Poll: Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe to have nude scene in final Harry Potter films?
- Thread starter Caligulove
- Start date
Recommended Videos
well I have to say (though I wont point fingers) that they seem to be trying to sex up the series which I can "get"
But it is completely unjustified.
But it is completely unjustified.
She can still be "Classy." There are plenty of actresses that have done nude scenes and were/are "classy" (examples: Helen Mirren, Judi Dench, Susan Surandon, etc.)coldshadow said:
Here's the issue I have with this:
We have (been forced to) watched the cast of Harry Potter, both Radcliffe and Watson effectively grow up. What with him starting his career as Potter at... twelve?
So yeah, it is a might disturbing that we shall have the ability to see them both as children and naked within the same series.
J.K. Rowling: you are undeservant of the fame you posses.
We have (been forced to) watched the cast of Harry Potter, both Radcliffe and Watson effectively grow up. What with him starting his career as Potter at... twelve?
So yeah, it is a might disturbing that we shall have the ability to see them both as children and naked within the same series.
J.K. Rowling: you are undeservant of the fame you posses.
I've never liked it, I got forced to watch a film and I have never read a book, so forgive me if I mess this up.
Isn't harry potter for kids? I know they released "special" books for adults so they wouldn't be embarrassed (can anybody notice the awful logic behind that?)but it started out for kids.
How can they possibly think that nudity is a good thing for a children's film?
I think its like that girl from high school musical putting pics of herself naked on the net.
I bet, like so many other films (hostel I am looking at you!), it will not add a thing to the film. If you took all the boobs out of Friday the 13th would the film be totally shot to hell (sorry for the pun)? If you took all the sex from hostel would the film be ruined? The only film you need sex and nudity in is porn.
If the only way you can get people to watch your film is with a bit of T&A then your not that great at making films.
Isn't harry potter for kids? I know they released "special" books for adults so they wouldn't be embarrassed (can anybody notice the awful logic behind that?)but it started out for kids.
How can they possibly think that nudity is a good thing for a children's film?
I think its like that girl from high school musical putting pics of herself naked on the net.
I bet, like so many other films (hostel I am looking at you!), it will not add a thing to the film. If you took all the boobs out of Friday the 13th would the film be totally shot to hell (sorry for the pun)? If you took all the sex from hostel would the film be ruined? The only film you need sex and nudity in is porn.
If the only way you can get people to watch your film is with a bit of T&A then your not that great at making films.
It is very easy to keep the ideas they have for the last book 'steamy' without showing any naughty bits or having the characters doing something along the lines of a sex scene. It's not that hard, as 'nude' can mean many things instead of simply flashing the camera.
Seriously, it's not that big of a deal.
If the kids can read about Harry Potter being naked, then they can certainly see him in the buff at certain points. A direct shot showing the goods would be very surprising, same with the Hermione character.
Besides, there is no sex scene in the books. It's not going to get that heavy.
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00029376.html
Seriously, it's not that big of a deal.
If the kids can read about Harry Potter being naked, then they can certainly see him in the buff at certain points. A direct shot showing the goods would be very surprising, same with the Hermione character.
Besides, there is no sex scene in the books. It's not going to get that heavy.
You might want to read this next articleDiscoveryOne said:
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00029376.html
*Gets down on knee*Labyrinth said:
Seriously, will you marry me?
I have been waiting that long for someone to say exactly that.
I am absolutely sick on tired of the taboo on nudity in general (teenage hormones aside).
It's not in anyway dirty, or sick and people who are offended by that need to get the hell over themselves.
I agree compeletely, things are only as dirty as the majority makes it out to be, I mean modern culture demonizes breasts for no reason, and that's the only reason they're considered sexual. I mean if women were forced to where gloves and not show there hands, it would be sexual to see a knuckle or a cuticle.Labyrinth said:
If women weren't made to hide they're breasts guys would be crazy for the first day or two, with breasts everywhere then it would just become natural.
Nudity is not disgusting or perveted unless you implant in peoples minds that it is.
Stop saying it's naughty and it will cease to be so, pure and simple.
Except all of their scenes were done while about twice her age minimum. They had been acting for a while and had decided to do that at that stage in their careers.IrishBerserker said:
Watson is 19 and getting her kit off for a bunch of perving camera crews is probably a mistake. Although she is modeling these days, who knows, perhaps she'll go the whole hog and become a porn star.
Well, she seems both intelligent and mature enough to make the decision. Though a few more years under her belt wouldn't/couldn't hurt.Octorok said:
As far as your little "porn star" comment goes, I sincerely doubt that it will happen.
and if this whole thing is a mistake for her, then its her mistake to make and learn from. I also doubt this will have any major impact on her career, whether it be positive or negative.
Daniel Radcliffe has already been nude in 'Equus' and noone seemed to object. As for Emma Watson, what's good fro the gander is good for the goose.