Guys, I hate to be the Wet Blanket O’ Truth[sup]TM[/sup], but I saw a test screening of *Closer * a few months ago, and it was not only gratuitous, it was disturbing. And wrong. And sick. And I loooove me some titties. Wait till the DVD, and hopeful Nichols will let you see the scene out of context, in a nice safe deleted scene.
And her body’s OK. No labia the size of mudflaps that I could see, but not amazingly hot by Hollywood body double standards. I’d feed her alcohol and see if she turns lesbo in a second, because she has a nice real body (and a real nice body) but in the context of this movie, I really wanted her to put her clothes back on. shudder
I’ll run naked through the thread if you want. After my wet blanketness, it’d be a lot closer to seeing Natalie naked in the context of this movie. Not really sexy. Like seeing your sister at a stripclub.
I made this point in the other Thread (Search much?). I’m 29, Portman is 23. I think social standards allow that it is not particularly perv-ish for a 29 yr old to want to get nasty naked with a 23 yr old.
However, as an individual, Portman has a very adolescent looking body. I just ain’t all that attracted to adolescents. For all of you in this Thread who are sexually attracted to adolescents, I suppose it is good that you have been able to find a young adult who just happens to look like an adolescent upon whom to lavish you lascivious leering. More power to you. May you find many more adults of this build so that you never need prowl the schoolyards.
All hope is not lost. I’m pretty sure you still get to see her breasts. As I understand, it was just the “raunchy shots of her fully nude" that were cut. So you just don’t get to see the Naboo Choo-Choo.
And, YES, I do think she’s beautiful- just not in a hard-on kind of a way.
:smack:
My post made it sound as if the reason it was disturbing was the mere OKness of her body. That’s not it at all.
The disturbing part of seeing her naked was that, in the context of the movie, she is totally manipulated and demeaned by total assholes (one in particular). This is **not ** a girl (we know she’s a stripper, right? It’s in the preview, so I’m not spoilering it) who became a stripper because it felt empowering in a Gloria Steinem way. Her private dance scene is so disturbing because of the conversation happening a the time. It’s a gut-wrenching, horrible scene to watch because of the context, not because of Natalie’s cute-but-less-than-spectacular body.
It’s uncomfortable in a very Mike Nichols’ specific way.
It is heartening to me that, in this time of national tragedy for all American males, the women of this board will boldly stand up, sans frock, and run naked through the thread to comfort us.
I think this thread has taken a wrong turn. MPSIMS is over that way.
Back to the subject…
I find it especially creepy how many of the Portman fans absolutely love her role in Leon/The Professional, where she was all of 13 and had an unusually intimate relationship with an older adult male. I agree it’s an excellent movie, but that combined with the lust to see her naked now, I find a little strange.
The topic of Natalie Portman nude (or not, as the case may be), is neither mundane nor pointless. EVER. Frankly, this belongs as a sticky (heh) thread in Great Debates, but we must toil where we can under the tyranny of the Mods.
<skips nekkid through thread. It’s best to skip since the gals are D-cups :D>
Stopping long enough to say that I saw Mike Nichols at the New Yorker Festival last year when he was talking about ANGELS IN AMERICA, and there was a retrospective of his career with plenty of May footage, and no, they were never romantically involved.
<skip skip frisk frisk skip skip bounce bounce>
Oh yeah, Biffy, slip us all a few bucks via PayPal and we will ship you the Extra Special Browser! Yessir, the Extra Special Browser. Yep.
The worst part is not that Portman’s nude scenes have been pared down to a few topless shots, but that we’ll have to endure Julia Roberts to get to them. Grimace.
