Like if someone wanted to make a movie about the destruction of the Minoan civilization by the eruption of Santorini. In the Minoan civilization, women walked around with dresses that exposed their breasts
And if you tried using Godiva hair or convenient hand placement after a while it would look ridiculous. So if someone made a movie about this and had the actresses wear the dresses but there wasn't any sexual content in the film should it still be rated R because of that.
@465loveyou5577 You should REALLY do some research on the MPAA. They are a HIGHLY corrupt organization. Those ratings, Its been shown that they are purposefully stricter with indie films and non big studio films than they are with the major studios. Why, Well probably because its FUNDED BY THE STUDIOS. Furthermore, the ratings are EXTREMELY arbitrary, "he independent film Saints and Soldiers, which contains no nudity, almost no sex (although, there is a scene in which a German soldier is about to rape a French woman), very little profanity, and a minimum of violence, was said to have been rated R for a single clip where a main character is shot and killed, and required modification of just that one scene to receive a PG-13 rating." en.wikipedia.org/.../Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system Now take a look at Saving Private Ryan, which by all rights SHOULD be NC-17 what is it, R. Yep. The MPAA is fucked the hell up.
Anyway, in my opinion the US is far too prudish about nudity. In your context, the breasts are not sexual at all, and should at best be PG13. R is ridiculous - but mothers will freak out if their perfect little angels see a naked tit on the big screen!
no, not at all. the body is something natural and the only reason why it's so sexualized is because we make a taboo out of it from the beginning. Do you think in the Minoan civilization guys were perving on boobs all the time? No, it was considered something completely natural and nobody gave a shit.
By making it a taboo you achieve the opposite of what you want. You don't protect kids by doing it.
It's mind-boggling how much nudity is a problem in the US. And 41% saying yes... wow
Yes I think it should be rated R. kids can still go see a rated R movie as long as they are accompanied by an adult. Most of the time theaters do not even check anyway. Rating a movie R is not a bad thing it's just a rating.
Ratings are idiotic in the first place. However, nudity is nudity.
No, I don't. I've got another question for you though, related to this one- do you feel that a movie should be banned if it had sexual content which would now be deemed illegal for the sake of historical accuracy? For instance, if some decided to make a film adaptation of Romeo and Juliet which stuck to the source material, explicitly clarifying Juliet's age of 13yrs old and using an age-appropriate actress (a 9yr old girl, since the average 13yr old girl back then would have had the same level of sexual development as the average 9yr old girl today- i. e, NONE) to play the role, should that person be allowed, or should it be banned because of that taboo element? Or if someone wanted to produce a film about Genghis Khan which featured him engaging in his self-proclaimed favorite pastime of raping all the wives and daughters of his defeated enemies, dozens at a time every single night, should that person be allowed to produce that film, or should it be banned because of the horrific actions portrayed?