If Pretty baby or a movie like this was made today and the film maker said we are going to use a 12 year old actress and she will be nude how would that be today? IN 2009 are we still taboo about nudity or not? Watching pretty baby i have no issues with Brooke being nude and i think it was all done in good taste.
shareNudity from under-18 actresses is actually *more* taboo in 2009 than it was back in the late 1970's, especially in the USA. Things seemed to change around the mid-1980's.
I think a movie like Pretty Baby could be made today, but it would probably have to be done in a country like France.
You could make it, but you might not be able to get it distributed. Just ask Adrian Lyne.
- Aging is a physical problem, and physical problems are amenable to engineering solutions.
They could make it they would probably use an older actress instead of an actually 11 or 12 year old girl.
shareyea i am sure your right i mean in todays world if an film maker tryed to get a 12 year old to do nudity on a movie everyone would call him or her a child molester or child porn or something even though it would just be a movie. its like people are up tight about that kind of thing. I do see lot of movies made like in other countries or like movings you see on the IFC channel that do show kids nude as they get out of a bathtub or skinny dipping with friends kind of thing and its like in some places of the world you see beaches full of mom and dad and kids all running around nude and no one cares you know lol. The pervs of the world are going to get there fix from anything and those people need to be locked up for sure, but as a movie buff i like all kinds of movies and its like a movie like Pretty baby where Brooke is nude dont bother me one bit.
shareWell now I have to admit there is a big difference between a movie scene of some kids playing in the bath tub or a shot of some cute nekkid 4 year olds playing on the beach with there parents and what Brooke was doing in this movie.
I also watch the IFC channel every once in while to catch some of my favorite non mainstream or foreign movies. While they do touch on controversial subjects and you do see some nudity of people of all ages I have yet to come across a scene featuring a completely nude little girl (and when I say little girl I'm not referring to 16 and 17 year old actresses) smiling, posing and moving seductively for older men the way it was done in Pretty Baby. Teenagers and other young adults yes but never a little girl or boy.
yea the IFC channel is not afraid to show a guys penis or girls front side but your right most of time they are all 16 and up but i have seen 1 movie not sure the name where they showed some young boys skinny dipping in a lake and when they got out you could see there penis clear. I am not all about nudity but i just feel in movies if a film maker feels they need to have nudity in a movie either it be a 20 some year old 40 some year old or a teenager or kid then as long as its tasteful and not dirty then i am ok with it. If its done in a porn way then yea that is wrong. but pretty baby to me was not porn i felt it was done in a good way.
shareIf a director would attempt to do what Louis Malle did, he would be banned from the directors guild, he would be labeled as a child molester and attacked to death on FOX News.
---
When all of your wishes are granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed.
governess98: Well now I have to admit there is a big difference...
AFC to PUA. That's the dream.share
You obviously didn't see 'Tomboy'!
shareThe way I see it is that IRL teen girls are already masturbating at the age of 12 most likely. So really it's not that shocking to me that at a young age of 12 or 13 a girl would begin to explore her own body. It's messed up that she's a child prostitute. But I guess I just don't care that much about her being naked in it because it was done for the sake of art. The movie was about a child prostitute. So it's not surprising that in the late 70's people let it slip. Sure they could have and probably should have used a older actress. But I don't know, it's over and done now. I don't think we should not watch a movie because of one or two scenes that we find uncomfortable or don't mesh with our modern sensibilities. Movies should be viewed through the historical lens of the time that they were made in. Such as Song of The south by disney. I believe that it should be released because it was made in a different time and it should be uncensored and exactly the way it was created. It's racist as hell, but it was made a long time ago when racism was more common in America. It should be viewed as a film that is clearly not right by our modern standards. It'd like like taking the racism out of the novel Huckleberry Finn or To Kill A Mockingbird it would be a revision and distortion of history, and it should not be change just because today it's considered racist. It was just as racist back then, but it should remain that way because it's important to show our history and learn from it.
The internet, where religions come to die.
Yes, but they don't show every foreign movie made there, so that proves nothing. The fact that the many foreign films with scenes of nude children rarely appear on IFC doesn't mean they don't exist.
share" I do see lot of movies made like in other countries or like movings you see on the IFC channel that do show kids nude as they get out of a bathtub or skinny dipping with friends kind of thing and its like in some places of the world you see beaches full of mom and dad and kids all running around nude and no one cares you know lol." That's in other countries not this one in other countries nudity and sex aren't taken as comodities .They aren't attached to the symbol of money they have and aesthetic appeal to the.Which is the way things should be everywhere its the square peg in the round hole.
In this country a nude child in film is looked at as kiddie porn look at the stink they made over;drew bledsoe's kid being filmed nude at the beach.It was silly and so stupid yet this the world we live in.Back then you had the hippie movement with free love and free thinking and expressing yourself one conscious etc.These are new times its almost like we've grown backwards.I feel the real issue that needs to be tackled is not so much showing that type of nudity .As it is educating adults and children show them it's ok to be nude .To except your body clothed or nude we all look the same underneath it all.There is nothing to be afraid or ashamed of ,i digress.
"The pervs of the world are going to get there fix from anything and those people need to be locked up for sure,"..You might as well lock up most of the men in this country HA! the truth is here in america we are overstimulated and over sexed i laugh when i hear people talk about us being conservative.We have a billion dollar a year industry based on sex and nudity .The thing with us is that is the only way we were trained to view sex .No other way sex nudity is a comodity it's all about the money .We are not sophisticated enough like our european neighbors .To just look at a naked body and appreciate it once again that's europe this is amercia .Two different frames of thought and belief when it comes to these topics .People need to be understanding of that when they make remarks about how .People in this country make a big deal out of stuff like this .Understanding needs to be on boths sides not just one ;until the day comes when someone is will to.Except that we should flip it around educate people about excepting nudity and sex as a natural order of things .In our lives your going to have your pervs .
I haven't yet seen this movie i've seen brooke shields in Blue lagoon in school once .The nudity didn't bother me i thought she was cute ,didn't think the movie was all that good either .i watched just to get a grade; i didn't look at it like oh thats brooke shields (boner) it was almost like watching Nat geographic.It wasn't glamorized it wasn't over done it was all natural.I feel all nudity should be that way take the glamour out of it .If i were to change things that would be a good place to start .
In Europe an actor is an artist. In Hollywood, if he isn't working, he's a bum.
"Nudity from under-18 actresses is actually *more* taboo in 2009 than it was back in the late 1970's"
I think that's debatable. Studios today are far more strict about getting age-documentation for an actor involved in a sex scene but for just an under-18 actress appearing nude, I don't think it's gotten more taboo. I didn't see any protests about Thora Birch's & Keira Knightley's topless scenes in American Beauty and The Hole. Both were 16 at the time of filming. American Beauty received moral criticism over its subject matter but that had nothing to do with Thora's character.
I don't know who Thora Birch is, or where she was born, but Keira Knightly is from Britain and at age 16, is considered close to or of age (I can't remember if it's 16 or 17). So, there's a difference right there. If she were born in America, then she'd still be considered a child/underage, and therefore would have had to have a body double do her nude scenes.
EMOTICONS ARE BACK! YAY!
I think the bigger question here is if one owned a copy of the movie, and the actress was fully nude at age 14, would that not be considered having child pornography?
shareThere's a huge difference between child nudity and child pornography. As far as I know, there are no laws against pictuers of naked children in a non-sexual sense. Unfortunately, many people can't tell the difference between the two which causes lots of unnecessary legal situations. As a result, most filmmakers and photographers will shy away from anything related to child nudity, because of people don't understand the difference.
The movie does not SHOW Brooke portraying any sexual acts, though you hear her having sex in another room. So no, owning a this moving is not considered possessing child pornography.
[deleted]
You might well buy the DVD, but some scenes have been heavily cut!
shareI think the bigger question here is if one owned a copy of the movie, and the actress was fully nude at age 14, would that not be considered having child pornography?
You could call a kid dressed in winter gear licking a pole child pornograpgy if you wanted to. The question isn't in the subject, it's how it's portrayed and under which context.
shareYes, good point. Today it is almost dangerous to even OWN something like this let alone produce it.
shareThe movie SNAP DECISION (2001) is about that topic. A roll of pictures is taken, including quite a few by low single-digit aged children, of those children, and... read the IMDB info. And I'll just mention the "sexting" going on with underage kids (producing and distributing child porn according to current U.S. laws).
Regarding making movies vs. re-releasing current ones --- The major U.S. law that relates to filming/distributing films like PRETTY BABY "grandfathers" existing films, so what was OK might not be allowable since then.
BTW, Brooke Shields was not totally nude in PRETTY BABY, used a body double in EVERLASTING LOVE, wore what she called "buppy pads" and used a body double in THE BLUE LAGOON. All of this is from various interviews with the actress, including a Johnny Carson interview where she described the "buppy pads" she wore on her chest, and answered his question about kissing Keith C..
Carson asked her if she had seen the film, and she answered that she could not get in the movie she starred in! It was rated "R", and she was 12 or 13.
She also appeared in JUST YOU AND ME KID with George Burns at roughly the same time as PRETTY BABY, but that movie has never been released on any consumer media, but it does get shown on cable from time to time. I have not seen any information about that movie.
You might be surprised at what she said she did while filming THE BLUE LAGOON in her commentary in the DVD's special features though... or not.
I've seen It's Just You and Me, Kid, but not in a really long time. I think there's ONE scene where she has no clothes, and if I remember correctly, she's hiding behind something, so the audience does not see her nude. If there's more than one scene with her without clothes, I don't remember it. I'm not saying there's not, I'm just saying, I don't remember it. Also, that movie is a comedy, so NOTHING like Pretty Baby. The "relationship" between Burns and Shields was COMPLETELY different. In the movie, I think she was seeking help, and he kind of got stuck in the role of helper. He was a kind of grandfather figure to her.
EMOTICONS ARE BACK! YAY!
Shields was totally nude in two scenes, her bathtub scene and her couch scene. She was not nude in the other films, except for a brief look at her buns in Just You and Me, Kid.
shareSee "To the Devil, a Daughter" and "Bolero", and no, not if the movie was from a major studio.
shareSome pretty smart people in this thread. I like the open-mindedness I see here.
I too agree that there is a tremendous difference between nudity and pornography, and that goes for children too. From what I've heard so far in this board it's clear that PB was not intended to be pornographic and that any and all nudity was done in good and proper context. It's just unfortunate that there seem to be way too many people in this world today who have no clue of the difference and so they are skittish about anything that involves nudity. Further, it's unfortunately that way too many of those skittish about anything that involves nudity are in some sort of legislative power and do indeed move forward with sanctions, indictments and prosecutions against those who they deem perverted just for having even seen an image of a nude child.
So barring that fact I would like to know how anyone would consider it safe to even be in possession of a copy of PB without being in clear violation of some state's or countie's jurisdictional law or sanction. Until I have documental proof by a supreme court that it is safe and legal you won't catch me in possession of a copy of PB, not even as a rental. Someone show me the proof!
[deleted]
I have an avi rip and a couple pictures of the photoshoot Gary Gross made in 1975. One picture of that shoot was reproduced by Richard Prince for use in his exhibition in 1983 if I'm correct. The picture was declaired no child pornography, however it was removed from the exhibition, despite Brooke's loss of the trial, after a warning from the police because Brooke Shields experienced it as embarrassing.
[deleted]
Unless proof by document from a Supreme court of the United States says otherwise, you unfortunately stand a chance of finding yourself under fire of the nation-wide witch hunt that is on for pedophiles and child pornography possessors.I bet he'd be really scared if he actually lived in the United States lol
Without a doubt he would and for good reason. Otherwise who in this world in their right mind would want to put their entire future and liberties at risk?
I'm inviting folks who say they know it's legal to actually put their money where their mouth is.
[deleted]
Why that is a mighty-fine site you've created in tribute to Brooke and PB. No, I think you're in good shape with the contents of the site, your choice of pics and vid clips is tasteful.
But you are right about the traps detectives set up in order to lynch people, and you are also right that it certainly seems these detectives and investigators tend to focus way too much on who is tuning into CP and not nearly enough going after those who are actually taking pictures of naked kids and exploiting them that way. Just last month yet another sting operation wrapped up in Central Florida where 48 people were arrested for possession of CP. 90% of those arrested were found merely in possession of CP, a few of those with only one or two counts, representing only one or two images. The way detectives in the US find out who has what is that they trace Internet activity right down to the IP address at point of destination of an illegal file. But just because an illegal file made its way to a computer at a specific IP address doesn't always the receiver was intentionally searching for that, after all the Internet is wide open to everyone and the incidental link to illegal material could happen to anyone. Problem is that once the file is brought into a browser it gets permanently cached into that computer's hard drive and aside of destroying the hard drive there's no getting rid of it, so everyone with an Internet connection in the US is at equal risk of being targeted by investigators and perhaps wrongfully accused of being a receiver of illegal or banned material. Prosecuters prosecute first and ask questions later. Is that justice?
So since PB falls into the category of something that visually depicts full-frontal nudity of a child and the story of the film is about prostitution and sex you can see why there is question as to what makes PB the exception to all the rules that pertain to what is CP, and you can understand why my question about where the actual documentational proof that any form of CP would be considered legal is in the face of everything else.
So someone in-the-know please show us the proof.
Boy, she's sexy! Have any nudes???
shareWhat makes you think OP would be careless as to post nudes of a pre-teen Brooke or links leading to anything like that anywhere here on IMDB? I think our guy's got more sense than that, mate.
shareWell, he could email them to me, privately.
shareYou wouldn't want that either, as that could be traced right back to you cos it's your registered E-mail.
shareWell, I already saw them on a Garry Gross website. And let me say, "Wow"! Loved them. She was hotter naked when she was 10 years old, than she is now.
shareOriginally posted by cjh8504: Well, I already saw them on a Garry Gross website. And let me say, "Wow"! Loved them. She was hotter naked when she was 10 years old, than she is now.
Well, I'd never do anything with a 10 year old in real life, but man! She was gorgeous at that age.
share[deleted]
You're right. And I do mean it it a semi-pervy way.
share[deleted]
A great engineer name of Dean,
Invented a masturbation machine,
With concaves and convexes,
It pleasured both sexes,
And played with itself in between.
-
What If Rick James had Become the Hulk?
http://tinyurl.com/59hfwy
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Now having her picture all over your house in frames and stuff, that's a little much. I mean, she was hot, but I don't need to see her all over my house. You're clearly obsessed.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I don't TOUCH babies. Or even look at them in person. But, when someone posts nude pictures of Brooke Sheilds, whatever the age, I'm gonna look.
share[deleted]
Before we cut loose with too much brimstone, let's keep something in mind:
Anybody wanting to molest poor little pre-teen Brooke is a bit late. No amount of looking at her pictures, with pureness of heart or seething lust, can hurt the child who no longer exists.
That said, the less perfect strangers tell me about what they masturbate over, the better.
-
What If Rick James had Become the Hulk?
http://tinyurl.com/59hfwy
[deleted]
To say Brooke was cute in PB and leaving it at that would be enough to raise an eyebrow among some folks, mainly cos others who hear a comment such as that question what the person who said it might be thinking and some folks would even go so far as to draw conclusions that the person who said it might be not right upstairs. Though drawing conclusions without knowing any facts or particulars tends usually in itsself to be a wrongful judgement call.
But if a person can walk into a nudist colony and not have any reservations about nudity nor have any excessive 'wow!' reactions to what he or she sees in there then he or she is good to go in that community. Nudity is not about sex, in fact nudist colonies have rather strict rules and protocols concerning community member behaviour.
That said, it should be a movie viewer's Constitutional right to view PB responsibly without fear of legal ramifications or judgementalism on the part of someone else.
[deleted]
What do you mean self righteous???
share[deleted]
There you go. Thanks Taylor.
shareOkay, a show of hands of how many IMDB members in this board actually have Pretty Baby on shelf or in an editing suite at the moment. Just say 'aye.'
share"Nay," if you're asking if I'm taking screen caps of this film for prurient reasons. But as far as tasteful handling of child nudity and sexuality, you don't get any stronger than this.
shareNo, my question was about who actually has a copy of this movie on-shelf within their movie librairies.
shareOh sorry, then "aye." The "editing suite" reference threw me.
shareWhat I need someone to tell me, is where can I get an uncut/uncesored version of this film on DVD in widescreen. Does anyone have a copy they would like to sell me?
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
How did you and Shoshy manage to watch Bastard out of Carolina?
LOL, this movie was in the bargain bin at Walmart.
shareThe Supreme Court ruled some time back that simple nudity and nothing more is not child pornography. For instance, nudist videos featuring nude children playing at the beach or the like are not illegal. It's true that some police and prosecutors either don't know about or ignore this ruling, but it's the law of the land, nevertheless.
shareThe movie has been sold on DVD on sites like Amazon and in big-name stores - I saw it once in the bargain DVD bin at Wal-Mart. None of these business have been targeted for stings by police nor have any of the buyers been arrested for possession of it.
shareIf Pretty Baby was made today, Roman Polanski would want to direct and he would have no problem having a 12 year old girl walk around in the nude.
shareOT, but in response to your remark of Roman Polanski, he might not have problem with it but this day & age the film project wouldn't get much further past the scriptwriting stages.
share[deleted]
And one more very important diference between then and now: At that time i suppose none of her friends or classmates didn't have a chance to watch the movie. If it was done nowdays the next day of its release every kid at school would have seen it and have clips and pictures of her to their cellphones.
shareVery good point. Technology these days has unfortunately opened up way too many opportunities for media targeted to a specific and restricted audience to be placed into the market for free and open distribution and with no regards as to whether that media will fall into the wrong hands. That's why this day & age simply being careful in protecting media that pertains to nude children is never enough. It cannot possibly be anywhere near enough.
While what's already out there cannot be stopped, what is being procreated demands control and a second thought as to whether a nude child will be captured into media for any kind of production.
Also the laws are alot different this day and age than they were then, that's another reason why Pretty baby or any production like it could not go into production today.
[deleted]
In an earlier reply I mentioned a Johnny Carson interview with Brooke Shields about PRETTY BABY, and he asked if she had seen the movie.
She answered that she couldn't get in the movie to watch the movie she starred in! It was "R", and she was 12 or 13...
And as far as tech goes, and this was years ago, Alyssa Milano and her mother Lynn(?) started up a company/business to get her images (nudes, etc.) off the internet after her younger brother used the internet and got a few eyefulls of his sister from things like EMBRACE OF THE VAMPIRE, BIKINI magazine, and several other sources. They also offered their service to other clients, including her co-stars on CHARMED (at the time). In a program about her and the business, she seemed to have been initially motivated by embarassment, and then realized how many people were making money using her images without paying anything.
It'd never happen in a million years. No reason to either, you can't have someone sitting in the bath without showing their chest? You can't have someone thrown across the room without a shot of their bare ass? It's ridiculous, honestly.
___
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx2zLgdkJpk
Brooke Shield was an eleven year old with pecks. Her nudity was in good taste, and the only people who can get turned on by her nudity are disturbed pedophiles. I saw no issue with the nude scene.
You love me more than sunny summer days.
There was no nude scene, she was photographed showing the upper back. She was acuaully wearing a swimsuit in the scene. There is no scene where she is shown having sex and there is no shot of her nude front. The subject matter is problematical, not the photography which is very discreet.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TSopped said so.
Have you ever actually seen this movie? Brooke is shown naked a number of times in the film, including frontal shots of her sitting up in the bath as well as lying on her side while being photographed. She is quite topless and her nipples are clearly seen.
shareYes I've seen the film. In the 70's when it was released it played at a movie theatre I was working in. I saw it about half a dozen times. I thought it was an interesting film rather than a good one.
The scene in the bath was shot showing her holding a towel over her front, the camera then moves around herand we see her back. The Madame then steps forward and yanks the towel away, we then get a close up of her face as she smiles at her customer. That was how they did it. I watched the film very carefully at the time because I was aware of Brooke Shields age when the film was shot. There was actually no frontal shots of any of the actresses in the film.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so.
Blatantly untrue. You were not there, and your post is just an apologists excuse for pedophilia and child pornography.
We have eyes.
Malle, and many others should have been arrested, ESPECIALLY Teri Shields. She was the biggest madam/pimp in the whole mess.
Then I suggest you use those eyes for something else than seeing things that are not there. Were you disappointed that there was no real nudity in the film?
You certainly sound disappointed.
_____________
I am the Queen of Snark, TStopped said so. And I have groupies, Atomic Girl said so.
Had you been paying close enough attention, you would have seen her bare pubes when she rose up out of the water and stood up right before she grabbed the towel. It was there, deny all you like. Clips of this scene clearly showing her pubic area are on the web as well as still photos. Her pubic cleft is plainly visible. You also ignore the scene where she is lying lengthwise on a couch being photographed by the artist, with her pubic cleft visible once again.
share[deleted]