Nudity in film.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

I cannot tell you why Cameron Crowe would care if Kate Hudson ended up as wallpaper. But I would like to think that that was taken into consideration.

Why? Why should it be taken into consideration?

Peace...

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

Also, I have NEVER heard of someone complaining that there was too much nudity in a film, but again, that is just me.

I most certainly have and keep in mind I do agree with one of piratehunter's points. Nudity should be tasteful and done in a way that actually contributes to the story being told. Nudity for the sole purpose of exposing body parts of select celebs isn't doing it "right" because it's not necessarily part of the story being told (unless the story being told is about select celebs showing body parts).

Halle Berry's topless scene in Swordfish is the perfect example. She could have worn a bikini top and that scene would have worked equally well. Someone just wanted to get Halle's bare breasts in a mainstream movie and Swordfish was that movie.

There are many adults who don't like nudity or profanity or vulgarity in movies they watch. I know some and we've heard about others in the media (people seeking out DVD players that censor movies, etc).

Peace...

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Why? Why should it be taken into consideration?

Peace...

Why would directors think about wallpaper. That is absurd. They want to make their film. This is getting way out there.

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

There are many adults who don't like nudity or profanity or vulgarity in movies they watch. I know some and we've heard about others in the media (people seeking out DVD players that censor movies, etc).

Peace...

No one is forcing them to watch it. I recall when Titanic came out on VHS, church groups were editing out the sketch scene. Again, this would venture into religious influence. That is why I asked upfront if there was a religious conflict. We got that out of the way, but it is a big part for some.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

Why would directors think about wallpaper. That is absurd. They want to make their film. This is getting way out there.

Not necessarily. I want to read piratehunter's response so he might be onto something we haven't considered yet. He did state his post, which I quoted, was hypothetical (even though it didn't read like it when I first read it) so let's give him a chance to answer the question.

Peace...

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

No one is forcing them to watch it.

I understand that but that doesn't change the fact that some people, including some adults, have issues or a dislike of nudity or too much nudity in movies. Of course, to some ANY nudity could be considered "too much".

You stated you never heard of anyone complaining of "too much" nudity and I was responding to that.

Peace...

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Why? Why should it be taken into consideration?

Peace...

Because he should care about his actors. He should care if the nudity is tasteful and needed. If he understands that her nude photos will be all over the net, the scene should be worth it.

-PH

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

You stated you never heard of anyone complaining of "too much" nudity and I was responding to that.

Peace...

We down here crave some different skin now and again. Potted meat also. Mmm hmm.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

Because he should care about his actors. He should care if the nudity is tasteful and needed. If he understands that her nude photos will be all over the net, the scene should be worth it.

Ok, then where is the line drawn? Should the filmmaker also care about the careers of the talent cast when making the film? Should certain characters get considered differently based on the importance of the actor cast or the importance of the character to the story? What if the filmmaker envisions Robert DeNiro playing a part and adjusts nude scenes accordingly. DeNiro turns down the part. Now what? Does the story get re-worked because Colin Farrell wants the part?

Peace...

[mighty mint]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I didn't think the sex scene in MB contributed to the story as much as you imply. In fact, I was disappointed in it for I felt it was "forced". It felt like someone decided Halle Berry "needed" to be in some 'hot' or 'torrid' sex scene, and I didn't think that was needed in MB. I also felt that scene was much too long, and that's coming from someone who would have loved to see her in a prolonged sex scene.

I think that the "forced" feeling was what they were after or rather a characters desperate need to escape their present reality through forced pleasure. It may have been too long. It definitely is not one of those scenes that you would want to watch with your parents. As others have mentioned already, I am sure that Halle had a large part in how graphic AND how long that scene was...

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I equate the relevance of the sex scene in MB with the relevance of the prolonged scene with Neo and Trinity in Matrix Reloaded. It just wasn't really needed or at least for not as long as it was in the movie.

The scene in Reloaded was pure crap and IMHO that felt forced as if there "needed" to be a scene like that somewhere so that they could "show their love." I felt that that scene added nothing to the movie and in fact, had they not included it and continued the love pressure it would have made the ending that more intense and effective.

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I don't see this. I don't think her sex scene in MB made her a "star". She was acclaimed for her work in "Introduction to Dorothy Dandridge" and I think she made a good Bond girl in "Die Another Day".

Well, here I disagree with you and need to clarify my statement...first, the scene did NOt make her a "star" in my eyes but obviously it made her a star in the eyes of those handing out our man Oscar. Second, that Oscar would beg to differ as to what movie made her a star in the eyes of those who seem to reign supremely in Hollywood. Many actors have had good break out roles but that does not necessarily mean that they will become a star/Hollywood powerhouse. Third, I don't even want to discuss her acting as a Bond girl in DAD as she was one of the worst on record only dethroned by Denise Richards. (I am sure that umainebear will have something to say about that statement)

Originally Posted by tomdkat

We can wonder all we want about this, but that's something for the actors to deal with and none of our concern.

True, but that is one of the main points of discussion that Pirate introduced with the discussion of this thread and I was only agreeing with him.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Ok, then where is the line drawn? Should the filmmaker also care about the careers of the talent cast when making the film?

You're going way too far out. Film collaborative art and all I’m saying is that the director should care about the well being of the actors. He should care about the grips and best boys as well.

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Should certain characters get considered differently based on the importance of the actor cast or the importance of the character to the story? What if the filmmaker envisions Robert DeNiro playing a part and adjusts nude scenes accordingly. DeNiro turns down the part. Now what? Does the story get re-worked because Colin Farrell wants the part?

Where are you getting that from? If a part is written, the actor should play that part. If DeNiro doesn't want to do a nude scene he can talk to the director/producer about changing it or not take the role. But I'm not sure how that's relevant here.

-PH

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

I am sure that Halle had a large part in how graphic AND how long that scene was...

She indeed did, as she also did in Monster's Ball. Why aren't we talking about Billy Bob's balls? Talk amongst yourselves.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

I think that the "forced" feeling was what they were after or rather a characters desperate need to escape their present reality through forced pleasure. It may have been too long. It definitely is not one of those scenes that you would want to watch with your parents. As others have mentioned already, I am sure that Halle had a large part in how graphic AND how long that scene was...

Sorry for the confusion on what I meant by "forced". I meant someone tried to find a way to work "hot" and torrid sex featuring Halle Berry into the movie. There was no passion. There was no lust. I felt they were cumbersome together in an effort to create desire and lust and it just wasn't there. No tension. If you want to see what I think you're getting at, watch Asylum. There is a scene that has the elements I think you're getting at in the scene in MB.

I can see there being awkwardness between Halle Berry's and Billy Bob's characters but the scene just didn't work AND given how bad it was, they could have dropped a hint and moved on.

The scene in Reloaded was pure crap and IMHO that felt forced as if there "needed" to be a scene like that somewhere so that they could "show their love." I felt that that scene added nothing to the movie and in fact, had they not included it and continued the love pressure it would have made the ending that more intense and effective.

I agree.

Well, here I disagree with you and need to clarify my statement...first, the scene did NOt make her a "star" in my eyes but obviously it made her a star in the eyes of those handing out our man Oscar.

I have to question this. I think her performance in MB is what won her the Oscar, not the sex scene.

Second, that Oscar would beg to differ as to what movie made her a star in the eyes of those who seem to reign supremely in Hollywood. Many actors have had good break out roles but that does not necessarily mean that they will become a star/Hollywood powerhouse.

Agreed, but we're talking about the sex scene in MB, not her overall performance (which is why I think she got the Oscar).

Third, I don't even want to discuss her acting as a Bond girl in DAD as she was one of the worst on record only dethroned by Denise Richards. (I am sure that umainebear will have something to say about that statement)

I didn't say anything about her "acting" in DaD but she made a damned fine Bond girl. I mean look at that rack!

Peace...

[Dilmo]

Did anyone see the hospital scene in MB, when she found out her son was dead? That is what garnered her the Oscar. Other factors included, it was a great performance. Nudity and all.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

You're going way too far out. Film collaborative art and all I’m saying is that the director should care about the well being of the actors. He should care about the grips and best boys as well.

Doesn't caring about the careers of those cast count as caring for their well-being? I mean, when you get right down to it, that's what you're talking about, right? What is the harm in stills of Nicole Kidman in Eyes Wide Shut appearing in the Internet? The harm (or potential harm) is her career would be negatively impacted. Otherwise, why would there be a need for concern at all? I didn't think about the crew but how does a decision on having nudity in a scene relate to the crew? Is the idea not to offend the key grip or something?

I'm sorry, but you're losing me here....

Where are you getting that from?

Well, I was trying to find out where your line is being drawn.

If a part is written, the actor should play that part. If DeNiro doesn't want to do a nude scene he can talk to the director/producer about changing it or not take the role.

With this I agree and I think that's what others have been saying as well. If they want to do the scene, they do the sceen. If they don't want to do the scene, they don't take the part. They being the actors. It's the changing of the scene due to an issue with the actor that I think we are disagreeing on.

I believe you feel the scene would need to be changed or written with some mysterious concern for the actor(s) involved to accomodate the actor, in some way, where others here (myself included) feel the scene should be written to tell the story, first and foremost, and if it includes gratuitous nudity, so be it.

Peace...

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I believe you feel the scene would need to be changed or written with some mysterious concern for the actor(s) involved to accomodate the actor, in some way, where others here (myself included) feel the scene should be written to tell the story, first and foremost, and if it includes gratuitous nudity, so be it.

Peace...

Well said. This is just my opinion, but we keep going nowhere fast. This will never be resolved. The MPAA is in charge of ratings. Be it fair or not. Descriptions are available at various sites. What one thinks is wrong, another sees it as art and free speech. It's all politics really.

[mighty mint]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I have to question this. I think her performance in MB is what won her the Oscar, not the sex scene.

Agreed, but we're talking about the sex scene in MB, not her overall performance (which is why I think she got the Oscar).

Interesting...I agree that she won because of her acting - I can see beyond the 5 minute fleshfest BUT I remember distinctly the comments made concerning her performance in that movie and the focal point of the majority of those comments were about how "brave she was" and how "she embraced the character in a deep way" and how "willing she was to go the extra mile" etc, etc, etc...

I do NOT believe that they were talking about the scene in the hospital...they were talking about her willingness to be buck in the movie in a very riske scene.

Let's put it this way, if you think that she would have won that oscar without the sex scene then you have much more faith in Hollywood than I ever will!

[mighty mint]

And I don't want to see Rober DeNiro nude in any scene

EVER!!!

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Doesn't caring about the careers of those cast count as caring for their well-being? I mean, when you get right down to it, that's what you're talking about, right? What is the harm in stills of Nicole Kidman in Eyes Wide Shut appearing in the Internet? The harm (or potential harm) is her career would be negatively impacted. Otherwise, why would there be a need for concern at all?

Ok, when I say “care” about the actors, I mean that in an all encompassing way. There is no harm in stills of her on the net as long as the scene isn’t gratuitous.

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I didn't think about the crew but how does a decision on having nudity in a scene relate to the crew? Is the idea not to offend the key grip or something?

I was just saying in general, since film is a collaborative art, the director should care about the well being of his collaborators. That has nothing to do with the nudity.

Originally Posted by tomdkat

I believe you feel the scene would need to be changed or written with some mysterious concern for the actor(s) involved to accomodate the actor, in some way, where others here (myself included) feel the scene should be written to tell the story, first and foremost, and if it includes gratuitous nudity, so be it.

Not necessarily. I just think it should be discussed. Say a director really wanted a certain actor for a role and the film called for nudity. The director could look at that scene and ask himself/herself if the scene was really needed for the film. That’s all I’m saying. If a big name star is in the film and doesn’t want to do the nude scene, but the film really does require it, then I think it’s time to look for another actor that shares this view.

-PH

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

Let's put it this way, if you think that she would have won that oscar without the sex scene then you have much more faith in Hollywood than I ever will!

I totally disagree. The sex scene enhanced her character's need for love, no matter how explicit it was. Gwyneth Paltow must have also won for her nude scene. Let everyone get Oscars for nudity! No. I think not. It is about baring your soul for the camera.

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

Ok, when I say “care” about the actors, I mean that in an all encompassing way. There is no harm in stills of her on the net as long as the scene isn’t gratuitous.

Why? It's not up to us!

I was just saying in general, since film is a collaborative art, the director should care about the well being of his collaborators. That has nothing to do with the nudity.-PH

What about the writer? I would be appalled at changes in my script.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

Why? It's not up to us!

What's not up to us?

Originally Posted by Dilmo

What about the writer? I would be appalled at changes in my script.

And that might be, hence the discussion. I'm not they WILL change the script. I'm just saying that if the writer wrote a scene that had a women getting out of the shower and she's nude just long enough to have hi-res captures all over the net; is that really worth it?

-PH

[Pirate]

Congrats to Dilmo who got the 100th post in the thread. Damn, I wanted that!

-PH

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

Interesting...I agree that she won because of her acting - I can see beyond the 5 minute fleshfest BUT I remember distinctly the comments made concerning her performance in that movie and the focal point of the majority of those comments were about how "brave she was" and how "she embraced the character in a deep way" and how "willing she was to go the extra mile" etc, etc, etc...

Of course people are going to comment on her participation in that scene since she wasn't a pornstar and didn't have a history of those kinds of scenes in the past. That's not to say the award was given to her because of that scene.

Let's put it this way, if you think that she would have won that oscar without the sex scene then you have much more faith in Hollywood than I ever will!

Yep, I do because she was great in that role. Besides, the sex scene sucked (IMO) so I have to exclude it.

Peace...