Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Nudity or Violence?

  • Nudity

  • Violence

  • Both

  • Neither

  • Don't Care


Results are only viewable after voting.
There should be a law against actors wearing clothes in films or tv-series. After a few years we can start allowing them back on again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AngerDanger
Have way, way, way too much violence.

Time for some screen equality! (of both and all shape of sexes, not just balance with violence).

Funny, 99.999% of people have sex, yet is forbidden to be shown on TV at any time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeyf
I feel ambivalent about this. If your story can arouse without explicit nudity/sexuality or disturb without explicit violence/gore, that demonstrates skilled writing, acting, and directing.

On the other hand, the OP adds the clarifier, "when it is important for the story." I'm tempted to say that when it's important to the story, I don't care which is shown because it's the story that is enhanced.

But maybe I lean more towards preferring well-motivated violence in films because it tends to be more choreographed and cinematic by default than nudity. I don't know if the breakthrough fight scenes in The Matrix would be considered violence or not, but a lot of them were basically dance scenes with bullet time.

… Me, I look to the Bechdel Test, and am of the opinion that 1) You can tell a gripping, compelling and powerfully moving story (for example, The Inner Light, one of the best ever episodes of STNG - Star Trek Next Generation) without resorting to either nudity (again, I assume female, and I assume youthful and perkily perfect), or violence (of necessity, in recent years, jaded palates and all that, becoming ever more unnecessarily graphic), and 2) not every audience is comprised solely of young, (or middle aged) heterosexual males. …
Semi-related: Alison Bechdel is of particularly distant relevance to these forums given that her graphic memoir, Fun Home, was adapted for broadway and co-produced by infamous ex-Apple Scott Forstall.

Small world, eh? :)
 
Last edited:
Funny, 99.999% of people have sex, yet is forbidden to be shown on TV at any time.

Really? Sure some slight over-estimation, here, perhaps?

Even those in religious orders - who take their vows seriously?

Those who are asexual?

Who are in hospital, prison, or mental asylums? (These latter tend to be victims rather than active, consenting participants if and when sexual activity does indeed occur).

The handicapped, physical and mental? Those who are seriously autistic, or who are too reserved or introverted to wish to experience such intimacy? (No, autism and introversion are not at all the same thing).

And yes, there are further categories I could list.

Seriously, 99.9999% - even if you read Kinsey - is a bit of an over estimate, even in the First World.
 
  • Like
Reactions: millerj123
Seriously, 99.9999% - even if you read Kinsey - is a bit of an over estimate, even in the First World.

We could also stretch this bit of hyperbole to say that 99.9999% of people masturbate, move their bowels, pass water, etc. - and we don't show that on television, either.

Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's a good idea to do in front of others.
 
Really? Sure some slight over-estimation, here, perhaps?
...
Seriously, 99.9999% - even if you read Kinsey - is a bit of an over estimate, even in the First World.

Yes, including all you say.
Let me just add: age from 18 and lived to at least 70. Should include 40 YO virgins (and yes, do exist, and cured).
[doublepost=1551991635][/doublepost]
Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's a good idea to do in front of others.

And yet we see animals doing all the time, YT full of vids, and the stuff of meme's.

Oh, and kissing is also considered sex.

So, it is almost an absurdity to conceal it.

PS: seen it happen in public 5 times in my life.
 
the human body is beautiful and supposedly created in a gods own image
 
It is pretty well conclusive that watching violence encourages it. I'd rather celebrate the human body than violence.
 
I like some nice well done tasteful violence. Like the John Wick movies. I don’t nudity in films, there’s enough free nudity on the net nowadays. It’s not like when I was young and the only chance for a peak was watching porkys on HBO.
 
Whether the human body is considered beautiful or not, may often be found in the eye of the beholder.

And, I tend to incline to the view that gods are created in our image other than the other way around.
I agree, the other way around is human ego, although no one living, that I know of, would know... as something factual.

I’ve not voted in this poll because I’m not sure what the point is, nudity, violence, good or bad, preference? They can be both good and bad, preferred or not preferred depending on context, factors not clarified by the simplicity of the possible answers that the poll allows to be made.
 
I agree, the other way around is human ego, although no one living, that I know of, would know... as something factual.

I’ve not voted in this poll because I’m not sure what the point is, nudity, violence, good or bad, preference? They can be both good and bad, preferred or not preferred depending on context, factors not clarified by the simplicity of the possible answers that the poll allows to be made.

In truth, a good story that is well told, well scripted and well acted needs neither nudity nor violence.

But, done tastefully - and in a context that ensures that they support the narrative rather than themselves become the narrative - both nudity and violence (used sparingly) can enhance the telling of a tale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat and Huntn
I agree, the other way around is human ego, although no one living, that I know of, would know... as something factual.
I’ve not voted in this poll because I’m not sure what the point is, nudity, violence, good or bad, preference? They can be both good and bad, preferred or not preferred depending on context, factors not clarified by the simplicity of the possible answers that the poll allows to be made.

don't be partly cloudy go ahead and vote.

if man and their gods are created in the SAME image; well equivalence goes both ways
enjoy.
 
don't be partly cloudy go ahead and vote.

if man and their gods are created in the SAME image; well equivalence goes both ways
enjoy.
The choice I would vote for is “depends”. I have found both violence and nudity to be appealing in a story or gratuitous, and that all boils down to the story. Neither exist in a vacuum and rely on the story, it is the story that provides context justifying either. Personal taste decades how much is too much.

As has been mentioned often in these forums, it also seems that violence with US audiences is much more acceptable than nudity/sex, for those who object, my impression is it’s based on sexual hang ups, viewing sex as sinful, when it is an intrical part of our biology although I’ll acknowledge that as with anything, over indulgence can be bad, seeing it depicted as part of a story maybe good or bad... depending on how and how much.

I remember movies earlier than the 1960s where the viewer had to infer that a couple was sexually intimate based in hints the movie makers gave us, like a kiss, followed later by, I’m pregnant! For the audience who are in the position of being voyeurs, this stifles the realism of such a story. Today, I think we are in a better place regarding the depiction of nudity and/or sexual intercourse in movies, but I will acknowledge this may have something to do with my male brain. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.