Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Spoiler:

The main character's name is Alex Rahl. That's strange for a modern day thriller huh?

awesomesauce! definitely gonna look into it now!
Cheers Scythian
(and apologies for any typos, its my birthday so i got a little drunk earlier lol)

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Spoiler:

The main character's name is Alex Rahl. That's strange for a modern day thriller huh?

awesomesauce! definitely gonna look into it now!
Cheers Scythian
(and apologies for any typos, its my birthday so i got a little drunk earlier lol)

No problem. There are plenty of drunk posts in my post history. I am glad you liked that spoiler.

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Spoiler:

The main character's name is Alex Rahl. That's strange for a modern day thriller huh?

awesomesauce! definitely gonna look into it now!
Cheers Scythian
(and apologies for any typos, its my birthday so i got a little drunk earlier lol)

No problem. There are plenty of drunk posts in my post history. I am glad you liked that spoiler.

Spoiler:

If you read the last book, then you should have a good idea about what this "world" is and who that person descended from...

glad im not the only one making the drunk posts
unfortunately uni (and therefore a lack of funds) means ive never been able to get a hold of the last few books, but im definitely gonna do it now, i finish this year so i finally might have some money (if and when i get a job haha)

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Spoiler:

The main character's name is Alex Rahl. That's strange for a modern day thriller huh?

awesomesauce! definitely gonna look into it now!
Cheers Scythian
(and apologies for any typos, its my birthday so i got a little drunk earlier lol)

No problem. There are plenty of drunk posts in my post history. I am glad you liked that spoiler.

Spoiler:

If you read the last book, then you should have a good idea about what this "world" is and who that person descended from...

glad im not the only one making the drunk posts
unfortunately uni (and therefore a lack of funds) means ive never been able to get a hold of the last few books, but im definitely gonna do it now, i finish this year so i finally might have some money (if and when i get a job haha)

Spoiler:

although im guessing that this world is the same one from Sword of Truth in the far future?and Alex has to be Richard's descendant...

I didn't realize that you haven't read the last few. Yeah I think you need to read those before The Law of Nines. They should be on paperback.

Cannot wait for Game Of Thrones.

I've been on the R.R. Martin bandwagon since I found out my Little bro is close friends with his nephew. I figured that If I didn't start reading the books then, I'd be betraying all of Geek-dom

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:
for me iyt failed at the first hurdle by not even getting the first couple of chapters (and therefore first episode) right...
my dad even recorded them all for me while i was at uni so we could watch them together, we watched the first one and after it finished there was total silence in my house for at least 5 mihnutes, before my dad picked up the control and said "delete" in a cyberman voice....made me crack up
i will definitely have to take you up on your advice and find Law of Nines too, thanks!

Yeah the first episode wasn't what I wanted, but I could tolerate it to an extent. After that it was all downhill. It got better once or twice, but for the most part it got worse.

If you need any other convincing to read The Law of Nines, open this spoiler. This person's name should convince you:

Spoiler:

The main character's name is Alex Rahl. That's strange for a modern day thriller huh?

awesomesauce! definitely gonna look into it now!
Cheers Scythian
(and apologies for any typos, its my birthday so i got a little drunk earlier lol)

No problem. There are plenty of drunk posts in my post history. I am glad you liked that spoiler.

Spoiler:

If you read the last book, then you should have a good idea about what this "world" is and who that person descended from...

glad im not the only one making the drunk posts
unfortunately uni (and therefore a lack of funds) means ive never been able to get a hold of the last few books, but im definitely gonna do it now, i finish this year so i finally might have some money (if and when i get a job haha)

Spoiler:

although im guessing that this world is the same one from Sword of Truth in the far future?and Alex has to be Richard's descendant...

I didn't realize that you haven't read the last few. Yeah I think you need to read those before The Law of Nines. They should be on paperback.

no worries, gonna try and get hold of them, i got my dad into the books too so might see if i can persuade him to fork out the money for them instead of me
failing that, ebooks. If only there was somewhere that did them for free....hmmm google time


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Potato_God wrote:Cannot wait for Game Of Thrones.

I've been on the R.R. Martin bandwagon since I found out my Little bro is close friends with his nephew. I figured that If I didn't start reading the books then, I'd be betraying all of Geek-dom

thats pretty cool!
and yes you would be a ....HERETIC!!

Well, what is everybody's thoughts after the first episode? I enjoyed it quite a bit myself. This is my first ever HBO Series and my wife laughed when I was shocked by the nudity. She says that the original Sex and the City was the same way.... If only I'd have known...

I didn't find the nudity overly done or distasteful, it certainly helps the male crowd as if it needed any more help on a fantasy series but still. I'm still coping with people not looking like they did in my head but I didn't find anybody overly not fitting of their character. I wish Cersei was a bit ummm "Hotter?". Crapy word but in my head she was a complete bombshell thats why she could manipulate so well. The woman in the show is pretty, and does her cold bitchy like attitude very well, but didnt feel like she quite cuts it on looks.

Curious to hear others thoughts.

Damn! no HBO :(
anyone know where i can see it (from the UK)

Fun fact about episode one: almost every of age female actress (sans the one playing Catelyn Stark, and a few house women) is nude, topless, or engaged in a sexual act before the end; including one portraying an underage girl.

Ya I was laughing when I told my wife that the all nude Daenerys there was supposed to be 16ish at most. Fun times! Her brother didn't seem to mind however....

Pyronick wrote:
I didn't find the nudity overly done or distasteful, it certainly helps the male crowd as if it needed any more help on a fantasy series but still.

The only scene that I could see reasonable criticism of was Daenerys' bath scene, though even that has legitimate, if subtle, theatrical merit.

Pyronick wrote:
I'm still coping with people not looking like they did in my head but I didn't find anybody overly not fitting of their character. I wish Cersei was a bit ummm "Hotter?". Crapy word but in my head she was a complete bombshell thats why she could manipulate so well. The woman in the show is pretty, and does her cold bitchy like attitude very well, but didnt feel like she quite cuts it on looks.

I think that, relative to the other women in the series (ignoring Daenerys), Cersei stands out as being more classically attractive while still maintaining the "realistic fantasy" feel of the books.

More gnerally, I thought the casting, and acting, was fantastic. The guy they got to play Viserys especially so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pyronick wrote:Ya I was laughing when I told my wife that the all nude Daenerys there was supposed to be 16ish at most. Fun times! Her brother didn't seem to mind however....

I thought she was 13, but either way I'll bet that causes some stirs (though not big ones, as her age isn't really discussed in the show).

You have a good point that in comparisson to the other women of the time and the show, Cersei is very attractive. Well said. I'd agree that the bath scene was... here's some boobs. I'm always down for that however.

I thought the acting was very good as well and have high hopes for the series. I was actually shocked at the amount they went through on the first episode, but then when I was laying in bed thinking of just how much happens in these books, they havn't even scratched the surface. Is there any word of the how long they intend this to be? How many episodes / seasons etc?

Revenent Reiko wrote:Damn! no HBO :(
anyone know where i can see it (from the UK)

It's on Sky Atlantic HD tonight, showing each episode the next night after the US get it, never read the books but Aurelia and I are planning on giving it a watch.

Pyronick wrote:I thought the acting was very good as well and have high hopes for the series. I was actually shocked at the amount they went through on the first episode, but then when I was laying in bed thinking of just how much happens in these books, they havn't even scratched the surface. Is there any word of the how long they intend this to be? How many episodes / seasons etc?

First season of Rome is 12 episodes. I would expect them to try to cover the first book in one season. I could be wrong, but that's 12 hours.

Pyronick wrote:Well, what is everybody's thoughts after the first episode? I enjoyed it quite a bit myself. This is my first ever HBO Series and my wife laughed when I was shocked by the nudity. She says that the original Sex and the City was the same way.... If only I'd have known...

So many HBO shows resort to gratuitous nudity. For example, watch The Pacific. There are so many instances of nudity that are really pointless.

I have no problem with nudity or sex on HBO, but it should only be done when it actually makes sense in the context of the story. HBO seems to think that because they can get away with nudity, they should show a topless woman once an hour.

I don't intend to watch the show as it's being broadcast, I plan on getting the series when it comes out on DVD (which hopefully won't take too long).

Nudity is the natural human state. Attractive naked bodies are nice to look at. It doesn't have to be making a narrative point.

I agree that it can be dumb or silly to show nudity when it actually doesn't make sense for a given story (like someone wearing skimpy clothing in a cold climate, say), but if it makes sense in context, the only reason not to do it is if you're pandering to prudes. Which HBO, not being on network TV, has the luxury of not having to do.

I agree 100% with you, Mannahnin, regarding nudity that makes sense. But I think it's clear that HBO goes out of its way. They don't have to pander to prudes but they do pander to people who like nudity whether it's necessary to tell a story or not.

Mannahnin wrote:Nudity is the natural human state. Attractive naked bodies are nice to look at. It doesn't have to be making a narrative point.

When the point being made is adverse to the narrative, or distracts from the narrative, it's gratuitous.

Mannahnin wrote:I agree that it can be dumb or silly to show nudity when it actually doesn't make sense for a given story (like someone wearing skimpy clothing in a cold climate, say), but if it makes sense in context, the only reason not to do it is if you're pandering to prudes. Which HBO, not being on network TV, has the luxury of not having to do.

There's a difference between "pandering to prudes" and "makes sense in context."

If a couple of guys go to a strip club, then yeah, it makes sense to show nudity (even if the scene can be shot without nudity). But if you're showing a woman playing a ukulele, why the hell do you have to show her in the buff?

The examples of HBO using gratuitous nudity are legion.

As I said in my last post, if it actually is adverse to or detracts from the narrative, I agree that it's inappropriate.

If it serves even a minor narrative purpose, why not?

Danaerys in her bath chamber was part of the story. She was getting dressed/prepped for the meeting, and the scene shows her brother's callousness toward her and casual willingness to use her body and her sexuality for advantage. Her climbing into the too-hot bath is her attempting to mask/deny her emotional pain using physical pain. Like a lot of adolescent girls do. Did they NEED to show her boobs? No, not really. Did it add to the emotional impact of her brother's mistreatment? I think so.

The woman playing the ukelele nude makes sense in context too. It illustrates the power and hedonism of the men.

In situations where it neither adds nor detracts from the narrative value of a scene, it comes down to personal taste. Some people find nudity distracting or unappealing. Others enjoy it. My wife sure enjoyed half-naked Jason Momoa.

Yes I thought it was all well and good myself.

On a different note:

Here is an interesting link my brother found for me. It gives a recap of the episode encase you are not familiar with the book series, to which I can't imagine I would have any understand of what was going on without having done that.

http://viewers-guide.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/#!/map/

I found myself having to explain lots of things to my wife, but that's also cause she is impatient in these types of things and wants to know whats going on right away...

Pyronick wrote:I found myself having to explain lots of things to my wife, but that's also cause she is impatient in these types of things and wants to know whats going on right away...

Just point at the screen and say "See that guy? Dead. That one? Dead. That one? Dead. The guy you really like? Dead. The guy you hate? Dead. The other guy you hate? Turns out to be a pretty decent guy."

Mannahnin wrote:
Danaerys in her bath chamber was part of the story. She was getting dressed/prepped for the meeting, and the scene shows her brother's callousness toward her and casual willingness to use her body and her sexuality for advantage. Her climbing into the too-hot bath is her attempting to mask/deny her emotional pain using physical pain. Like a lot of adolescent girls do. Did they NEED to show her boobs? No, not really. Did it add to the emotional impact of her brother's mistreatment? I think so.

That was my appraisal as well. I was merely suggesting, in my earlier post, that I could understand why people might object. That said, in my opinion, not showing her nude in that scene would have made it very clumsy.

Mannahnin wrote: The woman playing the ukelele nude makes sense in context too. It illustrates the power and hedonism of the men.

Mannahnin wrote:
My wife sure enjoyed half-naked Jason Momoa.

The comparison shots of him in Stargate: Atlantis and him in Conan, and now Game of Thrones, are fairly absurd. That man spent many an hour in the gym with personal trainers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pyronick wrote:
Here is an interesting link my brother found for me. It gives a recap of the episode encase you are not familiar with the book series, to which I can't imagine I would have any understand of what was going on without having done that.

They definitely could have elaborated on Jaime more, all you really find out in ep. 1 is that he wears armor, and sleeps with his sister.

biccat wrote:If a couple of guys go to a strip club, then yeah, it makes sense to show nudity (even if the scene can be shot without nudity). But if you're showing a woman playing a ukulele, why the hell do you have to show her in the buff?

I feel compelled to come back to this, because it's been nagging at me.

This example is really funny. Because it's clear that whoever came up with it, on whatever website you got it from, has never seen the show. If you've seen the show, or have any idea who the characters are, it's blatantly obvious that "a woman playing the ukulele" is not the point here.

The point is that these are wealthy and powerful men involved in criminal enterprise, and they are enjoying being entertained by a naked woman. There's also dramatic value in contrasting Nucky's use of women for entertainment and companionship vs his public image and support of the women's suffrage and temperence movements. His public face is one of rectitude and supporting strong women, many of whom have firm religious convictions and opposition to alcohol. His private nature is that he is the head criminal bringing alcohol into the city, and that he is commonly entertained by floozies.

This example is actually a better and even more narratively-appropriate use of nudity than the stripclub scenes in The Sopranos which you condone as logical and okay.

biccat wrote:The examples of HBO using gratuitous nudity are legion.

That may well be so. But no one's provided any in this thread yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

Pyronick wrote:Here is an interesting link my brother found for me. It gives a recap of the episode encase you are not familiar with the book series, to which I can't imagine I would have any understand of what was going on without having done that.

They definitely could have elaborated on Jaime more, all you really find out in ep. 1 is that he wears armor, and sleeps with his sister.

Well, they give you a little more than that. They show you that he actually likes and gets along with his brother Tyrion, in contrast to Cersei, who disdains him. They tell you that he fights in tournaments, and apparently enjoys it/challenging other powerful men in that context. They show you that he can be good at hiding his intent from a person whom he intends to do harm, but has a certain awareness of his own immorality, even if not enough to stop him from doing wicked things.

Mannahnin wrote:This example is really funny. Because it's clear that whoever came up with it, on whatever website you got it from, has never seen the show. If you've seen the show, or have any idea who the characters are, it's blatantly obvious that "a woman playing the ukulele" is not the point here.

Obviously you never saw the episode in question. The men were at a brothel, where nudity has it's place. But the woman wasn't there for sexual gratification, she was there to play an instrument for the men. There is absolutely no reason for her to be naked, other than "hey, you know what this scene needs? More boobs."

Gladiator Blood and Sand (from Encore) had a similar problem, they used nudity a number of times where it was unnecessary. Apparently they had an open casting call for porn stars and strippers so that they could fill the stands with topless babes during some of the gladiator contests.

Watch some shows on HBO and when you see someone nude, ask yourself "could the story be told just as well without nudity here?" Generally the answer will be yes. Sometimes, the answer is "no," and those times are certainly worthwhile. You don't have the distraction of a strategically placed plant to obscure what is really going on.

dogma wrote:Fun fact about episode one: almost every of age female actress (sans the one playing Catelyn Stark, and a few house women) is nude, topless, or engaged in a sexual act before the end; including one portraying an underage girl.

Well, the HBO audience seems to like that if many of their other series are an indication. Recently watched Pillars of the Earth too and it was just annoying whenever the love scenes showed up. Personally I think it is stupid of the shows producers because it is nothing but a distraction from the storyline, usually kind of sappy with blaring 'passionate' soundtrack crap behind it, and even as a heterosexual guy who finds naked chicks attractive and loves the books, it makes me less comfortable about trying to get other people to pay attention to it. The book isn't written like a romance novel with pages and pages of descriptive lovemaking, so the show shouldn't be focussing on that either.

My mother, who likes court politics stuff, my GF, who likes good storys, are both kind of "meh" about unnecessary titilation and female objectification seeming to be a requirement in some genres. Knowing that, it will be hard for me to get them into the story because the minute they see that going on, they will lump it under the "just another stupid guy fetish" assumption that many women have. It's like the network is stuck in the 80s R rated movie mentality where it's mandatory to see tits at least once for really no reason other than that every other movie is doing it.

I am not a prude, I don't care, nor do I need to see fantasy chicks naked in soft porn scenes, but I don't like that it can ruin the audience for a great concept for a show. I wish I could watch it, but don't do HBO. Have to wait for the DVD and just deal with the fact that most women will not pay attention long enough to see that it is about more than just the one thing they are bound to notice and focus on. I don't want to have to explain that in the confines of the world portrayed "underage" was not a tabboo either and get into all that crap.

I am very disappointed to hear this.

It's "The Song of Ice and Fire" by George R. R. Martin.

There's lots of men-objectifying-women within the world of the novels. There's lots of women-objectifying-men-who-objectify-women in the novels, too. And both sides are playing off, and preying on, the proclivities of the other throughout the series. In SoIF, sex is both a weapon and a reward, depending on the individual character (sometimes, it's both at the same time). There's a metric assload (that's 3.25x a standard US assload) of nude scenes and sex scenes in the novel, both male and female-centric.

Also, I would say that maybe you should stick with "women you know" rather than say "most women" as none of us here can speak for a majority of a gender when it comes to their tastes in television. Over here, most of the women I know who would watch a show even vaguely like this, nudity or none, are very, very excited for A Game of Thrones.

biccat wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:This example is really funny. Because it's clear that whoever came up with it, on whatever website you got it from, has never seen the show. If you've seen the show, or have any idea who the characters are, it's blatantly obvious that "a woman playing the ukulele" is not the point here.

Obviously you never saw the episode in question. The men were at a brothel, where nudity has it's place. But the woman wasn't there for sexual gratification, she was there to play an instrument for the men. There is absolutely no reason for her to be naked, other than "hey, you know what this scene needs? More boobs."

You are so wrong it's actually funny. Yes, they were at a brothel. In this case one where even the musical entertainment is titillating, and that's part of its draw. She was there to be naked AND play for the men. So they could feel powerful and gratified, even when they weren't actively having sex. Just like the mobsters in The Sopranos could be amused by having female flesh on display around them while doing business at the strip club. Even if they weren't there for boobs, having boobs on display around them makes them feel powerful and gratified.

biccat wrote:Gladiator Blood and Sand (from Encore) had a similar problem, they used nudity a number of times where it was unnecessary. Apparently they had an open casting call for porn stars and strippers so that they could fill the stands with topless babes during some of the gladiator contests.

You mean Spartacus: Blood and Sand, and here I almost agree with you. I found the level of nudity and CGI blood in that show silly, clumsy and dumb, and didn't bother watching it other than a couple of episodes.

biccat wrote:Watch some shows on HBO and when you see someone nude, ask yourself "could the story be told just as well without nudity here?" Generally the answer will be yes. Sometimes, the answer is "no," and those times are certainly worthwhile. You don't have the distraction of a strategically placed plant to obscure what is really going on.

Here's the thing. Your concept is predicated on the assumption that we're better of without seeing nudity unless it's actually necessary to the story/actively advances the plot. This is your personal taste. You find nudity at least distracting, if not actively offensive. My personal taste (and I think most of humanity's, but of course I can't speak for most of humanity) is that an attractive human body is itself appealing, and has aesthetic value and merit. So if it doesn't actively detract from the scene, it's not a bad thing.

I thought the first episode was kinda dull and boring. The first part before the opening credits was cool, I was hoping for more of that kinda stuff I guess. Instead, it's just another HBOobfest like every other show they do. Hopefully it'll get better...

Mannahnin wrote:You are so wrong it's actually funny.

I can't imagine what your purpose is in posting this comment. I can't disagree with you without being "so wrong it's actually funny"? Seriously, grow the feth up.

Mannahnin wrote:Here's the thing. Your concept is predicated on the assumption that we're better of without seeing nudity unless it's actually necessary to the story/actively advances the plot.

Actually there are a lot of other reasons to avoid nudity unless it's necessary. First, you can't syndicate your program on network TV with lots of nudity. Second, when you release it on DVD, you get the ominous "MA" rating, which is going to limit sales. Third, you have a limited number of actors and actresses who can fill a role, since not everyone wants to do nude scenes.

Mannhnin wrote:This is your personal taste. You find nudity at least distracting, if not actively offensive.

It's also the personal taste of most of society. That's why we have decency laws, censorship on television programs, and the like. People find nudity distracting.

If I was driving down the road and I saw a hot blonde standing naked by the side of the road, yes, I would be distracted. You probably would too. Because it's nice to look at naked women (and for some, naked men, but see Elaine).

When nudity appears on screen, it distracts, which is the intent of the director/author/whoever put it in there. It takes away from a good plot when the audience is distracted.

This is also why there aren't a lot of explosions in Romantic Comedies.

Mannhnin wrote:My personal taste (and I think most of humanity's, but of course I can't speak for most of humanity) is that an attractive human body is itself appealing, and has aesthetic value and merit. So if it doesn't actively detract from the scene, it's not a bad thing.

Except when it's gratuitous, it does distract. If you're watching a scene and you see a naked woman, it's going to distract. Unless it's advancing the scene, it shouldn't be there.

It's like profanity in comedy, it makes a point and adds shock value (well, used to add shock value), but it usually doesn't make a joke funnier than it would have been originally (George Carlin excepted).