Nudity Cut in DRACULA — Page 2

Wednesday = family matinee??? Don't kids go to school on Wednesdays?

---

The sad thing is Tom was always in clothing.
If he was nude it could be bearable.
Well maybe.

Updated On: 8/6/04 at 11:43 PM

I always felt the nudity in Take Me Out was essential (and delicious, too!), because it's used as a contentious weapon to make the other players uncomfortable.

Also, I thought the last moment in Wit, when the lead character (sorry, forgot her name) steps into the bright light naked, was very poetic and beautiful.

---

Were they naked in THE FULL MONTY? Now that would have been essential to the plot, right?

Were they naked in THE FULL MONTY? Now that would have been essential to the plot, right?

Yes, they get naked at the very last moment. But behind them are about 1000 strong lightbulbs that flash on, so you only really see them in the nude if you sit in the front row (which I was....wow!).

Back to Dracula: poor matinee audiences. They're not getting their boobs for their buck.

---

If only they could find a way to cut the crappy score and pathetic performances rather than the nudity, they might be on the right track...

---

For all the attention this is getting, you'd think this is some kind of porno show. The nudity lasts perhaps a minute on stage. O'Hara's scene is extremely brief and honestly I missed Errico's, though that was suppose to last a bit longer.

Anyone recall the nude opening scene of Passion? I remember thinking to myself that was gratuitous when I saw it, included just to sell tickets, but don't recall it generating much attention. Maybe I'm just being forgetful though.

yea, I can only think of a few instances where nudity is "integral" to the show, Take Me Out, W;t, and Full Monty. There may be more, but for me, 99% of the time there's really no need. If it takes you out of the show, then it's wrong. The fact people go to the theatre on the fact that they'll see naked people on stage is wrong. If it's art, I have no problem. I only have a problem when it takes away from the art form. I can't comment on Dracula as I haven't seen it, but if they have the option to cloth the women during the matinees then there shouldn't be a need for the nudity. If they can convey the director's vision with clothes, then the people should be clothed.

There are lots of instances of integral and/or artistic but debatably essential nudity on Broadway. Off the top of my head, The Elephant Man, M. Butterfly, Equus, Jumpers, The Changing Room, Steaming, Romantic Comedy, Sweet Sue, Love! Valour! Compassion!, Angels in America, The Wild Party, The Will Rogers Follies, Frankie and Johnny in the Clair de Lune, The Women (in its recent revival) and Requiem for a Heavyweight all featured nudity. L! V! C! went a little overboard, in my opinion, in that there were times when I didn't feel it necessary for the characters to be naked. Also, The Will Rogers Follies offered a topless female dancer and Jerry Mitchell in a red jockstrap, in the deliriously over the top opening number for no apparent purpose, though looking at beautiful naked people is never a chore. Otherwise, though, the nudity in the rest of the above titles were often a major element in the plot or in a particular scene.

Tom Hewitt, in his Broadway.com interview, offers a very reasonable justification for the nudity in Dracula:

Q: How do you feel about the nudity in the show? [Hewitt rips Melissa Errico's top open in one scene, and co-star Kelli O'Hara is totally nude with her back to the audience in another.] Is it necessary?

A: Those decisions aren't up to me, but I don't mind it, There's a dangerous sensuality in Bram Stoker's novel that manifested itself in covert, oppressed Victorian ways. To get any sort of sexual danger on the stage, we have to be more overt, more up to date. So I think that's why it's there, I don't think it's gratuitous; I think it's there for a reason.

---

Updated On: 8/12/04 at 02:32 PM