So I'm too lazy to look up another site and what I already read was inconclusive. My question is, is there going to be Hailee Steinfeld nudity and how much? This subject I imagine sparks some controversy.
shareI probably won't see this in theatres, but if I do, I really hope you are not sitting next to me. Grow up. There are much better (and less criminal) things you could be thinking about.
shareNudity would make the film more authentic and give it an edge. Sixteen year old breasts look the same as eighteen year old breasts for the most part. Keira Knightley was fifteen when she went topless in a movie and it didn't ruin her career. If it's in theatres it's not illegal, and the only ruining will be our fun if it's denied.
Singnatures are as stupid as tattoos.
You just want to ogle a naked little girl. Perv. It's weird, but a bit understandable to wonder this to yourself. But to come to a public forum to specifically ask "huh huh, do we get to see her naked, huh huh" just brings images of a drooling perverted sex predator that should be locked up due to an egregious lack of self-control. I'll bet that freak Castro in Ohio focused on the exact same things when a movie with a young girl came out. "Oh God!! I hope I get to see her naked!" Seek help, and if you are keeping children in your basement, for God's sake let them go and turn yourself in.
Nudity would make the film more authentic
Brooke Shields was 13 when she portrayed a 12 year old girl being raised in a bordello and selling her virginity. That was in 1978. It was integral to the story and well done and everyone went to great pains to make sure that she was not burdened or taxed or mistreated.
In Romeo and Juliet the love affair is passionate, dysfunctional, all consuming, forbidden, and burns hot. Some level of nudity wouldn't be untoward and could probably be done in a non-gratuitous way that would serve the story.
It'll be interesting to see how they approach it.
For the record, I'm a grandmother of three and don't much like children and avoid them when I can. So, save yourself the trouble of calling me a perv - my perversions run to adults and power exchange games.
Please understand I'm not against nudity in film. At times it is appropriate and can certainly be artfully done. My objection was with the OP's approach to the subject. Had he not been a complete pervert obsessed with only the sexual aspects of such a move, I wouldn't have even bothered posting. But when somebody says 'will there be nudity, and how much' you know he cares nothing for art, and is simply a sex-obsessed deviant.
shareIt's what the story was meant to be. With all the blood, gore, war, torture, Passionate love and hate.
You cant walk up to the Venus Di Milo and put your grandmothers bath robe on it, because it offends you. Just don't look! R & J was a somewhat realistic story of life at that time.
So if you don't want to see real live, watch the Disney channel.
If I remember correctly they were 13 and 16. A not unheard of or uncommon, marring age at the time.
Yea so what!
24X
Shakespeare staged none of this with nude actors. There is no despoiling scene in the play. And had there been, the dramatic suspension would have been broken--Juliet, like all female characters who took the stage at the Globe, was played by a male. Put your eyes and your d!@k away.
shareYou don't have to explain yourself. I understood why that posters comment gained your response. Anyone with half a brain would have understood where you were coming from when you posted your reply. First of all the movie is rated PG so it would be unlikely that there would be any frontal nudity. Had it been rated R it would have been a valid question.
shareYou are yet another brainwashed and ignorant American that doesn't know the elementary things. 16 year-old is not a little girl (no matter how any authority tries to convince you of that). 16 year-old is a grown-up fully sexually developed woman who attracts attention of anyone who is sexually attracted to women. And there is nothing perverse in that.
shareBut to come to a public forum to specifically ask "huh huh, do we get to see her naked, huh huh"
Please click on "reply" at the post you're responding to. Thanks.share
Well said!
shareNudity from the lead male role would make the film more authentic and give it an edge too, but you're most likely one of those guys that freaks out when a guy goes shirtless in a movie, huh? It's scary when you become the thing you hate. Pedophile or homosexual, whichever one, if not both, I'd bet my farm if I had one.
"Well, 4 out of 5 doctors agree that I am actually insane." - Hayley Stark
There are several other board comments on the same subject. " what will this have to offer but the same bs"
shareIt seems two people get my point and two jump to conclusions and freak out. I am not homophobic or a pedophile, it seems you two are the ones who seem to have a suspicious soft point. If you want to insult me, do it in person you cowards. Male nudity would be fine as well, sexism would be pathetic.
Singnatures are as stupid as tattoos.
I am not homophobic or a pedophile
If you want to insult me, do it in person you cowards.
Good, everyone is on the same page!
Because, the best of good couture is to be honest and stir emotion. Not revise history and art because it makes you uncomfortable and you'd rather not think about it. The Disney version of life “R & J” is fine if your 10, but life moves on and we have seen at least 6 or 8 Disney versions of this story.
[deleted]
"Americans are more comfortable with bloodshed than sex." This indeed sums up a good post.
What is also evident from various replies is that people like dumping their views on a simple question instead of answering it. The question might have been asked for any of the reasons stated in any of this thread's posts -- with one exception, pedophiles prefer younger girls -- and I see no reason to bloat the thread with opinions on the poster's intentions.
I mean, fine, we get it. Nudity is worse than blood, sex worse than death and the view of nude children injecting evil into mankind. Only clearly insane people disagree. Since there is no point arguing with the insane I would ask everyone to stop trying; the discussion is pointless since the correct stance is trivial and unlikely to change for involved participants.
I hope I die before I get old
Typos in 'singnatures' aren't as stupid as typos on tattoos ;)
shareKeira Knightley was fifteen when she went topless in a movie and it didn't ruin her career.
More authentic my foot, pretentious pervert.
shareYou guys get inredibly butthurt for little to no reason. I like seein titties too. Maybe this is his Hollywood crush casted. *beep* it I find out my celebrity crush is in a movie I'm curious if I'll get to see her naked. Plus it's part of their job. It's not like they can't turn down a role for the nudity in it. Megan Fox has kept herself pretty clothed (unfortunately).Ya'll actin like because this man wants to see some titties that he's immediately some pedophile. hell naw. ya'll are just some *beep* lying to yourself about the obvious attraction to beautiful younger girls. Not like he's gonna go to her house and rape her or something. Agreed he coulda said it better but ya'll need to get off his nuts. butthurt ass crowd smh
shareThe problem is not the lack of nudity directly, just that everything gets so sugar coated. No wonder diabetes is so common anymore.
shareWhat about asking Shakespeare? Young love and sex at that time was common (and we think our kids are having sex too young????). The play has been done and redone and redone on stage and film.
This is about PASSION. Pure passion that people would die for. Maybe not NOW but back then when people might live until middle age if they are lucky.
Shakespeare wrote this as a torrid love story. We never SEE it as that but reading it and studying it certainly proves this was more passion than we see now in most "romances"....and with a lot more skin!!!!
Think Twilight then think R & J. Both are total passion and "I would die for you" love. Then think of the films. Pure and utter crap because they want a PG rating for teens.
Again, all about the money...so go pay your ten bucks and get it over with. If you want pure passion read the play and see it in your mind. It will be much better than the crap you are going to get on film because centuries of time have changed us into hypocritical closet watching porn freaks. (Sorry not all of us, but those here who can't see the beauty of young love as Shakespeare wrote it).
Now that was the perfect explanation.
Thank you !
In Shakespeare's time, when the play was first performed, women were not allowed to be actors. So all the roles were played by men. The female roles were played by men in drag.
There was no sex on stage.
Even kissing on stage was usually (perhaps always) faked.
I just saw this film and it is truly exquisite.
And to answer the original perv's question: No. There is no nudity in the film.
Thank you Jacob-Hudson.
Singnatures are as stupid as tattoos.
You guys get inredibly butthurt for little to no reason. I like seein titties too. Maybe this is his Hollywood crush casted. *beep* it I find out my celebrity crush is in a movie I'm curious if I'll get to see her naked
Ya'll actin like because this man wants to see some titties that he's immediately some pedophile. hell naw. ya'll are just some *beep* lying to yourself about the obvious attraction to beautiful younger girls
Uh...not sure why you would ask. I hope you are not the pervert that you sound like with that question and your member "name".
There is NO nudity in the film.
Cause I'm a heterosexual man. What's perverted about that or my name? What makes your name so cool you self righteous, judgemental so and so?
Singnatures are as stupid as tattoos.
Most perverts are heterosexual. Most child molesters are heterosexual.
And the fact that you can't spell comes as no surprise.
Please do everyone a favor and don't post your creepy messages on IMDb again.
Sixteen is hardly pedophile material. How old were you when you first had sex? If it was below eighteen then you've had more sex with minors than me, friend. One spelling mistake, one mistroke and you question my intelligence. Well genius, my IQ has been tested and it is probably higher than yours. If you like fuelling a fire so much then give me your address and a plane ticket and we can have a heated discussion together.
shareSixteen is hardly pedophile material.
You need help. I'm pretty sure you sit in parks fapping everytime a little girl's skirt goes up.
You are the only one who needs help here. If you say that interest in 16-year-old have anything to do with paedophilia, you are either a hypocrite or a total idiot. FYI, the term 'paedophilia' refers to sexual attraction towards prepubescent children i.e. 11-12 years and younger if we are talking about girls and a year older regarding boys. Since that age they start to develop features that make them sexually attractive. By the age of 15 this process usually completes. As a result many girls already have developed bodies at the age of 13 and most of them are fully developed by the age of 15. That means that interest of any healthy grown-up man towards teenage girls are totally natural as physically they are grown-ups already and it definitely has nothing to do with any deviances such as paedophilia. I'm amazed how so many Americans are totally incapable of understanding this simple thing and continue to babble some brainwashed *beep*
shareThat means that interest of any healthy grown-up man towards teenage girls are totally natural as physically they are grown-ups
And again he is right. Being attracted to a sexually developed 16 year old girl or boy is universal amongst all humans.
'Blasphemy! Preposterous! You're insane!'
No, not at all. It wasn't too long ago that by the time we were 12-18, half of our life would be over. This was because of poor hygiene, and ignorance of medicine amongst hundreds of other reasons. Roughly for 100 thousand years, humans had children as early as they were able to conceive. But in order to do that, you have to find a mate.
How do you do that? The best way is to be attractive. This is seen in all manner of species, including humans. We are generally more attractive in our youth so that we are more inclined to obtain a mate and breed to expand our species.
It isn't even a matter of debate, it is proven fact known through science. Any man or women that denies a general attraction to a sexually matured teenager between the ages of 14-15 is lying through their teeth, because you cannot simply erase 100 thousand years (or more) of evolution in a single century.
Society is trying to change things by putting laws and labels out to make people feel bad about an attraction to anyone under the magical number of 18, but it just isn't going to happen, because it goes against our primal instincts.
Of course, this doesn't justify any action towards breaking your countries law and anyone who does should be punished. It is best to treat teens like displays in a museum. You can look, but don't touch otherwise don't go to the museum at all.
There is your science lesson for the day. Use the knowledge wisely, or ignore it and call me a lunatic. But you better damn sure research any of these claims yourself before casting judgement.
If that's true, if you don't know who I am, then maybe your best course would be to tread lightly.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Dyingroses, he is right. A sixteen year old would not be considered pedophilia. Still trouble though in all of North America.
If that's true, if you don't know who I am, then maybe your best course would be to tread lightly.
In many states of the US, including my home state of Washington, 16 is the age of consent
shareWhere the hell do all you idiots come from anyway?
shareNo, there is no nudity from Hailee. Douglas Booth (Romeo) is shirtless in one scene, and that is the only disrobing in the film.
shareIt's a valid question, giving the context of the story.
The original script did have several nude scenes for the character of Juliet, however after Hailee Steinfeld was cast all nude scenes were cut. Understandable with her having been 14 or so when they filmed it.
Thank you both for the uninsulting insight.
Singnatures are as stupid as tattoos.
Hey, I just saw the movie yesterday in theaters. This is the most modest and descent movie I have seen in a long time. The only thing it shows is Juliet's undergarments, and Romeo with his shirt off. The scene only consist of them taking off their outer garments while kissing; then as they lie down, the screen begins to fade as it transitions into the next scene. This is all it shows...so it iv very descent.
shareIt's decent, not descent. Descent is like you are making a descent into a deep cave. I would have let it slip, but you typed it twice.
shareThree sentences, two with split infinitives. I would have let it slip, but you did it twice.
shareI split my infinitives boldly at will.
shareWho cares if there is nudity they are actors some roles require it some don't . But going to see a movie just for the nudity you can do that from the internet at home. As for her age no studio is going to risk breaking the law.
shareAs for her age no studio is going to risk breaking the law.
I remember her being in the Hole at around (17) but I may be wrong 15 seems young but I do remember Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby. And from what I recall there was a lot of controversy. But then again things were different in Hollywood then. The politically correct and conservative way of thinking has become the norm now.
shareKiera Knightly was the exact same age as Hailee was in this movie (15 years old), when she showed her bare breasts in a movie 10 years ago. Why was that allowed, and not in this movie? Apparently it doesn't "break the law" because that studio did "risk" it, and it was allowed then.
Nah, it's only child porn if it's deemed to be sexualized. That's why Pretty Baby and American Beauty are not illegal to own and view
Also why everybody who has pictures or video of their children or grandchildren bathing are not arrested for child porn
Get educated you *beep* prude
Actually nowadays they are. If u take a picture of your kid naked in the bath now and take. It too place that develops photos they have to report it to police.
I know this as I used to work in boots in England and they develop photos and called the police more than once for pics of kids naked in the bath. It is now illegal for ANY naked pictures of children. Again in England this means under 16, america 18.
It's not rocket science
"F U C K me gently with a chainsaw" Heathers
What I think happened was she was going to be topless, but since it was found out far before it came out there was so much outcry against it that they changed it
share