Is this legal? - Paradise (1982) Discussion

[–] spamdump8 17 years ago

Bodydouble.

reply

[–] windswords2 17 years ago

She claims that it was her. There is one scene they did use a double in (close up of her chest in the love scene with Ames). The double was much more endowed than her. But all the other shots seem to be her.

reply

[–] fc31 (4563) 2 years ago

Nudity is OK. Remember "blame it on rio", another underaged girl showing a lot of nudity, as long as her parents signed, it is OK.

reply

[–] mrtron81 16 years ago

Have you even seen the movie? She couldn't have been using a body double for her shower scene because the viewer can very clearly see her face in the full-body nude shots.

To answer the original poster's question, yes it's completely legal. Actresses under 18 can do nude scenes as long as there are no actual sex acts(porn) or any "lewd or lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area."

reply

[–] cityslickerktm 16 years ago

"I was only 17 when I did my nude scenes in Paradise (1982). They were serious and more difficult because they were not easily justified. But the topless scene in Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982) was funny, which made it easy".

Legal or not, this is insane. How do you allow a 17-year old to do a nude scene? Where he hell were her parents?

reply

[–] StormShadow420 16 years ago

I think people back in the early 80's were generally less uptight than they are today.

--
Eye for an eye Robinson!

reply

[–] carthur27 11 years ago

"I think people back in the early 80's were generally less uptight than they are today."

Stormshadow, that's ridiculous. Just one fact, we elected President Reagan in November, 1980.

reply

[–] Royalcourtier 10 years ago

Reagan was a great president. Puritanism is stronger in America now than at any time since the 19th century, despite immorality being rife. Why assume that film of a naked 17 year old is illegal? Even in represses America it isn't.

reply

[–] mrtron81 16 years ago

Why is a bad for a 17-year-old to do a nude scene if she and her parents are OK with it? She was just a few months away from being 18, and 18-year-olds can do hardcore pornography. If you say it's wrong for someone under 18 to do nudity on screen, why stop at that? Shouldn't wearing a bikini be wrong as well? It shows almost as much. Where do you draw the line, and who gets to decide? It seems to me you have to leave it up to the actress & her parents, within the bounds of the law.

reply

[–] cityslickerktm 16 years ago

you obviously have no children

reply

[–] webmaster-1502 16 years ago

This film, like "The Blue Lagoon", portrays a story of natural love. It's a completely innocent and pure portrayal of two individuals falling in love within the beauty of nature. None of the nudity in the film was down with indecency, none of it was vulgar (excluding perhaps what the Arabs were doing). Human beings long ago, and still in many parts of the world, walk around naked and pay no care to what modern civilization thinks of it. The only people I know who would object to this sort of film are people like Christian's who, as the film tended to mock, believe sex is a sin. These sort of films are great because they reconnect people with the true essence of humanity: love, survival, and making babies as opposed to money, drugs, and selfishness.

reply

[–] its_like_ya_know 16 years ago

Not all Christians are crazy bible thumping prudes despite what you may have otherwise been led to believe. Some of us can actually appreciate the purpose of nudity in a film such as this one regardless of the actor's age. Generalizations < Intelligence.

That said, American moral ideals desperately need to catch up with the rest of the world. The Jenarlo Wilson case is a perfect example of the laughing stock our judicial system has become with regard to this subject.

reply

[–] bonsaisamurai 16 years ago

the blue lagoon was mentioned - Brooke Shields did full nude scenes when she was 12 playing a prostitute... so an almost 18 Phoebe Cates is no biggy.

reply

[–] Spycat 14 years ago

...what webmaster-1502 is trying to say is its good J.O. material.

reply

[–] carthur27 11 years ago

webmaster, you sound every bit as opinionated as the Christians you so obviously hate.

reply

[–] Ledhed 16 years ago

Oh get off your high horse cityslickerktm. Just because you may have donated sperm, or pushed out a baby does not make you better, more knowledgeable, or more worldly than anyone else.

Michelle Johnson was 17 in 'Blame it on Rio', Brooke Shields was 12 in 'Pretty Baby'. It's perfectly legal and not at all inappropriate to do what they did.

reply

[–] ContinentalOp 9 years ago

you obviously have no children

She was over the age of consent in nearly all the US states and in almost every country in the world. She can have sex yet she cannot appear nude in films, according to you? That is pretty weird.

Formerly KingAngantyr

reply

[–] xenophile2002 16 years ago

Where he hell were her parents?

Her parents would have been on the set so they could be sure that nothing iffy was happening to their daughter. This is what the law requires. So that's where her parents were: on the set.

_____
http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
The subject comes up often enough.

reply

[–] carthur27 11 years ago

"Her parents would have been on the set ... This is what the law requires."

It most certainly does not.

reply

[–] califlipmix 16 years ago

Doing a nude scene for thousands of dollars in a hollywood movie is TAME compared to some of the stuff the average teenage girl does when mommy and daddy are at work ... And thank god for Phoebe and her parents for allowing the nudity:)

reply

[–] kenneth-r-close-1 15 years ago

Where he hell were her parents?

I think they were at the bank, counting their daughter's money.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Popcorngal (4347) 3 years ago

I read somewhere she was hesitant , but dad encouraged her to take the role. I guess he was free spirited and wanted fame for her, who knows. I never saw the film but remember it's promotion in HS.

reply

[–] BigRich 16 years ago

Bodydouble.

You obviously didn't watch the movie!
I watched it last night on the FLiX channel and she was extremely naked during her beach shots and when she swam nude. She was very perky and looked great.

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

reply

[–] pike100 16 years ago

BigRich, actually a body double was used for Phoebe during portions (definitely not all) of her character's numerous nude scenes.

Didn't you notice that "her" breasts were at least 1 cup size larger in some of the nude/topless shots in which her boobs and her face were not shown together? And then in the shots where you can see her face & nude body at the same time, her breasts are somehow magically "reduced" to a somewhat more modest (but still very nice!) endowment?

This is especially noticeable in some of the close-up shots of "her" breasts during the scene in which Phoebe's character is making love with Willie Aames' character. In all of the up close shots of a pair of breasts being fondled by Willie, the breasts that the viewers are seeing belong to a body double.

Colonel Angus: Well thank you Miss Anabelle. And if I overstay my welcome, just tap me on the head.

reply

[–] BigRich 16 years ago

What I wrote to the other person was out of context. What I meant by that person obviously didn't see the movie, I was trying to say that the other person must not have seen any part of the movie and is like most people on IMDb that shouts, "body double" or "Fake", without even seeing a scene from the movie. I tuned in when she was on the beach and swimming in the water. I watched about 20 minutes of it and then flipped back and forth until close to the end of the movie.

If what you're talking about was a love scene, then I totally understand where a body double would be used, however, the non-sexual scenes on the beach - that was her. I didn't get a chance to evaluate breast sizes.

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

reply

[–] pike100 16 years ago

My bad, Big - I didn't know that you had only seen a portion of the movie, nor did I realize that your Comment was actually directed to another Poster whom you felt probably had not seen any of the movie.

Colonel Angus: Well thank you Miss Anabelle. And if I overstay my welcome, just tap me on the head.

reply

[–] sir_fartsalot 16 years ago

Not everybody in every part of the world shares America's prudish opinion on nudity. European countries have been making films with nudity and minors for decades.

reply

[–] xenophile2002 16 years ago

And they have less teen pregnancy than we do.

_____
http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
The subject comes up often enough.

reply

[–] meldrone 16 years ago

On the other hand, we have less intelligence. Just read that
cityslicker guy's posts.

reply

[–] lacedemonians 16 years ago

European men are becoming thoroughly emasculated. European women no longer have children fast enough to sustain the population. European culture no longer has the martial will to defend itself versus hostile cultures (i.e. Islam). Hence, European societies are going extinct.

Illegitimus!

reply

[–] jklein8787 16 years ago

I was more offended that the monkey was jerking it.

reply

[–] lazarillo 16 years ago

Why do so many people on this site worry so much about crap like this? It was 25 years ago, for christsake. So she was 17 years and 8 months old--at that time I, myself, was only about 11 years and 8 months old. Like every other frickin' guy my age in America I have fond memories of Phoebe Cates in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" and "Private School" when I imagine she was only slightly over eighteen, and she looked pretty much the same as she does in this movie. (And these adolescent memories have never personally compelled me to run down down to the local high school, foaming at the mouth). Why worry about this kind of nonsense? Are we protecting children today by obsessing about the age of every damn actress who ever did a nude scene in every damn movie however many years ago? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to get up early in the morning and see what your own undeage daughter is wearing (i.e. not wearing) to school everyday? God knows, if you happen to have a 17-year-and-8-month old daughter at home, you probably have a LOT bigger things to worry about than that she's going to appear nude in a lame rip-off of "The Blue Lagoon".

reply

[–] carthur27 11 years ago

"And they have less teen pregnancy than we do."

It's a statistical fact that's due to our minority population. Also, over 70% of the black mothers in the U.S. give birth out of wedlock. It's about 50% for Hispanics.

reply

[–] sweiland75 16 years ago

This is a Canadian production. Canada is not a European country.

http://www.savemoonlight.com

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sweiland75 15 years ago

It might as well be, given how liberal we generally are.

http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/ You can help change the world.

reply

[–] burroughs1111 16 years ago

These parents, (mostly middle/ upper class housewives with too much time on their hands.) who object to nudity or sex of any type on film will most likely allow their ten year-old child to watch a gory horror movie like "Saw" and not think twice.

reply

[–] IrishLass240 16 years ago

If you find this shocking, Brooke Shields was either ten or twelve in "Pretty Baby". She was naked and played the daughter of a prostitute who sold her virginity to the highest bidder.

Phoebe was almost a woman by comparison in this movie. She obviously has always been very comfortable with her physical form. That is particularly obvious in her scene in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High". I understand that many high school boys at that time went to sleep at night with her image edged in their minds! I personally was an attractive young girl in high school, as many of us were, but would never in a million, billion years have ever considered displaying myself like that. I know the male viewing audience at that time appreciated her "confidence", but I'll never understand it.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Falconeer 15 years ago

What difference does it make if someone not quite 18 does some nudity in a film? I'm sure ol' Phoebe wasn't emotionally scarred by showing a little skin in some silly teen flick. I bet that monkey was the one who really suffered! will someone please tell me what is so filthy and shameful about the human body that people feel it needs to be hidden away like some dirty secret? you know, most girls that age would love to be portrayed as symbols of beauty, and to be adored all over the world. Having pride in one's body is healthy, at any age...

reply

[–] Linda1973 15 years ago

It's quite possible that Phoebe WAS 18 when she did the nude scenes.

One has to remember that movies are most often filmed out of sequence for practicality during the production, and reshoots and pickup shots are often done after principal photography. Principal photography may have been March of 81 to May of 81, and there could have been reshoots or pickup shots after that, when she was 18....who knows? So, it is quite possible that all of the nude scenes were shot after she turned 18 since she was only a couple months shy.

If not, her parents would have had to give permission, and I'm sure they didn't force her into anything, so it's really not our business. None of her shots were in a sexual aspect, so I see nothing wrong with it, myself.

reply

[–] AlyAJfan 15 years ago

Linda1973, did you bother reading the FIRST post of this thread where everything was explained, or did you just post your opinion without doing any real research?

Does it matter that Cates herself said she was 17 when she filmed her nude scenes? Or does that small fact get in the way of you actually making sense?

reply

[–] Linda1973 15 years ago

AlyAJfan, did you work hard to become an A$$HOLE or did it come naturally?

What's your problem? I made a post, which is anyone's right to do. It was a simple alternate possible reasoning, nothing that I stated was a fact of the film.

The FIRST post was asking questions, or did you not read it?

I didn't realize you were the Phoebe Cates Encyclopedia. Forgive me.

God, what an a$$hole.

reply

[–] AlyAJfan 15 years ago

and it's my right to reply and my simple alternate possible reasoning that you now know how stupid you seem by stating an opinion that has no basis in fact, especially after those facts were stated, but you simply couldn't be bothered to read.

I'd rather be an a$$hole than a dumbass.

reply

[–] Linda1973 15 years ago

Listen, jerk, you started this...why the attitude?

What was your reasoning for attacking me? The original poster stated stuff that is on IMDB, which anyone can post. The original post NEVER mentioned Phoebe's quotes. I was stating an alternative that is widely known to the public of how films are often shot out of sequence or pick-up shots are later done, that was it. I never said anywhere that this was the actual case. So what is your problem?

Go back to watching your little teeny bopper shows. Miley misses you. Are you a little girl, or am I going to one day see you on "To Catch a Predator"?

reply

[–] jdwebb2691 15 years ago

Linda, are you in another argument? I can't let you out of my sight! LOL!

I read the string, and trust me, you did nothing wrong. Not sure what's wrong with that other person, but ignore it, you're good! :)

Stay out of trouble!

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] luvmachine 14 years ago

It was the end of the Jimmy carter era. Regulations in every industry were so lax, particularly Hollywood. Sex was the only thing to keep people's minds off the ineptitude.

"Remember when I promised to kill you last?"

reply

[–] aRealCoolGuy 13 years ago

Child pornography is designated as a minor engaged in "sexually explicit conduct". Nudity is not sexually explicit conduct... it just means you're not wearing clothes... I see naked little kids running around at the public beach every week... should I call the police and have their parents arrested... c'mon... Despite the fact that some people may associate nudity with sex; they are two completely different things... (which, by the way is the reason there is a body-double in some scenes; those particular scenes were decided to be sexually-oriented instead of just plain naked). There was another actress who famously was nude in a film around the age of 15 but I can't think of the actress or film off the top of my head..

reply

[–] la1-1 13 years ago

Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby (1978)played a working child prostitute she was 13. So after that a shower in Paradise would have been easy.

"This is the worst kind of discrimination! The kind against me!"

reply

[–] aRealCoolGuy 13 years ago

Yep! It was Brooke Shields! Thanks for chiming in... I have never seen the film but had heard about it...

___________________
"That's pretty dangerous building a road in the middle of the street..."

reply

[–] la1-1 13 years ago

I checked and she was 12. I have it on DVD. Although well made it's hard to sit threw. The creep factor is too high. You keep hoping for a cholera outbreak or Katrina like flood too take them out.

"This is the worst kind of discrimination! The kind against me!"

reply

[–] gspinoza 13 years ago

If her parents agreed, there's nothing illegal.

reply