Does Nudity in Film Offend You?

[romantico]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:39am

Alot of people are disturbed and bothered over Eli Roth and his violent films. I personally don't think Eli is talented and offers nothing to the film community. I also think his films are beyond sick. However, I also feel this is a free country and I hate censorship. Therefore, Mr.Roth has the right to make the films he wants & I choose not to see them. I also think its dumb to say people who see these films or likes these films are sick. I look at film as art. Everyone's taste is different and there is no wrong or right when it comes to liking a film, in my opinion.

Now, having said that I'd like to ask if anyone feels there is too much nudity in films? We know theres too much violence,but what about nudity. I tend to agree more with the European school of thought where I feel nudity is less harmful than violence to society. I think I may be in the minority on this though. Theres a GREAT documentary called THIS FILM IS NOT RATED. This film shows the corruption and hypocrisy of the MPAA. For example, In the film BOYS DON'T CRY, we see a woman having an orgasm. In the film AMERICAN PIE, we see a woman having an orgasm. Both scenes are almost identical. AMERICAN PIE gets an R rating where BOYS DON'T CRY gets a NC-17 rating. The only difference is in AMERICAN PIE the girl is recieving oral pleasure from a guy. In BOYS DON'T CRY the girl is recieving oral pleasure from another woman. So, BOYS DON'T CRY had to be re-cut to get an R rating. There is no doubt there is homophobia in the MPAA, but perhaps thats another thread.

I watch a film like the DREAMERS and see it gets an NC-17 but a film like HOSTEL gets an R rating. The MPAA is sendinga message that its okay for films to have rape,mutilations,torture,graphic violence, and violence towards women but nudity is somehow looked at as being indecent. I'd rather a kid of mine see a nude body than a brutal torture scene, but thats just me. Another example is SHORTBUS. I have friends who call that film a porno movie.There are films that I agree should be viewed by adults like NINE SONGS or LIE WITH ME that have graphic sexual situations. Then theres Larry Clark's KEN PARK that can't even be released in this country due to the fact no one will distribute it due to the nudity and sex. Some people have called me a pervert and sick because I enjoy films that take risks and will push the envelope with nudity. This is why I kind of felt the need to speak up for those who are accused and labeled as sick for enjoying some violent slasher film.

So,my question(s) are,does nudity in film offend you?Do you feel there is too much nudity in film? I'll leave by asking one more question. Heres a poster to THIS FILM IS NOT RATED. Now, I know for a fact that if this poster was on display in my local theatre it would be removed within ten minutes.Personally, I think its a beautiful poster. The religious groups/rightwingers would just mob the theatre. But then a poster for HOSTEL part 2 would not even be looked at twice. Which poster is more offensive?



vs.

Updated On: 6/7/07 at 10:39 AM

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:42am

only if they are ugly. or women. or ugly women.

[misschung]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:46am

Interesting points raised - particularly the Boys Dont Cry vs American Pie ratings. Although do you know for sure that those two scenes were what prompted the MPA to assign those ratings? Personally I think Boys Dont Cry is a much heavier film than American Pie, although I havent seen it since it was first released. I don't doubt that what you said is true, but I'm willing to bet there were other reasons behind the NC-17 rating. Personally I think R would have been sufficient, though.

The Dreamers had two versions - one was NC17 and one was R - I have seen both. The former had full frontal male nudity and the second one didnt. A film like Hostel or even Clockwork Orange are much more disturbing than seeing full frontal male or female nudity, in my opinion. Not to mention that male nudity usually elicits a stricter rating than female.

I think that nudity is handled much differently in European film (and television) than it is in the states. I will stand by my opinion that extreme violence is just as offensive than nudity - but again, the contexts of both are equally as important.

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:47am

Or fat, RobbO. No one wants to see fatties naked.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:47am

The MPAA is a joke. Always has been. Always will be. End o' story. Are you on the payroll for HOSTEL 2?

[romantico]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:48am

I saw HOSTEL 2 and HATED IT!!!!! Hell no!!!

In the documentary THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED thats the reason the MPAA gave the films director Kimberly Pierce. It was that scene alone that got the NC-17 rating. They re-edited that one scene and it got an R rating. There was a scene in the COOLEr where Maria Bello showed a flash of pubic hair and they gave it a NC-17. The director had to remove that split second scene to give it a R rating. I can't even type this stuff with a straight face! How lame is that???

Updated On: 6/7/07 at 10:48 AM

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:48am

duh, sg, all fat women are ugly so that was kinda understood. like women with harelips.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:49am

What RobbO said.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:50am

I get offended when a movie cuts nudity out of a film when it airs on tv.

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:51am

Well, I just felt like ugly was too vague. I wanted to make sure that I specifically called out the fatty fat fatties.

[VIETgrlTerifa]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:53am

Isn't there like a hump counter at the MPAA? Like a scene can't exceed this amount of humps if it wants an R rating.

[romantico]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:53am

Yes, that would be the thrusting clause. No more than 6 thrusts from a guy in missionary position will allow a R rating. More than 6 thrusts and two groans will give it a NC-17. One MUST limit there thrusts to 4 and one groan for a PG-13, but it must be a medium shot dimly lit. Man on man action regardless to the amount of thrusts will automatically give it a NC-17 or UNRATED.Hopefully this will clear things up.

Okay, dumb question. Howcome the poster for THIS FILM IS NOT RATED was removed but not Hostel 2? Please, don't tell me it was over a naked butt.I'm just curious so I'll know for future refference. Thanks!

Updated On: 6/7/07 at 10:53 AM

[DG]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:57am

When I ran a movie theatre complex, at least one parent a day would ask why a certain movie was rated 'R'. If it was for violence, there was never any other question and the ticket was bought for the child. If it was for sex/nudity/language, then any number of follow-up questions were asked - and rarely was the ticket bought.

[misschung]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 10:58am

"Well, I just felt like ugly was too vague. I wanted to make sure that I specifically called out the fatty fat fatties."

what about fat, ugly men? *coughboratcough*

[RobbO]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 11:01am

touchme, do you know how many times i watched "living out loud" on encore for mr. cibrian's scenes only to be disappointed time and time again!

[jenna2]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 11:06am

I think the U.S. rating system is very interesting... American movies go through a separate ratings trial in Canada, so often 'R' rated films are knocked down to '14A' and 'PG-13' down to 'PG'. Films with nudity/sexuality usually have lower ratings than violent ones. (And then there are the occasional separate Provincial rating, so a promo poster can have up to 3 ratings on it -- it gets a little confusing sometimes)

Updated On: 6/7/07 at 11:06 AM

[misschung]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 11:15am

I'm surprised that Boys Dont Cry got an NC17 rating at first - did the same thing happen to the bareback? Or is that a different scenario since its two good looking gay guys?

[romantico]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 11:21am

I am not sure about Brokeback,but we do discover that there are two men of clergy on the appeals board for the MPAA.(which I think only enforces my argument that the MPAA is homophobic)

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 12:34pm

"I tend to agree more with the European school of thought where I feel nudity is less harmful than violence to society. I think I may be in the minority on this though."

I'm sure nearly everyone here would agree with you.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 5:26pm

Nudity does not offend me. If anything there should be more nudity in film. I mean, c'mon. Colin Farrell is pretty big, but housewives in middle america fainting at the site of it in pre screenings should not be making headlines. It's more offensive to me that we're expecting to believe people who are naked move around all the time in the perfect poses so as to hide the goods. How realistic is that?

[misschung]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 5:47pm

what movie are you talking about

*waits with pen and paper poised*

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 5:53pm

no, see those frames were cut from A Home at the End of the World because the audiences in the pre screenings couldn't not be shocked at the site of a penis on screen.

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 6:04pm

"Yes, that would be the thrusting clause. No more than 6 thrusts from a guy in missionary position will allow a R rating. More than 6 thrusts and two groans will give it a NC-17. One MUST limit there thrusts to 4 and one groan for a PG-13, but it must be a medium shot dimly lit."

I have to wonder, then, how Knocked Up got an R. There's quite a bit of thrusting and moaning goin' on.

Anyway: Nudity doesn't offend me, nor do straightforward sex scenes. What does offend me, however, is sexual violence.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 6:07pm

Lack of male nudity in films where female nudity is prominent offends me.

[RENTingFAME]

Posted: 6/7/07 at 6:35pm

I agree, Marc. And vice versa.

That said, I fully support nudity in films as a part of art.

And hotness.

Updated On: 6/7/07 at 06:35 PM