Bruce Watson
Veteran
Nope. Only after 1930 (Motion Picture Production Code (Hays Code) adopted), and really after 1934 (full enforcement). Watch some "pre-code" films and see for yourself.
Why must nudity be justified?
- Thread starter roxics
- Start date
Nope. Only after 1930 (Motion Picture Production Code (Hays Code) adopted), and really after 1934 (full enforcement). Watch some "pre-code" films and see for yourself.
combatentropy
Veteran
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I would never watch a porno if the nudity in it was not justified.
roxics
Veteran
I have a strong opinion on it. But I'm always interested in hearing opposing viewpoints. I have changed my opinion on things in the past based on arguments people have made. So I'm not set in stone.
JAMedia
Well-known member
I have been amused by recent comments on DVXuser about "censorship" of US films to fit the Chinese market. Yet for decades Europe has has to put up with films "censored" by Hollywood to fit the Puritans/Hayes rules.
We have often commented on "American Sex" in films when the couple are passionately engaged in bed and the lady never removes her bra. I an not looking for gratuitous nudity, you can shoot it from appropriate angles, but do you know any women who wear a bra in bed during sex? Of course there was the "sex scenes" where the sheets are between the actors so they never touch. Even more hilarious where after a night of passion both parties spring out of bed wearing underwear.... Whereas in a European film or broadcast TV nudity is "normal" Also nudity does not mean sex or even eroticism.
I think it was "The Hills have Eyes" some mutants break in to an RV where there is a family and butcher them including killing a baby. Lots of violence, blood , gore, close ups etc and swearing. However the mother was breastfeeding the baby when they were attacked. After the baby was killed she was grabbed and pulled into shot for some gratuitous violence having seen her baby killed..... However so that no one was offended her top was suddenly buttoned so there were no naked breasts or even worse a naked female nipple on show as she was slaughtered. Thus the mind of no one watching was corrupted.
I think the US does need to have a word with it's therapist.
If I can find it there is a very good interview with Helen Mirren on sex and nudity in films and the US attitude to it after they cut 20 minutes of a film she was in.
This covers it but was not the interview I was looking for https://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/interview-with-helen-mirren
roxics
Veteran
I feel that way about The Walking Dead. That is a show where I will pit violence/gore against nudity and make a personal judgement call. But that's because I'm not personally a fan of gore. So my view is subjective. So take it as you will.
I just find it strange that we have all these people walking around all gory with guts and brains hanging out and throughout the show not even a single bare bum is exposed. To me personally, there is something wrong with that. You're show the insides of people hanging out, but not a bare bum?
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
NorBro
Major Contributor
The baby survived in that movie, but nonetheless it's still up there in the classic 2000s era of pure evil.
For me, Jason/MM/FK started that, but as filmmaking and post-production drastically improved, they really went all out during those years and took everything to another level.
___
Someone might have mentioned this already, but I think the simple answer to this question is because the violence is fake and the nudity isn't.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
I have a slightly different perspective on the original question. Usually I hear it posed as coming from an actor, meaning that someone asks if they would ever appear nude on film and they state that they would only consider it if it was justified in the story.
Nudity is very different from violence. We all know that the violence, even the most disturbing, is fake. No one is really getting their head bashed in or arm chopped off. But if an actor appears nude on screen then that's it -- it is that individual showing their naked body for all to see. There will be GIFs and screen caps and everyone and their uncle will be able to find it with a quick Google search.So to be willing to punch someone v be willing to show one's bare butt are very different things.
Nudity is very different from violence. We all know that the violence, even the most disturbing, is fake. No one is really getting their head bashed in or arm chopped off. But if an actor appears nude on screen then that's it -- it is that individual showing their naked body for all to see. There will be GIFs and screen caps and everyone and their uncle will be able to find it with a quick Google search.So to be willing to punch someone v be willing to show one's bare butt are very different things.
JAMedia
Well-known member
The violence and sex are both fake. The nudity isn't.
However nudity does not equal sex or anything dubious or immoral.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Yes, as mentioned, that's the difference.
That's the simple answer to the question no matter what nudity equals or doesn't equal.
The difference between them is why it is the way it is.
FWIW, the original "The Hills Have Eyes" is from 1977. A Wes Craven film.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c0/c1/01/c0c10149141cecd44d3b3e3f616f5729.png
A side note : the Soviet films had plenty of "justified" military battle related violence. In the 1970's, a couple of films had partial nudity. The language was completely docile. As glasnost' and perestroika were announced in 1987, Soviet films took a sharp turn toward an R-rating. In post-Soviet Russia, one could even find nudity on television. Putin push a kibosh on all that. They're back to the fake patriotism now.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c0/c1/01/c0c10149141cecd44d3b3e3f616f5729.png
A side note : the Soviet films had plenty of "justified" military battle related violence. In the 1970's, a couple of films had partial nudity. The language was completely docile. As glasnost' and perestroika were announced in 1987, Soviet films took a sharp turn toward an R-rating. In post-Soviet Russia, one could even find nudity on television. Putin push a kibosh on all that. They're back to the fake patriotism now.
JAMedia
Well-known member
That is the critical point. This side of the pond nudity is not seen in the same way as in the USA.
Nudity is often broadcast before the watershed in the evening. It depends on context.
Nudity is natural and normal.
Sex OTOH does have restrictions on when it is broadcast
NorBro
Major Contributor
Previous decades had more lax morals at times - depending on the context - but society changes put more pressure on the United States to change as all eyes are always on America's content. [By now it's no secret how you feel about the states, lol...but it's true.]
All this really depends on who's making what and where it's going.
All this really depends on who's making what and where it's going.
roxics
Veteran
True, usually. Although the nudity can also be fake, using prosthetics and the like. Or alternatively, body doubles can be used. And said body double actor can even use a screen name so that no one is put out completely if not 100% comfortable with it.
But we also have to ask, is the real thing bad? Is something better just because it's fake?
There is a reason the violence and gore is fake. And while there may be a moral component to it, it's actively physically harmful. Probably even detrimental to an actor's survival and their ability to perform a second take if needed. I mean, if they're dead and bleeding on he floor, you're not getting a second take. If they flash some naughty bits, no one is getting hurt.
That said, take me for example. I don't like gore, I turn away from it. No matter how much I know it's fake, I can't watch it. Nudity I can watch all day long. So I'm not sure if real versus fake is all that big of a differentiator. I think it's more about a person's reaction. And I say that with the understanding that some people have the same reaction to nudity that I have to gore. But I'm also not asking filmmakers to justify the gore the way people often do with nudity.
I saw an edited Italian hard core - kind of a racier version of Cinemaxx at Night - film called "Porno Giorni" in December, 1978 soon after our arrival there. The theater was filled with the Soviet immigrants. Including my parents.
JAMedia
Well-known member
JAMedia
Well-known member
Really? It wouldn't make my top 100. (or probably not even top 500)
What was the point of referencing it in this discussion?