The shot of the topless dead girl seems like some last-minute concession to one of the (male) producers, who probably thought that if a shot of James Olson's nice bare-ass would be part of the storyline, then a woman's boobs would have to be added to even things out. Men!
"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"
I agree. While I like breasts, and looking at them, they had no place in this film. But look out, they usually travel in pairs!
shareI was too busy looking at James Olson's gorgeous naked ass!
shareHey folks,
When I was a 14 or 15 year old boy, I guess I would have been titillated to see a naked gal in this or any other film. At some point, however, most folks get past their teen years, and their ideas of quality art work, entertainment, and life in general no longer is based on teenage hormonal titillation.
At this point, the nude scenes as seen in this and so many other films simply become gratuitious nudity as NYCruise suggested. For myself, this kind of stuff has become a boring waste of time. I think the same thing can be said for gratuitous use of foul language. I am not suggesting that films should never have any nudity or cursing; there may be times when it may actually add something to a story. However, to me it seems that so much of filmmaking has evolved to the point where skin and trash talk have replaced the whole idea of a good story to tell.
I liked this book when it first came out, and I liked the film, but the skinshow part of the film was simply gratuitious nudity as suggested by NYCruise. It simply was not necessary for the great story that was unfolding on the film.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
OMG a pair of boobs, im so shocked !
One would wonder how the human race didnt get extinct by now if boobs are that shocking.
Not to mention all those people who breast feed, traumatised infants for life being exposed to boobs so closely, omfg!
But, yea ok, whatever.
_____________________
Any last words ?
Shut the *beep* up
-Mutant Chronicles-
True art is being able to appreciate the human form, not shying away from it.
In reality, a bacteria or whatever it is like this would have killed some people while they were naked and left their corpse there to be shamefully discovered. The nudity doesn't stray from the reality of the film at all.
Another way to look at it is to just get over the nudity and stop being a politically correct wanker.
(not meant to be a reply to you, lorddeseiz)
[deleted]
I must admit to being titilated at the tits oot scene. I had a quick wank afterwards.
Oh and Captain_Augustus_McCrae shut up you wanka
Puritans, puritans everywhere.
Guess what: stick to Pixar films. No nudity in them.
----------------------
http://mulhollandcinelog.wordpress.com/
I think the original poster would (probably) agree that nudity and specifically female nudity do have a place in movies. It's just that they felt a little out of place in this particular movie.
Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/and the feeelin's right/Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/what a fight
Untrue. Pixar films abound with nude talking animals and vehicles. Where is the outrage with that?!! ;)
Rated AN, for Animated Nudity?
It couldn't be Rated IAON, for Inarticulate Object Nudity, because, well, as previously stated, they are articulate in Pixar films!
So...Rated AIAON, for Articulated Inarticulate Object Nudity, then? 😎
What sick f-ck sees a corpse with no clothes on and thinks of it as "nudity"?
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Oh please. Stop acting sanctimonious. That actress was cast because she was attractive, and the shot was meant to be enticing. People who react accordingly aren't sick.
Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/and the feeelin's right/Oh yes it's Laaarry Holmes/what a fight
I need to re-watch...I guess I missed that scene.
shareAs I recall, her body was contorted in the shot. She looked like she died in pain, to me. I was a little shocked by seeing her nude, but then I quickly figured that not everybody dies with their clothes on, so it made sense for the movie to show it that way. For this reason, I'd hardly call it gratuitous. If anything, all that clothing on the dead people was probably gratuitous. I'd expect more naked people than just one young hippie chick.
Additionally, during split-screen scenes later in the film, the same shot appears again, but this time it is darkened so much as to be barely recognizable. Perhaps the producers felt that one token brightly-lit naked shot was enough, and two would have been excessive?
Whatever.
This shot was missing from the Film4 broadcast on 12/06/15.
shareFairly sure that, rather than being gratuitous, the female nudity was meant to be disconcerting. A normally sexual image made horrific by the girl's death and the images of death surrounding her. All the male ass in the move, though, was definitely gratuitous and meant pacify the chicks who were dragged to this movie by their nerdy boyfriends ;)
shareI didn't see the film, but I just finished the book, and I don't remember any nude dead bodies being described, so this must have been added for the film.
As far as totally gratuitous boob shots, my favorite is Zoe Kazan in "Revolutionary Road." Laughably pointless, but enjoyable.