I'm pretty impressed by the full length nude scene.
I never thought this could be possible, back in 1933, in a "family" mainstream movie, starring a famous actress (i suppose she was, wasn't she?)
maybe jennifer love hewitt could learn from maureen o sullivan LOL
Kudos to Gibbons for his creativity and O sullivan for being such a hottie
That was pretty daring to do in the 1930's.
ANIMAL LOVERS UNITE
That was not Maureen O'Sullivan doing the scene, and she wasn't nude. The actress that was doubling for her was wearing a full skin-colored body suit. Still, I must agree with you that the idea for that time sure was (in my opinion) shocking, and it was suprising that they "simulated" it at all. I suppose what they did is just as good as a nude scene anyways, though. The idea is there.
shareOne thing the nude swimming scene made clear is that Maureen O'Sullivan had nicer tatas than her body double. Thankfully, the dreaded Hays Code (up yours, Will Hays) had not yet reared its ugly head.
shareMovie_Crazy999. Sorry you are wrong. Watch Maureen O'Sullivan's interview taken about a year before her death. In it she states that at first Jane [Maureen] was to be almost naked, wearing just a loincloth [With front panel only, without any other under garment] for the entire movie, but after Maureen had run around in the fake jungle for two days of filming trying to hide her breasts and bottom behind tree leafs and shrubbery it was decided it would be a little too controversal, so on went the top and and the loincloth had a rear cloth panel added.
With regards to the nude swimming. It was Maureen having her silk dress ripped off by Tarzan as he throws her in to the river naked [Freeze frame will show she was naked]. The first time they did the shot the wardrobe department hadn't cut away enough stitches and she almost broke her arm as the dress didn't brake away as it should have. She was going to do the underwater nude swimming as well but as she could only hold her breath under water for less then 30 seconds by the time they had got the bulky underwater camera and camera men set up she had to surface. They were going to cut the scene completely from the film until Johnny Weissmuller suggested Josephine McKim. She had won a gold medal in the same 1928 Olympic games swimming team as Johnny. She was contacted and she also ageed to do it in the nude as the scene before had Maureen entering the water naked. She could hold her breath under water for over 3 minutes. Maureen througt that there may be a couple of seconds of her swimming under water naked in the film, but she wasn't sure. Boy! Would I like to have those first 2 days of filming
I was glad to find this DVD set had gone down in price from $60 to $20!!! What a deal. I am always surprised that people are so excited about the few minute "nude" scene in this movie. Ha :) It WAS revolutionary for its time, and can be totally appreciated in context.
This is my favorite Tarzan movie. Maureen O'Sullivan IS very pretty and especially in the earlier movies, Johnny Weissmuller makes a hot Tarzan. The movies seem cheesy by today's standards but they are so enjoyable, a must have for a DVD collection. Has anyone read the books? I think they are free online at one of the books online sites. Project Gutenburg maybe? I have not--how do they compare to these movies?
[deleted]
It was made before "THE CODE". After that they'd use symbolism.
shareI think MovieCrazy is incorrect and that the underwater nude scene was for real, not a body suit. I have two friends who are semi-specialists in the history of nude in cinema, and they are under a strong impression to that effect. One of their arguments is that they can't find any other instance of a body-suit nude bothering to fake the pubic hair. Another is that intense magnification doesn't show a body suit beginning or ending anywhere, not even at her neck.
share[deleted]
FWIW, I believe the woman used for those scenes is without a body suit, also.
shareAccording to the documentary on the DVD set, the body double was in fact in the nude. And this was shot after the "Hayes Code" was put in effect. It caused a big controversy. The scene had to be reshot. The movie was released in three different versions... one full nude, one topless only, and one fully clothed... different versions were shown at different theaters. When the Hayes Code office found out about this they were very upset, both nude versions were pulled completely and not seen again until it was found in the vaults in the '80s(?).
shareIt was made after the implementation of the Hays Code, but before Breen was in charge of it (he was stricter with censorship and sold himself as such). As soon as one year later, it probably wouldn't have even been allowed to be made.
shareShe does appear nude, but more like in shadows than the clear photography of today. Of course, that's part of the charm. A thousand times more sexy than Bo Derek's explicit attempt to duplicate what they did in fuzzy black and white 50 years before her.
shareI didn't know they intended to shoot the entire movie with Jane topless...man,that makes my head spin!Wonder if they shot those 2 days on closed sets with tight security,or what?Sure hope that footage surfaces someday.To behold the lovely O'Sullivan bopping about sans top would have been a life altering experience....
shareI didn't remember that there was nude scene, I saw this film today again after some 30 years. I guess I've seen the alternate version earlier as a kid. Otherwise I surely would have remembered such a scene... :)
Lions and elephants fighting was pretty impressive too.
Good work in 1934 despite some obvious lame tricks.
caraeas wrote:
"To behold the lovely O'Sullivan bopping about sans top would have been a life altering experience...."
I started watching Tarzan movies when I was 3 or 4 years old and fell in love with Jane at that young age. Maureen O'Sullivan may be the most beautiful woman I have ever seen. I was crushed when I read that wasn't her in the nude scene, but a big thanks to Ted Turner for releasing the nude version.
Ms O'Sullivan said somewhere that they filmed her topless for a couple of days, but it got tiresome having to make sure her breasts were hidden by a tree limb or something. The answer to that, of course, was not to hide her breasts.
I found a picture of Ms O'Sullivan in her Jane outfit laying on a chaise lounge with her sun glasses pulled down looking at the camera--she was stunning. I lost the picture to a computer crash and have never found it again. Just goes to show the importance of backing up crucial data.
It's definitely my favourite film of the series as well. That scene is breathtaking cinema. I also feel that Tarzan Escapes is an outstanding film. I love pre-Code films in which directors really dared to push the envelope further and further to see what they could get away with. Unfortunately such freedom was misunderstood and therefore very short-lived.
sharehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNGXdw2_6DM
Its on YouTube :)
[deleted]
Was going to say. Someone said "skin tight body suit"? What, with pubic hair on it?
It would seem that a skin tight body suit with nipples and pubic hair painted on it would negate the reason for a skin tight body suit in the first place.
share[deleted]
Body double Josephine McKim did the underwater segment in the nude, while Maureen O'Sullivan wore a body suit for the other swimming scenes.
No blah, blah, blah!
Yes she is definitely butt naked. I have the DVD going now and you can clearly see her butt cheeks/crack and even some nips near the end of the swim. Pretty daring for 1934 the year my mother was born. She either shaved her pubes or more likely has some type of snatch cover. At the end of the swim she heads for the surface giving us a full-frontal. No pubes visible.
According to the documentary which is in the DVD box set, three versions of this swim scene had to be made for showing in various countries, and it was only in 1987 that the fully nude version re-surfaced.
The girl doubling for Maureen O'Sullivan was indeed nude. The scene was shot with Olympic swimmer Josephine McKim, a swimmer in the same Olympics as Weismuller. There were three "nude" scenes shot. #1 was fully nude, #2 was a topless only shot, and #3 was a fully clothed shot. The versions were released in these different forms depending on where the movie would be shown.
This movie was filmed and released pre-code - the code started on July 1, 1934 - this film was released in April 1934.
Captain Bob said --
"Pretty daring for 1934 the year my mother was born. She either shaved her pubes or more likely has some type of snatch cover."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You should ask your mom about this next time you see her. Also, she sounds hot.
This scene was pre-Hayes code. In fact, since the Tarzan series appealed to children, the scene generated outrage that helped to establish the code.
shareWhat nude scene? Unless you mean the nude scene in Tarzan Escape?
shareI would think shaving the pubic area would be dangerous as the razor of choice back then was probably the straight razor commonly seen in cowboy movies' barber shops. As a guy I definitely wouldn't use one of those down below.
Safety razors and electric razors probably weren't around.
You do realize that most cowboy movies are set in the 1860s -> 1880s time frame, or roughly 45 - 70 years before the making of Tarzan and his Mate.
According to wikipedia, the first American safety razor patented was in 1888, and Gillete applied for a patent on their disposable blade version in 1901. By World War I, safety razors were being supplied to all American soldiers being shipped overseas. The first electric razor was patented in 1928. So even that existed, but probably wasn't very common yet.
I have no idea how likely pubic shaving would have been at the time, though.
The merkin dates back to the early 15th century. Originally made of the pelt of a small animal, which is pretty much how the region has been associated with those animal names. Shaving would definitely predate the use of merkins.
share