this must be the oldest movie with full frontal female nudity that i recall seeing
so many movies, so little time

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

You all sound like a bunch of prudes. The scene is amazing and I much prefer the explicit cut with all the nudity. It feels more authentic. I also don't feel it plays over long. Frankenheimer is building to a state of catharsis with the character. All his years of repression and feeling dead inside are slowly crumbling and his new self is starting to form. Although it doesn't take, it is the point of the experiment that is Hudson's new life. It's a masterful scene and quite a sexy one at that.

This message has been deleted.

I've just Frankenheimer's commentary in which he tries to peddle the notion that without nudity it somehow came off more like an orgy. I generally respect a lot of what he had to say in his commentary tracks but this had to rank as one of the dumbest things I'd ever heard in my life.
It's too bad that the scene of Hudson visiting his daughter was lost and not able to be restored because I would have rather seen that one than the unedited wine scene. I wish Frankenheimer had elaborated on how that scene played out but unfortunately he spent about two-thirds of the commentary track telling us more about how brilliant James Wong Howe was. He needed to dial that back a bit.

I dont think its "cheap exploitation" at all; it is, however, a rather silly scene. As well as a needlessly drawn-out one.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

The MPAA ratings system did not appear until 1968. The first ratings were G-General Audience, M-Mature Audiences only. R-Restricted 17yrs and older, and X-Adults only. Nowdays, Seconds would get a PG-13. Full frontal in a Hollywood movie was a BIG DEAL back in 66', so I see why it was trimmed before the DVD release restored it. In the late 60', they were just chomping at the bit to show a little t&a in the movies, and this was Frankenheimer's first chance at it.

This is the usual stupid cliche that says if you object to a nude scene you are a 'prude' who doesn't appreciate "art". Boo-hoo, cry me a river. I don't have to see the nudity to get the point, okay? I've already been served up a ton of character exposition and dialogue that tells me enough about this character's "transformation" and the idea that nudity is necessary to sell a point that any one with reasonable intellectual comprehension "gets" is just a stale cliche from people who have a hang-up with the fact that people can rightfully object to it.

other than being the key scene in which the lead character undergoes a major transformation representing what may be the largest single chunk of character development in the movie, that scene is completely pointless
They'll hang you as sure as 10 dimes will buy a dollar

I agree that the scene was incorporating the "style" of the times, however, people are noticing the scene dates the film and it doesn't hold up very well.
Illusion is the first of all pleasures
-Oscar Wilde-

Maybe the length of the scene was not necessary, but then again to understand the turmoil that Rock Hudson's character is going through in his new life, it was quite important, cinematically speaking, that he had to be taken into a world he had never experienced before, or even suspected.
It could have been anything a bit extreme, but then we were in 1966 and sexual liberation was in the air, so I guess that this sequence was quite meaningful at this time of mental repression. I think it is overlong, but beautifully shot, with a true (and then quite new) psychedelic point of view, borrowing off Middle Age mythology.

I agree that the film was better in its edited form. Also keep in mind that the Rating System didn't come about until 1968. The "R" was assigned after the release. Jerry

And I thought the point was that the OP was surprised that there was nudity in such an old movie. What you mean is off topic, but I agree. The movie could have done without the nudity. Maybe Frankenheimer really wanted to shoot a nude scene because that was around the time a mainstream movie could finally afford such a thing.
I'm here, Mr. Man, I can not tell no lie and I'll be right here 'till the day I die

"Hey, this wan't 1940! The Hays code was already out of power"
That's not the point. The point is that the scene was absolutely unnecessary in terms of making a fundamental plot point and IMO if you don't need to do that to make the story point, then a director with some sense would let discretion be the better part of valor.
X is still for pornography by any definition of the term.

Hey, this wan't 1940! The Hays code was already out of power and the Rating System was already in place. Although the system was still new and they used to give a movie the X rating just for a few seconds of fronal female nudity, so it isn't surprising that Frankenheimer dared to shoot nude scenes but was forced to omit them from the final cut to get a marketable rating, since X was basically for pornography back then.
I'm here, Mr. Man, I can not tell no lie and I'll be right here 'till the day I die

It was one hot girl at first, and it was a slight glimpse of her, a side shot of nudity and then a slow spin, until she finally revealed herself
And I thought, "Okay"
And then everyone started getting undressed and hopping in. I thought it was a pretty pointless scene. In fact, I'm not a fan of that entire sequence hippies out doing their thing.

I would have preferred seeing the original sanitized version because IMO, the unedited version degenerated into cheap exploitation, especially when that scene went way too long in terms of making its fundamental plot point.

This message has been deleted.

No. A scene made it onto the dvd that wasn't in the orginal release. It's mostly women. It was a rather bizzare scene. I don't think I'll ever drink whine the same way again.
"I'm a vehemently anti-nuclear, paranoid mess, harbouring a strange obsession with radioactive sheep."