Originally Posted by clive
I think like all of these debates it's not about nudity right or wrong but about how it's used. If it tells you more about the character and moves the story forwards it's a good thing, if it's just getting some breasts into the film to push up your DVD sales, then it's another matter.
What if you go into it knowing that nudity will help you getting DVD distribution, but at the same time you only allow the kind of nudity/sex that moves the plot forward?
Quote:
Originally Posted by clive
I also think that from a directorial POV you have to have very clear ideas of why you are doing it and be completely honest and professional with your actors. If they sense any doubt in your ability to take care of them, it will look awful on screen.
Do you think it is wise to tell them, "Hey, do a nude scene so we can sell this thing." or do you mean let them know that you have their interest at heart as well as your own?
Quote:
Originally Posted by clive
However, saying that, I have a friend who wanted to put a sex scene into his dreadful horror film and only had two guys in that day, so he persuaded them that if they did the sex scene, he'd get a girl to do cut aways separately so it would look like a guy and a girl. Of course he had no intention of doing that and it remains the funniest four minute sex scene I've ever seen in my life.
That's hilarious. How pissed were the actors when they saw the final product of their "labors?"
Wow, some interesting questions here.
I try really hard not to build alter my stories to the perceived needs of distributors, so I'd never put a nude scene in just to clinch the deal. However, I do market research my films and make sure there is a market for them that will cover the costs before going into production. Meaning I'm more likely to greenlight a project where I can see easy sales. As it is, in the next three feature scripts I'm developing two have nudity and one doesn't. One only has 15 ratings nudity and the nude scene is actually playing a joke on the audience, in the second film there is a lot of nudity and explicit sex, but then it's a film about voyeurism, so it's central to the story. In my main project at the moment there's no nudity and no need for it.
I've always been completely honest with my actors, if I was at the point where I had to make a quick easy sale picture for direct to DVD, just for the money I'd tell my actors what we were doing and how nude scenes were going to get them a pay packet faster than one of my other projects. Honesty is the only way to go.
I don't know how the actors felt about it, I think they're still working with him, so they must have found it funny too.
The other debate here that interests me is the porn debate. It is a completely different debate from the nudity debate, in that it is almost a completely different industry. Directorik is right in that it is the most profitable form of video production in the world, with the the largest market. If money and mass distribution is your thing then porn is the best market to get into. Format is irrelevant, you can edit it on almost anything and still get sales, you can forget about production values and still make money. However, I think that once you enter that world it's incredibly difficult to get back into mainstream film production, for all kinds of reasons. I know that Ron Howard considered directing a porn film early in his career, but decided that he couldn't live with the press throwing it in his face for the rest of his life. I've spoken to a lot of directors who have considered using a porn shoot as a way of financing their other projects. I've always felt that those that went ahead and got into shooting porn did so because that's what they were really drawn too, not just for the money.
Where this debate is interesting for me is that one of my current projects is extremely sexually explicit. I know it's not porn because they'd be less plot and character development if it was, but there is a real issue about making films about sex within the mainstream industry. A good example of this would be Caligula, which was funded by Playboy but had some incredible acting in it. It's clearly a mainstream film, but the levels of sexual exploitation get very close to porn. The same could be true of films like Baise Moi and Bound.
I think that nudity in films is part and parcel of that openness,
