Question about nudity scene?
-
oprlvr33 — 15 years ago(November 17, 2010 08:28 PM)
And
Obviously (just in case the rest of you didn't catch on) her 'nudity' was a form of humiliation; strung up by brutal chains (like a captured animal), locked inside a freezerbare naked??? Personally, I wouldn't have survived but a few moments!
The female body does not have the same insulation as a males. Amazingly, she survived long enough to have words with Jeff AND get sprayed with freezing water(!) -
MegKotlanger — 15 years ago(January 26, 2011 10:03 AM)
Well, i think the fact that she was being frozen to death made the nudity at least practical in this case. As to why it wasn't a guy in the freezer, they probably thought it is more pleasant to see a woman naked instead of frozen sausage. Also, when it comes to full frontal, I think they can get away with a woman and not a man with an R rating because their actual genitals are covered.
-
stayprettystockholm — 14 years ago(January 05, 2012 12:26 PM)
Because more guys watch horror than girls, and men are easier to appeal to in movies anyway. Promise them even a bra strap and they come running to the theater in hordes.
http://i44.tinypic.com/x4ozk.jpg -
MacheteDontText — 15 years ago(December 04, 2010 09:47 AM)
also, the full frontal is kind of hard to see the details because of the fact the room she is in is really misty so you can kind of make some stuff out. It is a really disturbing scene however.
Machete don't text -
Seth_Raven — 15 years ago(December 14, 2010 10:34 AM)
You're saying your son is old enough to watch horror movies but yet this movie is 18+ and from what you've said your son is 11. What is wrong with you?
You know, there's an age rating for a reason. Jesus man, he's a little boy, how could you seriously even just think about letting him watch this? -
A-Pseudo-Intellectual — 15 years ago(March 28, 2011 01:10 PM)
Right. Let's show the kid all the NC-17 rated graphic torture, mutilation and extreme violence we can, but god forbid he see a naked woman!
You're a classic example of why some people simply make horrible parents and shouldn't be allowed with 10 feet of a child.
"I was cured, all right." -
dolores_medina — 14 years ago(July 17, 2011 05:52 PM)
If he is fapping to torture porn, don't worry, he won't grow up to be a reasonably well adjusted adult with Mild curiosity about the opposite sex, likie most of us did. He'll grow up to be a serial killer. Ya, I can see this as a better option, i mean, God forbid he should see boobs, but torture?? ya, that's awesome for an 11 year old.
-
Totemkauf — 11 years ago(May 30, 2014 03:58 PM)
I feel sorry for this kid if his first time seeing a nude woman is a tortured victim in a horror movie.
This is def not a series for 11 year olds
But in defense of violence/vs nudity 'protection' , I think it's about the likelyhood of real life immitation. Show a kid two people doing it , and two people stabbing eachother. The kid is more likely to go out and do itwith somebody some day than to stab someone. It's all about trying to control teen pregnancy etc.
I agree its irrational to be so anti-nude etc instead of having more of an educational process, but I feel there's greater risk of sexual content affecting a young persons actions than extreme violence.
Well kids 15 now so hopefully he hadn't been scarred lol. -
Ceephax — 14 years ago(October 31, 2011 08:40 PM)
God, I really cannot believe how people have such an issue over a naked body which is part of human nature, but seeing extreme graphic torture and mutilation is totally ok. It's like it's ok to show war and people killing each other on day time news, but god forbid they should ever show nudity of any sort! They even have nudity in films such as Walkabout, which is rated PG13, a great film about 2 school kids surviving in the desert.
Here's an interesting fact- they teach sex education in schools in which kids see the pictures of the naked male and female body in books (even in videos, although nothing pornographic) but I highly doubt they would show films such as the Saw series, because it's a bit twisted, corruptive and un-natural, and for grown ups only, you know?
Besides, don't young boys masturbate around the age of 11? He probably does it behind your back and may own a few copies of porn mags in his room anyway!
I seriously hope this is a joke.
SILENCIO. -
zOtx — 14 years ago(February 18, 2012 02:39 PM)
@deepblue184
Your argument is completely flawed. "The might be able to take this but not able to take something that looks like breasts?" Doesn't the blood look like blood? Doesn't the torturing look like torturing?
If the child/parent has more of a problem with nudity than violence, then I think they need their brains checked. Nudity is natural, we see ourselves naked every day. In this movie, it isn't even slightly sexual. Torture is NOT natural and children are NOT acquainted with it.
"May not be ready to show this child the female form" - but ready to show limbs being twisted until the bones break out?? What the heck is wrong with you? The kid bloody KNOWS what the female form looks like, it's TOUGHT IN SCHOOL. -
sublimeglass — 14 years ago(March 02, 2012 11:36 AM)
I'm going to go with TROLL because as a parent I can't wrap my head around something that stupid. You got us, man.
Guys, no actual parent should ever say they want to preserve their child's innocence by shielding them from nudity but allow them to watch torture. Because it wouldn't matter if they knew what was Real and what was Fake, since the things that happen in this movie could potentially be Real.
Closing it out: OP was looking for uproar.
