity was very uncomfortable and unnecessary. Not so much the male nudity but the virtually X-rated sex scenes.

I have yet to see the movie, although I doubt making you uncomfortable was the goal; likely it says more about the culture in which you were raised. I have heard some great reasons to necessitate nudity in the Watchmen. In some movies disarming the audience may be the goal, and can be an effective device for a film maker.

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

there are many studies showing that violence in media may make aggressive people slightly more aggressive but it doesn't make anyone go out and kill people, whereas, sexually suggestive music or movies DO cause people to engage in more sexual activity. That's real great for society, more pregnancy, disease and broken families.

I think you forgot to post the link to your studies; I would be interested to read the one that confirms the positive link between nudity and sexual activity as suggested. I think abstinence and religious restrictions on condom use is far more damaging. Read this from the American Medical Association for more information.

[witheygull]

Originally Posted by Ataneruo

I have seen many movies but I have yet to see a SINGLE movie in which any blatant nudity was the slightest bit necessary. It simply isn't.

You are correct in believing that nudity in films is not necessary. However, movies themselves are not necessary; they are very much a luxury in our existence. Very little of what most people do is driven by actual necessity.

I'm all for nudity in movies when it is appropriate to the situation presented or when used completely gratuitously for comedic effect. What I can't stand is puritanical directors/actors/studios *****footing around the issue and not displaying nudity when it would be entirely appropriate.

Think about how many movies you've seen where a couple seems to have L-shaped sheets on their bed. The sheet will cover the woman's entire chest, but only comes up to the man's waist. Down with L-shaped sheets!

I also hate when you have a nude character on screen (male or female) laying down in a profile shot with the leg closer to the camera bent so as to cover up the actor's genitals/pubic hair. It is a completely unnatural pose. Either show naturalistic nudity or stage the scene differently rather than draw my attention to the artificiality of the movie.

Edit: Gah, I've been censored! Those asterisks were not my doing.

[Twitch9]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

See I would consider porn on blu but 2 things -
My nieces go through everything in my room
Porn costs a lot on DVD, on blu-ray it's gotta be like $49.99+ for quality porn, pass.

Just to make a quick point if it was not for porn supporting blu-ray we would all be on the HD DVD forms right now, porn is why blu-ray won the war.

[toef]

Originally Posted by Twitch9

Just to make a quick point if it was not for porn supporting blu-ray we would all be on the HD DVD forms right now, porn is why blu-ray won the war.

Not this again. People think they are knowledgeable because they know porn helped VHS beat Beta, so they think it applies to BD too. It had nothing to do with BD vs HD-DVD, because most people go online for their entertainment now.

I've still yet to see a valid argument for why nudity SHOULD be in movies. Most people give a broad, artsy response, but can't really explain why taking it out would be a problem.

Name a single movie where the whole movie would've been a flop if it weren't for the nude scenes? I'm not saying it shouldn't be there, but some people want it there for no reason, which just makes them sound like teens going through puberty.

Most people sound like they just want to cry censorship or religious oppression, just for the sake of having something to go up against.

American Wedding was on TV this morning, and of course the nude scenes were edited. Turns out the movie still sucked just as much without them. Go figure.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by toefer

Not this again. People think they are knowledgeable because they know porn helped VHS beat Beta, so they think it applies to BD too. It had nothing to do with BD vs HD-DVD, because most people go online for their entertainment now.

I've still yet to see a valid argument for why nudity SHOULD be in movies. Most people give a broad, artsy response, but can't really explain why taking it out would be a problem.

Name a single movie where the whole movie would've been a flop if it weren't for the nude scenes? I'm not saying it shouldn't be there, but some people want it there for no reason, which just makes them sound like teens going through puberty.

Most people sound like they just want to cry censorship or religious oppression, just for the sake of having something to go up against.

American Wedding was on TV this morning, and of course the nude scenes were edited. Turns out the movie still sucked just as much without them. Go figure.

well stated toef. i think nudity can add a somewhat "beautiful" touch to a movie if presented in the right fashion, though few do. "The Reader" is a prime example of this. showing kate winslet and that kid together was not for the purpose of trying to attract attention (altho of course it did)...it was for the sake of their relationship. many many movies don't need to show as much nudity as they do and they would be just as good imo.

the older bonds movies (minus the credits sequences) rarely showed much (female) nudity but were still able to get the point across of what was going on. the newer ones show much more but how much does that actually add to the movie...

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by toefer

Not this again. People think they are knowledgeable because they know porn helped VHS beat Beta, so they think it applies to BD too. It had nothing to do with BD vs HD-DVD, because most people go online for their entertainment now.

I've still yet to see a valid argument for why nudity SHOULD be in movies. Most people give a broad, artsy response, but can't really explain why taking it out would be a problem.

Name a single movie where the whole movie would've been a flop if it weren't for the nude scenes? I'm not saying it shouldn't be there, but some people want it there for no reason, which just makes them sound like teens going through puberty.

Most people sound like they just want to cry censorship or religious oppression, just for the sake of having something to go up against.

American Wedding was on TV this morning, and of course the nude scenes were edited. Turns out the movie still sucked just as much without them. Go figure.

Your argument is easily defeated by itself.

Name a movie that was damaged in box office BECAUSE it had nudity in it.

Last I checked Titanic is still the top box office draw of any movie... ever.

Wait, there WAS nudity in that movie wasn't there? It WAS part of the plot as well last time I checked.

It's not about censorship or religious oppression, sometimes it's about people crying and whining when they see a boob on screen, but letting things like explosions and people dying on screen getting disemboweled pass with a blanket acceptance.

Some folks take boobs WAY too seriously, if you want to claim that nudity isn't necessary in most movies, then one could also make the same claim for violence or other graphic themes.

Logan