Pajiba

Yes.

boobs.

Nope, but I'll Google it after it's out on DVD. There's nothing really satisfying about nudity in movies; it's usually in passing and nothing is happening.

But I do get closure out of it. Most attractive big-name actresses make sexy eyes in a lot of pictures, and after a while it gets old and becomes a weird kind of burden, like I know I'm going to look at it out of obligation and come away feeling no better. So seeing somebody like that naked is a breath of fresh air, a splash of reality that proves she's just another person, just another woman.

And usually they're not all that hot after all. Movie stars are so damn skinny, it's just ribs and dessicated skin.

Very excited to see Magic Mike sometime. So many hot pieces, so little time.

I'm all for nudity in film/TV as long as it makes sense in the plot and isn't used as a ticket sale gimmick ("oooh, she's dropping her towel to get in the bath and there's a killer about to strike")or a shock tactic ("oooh, are you uncomfortable with this? How about now? Aren't I the libertine?"). Then again I'm all for nudity in real life too, so I guess I'm the wrong person to ask.

Would I pay to see Julia Roberts and Sarah Jessica Parker naked in a scene reminiscent of the Jennifer Tilly/Gina Gershon horizontal tango in Bound?

Posted by: Jerry at January 11, 2012 2:54 AM

--------

I don't think I would. Not when I can go out to the park on a cold winter's day, grab two dead and sad sticks of wood that have recently dropped off a lonely tree and rub them together spasmodically to get much the same aesthetic effect.

Here's my metaphor: I love Viggo. I paid to see Appaloosa, which was good, but -- no Viggo nudity or even the suggestion of it. I would not see it again. I paid to see History of Violence, which had no Viggo nudity, but lots of suggestion of it and lots of tension and y'know...sex stuff. I bought it. With real money. I paid to see Eastern Promises and there is STERLING Viggo Nudity...albeit not the kind you might be thinking, but it was perfect and gnarly and crafty and YESS!! I bought it and I have it hidden in a safe place. I would not pay to see The Road. It has no Viggo nudity but even if he gave me a lap dance I would not see it.

So there you go.

I think my answer to your question is: Is it Viggo-Level Nudity? Paddydog, it's your move.

see the above

The two most memorable and true to the story scenes of nudity I remember are

Schindler's List

The scene where they stripped the Jews at the concentration camp and the poor old man was running trying to cover himself. It was a heartbreaking scene that showed how the Nazi's stripped everything from the Jewish people down to their basest needs, their clothing and their dignity.

Kramer vs. Kramer when the boy encounters a naked JoBeth Williams in the hallway. It would not have played as well if we didn't see what the little boy was seeing.

Most of the nudity in films is just to get your seat in the theatre. Not saying it isn't effective but men get lovely boobs while women get saggy balls.

Looks like I didn't answer the question. Is there a celebrity I'd pay to see naked?

I don't think so. I love Russell Crowe but the best part of a man is from the waist up. No, I don't want to see Russell's Crowe, or Sean's Bean or George's Clooney. Not on the big screen anyway.

Tits do not a better movie make. Ass does not make a story more compelling. Gyno shots do not improve editing. Dutch angles of penises do not make movies more art worthy. I'm not saying that there isn't a time and a place for nudity and sex in cinema, quite the contrary it can in fact be a very powerful and even sensual part of film. But so often it is clumsily or pointlessly used. When I think back on all that I have seen, I realize that much of it was completely unnecessary. And much like needless cursing for the sake of cursing or over-the-top violence and gore, the overuse of such cheapens the value of it. If a movie 's overall presentation is not affected by the removal of the nudity and sex, then you have to ask yourself if it was all that vital in the first place. Ironically, most love stories are not improved with the inclusion of sex. Probably because one can have sex without love. Movies on the other hand often have the tone of "See, look! They're fucking each other they must be in love." It's a cheap way to tell a story quickly and not depend on actors' abilities or chemistry to tell the same thing in more time.

It might be a sign of the times, but some of the older films were able to show the same tone without hitting the viewers over the head. The power of suggestion was still an art form. Women could be smoking hot without getting naked. The leading man could sweep his female counterpart into a passionate embrace, the scene would fade to black and then come up the next morning. Audiences were still able to use their imagination to fill in the gaps. Nobody needed boobies bouncing in their face for 20 seconds. We knew they did it. It's come to the sad point where if audiences don't see the sex- it never happened. Perhaps if it were treated with a little less hamfistedness and with a little more delicacy and respect, I could take it more seriously than how it's often portrayed.

I correct myself. Those previously mentioned shots are actually requisite in one type or film- porn. A type of movie that requires no real plot, development or acting. Much like Michael Bay movies are almost nothing but explosions and fighting shots, or the so-called "torture-porn" sub-genre movies are a collection of overt killings. The pointless action shots, regardless of what kind of action, are merely the condiments to the meat of the story. Without that substance, you are left with a plateful of salt, pepper, ketchup and mustard. And while that might all leave a taste in your mouth it also will ultimately leave you feeling empty and unfulfilled.

What other choices do I have?

"Those hoping to get a peak of the famous Fasschlong..."

In this context, should we assume "peak" to be synonymous with "tip?"

What do you mean "on the off chance"? We have the internet now. Before the movies are even released any skin-showing has been cataloged and indexed for easy verification. There is no "will she/ won't she", we have confirmation and screen captures. You don't even need to see the movie.

Although that's not to say it doesn't have an impact on box office. There is plenty of buzz and anticipation to be drummed up if a previously unrevealed actress is going nude. And A-list full frontal still raises a few eyebrows now matter how jaded and desensitized the internet makes us. I'm not going to see The Reader just for the skin, but, I mean, I'm aware going in that Kate Winslet is very naked in that movie and Kate Winslet naked is a very, um, compelling thing to get to see and so that does contribute, sure, to anticipation of the movie, I guess. Sorry, what was the question again?

I do remember celebrity nudity being more of a thing when I was a kid and outright pornography was difficult to come by. Movie nude scenes were one of the only legitimate ways to see breasts, and seeing breasts was very important to a growing boy, so movie nudity was serious business. I still remember that Critters 2 was PG-13 yet featured a topless playboy model. And due to the goofiness of later Police Academy movies parents would probably let you watch the first one without too much oversight despite much more adult content. Same for Revenge of the Nerds. Basic Instinct was like the Holy Grail of film nudity in 7th grade if your parents had a copy you could sneak.

I'm assuming the title question was rhetorical?
I also assume that Pajiba has no problem using celebrity skin on its own site since I'm assuming pictures of Amanda DO exist with no visible cleavage?

No? None? All of her pics show more breast meat than a Butterball turkey commercial? Ok well then carry on.

A whole movie? No. Just the good parts.

I love everything about that last picture. Except that the guy all the way on the left is not front and center.

OK, seriously, nudity, whatever, the important question is:

Is this Patrick Muldoon the same Patrick Muldoon that was in Starship Troopers? He's a producer now? WTF?

To Megan and anyone else ready to see millions of famous packages in "Magic Mike"...they're not showing anything! I can't remember if it was one of the actors or the director but they said all any of the actors will be showing is thong.. I read it on Perez:/

You do know that Seyfried not only got naked but had hot lesbo sex with Julianne Moore in Chloe a couple years back, right?

Moron.