I heard the same about Scarlett Johanson in **The Island **, in the scene where she wakes up and gets out of bed she thought it would more realistic if she were topless; the director thought differently…
A strange half-way example: the lwonderful, lingering, loving shot of S.Jo’s butt at the beginning of “Lost in Translation.” Gratuitous sexual content mixed with gratuitous clothing…if you’re going to focus on that bum, and by all means please do so, there’s no need for panties.
You! Corner!
until you learn to stop screwing with my fantasies
Thanks for providing that name. Looking at her resume, (and making a few um…internet searches…), she is the JT Walsh of gratuitous nudity.
Beyond the films listed, she is the chesty girl in Night Patrol, Another 48 Hours, and My Tutor.
WOW! And she never got an Oscar. (there’s a double entendre to be had there!)
Oddly, if there is a director who knew how to use nudity as a cinematic tool beyond mere titlation or even story elements, it was Altman (see the discussion of the Player upthread). He almost always had nudity, but I wouldn’t argue it was for nudity’s sake.
Too bad the “mysterious lady” in his last film didn’t wander around in the buff. I never understand why angels have clothes on.
Monty Python’s Meaning of Life:
The topless women chasing after Graham Chapman as his chosen method of death.
Funny, but completely gratuitous…
Isn’t it always like that? The hordes of topless women are all chasing the gay guy.
I don’t think either of those count as gratuitious. They make perfect sense in the context of a husband and wife alone.
Quoth TBG:
Yeah, but they didn’t have any full-body shots of him from the front anyway (it wouldn’t have made sense for the scene). And male butt is still acceptable for PG-13, right? Or, as I said, they could have just used funny camera angles to not show his pants.
Oddly, in the new PG-13 Wolverine film, it shows him nude for a rather lengthy scene. In fact, there is one moment that he jumps off a waterfall that his “other claw” is concealed only by a careful turn of his leg.
And moments later, you have gratuitous NON-nudity. She’s changing from the naval jacket to the sensible dark clothing and it’s natural to be naked for a moment while changing, isn’t it? But no–the woman who had just (or so she thought) flashed her boobs at a entire shipful of sailors, “modestly” hides them to put clothes on!
Don’t forget about Dr. Manhattan in Watchmen.
Sure, showing him nude was intertwined with his increasing detachment to the human condition, but boy did they show it a lot. It seemed that the movie had Manhattan’s scenes featuring full frontal far more that the source material.
It gets even more outlandish when he leaves humanity to go to Mars. He gets there and figures “Hey, guess I’ll just do some jumping jacks.”
I saw *Monsters vs. Aliens *this past weekend with my kids. CGI film. Dreamworks. You’ve probably heard of it. Anyway, there’s a very early scene where the character Susan is about to get married, but the ceremony is interrupted when she grows to a height of about 50 feet.
Now this is a family film, so it is perfectly understandable that there wouldn’t be nudity – and, indeed, probably a good deal of outrage if there was. But what struck me as I was watching it was that she seemed to be growing out of her dress in the early part of the transformation (there was CGI fabric tearing and more exposed CGI skin), but then at some point the dress decided it was small enough and then started growing with her.
I know the character was a reference to the famous B-movie Attack of the 50-ft Woman, which I’ve never seen. Perhaps the same thing happens there.
I am morally certain that a few moments’ search will uncover versison sof that scene in which Susan’s dress is not so accommodating.
Another stripper example. Rob Zombie’s 2007 Halloween. Sheri Moon Zombie plays a stripper. This movie shows her daughter having sex and then murdered, totally topless. Another teen girl is killed while topless about to have sex. But SMZ is in a strip club on stage dancing for a guy and she keeps her bra on. Totally gratuitous non-nudity.
Ladies, if the role is for a stripper, especially on stage, either do topless or don’t take the role.
Thanks for that link, CalMeacham. He’s right, that is about the size of things. Hollywood strippers bear little resemblance to the real thing. I understand why TV strippers have to keep their bras on, but it just makes no sense in movies, especially rated R movies, especially when they already show tits.
[adds to queue]
[removes from queue]
What are you talking about?
NetFlix probably.
My favorite gratuitous non-nudity is in Beowulf. In a movie that was supposed to be serious and scary, it completely wrecked the suspension of disbelief when they coyly plunked objects in the foreground to obscure Beowulf’s cock. I was forcibly reminded of the all-nude Bloom County strip (ha!) wherein helpful little flowers would lean way over to cover the naughty bits, and so on.
Add to that the fact that this is about fifteen minutes removed from a scene of an anthropomorphic monster ripping people’s limbs off and chewing up their skulls and such, all rendered in unflinching detail, and it is totally ludicrous.
And yet totally par for the course with the MPAA - “People being eaten alive - check. People being ripped in twain, with guts spilling out and bits of sinew straining, then snapping - check. A cartoon penis? NOOOOOOOOOO!!!”
This discussion at some point made me wonder about the suicide scene in An Officer and a Gentleman. I trust this is an old enough movie that I don’t have to use a spoiler box?
[pause]
Anyway, why is the David Keith character nude when Richard Gere finds him hanged in the shower? Is it gratuitous nudity? Or is there some statement he is making with his own nude death? A stripped, literally naked and vulnerable, man?