My oh my. Some "parents group" is complaining to NBC-TV about the upcoming "The Playboy Club" TV show and it hasn't even starting taping yet. As if the network could even show any true nudity?
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/162129-parents-group-flags-nbc-show-for-nudity-clause
As if NBC not showing true nudity will stop kids from seeing it? It's not like NBC, CBS, or ABC can show nipple, butt, or bush. Other shows have shown healthy portions of boobs in the past couple of years. This new NBC show doesn't figure to be any different.
The next thing you know these type of "groups" will be complaining about the retailers showing babes modeling bras and panties in newspaper ads.
At least most of the boys in the 12 - 17 age range (from the time they start to notice girls and want to see all they can see) can often see almost as much on a regular basis when the girls in school wear the low necklines (even though most wear a bra) and some butt crack when they squat or sit down. They don't need to wait on NBC.
I wonder how many of these complaining parents are moms who enjoy Sex & The City, especially the HBO version and the movies in which there actually is some nudity from the main characters.
Showing posts with label nudity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nudity. Show all posts
Friday, May 20, 2011
Monday, October 25, 2010
Can't movies keep it real?
It’s bad enough that there seems to be less actual nudity in mainstream movies these days. However, it is time to point out how the movie companies taking steps to practically avoid nudity has an impact on how believable the film is.
I saw another example over the weekend when I went to see “Social Networking”. (I’m not going to spoil anything about the plot.) There is one scene in which one of the key male characters has slept with and spent the night with a college babe, which starts with the 2 of them in her bed in the early morning.
The babe has a sweat shirt on, revealing a bra strap in one shot, and has what I call full panties on. (The kind that are more like short shorts.) The dialogue reveals to the audience that the babe slept with the guy, but doesn’t remember having done so until he explains the situation.
Sorry, but if we are supposed to believe the events the male character described, then why on earth would the babe be wearing a sweat shirt and full panties? If the babe really had blacked out, wouldn’t she remember enough to know why she would have put on a sweat shirt, let alone bra and full panties? Even the panties she has on are not even close to believable. As a total creep spending time on school campuses over the years and seeing plenty of panties (and whatever else is or isn’t worn) that college babes wear, you can’t convince me that a babe of her caliber would wear anything more than a thong or much more revealing panties than the babe in the movie was wearing. If she really wore that type of underwear, she wouldn’t have been in that situation to sleep with the male in the first place.
In the next part of the scene, the babe is supposedly continuing the conversation and walking toward the shower, seen topless from behind. We do get to briefly see the side of a boob, but no nipple. However, in that shot, we don’t get to see her face (not that I was looking at the face!). Thus, it could very well have been a body double so that the actress playing the college babe didn’t have to show even the slightest boobie.
Some of you probably think I’m being a total creep in commenting about this. But whether you dig the nudity (when there is some) or not, my point is that it made the film less believable. That scene was NOT how that babe should have been presented. She should have been at the very least topless if not totally nude.
Think about it. It’s not like the guy who slept with her would make sure she has underwear on, let alone a sweatshirt over a bra, when she fell asleep in his arms after supposedly having sex. Or, if the guy did, it goes against his character in the movie.
There is a separate scene with a drug bust, and they show a powder drug being taken off of another babe’s stomach. For some reason, she is still wearing a bra. Like we are supposed to believe she wouldn’t be topless if not completely naked by that time? Worse yet, one of the male police officers in the raid instructs her to “Cover up!” while she throws a shirt on over her bra. Us movie viewers are intelligent enough to know that she already was “covered” and that a police officer would only react like that if the babe was topless.
This was really because the film maker didn’t want the nudity, and I know that. To me, it tells me the film maker wasn’t interested in making the movie plot believable, and Social Networking is supposedly based on a true story. If they couldn’t get one scene to establish one of the primary characters right, then how do we know how thorough the other scenes are?
In a way, this is even worse than TV shows and some movie scenes where the wife is in bed with her husband, yet very openly keeps the sheets up over her boobies as if he can’t see them. Those scenes detract from the story’s credibility as well, but even a guy like me understands that they can’t show the good stuff on TV shows.
I can understand that some women oppose nudity in the movies when it has little or nothing to do with the plot, even though most men enjoy it. Yet, in Social Networking, those are two separate scenes in which nudity was actually necessary to the scenes, and it was covered up. True, this was especially disappointing to me because I love seeing college aged babes naked as much if not more than any other age group. But this movie is a lot about college students, and this form of censoring or editing made it less realistic.
Come on, guys. We deserve better for what it costs to see a movie these days. Or at least “real”.
I saw another example over the weekend when I went to see “Social Networking”. (I’m not going to spoil anything about the plot.) There is one scene in which one of the key male characters has slept with and spent the night with a college babe, which starts with the 2 of them in her bed in the early morning.
The babe has a sweat shirt on, revealing a bra strap in one shot, and has what I call full panties on. (The kind that are more like short shorts.) The dialogue reveals to the audience that the babe slept with the guy, but doesn’t remember having done so until he explains the situation.
Sorry, but if we are supposed to believe the events the male character described, then why on earth would the babe be wearing a sweat shirt and full panties? If the babe really had blacked out, wouldn’t she remember enough to know why she would have put on a sweat shirt, let alone bra and full panties? Even the panties she has on are not even close to believable. As a total creep spending time on school campuses over the years and seeing plenty of panties (and whatever else is or isn’t worn) that college babes wear, you can’t convince me that a babe of her caliber would wear anything more than a thong or much more revealing panties than the babe in the movie was wearing. If she really wore that type of underwear, she wouldn’t have been in that situation to sleep with the male in the first place.
In the next part of the scene, the babe is supposedly continuing the conversation and walking toward the shower, seen topless from behind. We do get to briefly see the side of a boob, but no nipple. However, in that shot, we don’t get to see her face (not that I was looking at the face!). Thus, it could very well have been a body double so that the actress playing the college babe didn’t have to show even the slightest boobie.
Some of you probably think I’m being a total creep in commenting about this. But whether you dig the nudity (when there is some) or not, my point is that it made the film less believable. That scene was NOT how that babe should have been presented. She should have been at the very least topless if not totally nude.
Think about it. It’s not like the guy who slept with her would make sure she has underwear on, let alone a sweatshirt over a bra, when she fell asleep in his arms after supposedly having sex. Or, if the guy did, it goes against his character in the movie.
There is a separate scene with a drug bust, and they show a powder drug being taken off of another babe’s stomach. For some reason, she is still wearing a bra. Like we are supposed to believe she wouldn’t be topless if not completely naked by that time? Worse yet, one of the male police officers in the raid instructs her to “Cover up!” while she throws a shirt on over her bra. Us movie viewers are intelligent enough to know that she already was “covered” and that a police officer would only react like that if the babe was topless.
This was really because the film maker didn’t want the nudity, and I know that. To me, it tells me the film maker wasn’t interested in making the movie plot believable, and Social Networking is supposedly based on a true story. If they couldn’t get one scene to establish one of the primary characters right, then how do we know how thorough the other scenes are?
In a way, this is even worse than TV shows and some movie scenes where the wife is in bed with her husband, yet very openly keeps the sheets up over her boobies as if he can’t see them. Those scenes detract from the story’s credibility as well, but even a guy like me understands that they can’t show the good stuff on TV shows.
I can understand that some women oppose nudity in the movies when it has little or nothing to do with the plot, even though most men enjoy it. Yet, in Social Networking, those are two separate scenes in which nudity was actually necessary to the scenes, and it was covered up. True, this was especially disappointing to me because I love seeing college aged babes naked as much if not more than any other age group. But this movie is a lot about college students, and this form of censoring or editing made it less realistic.
Come on, guys. We deserve better for what it costs to see a movie these days. Or at least “real”.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Bottoms up in Palm Beach
Steve of SC writes:
"I enjoyed your story about your experience at that bar in Baltimore a few days back. It's always great when something like that happens in a bar or club.
But it is just as much fun if the (babe) is showing herself on purpose. I just got back from spending a few days in Palm Beach Florida. The other night I was in a bar (near the Breakers) after midnight. A cute babe came in by herself and seemed to know several of the people there. She had a couple of drinks and then started dancing, not paying a whole lot of attention to her jeans slipping down over her thong.
After another drink, a couple of the guys cheered for her, and then she got up, stood up on a chair, and pulled her jeans down below her rear end. She then pulled her thong down about half way in the back. Unfortunately, she stopped short of going the entire way down, but it was still a good view for all the guys as it was. Then she turned around and pulled the front of her panties down slightly, but not enough to see any (of the vagina).
Next, she pulled up her thong, pulled up her jeans, and lifted her top. She was wearing a very low cut bra. She pulled the bra out, but since she was on a chair none of us could see nipple. She stopped there, and let her t-shirt fall back over her bra. Then she sat back down.
That was quite a show for a bar. It was not a strip club by any means. After a few more minutes it became evident she wasn't going to do anymore. I went over and asked one of the guys at the bar if they had ever seen anything like that. The guy told me "She's in here all the time and always does that." He told me that he has heard she also does that at another bar nearby.
Why not go to bars and clubs to see naked chicks?"
Cool story, Steve. Sounds like you had a fun time in Palm Beach! And here I thought it was older women that frequented that area.
Anyway, while you and I have both enjoyed incidents with babes in a bar of late, it does not compare to what you can see if you are fortunate enough to be able to spy on babes from home or a safe location with binoculars. Seeing a flashing or an accident in a bar, as we recently have, is limited opportunity. While it is true you might have to wait a couple hours to see a babe at home, you might get a longer look as she comes out of the shower and towels off, changes clothes, or even walks around topless, bottomless, or completely naked.
That doesn't even count the number of times I have seen roommates or babes that have friends or relatives staying with them and you see multiple babes naked over the course of an evening or weekend.
In addition, seeing what we both saw in bars or clubs is a stroke of luck. Still enjoyable, but I'll take spying on countless hundreds of babes over the years any time vs. going to bars or clubs specifically to see nudity. And that includes butt crack from babes seated wearing low rise jeans.
Readers and listeners of "Total Creep - A Guy's Guide" are welcome to e-mail me with questions and experiences at ic.london at live.com.
www.TotalCreep.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)