I am shocked that this move got a PG-13. The full frontal nudity is not a brief shot but is shown about 3 the times in a row and one shot lasting for about 10 seconds. Most PG-13 movies that show nudity only show a brief shot. And this was 1991. Don't get me wrong I have no problem with nudity but Doc Hollywood I think is a fun smart "FAMILY" movie.
shareThe same thing happened with Critters 2. Suddenly, BLAM... bare breasts in a PG-13 movie.
shareWatch the tv edit she's in the water then blam a second later she says "you can blink now"
shareJEyler1183 has a point. Back then they were trying to figure out the ratings system. Beatle Juice and Big both drop the "F" bomb. And they are PG movies. If you go to the Big bored there's a thread about why an "F" bomb was dropped in a PG movie:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094737/board/nest/154464045?ref_=tt_bd_3
Critters 2 may be the hardest PG-13 ever.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
The MPAA have no problem with topless female nudity if it's not in a sexual context (and in this movie it's not.) Compared to male nudity, where a PG-13 movie can show a male completely nude with genitals obscured, or a R movie that can show literally every inch of the male body, it's in line with their precedent.
shareI think all nude scenes are unnecessary - and the majority are meant to titillate - not that I have a problem with that.
shareIt wasn't in the movie to lead to a sex scene. That reason if you want R it would go in also any National Geographic movie to.
share