A few years ago, Kevin Costner did a film called “For Love of the Game” - a film about (huge surprise) baseball.
Supposedly, Costner was buck naked in a shower scene, with his ‘bat’ exposed. And a suburban test audience (probably a bunch of unsuspecting people herded in from the food court with the promise of a free junior mint box) responded with an outburst of laughter. The penis scene was cut in the release version, which upset Costner. As it was a Costner film made after 1993, the film flopped as much as his wet willy did.
Anyway, I suspect that is why there isn’t too much R rated frontal nudity in all but the most dramatic or serious films (“Piano”, “Quills”) - films that don’t attract the multiplex crowd - which is just not involved enough to accept that in a film. Unless it is outright fluff like ‘Basic Instinct’ or ‘Wild Things’.
I also remember when that scene in “Wild Things” came on, there were probably 50 teenage girls in there who went
“whoahhhhhhhhhh!” at the same time.
I think it was Jerry Seinfeld who poked some good natured fun at this apprehension, when he likened the situation to being in a shoe store. “Just hold this guy’s hand and walk around the store. See how you like it”.
Back to the topic. One thing I didn’t see mentioned is that the male organ is, by nature, “out there”; while when you look at a naked woman in a fairly long shot, all you see is the pubic hair. So nearly any nude shot of a man, except from behind, is going to show the penis more than a comparable shot of a woman will show vagina. Being averse to showing the actual organs, many filmmakers would tend to show more female nudity.
I’ve heard that story too, but after watching the movie I know it’s better it was cut. It would have been a huge (hehehe) distraction in an otherwise good movie. It would have served no purpose other than Kevin wanted to show his johnson to the world.
Walloon Don’t we see Kevin Spacey in American Beauty? I’m not sure as I was laughing my head off during those scenes.
Nudity in main stream film is on a slight upswing. (I think) It seems that sometime in the early-mid 80’s we became a very ‘moral’ nation, what with Ronnie and the White House and Ed Meese as the AG. At that time sex came under attack by both AIDS and the ‘Moral Majority’. (I’ll you decide which is worse) The PG-13 rating was added to the code and 7-11 stopped selling Playboys and Penthouse. Even the slasher films reduced how much nudity they showed. Oh they still had their ‘sex’ scene. (long pointy object inserted into a womans abdomen, she gasps and falls over) but showing the boobies of the female victims went on a decline. But things are getting better.
But I’ve always thought there were more female bodies displayed than men. Counting up particular films is pretty useless, unless you are going to be thorough and do some sort of huge graph and show the number of boobies, bottoms and naughty bits by sex, per year, along with comparing the number of films with them to the total number of films released.
Now as far as Grousser’s comment goes about aestethics.
Well, I don’t agree with him but I do see his point. Where are the female ‘Maxim, Stuff, FHM’ magazines. Is there a national magazine that shows sexy pictures of todays young male stars in as little clothing as possible? Is there a magazine where bascially that is why it operates?
Re: Kevin Bacon, men being visually stimulated, etc.
As my 9th grade health teacher once observed: “All men need to be ready for sex is to see or be with a naked woman – and sometimes just be with a woman.” Now this was many years ago. When I think of male nudity in movies, it seems that it is rarely in the context of being with a similarly naked woman and if it is in that context, I think, unlike Kevin and his erect Bacon, most actors avoid the shot of a fully erect johnson.
FWIW I haven’t really paid much attention to nudity in movies, but as I think on it – thanks to this discussion – that is my observation. While most actors are fine with Mr. Happy hanging out there – provided he’s not an embarassment – but once he’s ready for work, I think filmmakers and actors alike prefer him out of sight.
I think it’s maybe more than just their preference – the MPAA has granted movies with full-frontal male nudity “R” ratings, but a fully erect penis is often enough to push a movie into “NC-17” territory. That’s box office death. So even if the actor is ready and willing (and many actors probably don’t have the stamina for multiple takes), the filmmakers will likely have to either edit the scene or make a big pitch to convince the MPAA that it’s artistically necessary.
I’ll never understand the weird fetish for making a woman look like a little girl below the waist. But, to each his own.
In the comedy-horror movie Return of the Living Dead, Leanna Quigley spends a considerable amount of time stark naked. Since the movie was made in the early 1980’s, I expected to see bush, but instead she looked smooth. Not just shaven, but smooth like a Barbie doll. No sign of labia – and I was really looking Then I listened to the director’s commentary on the DVD and found out that the studio went a little nuts about the nudity and required them to put a flesh-colored latex prosthetic over Ms. Quigley’s Mississippi Delta, which must have been uncomfortable. (A little research on the Internet confirms that Ms. Quigley is in fact a natural blonde.)
Yeah, in the movie “Romance” Carolyn Ducey has a nude crotchrope scene – the only nude crotchrope scene outside bondage films, ever, you probably will not be interested to know. But she’s got so much pubic hair that the rope just disappears into her bush just south of her navel. I mean,when she’s stark naked she has more cover than most women in a bikini at the beach. No thongs for her!
It’s not that she looks like a little girl, it’s that she’s even more naked :eek: with nothing blocking the view of such a beautiful sight. And pubic hair in the teeth is no fun.
I’d like to see those studies. “Anecdotal” and “evidence” are two words that don’t belong together, as anyone in Great Debates or General Questions can tell you, and somewhere in IMHO I think there was a discussion about how there’s more porn for guys because the porn industry is run by men, who pretty much just cater for themselves.
It’s well accepted, but that doesn’t make it actually true, just one of those things that gets repeated often.
And if it is true, then so what? Women should be put on display cos men like it? What if the women don’t want that? Or what if we don’t mind, but would like there to be more men getting nude too? We don’t get a say in the situation at all?
I get so sick of hearing men justify why the amount of nudity is movies is just fine the way it is - well, of course you think it’s fine, it caters specifically to your wants. But couldn’t you spare a thought for the women (half the world’s population!) who are bored of seeing boobies flashed for no reason, and would like to see some bare male arses (Aussie spelling) flashed for no reason? Can’t you find it in your heart to ask Hollywood for a movie that you can take your girlfriend to where you both get to see something a little arousing?
Come on, guys, have a little sympathy! Stop telling women that the nudity amounts don’t need changing, and celebrate more nudie bits for everyone!
And why would the porn industry be dominated by men? There’s nothing stopping an entrepreneurial woman from recruiting a bunch of guys for movies which would suit her tastes. Clearly, there’s some underlying asymmetry, here.
And women most certainly do get a say in the movie situation. You buy tickets, too, don’t you? Hollywood puts boobies in movies because when they do so, they sell more tickets. If and when they sell tickets by putting in bare male arses, they do/will do that, too. And sure, you like seeing nekkid men, but that’s just the annecdotal evidence you were just complaining about. Do as many women enjoy male nudity, as men enjoy female nudity? Do they enjoy it as much?
Chronos, that asymmetry in the porn industry is caused by the fact that until a very short time ago, women weren’t allowed to work outside the home, and we were taught about our sexuality by men. We’re working our way into different industries, educating ourselves, but attitudes like yours that say “this is the way things have always been, this is the way they should stay” make it uphill work.
I buy tickets, yeah, but the majority of powerful people in Hollywood are old men, and I have my doubts about their decision-making abilities (“Analyse That” being their idea of a surefire winner - what a pile of crap it was). If I avoid every movie that shows women’s nudity in an exploitative manner, or any movie that doesn’t show male nudity, for the sake of influencing box-office earnings, then I won’t get to see many movies. And hey, in spite of the unbalanced nudity, I still really enjoy watching movies. I’m not going to stop, I just wanted to have my say about the nudity issue, like the OP asked for.
Like you, I only have anecdotal evidence. In the abscence of any hard data, I think mine holds up as well as yours.
I don’t know why you find it so strange or annoying that women want to see appropriate nudie bits. Why can’t we all enjoy it? At least Spectre of Pithecanthropus understands what I’m trying to say - thanks, dude.
First of all, Lamia I don’t find naked men repulsive. I’m a man, but I’m a rational one. I don’t think my body is repulsive, nor Michael Angelo’s David nor any male’s. That’s what you thought I was saying. I only meant by social standards, where it’s more frequent to see bikini girls announcing cars, malls, etc., not men in “tangas”(is this word ok?). I won’t mind if that happens. Welcome the new era.
To Stringy:
I don’t think Demi Moore was sacrificing herself for the twelve million dollars that were paid to her. She naked a lot before that. Sharon Stone does it to. I don’t think they mind about exploitation. And for the others, many excellent actresses, like Meryl Streep, have taken off their clothes or shown some body parts in the pinnacle of their fame.
I never said that. Check my post again. What I said it was no need to account the amounts of nudity, just enjoy them. That’s what I entirely agree with you here:
Ok, I think that’s fair enough too, just don’t make sex wars… that’s my very message.
That’s exactly what I tried to say: If it isn’t a competition, why the need to check the exact amounts?
Completely agree. Don’t think men don’t respect women because men like to see them naked. Women like it too, ok? We can be naked with pleasure if that makes you women happy (I’m talking about actors, not me).
You see? We think the same, you just use to misunderstand me.
Greetings Grousser
(trying hard not to make enemies before friends)
If you include breasts as nudity for females, but not for males, then I’m sure there is more female nudity.
However, I think it is wrong to equate a female showing her nipples with a male showing his rear. Both sexes have both those parts, people. And nipples are clearly more innocuous. Heck, in some cases you couldn’t even tell just by looking at the nipples whether it was a male or a female. So it only becomes “nudity” when you find out it was a female.
The truth is, males show just as much or more than women. I find it annoying that females often act as though showing their breasts is equal to a man being completely nude. The reason that there is more female “nudity” is simply because nipples are hardly nudity at all. If you insist on counting them only for females, you will come up with there being more female nudity, but the truth is that males show just as much or more.
Weren’t allowed? I don’t know about Australia, but in the United States 1.9 million women worked outside the home in 1870 (14.8% of the workforce), 2.5 million women did in 1900 (18.2%), and 10.7 million in 1930 (22.0%).
Shall we agree that “old men” means men over 60? Here are the most powerful executives in the American entertainment industry, as ranked by Entertainment Weekly in 2002:
Jeff Bewkes (~51) & Chris Albrecht (54), AOL Time Warner
John Calley (73) & Amy Pascal (56), Sony
Leslie Moonves (54), CBS
Kaz Hirai (65), Sony
Barry M. Meyer (60) & Alan Horn (60), Warner Bros.
Bob Wright (~60), Andy Lack (56) & Jeff Zucker (38), NBC
Doug Morris (65), Universal Music Group
Ron Meyer (59) & Stacey Snider (43), Universal Pictures
Brian Becker (54), Clear Channel Entertainment
Sandy Grushow (~43) & Gail Berman (~47), Fox Entertainment
Jamie Kellner (56), TBS
Richard Cook, Nina Jacobson (37) & Thomas Schumacher (45), The Walt Disney Studios
Tom Freston (58) & Judy McGrath (51), MTV Networks
Herb Scannell (46), Nickelodeon, TV Land, and TNN
Tom Rothman (49) & Jim Gianopulos (~51), Fox Filmed Entertainment
Michael Lynne (63) & Bob Shaye (65), New Line
Bruce Rosenblum (~46) & Peter Roth (46), Warner Bros. Television
Jonathan L. Dolgen (58) & Sherry Lansing (59), Viacom/Paramount
Nancy Tellem (50), CBS
Leonard Riggio (62) & Steve Riggio (49), Barnes & Noble
Actually, the problem with the porn industry is that it’s driven, not by guys generally, but by the subset of guys who buy porn regularly – let’s call 'em porn addicts. In her 'True Porn Clerk Stories" – here’s the url –
Ali Davis makes it clear that most video store porn rental business comes from regulars who rent up to six videos a day, every day. While there are a lot of guys who rent occasionally, they just don’t account for the sheer volume that regulars do. (Davis said that just about every guy who came into the store rented porn, it was just a matter of how often).
I think porn would be a lot more “couples friendly” if it weren’t for the regulars. They’re the ones who have to see the money shots, and who like to see girl on girl action (because they’re threatened by naked guys) and who don’t give a flip about what the guys look like.
There is a female producer (and former porn actress) named Candida Royalle who has produced a line of couples-friendly adult tapes, but I think it remains a niche in a sea of stuff designed for porn addicts.
Me, I’m stickin’ to hentai, at least they have plots.
