MovieChat Forums > A Room with a View (1986) Discussion > Shouldn't we be warned about the massive...

Shouldn't we be warned about the massive nudity?

posted 20 years ago by contact-258
149 replies | jump to latest

This is a joke that it's not rated. We assumed that this would be equilavent to a G-rated movie as no one bothered to rate this. We thought it would perfectly acceptable for children to watch. WRONG! What a shock. Hello? Is it perfectly all right to have massive nudity if it's an "art film"? What a joke. Is it not rated because of snobbish elitism, which considers nudity in art films as somehow different from other nudity?

[–] Sly-Norton 13 years ago

Lisa needs braces!

[–] contact-258 13 years ago

I'm still traumatized almost seven years later after seeing this film. I've been in and out of therapy for years now trying to get over the shock of what I saw. Anybody got the name of a good therapist?

[–] Hewso 13 years ago

The usual therapy for someone with an irrational fear of something is to expose them to more of it a safe setting. So, you can cure your trauma by seeing lots of films with increasing amounts of male nudity. ;-)

[–] lantzn 9 years ago

You only way for you to be safe is if someone committed worldwide penocide.

[–] SnoozeAlarm 13 years ago

>>> massive nudity

I like your choice of words. My nudity is also massive, BTW.

Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!Spoilers!

[–] Miss_Sui_Generis 12 years ago

HAHAHA!!! All the awards to you!
It's as I said before-none of the actors was very large. Therefore it wasn't massive nudity. Though I wouldn't have minded.

Send lawyers,guns and money/The *beep* has hit the fan

[–] SnoozeAlarm 12 years ago

>>> none of the actors was very large

Whenever I see something like this, I always wonder, how shall I put this delicately, if one can determine from "relaxed" moments, the massivity of the area in question "when it counts"?

And my hearty compliments to you for your subject/verb agreement in the 3rd person singular indefinite pronoun. Very rare. Kudos!

I cried because I had no shoes until I met a man with no sole. ~ Ancient Disco Proverb

[–] harveythepooka 12 years ago

This is one of my all time favorite movies. I have seen it I don't know how many times and the 1st time I couldn't have been older than 6 or 7. I never thought there was anything weird or gratuitous about it.

I don't think the rating has anything to do with snobbish elitism. It's probably because of the amount of nudity it would have gotten an R or even NC-17 rating, if they had that at the time. So they chose to release it unrated. But the nudity is so innocent and not at all offensive or sexual that I don't understand why it could honestly bother people.

[–] mark-1589 12 years ago

To the OP: Perhaps you should watch this film again, because it is about Victorian repression of sexuality and passion, which, if you are any guide, remains a problem even a century later. In any case, I think you are really blowing this out of proportion - skinning dipping is simply bathing without a suit, something all boys do given the opportunity. It is NOT sexual.

[–] ShannonTriumphant 12 years ago

"Massive nudity"...really? Three guys have a swim and run around so far from the camera you get ONE glimpse of a (cover your eyes), penis (at least I think it was one! I'd hardly call that "massive"!

And excuse me for totally missing your equating nudity with uh..."snobbish elitism"! Then, I guess that any woman who videotapes the birth of her child (quite a gnarly and often upsetting sight!) is automatically either a "snob", an "elitist" or both? Because I fail to see any "socially redeeming value" in filming something like that!

But then, if someone wants to watch herself basically naked, squeezing out a baby head, to the tune of screaming, hollering, probably swearing, with lots of blood and other weird fluids...it's her right to do so! If anyone ELSE wants to watch, that's their CHOICE, just as it is people's choice to avert their eyes when the snobby, elitist naked guys from 1906 frolic in a pool on a hot day!

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

[–] forbidden10 12 years ago

I finish 2012 reading one of the most idiotic things I ever did (by the original poster).

Happy New Year! =)

[–] jlprizm86 11 years ago

I don't understand your point regarding the nudity. Don't your children know what all human beings look like? Why is this offensive to you? It's not like there was a sex scene which would be more uncomfortable. And not to make an even more obvious point but if your children want to see nudity they have all kinds of places that they will see it and it probably won't be done as tastefully and will be done in a much cruder manner. These kind of comments are completely ridiculous.

[–] rascal67 10 years ago

Due to the hypocritical double standards and prudish attitudes of the MPAA, the film didn't get subjected to a rating, for fear of an 'R' most likely. Therefore released as 'Unrated', which is legal in the States. Most other countries, UK, Australia, New Zealand, the film was appropriately awarded a PG rating.

The film could have easily gotten by with a PG13 in the US, due to the skinny dipping scene and 'naturalistic nudity', which is totally in context with the film's humor, narrative and setting. If any parent that gets offended by this scene, if their children witnessed it, need a reality check.

[–] blindvias-071407 10 years ago

Why would children sit through such a film? Is it intended for children? NO, it isn't.

But frankly, after watching this movie several times over the years, the nudity does not readily come to mind, and so I'm surprised to find a post such as this.