The parents guide is wrong! Graphic Nudity - Where?
-
TxMike — 9 years ago(August 07, 2016 02:00 PM)
Oh I read your post and also your posts on other boards, you are just acting like an idiot and seeking attention. You'll grow up some day! We can hope.
.... TxMike ....
Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes not. -
TxMike — 9 years ago(August 19, 2016 06:26 AM)
The OP was just being an idiot. "Graphic nudity" has come to mean full frontal and this movie has that. It is just information, it isn't judging whether it is good or bad, it just allows people to make more informed decisions before they take the time, possibly pay the money, to see a movie. If a person is offended by nudity then that is their choice, none of us should judge their decision, and they should not judge those who choose to see a movie with nudity in it. Information is just information, it isn't inherently good or bad.
.... TxMike .... -
CookieMonsterV — 9 years ago(August 19, 2016 08:24 AM)
I think you are away with the fairies if you think this film has graphic nudity.
The information should be factual in every respect so that people can make a judgement.
ITS TIME FOR THE MERKINS TO COME OFF, ITS TIME TO FREETHEVULVA!!
Please read my Bio. -
imdb-9802 — 9 years ago(August 31, 2016 08:49 AM)
Yes, "graphic nudity" is MPAA speak for mild ordinary nudity. No genitals needed.
Yes, its ridiculous that the MPAA considers nudity too terrible for children, but violence OK.
This is why Broken Flowers, for example, gets an R-rating in the US, but a PG in Canada. Plenty of Americans are happy to ignore the MPAA. -
CookieMonsterV — 9 years ago(September 01, 2016 06:14 AM)
What's worse is that a penis is now 15 and any merkin gets an R , very strange???
What's wrong with the world when violence is considered ok over non sexual nudity. They need their heads examining.
Broken Flowers is a lovely film and Alexis Dziena's head didn't explode when she showed her vulva! Natural nudity no merkin, not dark, no cgi, etc etc , I wish it was like that now. -
pimbatat1 — 9 years ago(December 23, 2016 06:54 PM)
Ah yes, Ava's mons pubis. Her pubic mound. Or did you mean to say her
pudendum
? The terminology is always tricky. Is it her pudenda, or her pudendum? Is it female genitalia, or female genitals? Both are plural!
At any rate, in the scene which you are referring, it's true that Ava's is covered in pubic hair. However, was it really "thick" in your estimation? Personally, I would describe it as "moderate". She was neat, clean, tidy, kempt, fresh, and well-trimmed. In this regard, I found absolutely nothing offensive in its display and would have to disagree with any parental guide claiming otherwise.
Furthermore, I thought the exhibition of Ava's bare buttocks was also respectfully done. Clearly there were many ways it could have gone wrong. For instance, the shot could have been filmed from squarely behind. In that case, it could have been possible that her dangling labia could have been seen from between the gap. As it were, the director wisely shot it from a slight angle, thereby ensuring only her round cheeks and the modest crack in between them were visible. Just as importantly, note that the cheeks of her buttocks were closed. A less experienced director might have missed this detail and not taken the care to ask the actress that they not be relaxed and open. Had that been the case, then perhaps a parental ratings guide
might
have had a legitimate grievance. However, given the way the scene was shot, they do not. As you can see, the director was navigating a minefield and succeeded with flying colors.
Finally, while Ava was admiring her naked breasts in front of the mirror, what was offensive about the way she was doing it? Yes, she was standing there fully nude without a shred of clothing. But was she, for instance, jiggling her breasts? Was she handling her breasts? No, she wasn't. She was simply admiring them and the rest of her naked body from a purely visual standpoint, and the viewers asked to join in.
So I must agree with you, CookieMonsterV, that the warnings by any parental ratings guide about the inappropriateness of any scenes in this movie are without merit. Graphic nudity? Hardly! If anything, I would say this was
family friendly
nudity, perhaps even
wholesome
nudity!