You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Warning Nudity!!!

Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 11:36am

Post 1 of 93

nanafanboy

Force: 690 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 345

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Okay not really, but does anyone know how film nudity laws work?
Does an actor who is to appear nude in a film have to be 18? or is it whatever consenting age is in your area? Where I live consenting age is 16, but does that mean a filmmaker could film a 16 year old nude? I googled this and all I got was pornography, so I was wondering if anyone knew for sure.

I think the law is something like: actors age 18 and over may appear nude on film. actors under 18 may also appear nude in a film with the permission of their parents and as long as the nude scene is not in a sexual context.

Also use this thread to post your opinion on nudity in film in general. I think it can be a great storytelling device as long as it isn't made pornographic. Most films in the USA can't get this right.

what do you guys think
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 2:14pm

Post 2 of 93

Andreas

Force: 4943 | Joined: 9th Apr 2002 | Posts: 2657

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm pretty sure it's 18, atleast here in Sweden. Otherwize there would be artistic atempets of pornographic movies (which ofcourse isn't called pornos but romantic documenterys etc) with actors under the age of 18.
So I'm pretty sure it's 18 years old for atleast frontside nudity.

Now to nudity in general smile
I know there are alot of people around here who think nudity is something that not belongs in movies. Even older guys. I understand if a parent of a 10 year old kid want to sit down with "it" and watch a movie and be sure of that there are no nudity, but other then that I can't see of a reason why nudity should be a bad thing.
Where ever there is nudity in real life, bathroom, bedroom, janitors room @ school there can be nudity in movies too. Throwing in a couple of boobs in a movie can get more audience so why not? It's like throwing in a awsome action or gore scene that has absolutly no point. It's awsome to see! And as you said. It can absolutly be a great storytelling device, but my opinion is, where there is nudity in real life there should be in movies too.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 2:28pm

Post 3 of 93

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Andreas, isn't the maximum age rating for movies in Sweden 15 years?

Andreas wrote:

Where ever there is nudity in real life, bathroom, bedroom, janitors room @ school there can be nudity in movies too.
In the janitors room?? razz
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 3:02pm

Post 4 of 93

Vertigo38

Force: 207 | Joined: 19th Apr 2003 | Posts: 68

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Personally, I'm not too fond of the nudity thing.

You can tell a story without nudity, and still have a great movie. In my opinion, all nudity is is in movies for, is to attract all those guys/girls whom are addicted to porn, or just those who "like" it. I wont say DONT put it in, but keep the private parts covered.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 3:18pm

Post 5 of 93

irishcult

Force: 1965 | Joined: 6th Jul 2005 | Posts: 440

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

its the age of consent in your area i beleive because the age of consent were i live is 18 and i have a 16 year old actor and there was a scene that mad it appear as if she was nude(she really wasnt just good editing) and i went through hell telling them that she wasnt and almost went to court so i had to read a crap load of info on it and read that an actor must be the age of consent in that area for it to be legal. But i would ask parents before doing anything. Yea i know odd topic to talk about.

Hello Mr. and Mrs. Smith

Umm yea bout ur daught she is going to be nude in one of my films.

yea weird convo. hope i helped srry if i didnt.

yea and vertigo is right even if you just hint the nudity your audiance can still have a racing mind wondering what happened instead of just showing it.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 3:45pm

Post 6 of 93

Andreas

Force: 4943 | Joined: 9th Apr 2002 | Posts: 2657

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

[quote="Redhawksrymmer"]Andreas, isn't the maximum age rating for movies in Sweden 15 years?

The age rating is 15, but i thought we were talking about the age to appear nude in films?
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 4:11pm

Post 7 of 93

ashman

Force: 4913 | Joined: 10th Sep 2005 | Posts: 904

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I have no problem with nudity in a film, like i have no problem with violence or blood. This is one of the things i respect about director Paul verhoven, it can be blood, gore, sex or action, any of these topics he takes them head on and not afraid to do some thing with it. Bound is another film with lots of nudity in it, but is and always will be an amazing film, one of the Warchoskis brothers best peices of work. But it all comes down to taste, everybody is an individual and will always like different things.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 4:49pm

Post 8 of 93

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

I feel (and I think i'm right) that films that have to use sex or nude people only put those in the film because the film is not very good in the first place.

Somewhere out there studio bosses think people want to see that, I bet 99% of people don't.

I wonder if anyone here can tell me the top ten films of all time and how many have a sex or nudity?

Good topic, well done.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 4:53pm

Post 9 of 93

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

I see no problems with nudity or sex in films if its part of the story. Saying its just for those who like porn is rather silly.

In the same way I see no problems with violence in films as long as it has a point.

If the story is strong and the film is well acted/directed then any of these are fine by me. Its just human nature... nothing terrible or bad about that.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:00pm

Post 10 of 93

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

Lets be honest. Who here doesn't like sex?

I thought as much...

Ok who thinks sex is in some way irrelevant to life?

Exactly.

Having sex in films is about as *un-necessary* as film of people going for a shit. Its all part of life, so to remove it for no reason is pointless. As schwar said - its human nature.

The difference, is that no one (except a very small minority) enjoy watching people going for a dump. Sex, on the other hand everyone likes.

It doesn't take a genius to realise that whilst Sex is undoubtedly added in some films for the sake of gratuitity, it is as much a part of many others films as the plot itself. Imagine 'Bound' without sex. Bor-Ring, but not only boring - also completely nonsensical. The film is about sex ffs.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:00pm

Post 11 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Yeah, I have no problem with it either. Most people (that don't smell really, really bad) have at least a few moments of nudity every day of their lives. Therefore, it's likely to show up in some stories - not gratuitously, but as part of a character's arc.

Nudity can be gratuitous and unnecessary like any other aspect of a film - such as violence, or swearing, or too much dialogue, or too much shakey camerawork...etc. Used in moderation, intelligently, it's just another part of the film.

It's also important to remember that nudity and sex are two entirely different things. Some people find sex unpleasant to watch in a movie, or unsuitable for young people, which is fair enough. But I don't see any problems with nudity - we're all born nude, and I imagine most people have seen themselves in the mirror once or twice. What's so shocking about it?

Liking or disliking it in films is a matter of prefence - just like some people don't like action movies, and others don't like Woody Allen. But saying there is something 'wrong' or 'unnecessary' about it makes about as much sense as saying there is something inherently 'wrong' with Woody Allen. smile
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:14pm

Post 12 of 93

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

I'm always amused how people draw the line at sex and nudity. Not the sight of people being mutilated - as if the CG making someone's brains paint the camera lense is somehow less objectionable than two people dry-humping fully clothed below the waist, under some sheets. At least you can't see penetration. I can see someone's brains and the distant look of abject terror in their now-dulled eyes, though.

One reason why society restricts access to violence, is that people don't want it emulated in any way. By restricting it to an age-range which is meant to be more mature and capable of rational thought, its imagined that less people would be irrationally motivated by the sight of something they don't completely understand.

The same can be said for sex. In modern society, where sex IS restricted to the age of consent (although impossible to enforce, obviously), we don't really want people below that age practicing what they see without due consideration of what they're doing.

What, therefore, is the message we're sending by cutting out *nudity*? Its wrong to be naked?

Get a grip.

Last edited Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:25pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:22pm

Post 13 of 93

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

b4uask30male wrote:


I wonder if anyone here can tell me the top ten films of all time and how many have a sex or nudity?
Only one (going by IMDB's worldwide tally) - Titanic. I'd argue that the scene is pretty pivotal to the entire movie as well.

You can't really judge by box-office takings - Nudity equals higher certification, which translates to lower gross, hence the stream of PG-13 / 12a rated pap we're subjected to each year.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:28pm

Post 14 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

b4uask30male wrote:

I wonder if anyone here can tell me the top ten films of all time and how many have a sex or nudity
As Alex stated, if you're talking box office, it's not a fair comparison, as nudity=higher rating=smaller audience.

If you're talking critically acclaimed, then, yes, nudity is very prevalent. Sideways, American Beauty and The Idiots spring to mind.

I imagine the list, if you were to sit down and think about it, would be near-endless.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:38pm

Post 15 of 93

Klut

Force: 2120 | Joined: 16th Apr 2004 | Posts: 1585

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

The only reason I saw Wild Things was cause of the nude scene with Denise Richards. And it was the only thing that made me like the film razz

I can't see why anyone would have a problem with nudity. It's all natural.

Last edited Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:52pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:40pm

Post 16 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

In those cases, though, it's just a bad film through-and-through. Nudity has nothing to do with it, really. Take the nudity out, it'd still be a bad film. That's like saying all action is bad, simply because xXx had some action.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:52pm

Post 17 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

b4uask30male wrote:

I wonder if anyone here can tell me the top ten films of all time and how many have a sex or nudity?
You mean like Titanic, the highest grossing film of all time?

Shot yourself in the foot juuuust a little bit there didn't you?

I'm in agreement with Xcession/Tarn. Whilst Sex Appeal does draw in crowds to some movies it doesn't necessarily mean that every film with sex of nudity is as poor. Sex IS a part of life, provided it's within the story and exists in the film so as to improve it then I've absolutely no problem with sex or nudity onscreen. I really can't see why it's such a taboo.

-Hybrid.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 5:55pm

Post 18 of 93

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +4

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Sex IS a part of life
Yeah, maybe for you cool people.

As an overweight single american who owns the ewok movies on dvd, i say BOO TO SEX!
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 6:23pm

Post 19 of 93

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

I knew titanic duh man, thats why i said not many in the top ten, tsk tsk.

I know about naked stuff in films, those that know me know what i've done in the past and even the people I sold to didn't like to see it in normal films.

OK, hands up and be honest, don't just go against me for the fun of it, hand up who wouldn't care if it's in a film.

My point is it's not needed, just think from a money point of view, topgun had it in the film and done well, but if they cut that 5 min scene that lets be honest wasn't needed they would have got a lower film rating and more people would have been able to see it at the cinema's, so from the point of sex sells, does it really.

Look after yourselves and each other.
Springer. wink

ps.

check the recon trailer posts, poor old john carter had a breast in it, and NEARLY everyone flamed him for it.

Last edited Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 6:26pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 6:26pm

Post 20 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

b4uask30male wrote:

I know about naked stuff in films, those that know me know what i've done in the past
Springer. wink
Aha... ha...hahhaa..haha..hAHAha...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

It's worth noting that the top ten grossing U.S. films are for the most part family films and make for the largest potential audience. Having nudity in a film doesnt immediately add to or detract from the film itself like you seem to believe. Like I've said already, if it fits with the story then why shouldnt it be portrayed?

Titanic, Terminator, 1984, Sin City all have sex scenes in the film as well as nudity and yet they still stand as being what I consider filmic masterpieces. Perhaps your view of this subject is only so clear-cut because of your experience with having titties in films in order to sell them? If that is indeed the case then you need to take a look at which side of film creation/sex appeal exploitation line you are on.

If you'd like to explain or justify your views like we all have been then some form of intelligent debate or discussion could take place. Until then... ahahahahHAHAHAHA!

Last edited Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 10:09pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 6:33pm

Post 21 of 93

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Nudity can be inferred cleverly with editing, angles, etc. Just look at American network television. I have nothing at all against nudity personally, but when you are dealing with those under 18, it is best not to risk anything that might land you in hot water.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 6:59pm

Post 22 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Indeed, clever editing and filming can infer just about anything. Hence you can make a film seem very violent without actually showing anything. Whether you do or not depends on style and theme. If it suits the film, then go for it.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 7:25pm

Post 23 of 93

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Indeed, clever editing and filming can infer just about anything. Hence you can make a film seem very violent without actually showing anything. Whether you do or not depends on style and theme. If it suits the film, then go for it.
Perfect example: The original Psycho. In the infamous 'shower scene', there was no actual nudity, nor did you ever see the knife actually penetrate the skin. Yet people swore that they saw such things when it came out. Why? Because Hitchcock was a genius.

Did he show skin? Sure. There was some belly here, some bare shoulders there, and a bit of leg in between. But no breasts, butts, or crotches. And the use of quick cuts, music and the just sight of blood even being there was enough to make people think that they had just seen one of the most gruesome scenes ever. Furthermore, the sound effects wizards stabbed a melon with a knife, so hearing the knife penetrate was enough to convince people that they saw it penetrate.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 7:38pm

Post 24 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I agree with most of the fxhome crew on this one, that it is simply a matter of opinion if you put it a film or not. As long as it's done tastefully I think it shows everyday life. But since most if not all nudity in films is female, how much of us would appreciate a big floppy male appendage on screen? Would we appreciate nudity as much?
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 8:26pm

Post 25 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

sfb - I refer you again to Sideways. Excellent use of big floppy male appendages to the benefit of the film.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 8:28pm

Post 26 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hmm didn't see it. Touche (sp?)
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 9:03pm

Post 27 of 93

jstow222

Force: 970 | Joined: 28th Oct 2002 | Posts: 1146

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

For those of you who were misled, here is some nudity:


Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 9:05pm

Post 28 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Tarn wrote:

sfb - I refer you again to Sideways. Excellent use of big floppy male appendages to the benefit of the film.
Oh yeah! hehehe.

Also... The Terminators Butt.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 9:17pm

Post 29 of 93

cinemafreak

Force: 1312 | Joined: 14th Dec 2004 | Posts: 322

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Sometimes I think nudity is unneccessary and sometimes I think it is. For instance I think it was necessary in Titanic like you all say, but I don't understand the point of Colonel Stuart practicing karate nude in his hotel room at the beginning of Die Hard 2.

And I'd say if you are a kid filmmaker under 18 who still lives at home it would be a mistake to even fake nudity if it points toward sex.

I also find it funny how nudity is labeled taboo by many people (parents especially) but when it comes to violence things are ok. But I can also understand that parents don't want little kids watching pornos.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 9:46pm

Post 30 of 93

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

You guys didn't pick up on point about recon trailer, I did bring it up for a proper debate but .(just to refresh Recon trailer had a womans breast and the make got flamed by 99% of this site's forum members).....

Also someone a few posts back said I shouldn't bring up the top ten films of all time regarding nude scenes, why not....? the reason FILM COMPANIES make films is to make money, please don't say they do it for fun, we do it for fun they do it make money, so I feel my point about the top 10 is valid.

I wonder would the top ten be different if certain films had lower rating and therefor bigger viewership.

I recall many a film being cut to get a lower rating for the above reason, money.

This reason why this subject is close to my heart today is because I was talking to my mum about the subject this morning, saying I can't show films to my kids, even kid type films have scenes I wouldn't let me kids see and my mother was saying the same about films, her words "I liked the old films where they left it to viewers imagination"

So my views are, (no need to be angry towards my views) but in 99% of films nude scenes are not really needed and to me would make the film better for me not to see it in.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 9:58pm

Post 31 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

cinemafreak wrote:

And I'd say if you are a kid filmmaker under 18 who still lives at home it would be a mistake to even fake nudity if it points toward sex.
Hmmm, I'd say that if it's done intelligently to explore the theme of underage sex, I'd say it would be a very valuable bit of filmmaking. Sure, there are situations in which it would be very unwise and irresponsible, but there's just as many in which it would be both artistically and thematically relevant and sensible.

Underage sex happens. If art confronts it, in an intelligent and restrained manner, then it means we can have a discussion about it, and be generally more informed and educated. And being informed and educated is always a good idea. smile

b4uask30male wrote:

You guys didn't pick up on point about recon trailer, I did bring it up for a proper debate but .(just to refresh Recon trailer had a womans breast and the make got flamed by 99% of this site's forum members).....
That's complete exaggeration. A small minority of young and/or religious users found themselves surprised and offended by the shot in question, despite the movie having an extensive warning/notification in the description.

It was not 99% of the forum. Only a tiny percentage of the overall active forum membership posted a response to the movie, and of those an even smaller number had a problem with it.

Don't forget, negative comments always sound louder than positive ones. Therefore a handful of offended people will always be more noticeable than masses of approving people. Bear in mind that people that had no problem with the breast shot wouldn't have even bothered to post.

I generally find statistics to be largely worthless, as you can read them whichever way you want. "Flamed by 99% of this site's forum members" means pretty much nothing in this context.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 10:07pm

Post 32 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Tarn wrote:

Hmmm, I'd say that if it's done intelligently to explore the theme of underage sex, I'd say it would be a very valuable bit of filmmaking. Sure, there are situations in which it would be very unwise and irresponsible, but there's just as many in which it would be both artistically and thematically relevant and sensible.
I think there's even a film that does exactly that titled "Lolita".
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 10:25pm

Post 33 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

And another one called 'Thirteen', that I've yet to see, but which I hear is pretty fantastic. Even co-written by a 13 year old, I believe.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 10:58pm

Post 34 of 93

ashman

Force: 4913 | Joined: 10th Sep 2005 | Posts: 904

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I still think Bound is an amazing movie.
Posted: Mon, 12th Dec 2005, 11:23pm

Post 35 of 93

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Here is the thread in question. Less than half were against it, which included ssjaaron, who was 15 at the time and is a religious person. CX3 didn't mind it, but he would have preferred otherwise. Other than that, there wasn't much conflict.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 12:09am

Post 36 of 93

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Serpent wrote:

Here is the thread in question. Less than half were against it, which included ssjaaron, who was 15 at the time and is a religious person. CX3 didn't mind it, but he would have preferred otherwise. Other than that, there wasn't much conflict.
Actually, there was seven pages removed by the moderators but the bulk of the argument was generated by a small group of vocal and abusive persons (under the guise of being religious for some of them) who went so far as to compare the actress to a prositute and so on, which is what b4 refers to if I am not mistaken. It was definitely not a majority but a very vocal (albeit immature) minority.

As far as Internet debates goes, I consider it a small scuffle. Sollthar incidentally got some minors invectives for having a young lady in her underwear in one of his early Nightcast teasers.

However, I'll never post another film or teaser with nudity on FXHome because of the level of maturity wildly varies (and obviously some people do not - or cannot - read disclaimers which were posted by both me and the FXHome personel with whom I had cleared the idea beforehand).

As far as I am concerned, nudity doesn't bother me in films. However, I have been told repeatedly that if you want to sell your film and you have no stars (which puts us in the realm of B-Movies), you need a certain amount of nudity that has to be removable in order to sell some terrtories. Muslim countires do not want nudity whereas Asian and some European do. Anglo-Saxon countries are half and half. I have been to the American Film Market three times now and I can say that it is an absolute truth: low budget films need nudity in order to have a chance to sell if they have no stars or little production value.

In the original script for RECON, there was no nudity. We had to shoot the scene at the request of the distributor who financed the rest of the film. We still have to shoot nudity for the sequel... We are trying to integrate it in the story but nevertheless...

If you don't need/want to sell your film, take it from me: keep your life simple, avoid nudity.

If you must, all models must be of legal age (18+), at least in Canada (and I suspect in the USA). You need a written permission from parents or tutors of minors. There are complex and strict rules that regulate shooting nudity (at least with union actors) and if it sounds like fun times, it isn't: it is very technical, awkward and boring.

Good luck.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 1:09am

Post 37 of 93

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Vertigo38 wrote:

You can tell a story without nudity, and still have a great movie.
Not if the story is about a nudist.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 1:10am

Post 38 of 93

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

JohnCarter wrote:

Serpent wrote:

Here is the thread in question. Less than half were against it, which included ssjaaron, who was 15 at the time and is a religious person. CX3 didn't mind it, but he would have preferred otherwise. Other than that, there wasn't much conflict.
Actually, there was seven pages removed by the moderators but the bulk of the argument was generated by a small group of vocal and abusive persons (under the guise of being religious for some of them) who went so far as to compare the actress to a prositute and so on, which is what b4 refers to if I am not mistaken. It was definitely not a majority but a very vocal (albeit immature) minority.
I believe about two pages of that was from me, if I'm not mistaken. Sorry 'bout that, by the way.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 1:48am

Post 39 of 93

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

And another one called 'Thirteen', that I've yet to see, but which I hear is pretty fantastic. Even co-written by a 13 year old, I believe.
Actually, the film never had any actual sex or full-frontal nudity, not even top-up, but it still suggested it in a very realistic retelling, and it was still fantastic. The whole subject was centered around sex and drugs, etc. and featured no sexual nudity.

I am personally against violence and nudity to a certain degree. And, while I respect your opinion, I think you all are passing the point that I know is more evident in my community, as I live in a far-overpopulated, lower-income area and attend a school with a high drug and crime rate. Sure, sex is real, but that doesn't mean it's necessary. nor appropriate. Two kids can have sex at 15, that doesnt make it appropriate. I guess I just think it's somewhat ludacris to suggest experimenting with sex and film at a young age, where a rational understanding of it is missing. (around ages 15-21) I think America has the highest standards (or at least restrictions) against sexual inference or nudity and drug-use/alcohol both in film (the MPAA) and in actual life. Now I understand non-Americans may criticize our laws and what some may call "sheltering", but I myself am fond and proud of them. Still, I have an understanding and tolerance for those with different views on this issue, as I am sure it is much a matter of age, not discretion.

Although, I must say, with Titanic, I saw it when I was 8, and believe, although it had inferences to sex and paintings of nudity, it featured nothing actually physical, and was rated PG-13. If I'm not mistaken, the "sex scene" lasted for about 2 seconds in one shot of a steamy car and alot of fading going on.


I just think less is more, and am a Christian, so I'm DEFINATELY sure that affects my view.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 2:34am

Post 40 of 93

nanafanboy

Force: 690 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 345

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I seriously don't understand the big deal with nudity and sex

Honestly if I had children I would rather them see two people making love than two people blowing eachothers brains out.

Here is something that seemed strange to me. The new Dukes of Hazard unrated DVD contains a scene of nudity. the boys walk in on topless girls. Now I assumed that in the original film that the scnes was exactly the same except the girl were wearing tops WRONG!!! the original scene was them sitting around doing drugs!?!!? The original film was rated PG-13, how is it more appropriate for a 13 year old to see illegal drugs being used than to see nude breasts? We need to get our priorities straight.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 3:01am

Post 41 of 93

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Keep in mind that violence being worse doesnt make nudity any less safe for younger viewers.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 3:01am

Post 42 of 93

cinemafreak

Force: 1312 | Joined: 14th Dec 2004 | Posts: 322

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Underage sex happens. If art confronts it, in an intelligent and restrained manner, then it means we can have a discussion about it, and be generally more informed and educated. And being informed and educated is always a good idea.
True, but normally the people making sensible and thought provoking movies about subjects such as underage sex aren't the kids to whom the subject would apply themselves. Getting my drift here?

Honestly if I had children I would rather them see two people making love than two people blowing eachothers brains out.
I agree with you on the note that violence shouldn't be seen as more appropriate than sex, but saying that you'd rather have your kids watching people have sex is a little bit strong IMO.

Not that school violence isn't a big issue, but if something were to get a teenager into deep trouble or risk of a ruined future it would probably be sex. That is why parents don't want kids exposed to things such as pornography. Is there a chance that playing shoot 'em up games may lead to school shootings? Yes. But I would say that influence from sex in the media is more eminent threat in teen and adolescent society than violence.

Now, I'm a teenager and I and many other people that I know can confirm that they have watched many, many movies in which people blow each other to bits and I would never even think of actually killing someone. I can also gather from experience that sex references and influence from the media have let to a degree of promiscuity (if thats a word) that otherwise wouldn't exist.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 3:31am

Post 43 of 93

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

pooky wrote:

Keep in mind that violence being worse doesnt make nudity any less safe for younger viewers.
How on earth is the sight of a naked body "dangerous" to a young viewer?
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 4:32am

Post 44 of 93

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The sight of naked bodies inherently promotes sex, and to young viewers this would promote sex at a young age, which could result in sexually transmitted diseases. Chlamydia is the number one STD in America now, and more than 80% of the cases are found in teens. That's how nudity is dangerous.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 4:35am

Post 45 of 93

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

I saw a really tasteful movie with nudity called Nightlust 2. It was about vampires that love to do it. Allot.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 4:53am

Post 46 of 93

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

The sight of naked bodies inherently promotes sex, and to young viewers this would promote sex at a young age, which could result in sexually transmitted diseases. Chlamydia is the number one STD in America now, and more than 80% of the cases are found in teens. That's how nudity is dangerous.
This has nothing to do with nudity. This has to do with lack of knowledge and education on sexual matters because people are too darn afraid to talk about sexuality, especially in America... For whatever reasons, religious or otherwise, the "taboo-ization" of human sexuality causes more problems that flashing a few breasts or bottocks on a screen... And the fact that it is "taboo" makes it even more attractive for some people than if it was discussed like any other human behavior.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 5:13am

Post 47 of 93

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

ben3308 wrote:

The sight of naked bodies inherently promotes sex,
Does it really? I can't recall becoming remotely aroused during Schindlers List, About Schmidt or Sideways, and I doubt may viewers would, young or old. Nudity doesn't necessarily carry sexual connotations.

I can remember watching Clash Of The Titans, Dragonslayer and Cocoon as a pre-pubescent and not even registering the nudity. So how exactly are they dangerous?
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 5:19am

Post 48 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

To preface this, I'm a Also a christian (not mormon) and I Personally Think Nudity isn't a huge issue as long as it pertains to the story, and it isn't gratuitous and used in Sex scenes. Infact, Sex scenes are Completely Unneccesary, so really, there's VERY few instances where nudity will be needed, even less if the film doesn't need to be realistic and/or affecting.

Putting nudity or sex in a film to help is sell is quite a well known Fact as far as the entertainment industry goes, but it does Bring to light the Perversion and Distastefulness of the Whole deal. I personally Will Never stoop as low as to Insert sex or nudity to sell my film, as i Value my moral standards and Beliefs FAR more than money or "Making it" in that Corrupt industry.

I don't however Find Any problems with Violence and Language in films, Because Neither are inherently Evil in and of itself, As both can become necessary in movie to build Suspense and/or Characters. Seeing a character having sex Is generally not needed.

And Carter, I agree with you're statement about "lack of knowledge" as far as sex goes. I'd also add that Its also due to "Lack of morals or Beliefs" just as much.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 5:47am

Post 49 of 93

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

Bryce007 wrote:


I don't however Find Any problems with Violence and Language in films, Because Neither are inherently Evil in and of itself,
Are you saying violence and bad language aren't evil, but sex / nudity is? I'm confused.

Bryce007 wrote:


both can become necessary in movie to build Suspense and/or Characters.
Not really - Hitchcock and Spielberg created incredible levels of suspense without either - The playground scene from The Birds for example, or the child's abduction in Close Encounters.

Bryce007 wrote:

Seeing a character having sex Is generally not needed.
Neither is seeing a characters brains blown out against a wall.

Taking "Irreversible" as an example, are you saying you would find it less objectionable to watch the sickening fire extuingisher beating than the later scene of Bellucci and Cassel walking around their apartment nude?
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 8:03am

Post 50 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Nope, Nudity isn't evil, and You seem to have skipped the part of my post that says it has its place, but not very often.

And Yes, I do thing Graphic violence can Properly Jarr and audience. As far as Only implying it goes...That would limit filmmakers signifigantly If they were always just "Implying" it.

I didn't see "Irreversible", but i've heard enough about it to know that its Extremely Unpleasant. The Difference between Unsexually showing Nudity and Hollywoods Quick-buck perversion of it is Huge. And a good amount of the time, Since nudity is commonplace in places like france, They aren't just throwing it in so some 13 year old guys will buy the movie and go "acquaint" themselves with it, unlike hollywood.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 8:30am

Post 51 of 93

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

What a great thread, it's got people chatting a lot.

Do you think then that it's an age factor, maybe 30 plus people feel different than younger people?

Tarn, about my statistics, I think your 98% wrong on that, wink did you know 50% of the statistics are made up on the spot. wink i know, i know too smart for my own good. smile
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 9:10am

Post 52 of 93

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

b4uask30male wrote:

Do you think then that it's an age factor, maybe 30 plus people feel different than younger people?
Less to do with age, more to do with the enviroment you grow up in. My parents were open-minded and educated me about sex from an early age, and I spent many a summer on the beaches of France, where naked bodies are in abundance.

Bryce007 - Sorry if I seemed harsh. I highly recommend watching "Irreversible" simply for its artistic / technical merits. It isn't for the faint of heart though.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 9:33am

Post 53 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I think how nudity is used has a big part in this. Nudity in Wedding Crashers was merely gratuitous and catering to their audience. Nudity in About Schmidt was for comedic value and if anything would DISCOURAGE sex...Nudity in Titanic can show a bond of openness in a relationship. I think the visual aspect of it can be edited properly as to not show the actual parts, infering the visual...But I think most men can agree the female body is a great work of art and if a filmmakers decided to go there within the context of the film, where is the issue? Films are rated rather properly...If you don't wanna see it, then don't go...While there was no nudity in the gimp scene in Pulp Fiction, (although I liked the movie overall) I found it rather offensive just because what was suggested. But people have to take risks...And that is how the characters acted, and thats who they were...How can you argue with that?..To loosley quote Seinfeld, the female form is like a work of art...Definitely good naked...While the male form is utilitarian...Like a Jeep....Not good naked.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:31am

Post 54 of 93

Remco Gerritsen

Force: 578 | Joined: 4th Mar 2005 | Posts: 517

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Nudity = okay

___
Bryce007
Seeing a character having sex Is generally not needed.
___

I think sex-scenes in films should not contain exiclipt nudity while characters are having sex, some examples of films who do this well, Troy, or all the James Bond films.

Nudity is okay, as long it isn't sex.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:54am

Post 55 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

James bond films have incredibly tame sex scenes actually.. And Troy was just a bunch of shots of Brad pitts ass.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:57am

Post 56 of 93

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Yeah but what Bond love scenes lack in floppy bits, they make up for - at least recently - in gratuitous god-awful puns.

When i watch bond, i don't cover my kid's eyes, i shield their ears.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 8:38pm

Post 57 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

Sorry, but how on earth dares anyone to say something like

Infact, Sex scenes are Completely unneccesary, so really, there's VERY few instances where nudity will be needed, even less if the film doesn't need to be realistic and/or affecting.
This is just ridiculous. First off, in a story, one can use any form of human communication or life to develop characters. Sex can be seen as a form of communication. When people have sex, there's a lot of things happening on a non-physical level as well. It CAN be necessary to show this if that's a vital part of my character development. It can be "necessary", it doesn't have to be, but it can be.

Could it be solved differently? Maybe. But that isn't the point, since everything could be solved differently.

Nudity can be a vital part of character development as well. Best example coming to my mind right now is American Beauty. The scene where Thora Birtch removes her Bra is a vital scene for her character.


Nudity is dangerous... That's not even funny. :I
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 8:41pm

Post 58 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Well said, that man. The American Beauty example is superb. It tells so much about the two characters at that precise point in the story. Anybody that watches that scene and has a problem with it needs to question their own motives, not the film's.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 8:46pm

Post 59 of 93

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm with Andreas.
Naked chicks rule.

I also agree with sollthar.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 9:59pm

Post 60 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

Sorry, but how on earth dares anyone to say something like
Well, I like to call it "having an opinion".

And I of course disagree. We have entirely Different views, so from My view, I say Sex scenes aren't mandatory. I also say Nudity isn't either. Simple eh?
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:06pm

Post 61 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Simple, eh?
Yes, it's indeed very simple. That's my problem with it.



I like to call it "having an opinion"
Everyone has an opinion. Opinions can be wrong too. smile
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:13pm

Post 62 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Well, agree to disagree. You aren't Running on the same belief system I am, so i certainly don't expect you to agree with me.

As far as Tasteful nudity goes, I don't see a problem. The Problem enters the equation with Graphic sex scenes/sex scenes between characters who aren't written as being Married. But again, We aren't operating by the same standards, So, It remains Belief based.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:20pm

Post 63 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Bryce007 wrote:

And I of course disagree. We have entirely Different views, so from My view, I say Sex scenes aren't mandatory. I also say Nudity isn't either.
And where exactly did anyone claim sex scenes/nudity to be mandatory?

I think the general consensus so far has said the exact same thing whilst a minority of people who I consider to have either radical christian or hypocritical views. Sex is never a 'must' for any type of film as a film by nature shouldn't be affected by what distributors want it just so happens that film-makers aiming for distribution often feel forced or are forced to include a sex appeal which often leads to some rather lame scenes.

Movies like American Beauty aren't written and then have nudity slapped onto the side of it for it to sell. The sex/nudity is an intricate part of the story and as a result I have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever.

Though saying that, I've no problem with the other end of the scale either. Just I find movies which sell on sex appeal to be rather lame and to be generally bad movies which aren't worth seeing anyway. (I'm looking at you, Coyote Ugly).

I really can't even begin to fathom what all the fuss is about, Sex/the naked body are things that are entirely natural, far more natural than war or revenge and there are plenty of movies even in the fxhome cinema based around those themes. Argueing the "I wouldnt want my kids to see..." arguement falls on the wrong side of the "totally redundant" line of points. There are age ratings to protect minors from harmful content afterall...

The Problem enters the equation with Graphic sex scenes/sex scenes between characters who aren't written as being Married. But again, We aren't operating by the same standards, So, It remains Belief based.
Say for the sake of argument you follow the christian system of belief. Over the decades christianity has told stories of violence, murder, torture and rape in order to further it's message. What's wrong with movies doing the same? Sexual Frivolity is portrayed as negatively as it is positively in movies and if you have a problem with a movies theme or what you believe it is condoning then simply...don't...watch...it. Christian's don't tend to read the Qu'ran afterall...

Last edited Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:25pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:21pm

Post 64 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I agree with you that peronsal taste is a matter of ones personal opinions and beliefs.

So if you say "I don't like nudity in movies" or "I'm offended by seeing a womens breast", that's your opinion and I'd leave it at that.

You said

Infact, Sex scenes are Completely unneccesary, so really, there's VERY few instances where nudity will be needed, even less if the film doesn't need to be realistic and/or affecting.
wich is worded, as you have clearly pointed out in the beginning, as A FACT. A Fact wich simply isn't true.

Opinion and fact concern different matters and should be handled differently. What you said and what I critised was NOT an opinion.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:30pm

Post 65 of 93

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

I can't recall saying I was offended by nudity Or sex whatsoever. Graphic or otherwise.

Since i Used "Infact" in that sentence, You're Critisism does make sense in that regard. However, It IS a fact to me, I suppose it just made it through in my post accidently.

Johncarter earlier mentioned how his distributors Asked him to work in some nudity/sex for Selling purposes, which I already responded to.

I find Sex scenes do Tend to Cheapen Sex as an act in general, Certainly making it something that seems like "just something else you may as well Do"

However, i can't see where the term "radical" fits into a Belief system such as christianity. That term Generally gets used in order to Berate or Play off the Subject in question as something ridiculous/absurd.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:41pm

Post 66 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Bryce007 wrote:

However, i can't see where the term "radical" fits into a Belief system such as christianity. That term Generally gets used in order to Berate or Play off the Subject in question as something ridiculous/absurd.
Perhaps to refer to extremist christians as it would be doing by exact definition of the word radical?

Although I don't wish to drag this topic into the dark realms of religion, Christianity is a very much modernising religion which has come to accept many issues as humanity simply maturing/changing. Many of my friends are christian and lead what is defined by christianity as good moral lives yet aren't offended by sexual content within film.

Sometimes Sex in a film does indeed degrade the sexual act, agreed. Though I can't personally think of any case where there has been a sex scene in a film which I have come away from thinking "that's what I want to do". Meaningless sex in films (take "The Rules of Attraction" for example) are often portrayed as negative events as they are in reality. I can see the point you're making in regard to tasteful, appropriate sex scenes and I'm agreeing with you.

There are other, slightly less obvious examples such as the Sex in the City TV series where after X amount of seasons of sexual promiscuity the characters find happiness in relationships which are solid, loving and faithful a.k.a. Moral Christian Relationships.

What I can't agree with is restricting others because of your moral standing (not something I am accusing you of) though it is something true of many extremist religious people hence my use of the term "Radical Christians".
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 10:46pm

Post 67 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I can't recall saying I was offended by nudity Or sex whatsoever. Graphic or otherwise.
Oh no no, sorry. That was only meant as an example for what could be stated as an opinion. I didn't mean to suggest you actually said that in one of your posts.

However, It IS a fact to me
What is it now? Your opinion or a fact?

I'm not sure where this comes from, but I notice a lot of confusion between fact an opinion in many discussions.

Stating something as an "opinion" doesn't autimatically render the topic a matter of opinion, if you know what I mean. Facts are not "to you" or "to me", facts are facts and are valid for everyone or no one.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:17pm

Post 68 of 93

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

I still can't see a single good arguement against nudity or sex in films. I'm all for it! biggrin
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:19pm

Post 69 of 93

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

i LUUUUUUUUUUURVEEEEE boobs!
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:20pm

Post 70 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Xcession wrote:

i LUUUUUUUUUUURVEEEEE boobs!
Aw.. Serves me right for hoping I guess.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:20pm

Post 71 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I could post a naked scene of me and you'd CLEARLY never wanted to see nudity in a film again schwar... smile
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:20pm

Post 72 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Depends if that purple Sollthar costume was involved or not.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:26pm

Post 73 of 93

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

as a religious person, i personally find nudity (and gore for that matter) very offencive.

however, that is just me, and it is deffinatly clear that nudity can help plot etc. in some peoples opinions. however, personally, i find it all to be totally pointless, stupid, and whatever it accomplishes, can easily be done differently.

as was said before, take alfred hitchcock for an example. aren't all his movies rated G?
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:45pm

Post 74 of 93

BackOfTheHearse

Force: 2660 | Joined: 17th Nov 2001 | Posts: 1099

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

as was said before, take alfred hitchcock for an example. aren't all his movies rated G?
Dial M for Murder: PG
Rear Window: PG
North By Northwest: Unrated.
Vertigo: PG
Psycho: R
The Birds: PG-13
Torn Curtain: PG
Frenzy: R


So no, not all of Hitchcock's films were G. Most were labeled originally as "Approved" and then when the ratings system became more categorical, his films were re-rated. Futhermore, these are USA ratings. Several of his films have been banned in other countries, and Frenzy originally was given an X rating in the UK.
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:55pm

Post 75 of 93

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Wow i guess i was pretty wrong about hitchock;

ive been thinking about it, and i really dont see a single thing sex can accomplish in a movie. i just dont see it. the only thingthat is done is give people somthing arrousing to look at.

can sombody fill me in as to how nudity can really help the plot? i dont seem to get it, and previous posts dont really give convising arguments...[/i]
Posted: Tue, 13th Dec 2005, 11:56pm

Post 76 of 93

nanafanboy

Force: 690 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 345

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

things that will make life happier

1. If you don't like nudity in films... don't watch films with nudity.

2. If you like nudity in films... watch films with nudity

3. If you don't care... watch any film you can get your hands on (Thats me)

4. Realize that everyone's opinion is valid... until they try to force it on others i.e.
( knock knock knock) "excuse me sir have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior?"
or
"I think Nudity and Sex on tv and in movies is bad, and since I don't like it then no one should see it. HAR HAR HAR"

5. Candy rainbows, golden crappers, and cars that run on dreams and sunshine.
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 12:00am

Post 77 of 93

SGB

Force: 2199 | Joined: 9th Aug 2005 | Posts: 855

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

the thing that bothers me is when a perfectly good movie hsa nudity added to it (and I think there is NO possible good reason for it). it just really makes me upset, especially as i feel morally obligated to not watch such movies.

aside from that, you are right, i could just not watch the movies at all, and i dont. but a lot of the movies are really good and they just slap that on for all the people who like it.

sgb
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 12:09am

Post 78 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I think Sollthars arguement with American Beauty crumbles your arguement sgb. I think that, with a lot of other people, that American Beauty is a great movie. I don't think the nudity that was in it was gratuitous or unecessary at all...Nudity was not "added" to it, it was in there and needed to be there to progress the story and show insight into the characters.
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 1:44am

Post 79 of 93

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Like the thread on pot-smoking and illegal drugs, this is pointless. Obviously people will have strong views for it simply for the reason that they enjoy it.


Still, like I have said in previous threads, I think this is mainly due to the lack/wealth of nudity and drug laws in varying countries/states, as well as, being a christian, the lack of religious influence on morales of those young adults. (who I believe are either still questioning their religion or are athiest/agnostic)

Just me.
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 1:59am

Post 80 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +2

atom wrote:


Still, like I have said in previous threads, I think this is mainly due to the lack/wealth of nudity and drug laws in varying countries/states, as well as, being a christian, the lack of religious influence on morales of those young adults. (who I believe are either still questioning their religion or are athiest/agnostic)

Just me.
Personally I think that this issue has little to do with religion. I consider myself a practicing christian. I think that nudity in films, while not always necessary, can develop story in some cases. There is no right or wrong on this issue. Just like anything else in the world, there is a grey area where sometimes you have to admit that this is not an absolute. Nudity does not go good in all films. By the same token, nudity in some films helps the story. If you are not for it, don't go see the film. Plain and simple. Just because someone doesn't have the same views as you please don't say that I am questioning my religion. That statement seems to me just to be a lack of understanding.

I don't particularly enjoy nudity in a film. I have a loving wife whom I care deeply for. There is no reason for me to rent Titanic and skip to the part where Kate Winslet is nude from the waist up. I have a wife. No mature adult goes, yay there is nudity in this movie, I'm going to watch this movie just to enjoy some T&A. I watched American Beauty for it's cinematic value. It is my opinion that every part of the movie, nude and non-nude scenes were necessary in progressing the story.

It is highly irresponsible as a filmmaker to not pursue all avenues of storytelling. I am sure there is a great big market for christian filmmakers who do not put any swear words, nudity or violence in their films. Which is perfectly fine. But most filmmakers are not going to censor their work, because our daily lives are not censored. Sex, swearing and violence are part of most peoples daily lives. To deny that and not put those things in films is denying the culture and the society we live in. I do not think it is fair to criticize any film set in modern day for showing what really happens in the world. Your going to tell a filmmaker he cannot tell the world how he sees it? God help us.

Last edited Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 6:43am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 6:32am

Post 81 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

can sombody fill me in as to how nudity can really help the plot? i dont seem to get it, and previous posts dont really give convising arguments...
Can somebody fill me in as to how watching nudity can be offensive? I don't seem to get it and previous posts don't really give convincing arguments...

If religious influence would make me feel insulted when I see a naked body, then I thank god for creating me as an atheist, because this appears a bit silly to me.

It is highly irresponsible as a filmmaker to not pursue all avenues of storytelling. I am sure there is a great big market for christian filmmakers who do not put any swear words, nudity or violence in their films. Which is perfectly fine. But most filmmakers are not going to censor their work, because our daily lives are not censored. Sex, swearing and violence are part our most peoples daily lives. To deny that and not put those things in films is denying the culture and the society we live in. I do not think it is fair to criticize any film set in modern day for showing what really happens in that world. Your going to tell a filmmaker he cannot tell the world how he sees it? God help us
Well said.
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 8:14pm

Post 82 of 93

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Aww...Man..I thought for a second that I was getting lucky..neutral

Hah, J/K just I have to say that nudity in movies are really uneeded. Like sex scenes are really irrelevant. (James Bond)
I for one am not a nasty director that makes dudes want to see my movie because it makes their hormones get happy.wink
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 8:23pm

Post 83 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Why are you making films then? You don't want your audience to feel anything? Odd intention as a filmmaker I'd say.
Posted: Wed, 14th Dec 2005, 9:05pm

Post 84 of 93

AAAx2

Force: 2450 | Joined: 11th Mar 2005 | Posts: 111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

I'd say that it is really up to the filmmaker weather there should be nudity in their films (relevent to the story or not) and it's completely up to the veiwer to decide if it offencive to them or not, then choose weather or not to watch the film. Simple arithmatic. Not really, but, either way!


-AAA
Posted: Sat, 17th Dec 2005, 12:48am

Post 85 of 93

ZukoVega

Force: 1661 | Joined: 24th Jul 2002 | Posts: 178

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I don’t have a problem with nudity in movies as long as it’s relevant to the story… the same with violence, language, etc… but I think the original question that started this thread was concerning underage actors appearing nude…

I believe the age of consent laws apply to sexual activity and have nothing to do with nudity in film. In the US it’s illegal for someone under the age of 18 to appear in any kind of lewd or obscene material. This then raises the question “what is obscene?”

Brook Shields was only twelve when she appeared in the movie Pretty Baby and Thora Birch was seventeen when she appeared topless in American Beauty. (Taken from RogerEbert.com) A spokesperson for the Jinks/Cohen Company, the producers, says: "It is not illegal. to have people under 18 nude or partially nude on film. The California Child Labor Board approved the scene, and its representative was on the set when it was filmed, as were Thora's parents."

It may not be illegal for an underage actor to appear nude in your movie but my personal opinion... don’t do it… Unless it’s absolutely necessary and you’ve consulted with a lawyer and have the money to cover any legal issues that may arise…
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 5:23am

Post 86 of 93

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Well I don't even know how to argue my point. Because my opinions are based off of religious beliefs. I can't use that as a supporting argument because...Well if you don't believe in God then who decides whats right and whats wrong for you...yourself or society. But I think you can have an equally good movie without nudity. I don't think that there is a movie where the nudity was absolutly vital. I have seen titanic edited and it was still amazing. Movies can just go down another path so that they dont have to film sex or nudity. And there are plenty of movies that involve romance that do not depict nudity or sex. LOTR, Star wars. Are two. But Really I have to agree with the statement. "if you don'tlike movies with nuditythem dont watch movies with nudity in them."
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 10:42am

Post 87 of 93

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

What about movies that may feature 'primitive' tribes in the middle of nowhere, who don't wear any clothes? For authenticity, nudity would be required. I think the problem here is that nudity is being confused with sex.
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 12:37pm

Post 88 of 93

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Indeed. Besides, even the bible features stories where nudity is involved or even a crucial element (for example Adam and Eve).
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 3:39pm

Post 89 of 93

PaleRider

Force: 1550 | Joined: 27th Apr 2005 | Posts: 63

VisionLab User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I was once involved in a short film based on a poem by William Blake. In the opening sequence, we see our lead actor getting out of bed naked. I remeber thinking why on earth does he have to be naked?
When I asked the dirctor this question he simple said
"This isn't hollywood dear boy! This is real life!".
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 8:06pm

Post 90 of 93

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

yeah but you dont need to show the body parts. There are camera shots that reveal that the actor is naked without showing anything.
Posted: Mon, 19th Dec 2005, 8:54pm

Post 91 of 93

outsiderlookingin

Force: 60 | Joined: 10th Nov 2005 | Posts: 138

Member

This is merely my opinion...I AM NOT ATTACKING ANYONE!

Ok, wanted to make that clear since some on here MAY think I do such things.

Anyone who thinks that movies should be devoid of nudity is limiting the art. Putting restrictions on art is the most extreme form of censroship ever, and it sacrifices the truths that the art of films are here for. The fact of the matter is that there should be no restrictions on any form of art, and Hollywood and society have already maimed moviemaking enough.

Personally, I say keep the religous right out of the art world. They only seek to censor and cover up what they don't deem Christian values. They have done so for the course of history and will continue into the future. We, as a people, need to embrace the responsibility of portraying the world as a real place, and not scoffing at the idea of nudity, drugs, or violence. These are things we created, yet we are scared to address them. That is ridicolous and adsurd. Don't lie to yourselves and say that you are not part of this, either. Each human being bears the responsiblity of what this world has become. If, as a filmaker and as an artist, you shy away from this subject matter merely because it's taboo, then you are not a true artist, you are merely a tool being used by the fears of society to justify your own false feeling of safety from the brutish real world.
Posted: Thu, 5th Jan 2006, 10:26am

Post 92 of 93

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

outsiderlookingin wrote:

Personally, I say keep the religous right out of the art world. They only seek to censor and cover up what they don't deem Christian values.
Err! Wrong. Try again.

Article 1

Article 2

It is two democrats, Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman who are leading the front for censorship of video games and such. You have gravely mistaken your view of the "religious right" in regaurds to this subject. Politics has little to do with this argument in my mind, so I'd rather not bring that up because of the democrats who I have mentioned look to, as you describe, limit the art.

In any event, as you can see from my previous posts I agree with most of your post. Nudity is just one of the things I think should not be censored. Drug issues, swearing, world wide problems should be addressed in films and to deny that is to deny the real world.
Posted: Thu, 5th Jan 2006, 10:35am

Post 93 of 93

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

sfbmovieco wrote:

It is two democrats, Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman who are leading the front for censorship of video games and such.
Because of their christian beliefs perhaps? Hilary Clinton takes advice from Lawyer Jack Thompson - Someone who claims God is on "his side".

I agree with pretty much everything else you said though wink