A suspension of a law in California expired on the last day of '22, allowing them to sue now. Seems like the actors have also defended the scene numerous times as adults.
I'm always suspicious of shit that resurfaces after so long, anyway.
Hollywood is gross, child abuse is gross. But so is waiting this long without a fuss, then suing when it's convenient.
Nudity isn't automatically child abuse. Art has involved nudity forever. Not that most of what Hollywood puts out is art. It's Hollywood so they probably sexually abused the children.
Didn't say it was child abuse, just that I don't approve of child abuse. That said, it is pretty sketchy filming naked minors. The minors can't legally consent, I'd imagine, so who does? The producers? They don't have the power. The parents? That's fairly ick, too.
Child abuse? Maybe not. Child exploitation? Well, child is the wrong word, but I'd say there's a pretty good argument to be made for exploitation of minors, considering there's a ton of stuff they can't really legally consent to.
In Leon the Professional the people in charge of Natalie Portman allowed a nude scene where she gets into bed with Leon. The actor for Leon, jean Reno, was the one who said no.
They only started changing the age of "minors" 100 years ago.
Human beings have been around for 250,000 years.
The age wasn't change because of morality, or protecting anyone, etc. It was changed because of economics - economists said that the later people put off having children (or not having children at all) the more money they created for the economy.
So now they give priority to the voice of narcissistic elderly women who - if left in charge - wouldn't let anyone fall in love, get married, or have sex ever. You slowly watch the stranglehold on your kids as fewer kids get married, or have kids of their own, and they're more depressed than ever.
It's bizarre to watch people so easily manipulated into a system where they're so hardcore engaged in making sure their own kids will be the end of the line and simply replaced in the future with people from other countries.
person A) does childhood nude scene. good for career. Works into adulthood. Puts nudes on Insta anyways just for the publicity. Nude scenes never bother him; basically a positive
person B) does childhood nude scene. Movie flops. Never works past childhood. Is upset by nudes being out there.
If you ban something you deprive person A of his freedom and the good it might have done him. On the basis of what? Oh that someone else would have done the same thing and regretted it. Only the parents can decide what's right, as in most things regarding children.
I disagree. Nudes of children have been painted forever, and a photograph is just an evolution of that. My view is that the human body is beautiful in all phases, and I don't want to discourage the viewing of it. No child could reasonably consent to it, so the parents' consent will have to do. In this sense, it's no different than a child doing anything. And I don't see why it should be different.
If we're still talking about child abuse, nudes aren't the problem. A child can be sexualized by a fully clothed photo, and a nude can be completely innocent. It's tangential to child abuse.
Lol what would you say if someone told you that you could claim someone who's dead:
The suit alleges that Zeffirelli — who died in 2019 — assured both actors that there would be no nudity in the film, and that they would wear flesh-colored undergarments in the bedroom scene. But in the final days of filming, the director allegedly implored them to perform in the nude with body makeup, “or the Picture would fail.”
Said certain things. And as a reward:
They are seeking damages “believed to be in excess of $500 million.”
For $500 million?? My real life self would absolutely tesify in court the Angela Lansbury forced me to show my bare buttocks on film for so much money I'd be able to own a home on every continent and "fuck you" levels of money.
“It wasn’t that big of a deal,” she said. “And Leonard wasn’t shy at all! In the middle of shooting, I just completely forgot I didn’t have clothes on.”
They are seeking damages “believed to be in excess of $500 million.”
Sex work is real work, and Shortbus is art, and having sex on the stage is still just acting, and nudity is natural, but these actors have been harmed for having acted in a tasteful scene waking up in bed naked, still mostly covered, in a Shakespeare play.
They should change their catchphrase to "hypocrisy is our strength".
is the scene something in question that's uncomfortable to watch or are they just after money?
I notice the article didn't include the scene in question.
Look deep within your soul, and ask yourself, "if they actively endorsed the scene, and the movie, for DECADES, have they suffered a half a billion dollars in psychologist bills worth of damages, or are they looking for a paycheck?"
I'd like a half a billion dollars. Who wouldn't?
Hollywood WAS being creepy and weird. Of course. That is what Hollywood does. And they need to stop. But that isn't mutually exclusive from them just wanting a paycheck.
If it wasn't an issue for them in 1968, or in 1978, then it certainly isn't an issue for them now. You don't get to wait over 54 years to decide something is finally a problem for you.
There was mention that California reopened a law that allows them to sue, meaning that law was open at least one other time in the past five decades. It didn't have to be in 1978. My point is they had the option to sue, or at least raise some concerns about what happened, and they didn't until their retirement money started running out.
They were underage in 1968, and perhaps the law did not allow them to sue in 1978. Now it does.
They were pushing a political narrative that having sex before 25 should cause you to be arrested and jailed because "something something brain development".
Has anyone started to notice that that keep raising the age over and over and over again?
Like I understand that people would be nervous about the old guy who wants the high school girls to come over and sleep with him. But they're missing that if you put the eldery women in charge, the results are much worse. They'd lock the teen girls indoors and never let them talk to another human being, just so their ego doesn't have to feel bad that they'll never be young again.
Every time it's the same thing.
when I was a young girl I did (sexual thing) and that made me successful!
now I'm older and can would no longer be able to do those things
so younger girls shouldn't be able to do (thing that made me successful)! either!
Successful societies have had men who admire attractive women in charge for...forever, basically. There's a lot of whining about it but honestly we know it works.
What happens to a society when it's politically dominated by narcissistic, older childless women? Does it just collapse as they seek to steal every scrap of attention from their younger counterparts?
A suspension of a law in California expired on the last day of '22, allowing them to sue now. Seems like the actors have also defended the scene numerous times as adults.
I'm always suspicious of shit that resurfaces after so long, anyway.
Hollywood is gross, child abuse is gross. But so is waiting this long without a fuss, then suing when it's convenient.
DNRTFA
Nudity isn't automatically child abuse. Art has involved nudity forever. Not that most of what Hollywood puts out is art. It's Hollywood so they probably sexually abused the children.
Didn't say it was child abuse, just that I don't approve of child abuse. That said, it is pretty sketchy filming naked minors. The minors can't legally consent, I'd imagine, so who does? The producers? They don't have the power. The parents? That's fairly ick, too.
Child abuse? Maybe not. Child exploitation? Well, child is the wrong word, but I'd say there's a pretty good argument to be made for exploitation of minors, considering there's a ton of stuff they can't really legally consent to.
In Leon the Professional the people in charge of Natalie Portman allowed a nude scene where she gets into bed with Leon. The actor for Leon, jean Reno, was the one who said no.
I don't think any of this is true, they're simply redoing the same teenage sex hysteria narratives my grandparents had in modern form.
I don't really think we're doing our children favors by reverting to a "babies are brought by storks" mentality here.
They only started changing the age of "minors" 100 years ago.
Human beings have been around for 250,000 years.
The age wasn't change because of morality, or protecting anyone, etc. It was changed because of economics - economists said that the later people put off having children (or not having children at all) the more money they created for the economy.
So now they give priority to the voice of narcissistic elderly women who - if left in charge - wouldn't let anyone fall in love, get married, or have sex ever. You slowly watch the stranglehold on your kids as fewer kids get married, or have kids of their own, and they're more depressed than ever.
It's bizarre to watch people so easily manipulated into a system where they're so hardcore engaged in making sure their own kids will be the end of the line and simply replaced in the future with people from other countries.
Imagine 2 people:
person A) does childhood nude scene. good for career. Works into adulthood. Puts nudes on Insta anyways just for the publicity. Nude scenes never bother him; basically a positive
person B) does childhood nude scene. Movie flops. Never works past childhood. Is upset by nudes being out there.
If you ban something you deprive person A of his freedom and the good it might have done him. On the basis of what? Oh that someone else would have done the same thing and regretted it. Only the parents can decide what's right, as in most things regarding children.
I disagree, broadcasting a nude child to the world is inappropriate for a host of reasons.
I disagree. Nudes of children have been painted forever, and a photograph is just an evolution of that. My view is that the human body is beautiful in all phases, and I don't want to discourage the viewing of it. No child could reasonably consent to it, so the parents' consent will have to do. In this sense, it's no different than a child doing anything. And I don't see why it should be different.
If we're still talking about child abuse, nudes aren't the problem. A child can be sexualized by a fully clothed photo, and a nude can be completely innocent. It's tangential to child abuse.
If true, that would shed a different light on the matter.
Lol what would you say if someone told you that you could claim someone who's dead:
Said certain things. And as a reward:
For $500 million?? My real life self would absolutely tesify in court the Angela Lansbury forced me to show my bare buttocks on film for so much money I'd be able to own a home on every continent and "fuck you" levels of money.
What damages?
Damages of not being given $500 million, sounds like.
What it always is in some states: Pain and suffering
That's how Alex Jones supposedly ended up owing 6 gorillion to the victims of the Sandy Hook Shoah
If anything, she should be suing her parents.
Sex work is real work, and Shortbus is art, and having sex on the stage is still just acting, and nudity is natural, but these actors have been harmed for having acted in a tasteful scene waking up in bed naked, still mostly covered, in a Shakespeare play.
They should change their catchphrase to "hypocrisy is our strength".
it'll likely get thrown out, but i would enjoy seeing hollyweirdoes lose $500m
Not going to lie, that movie is awesome, and that one scene is beautiful.
is the scene something in question that's uncomfortable to watch or are they just after money? I notice the article didn't include the scene in question.
Look deep within your soul, and ask yourself, "if they actively endorsed the scene, and the movie, for DECADES, have they suffered a half a billion dollars in psychologist bills worth of damages, or are they looking for a paycheck?"
I'd like a half a billion dollars. Who wouldn't?
Hollywood WAS being creepy and weird. Of course. That is what Hollywood does. And they need to stop. But that isn't mutually exclusive from them just wanting a paycheck.
The scene is question is tasteful. It's the morning after Romeo and Juliet's wedding night. We watched that movie in high school.
If it wasn't an issue for them in 1968, or in 1978, then it certainly isn't an issue for them now. You don't get to wait over 54 years to decide something is finally a problem for you.
They were underage in 1968, and perhaps the law did not allow them to sue in 1978. Now it does.
There was mention that California reopened a law that allows them to sue, meaning that law was open at least one other time in the past five decades. It didn't have to be in 1978. My point is they had the option to sue, or at least raise some concerns about what happened, and they didn't until their retirement money started running out.
They were pushing a political narrative that having sex before 25 should cause you to be arrested and jailed because "something something brain development".
Has anyone started to notice that that keep raising the age over and over and over again?
Like I understand that people would be nervous about the old guy who wants the high school girls to come over and sleep with him. But they're missing that if you put the eldery women in charge, the results are much worse. They'd lock the teen girls indoors and never let them talk to another human being, just so their ego doesn't have to feel bad that they'll never be young again.
Every time it's the same thing.
Successful societies have had men who admire attractive women in charge for...forever, basically. There's a lot of whining about it but honestly we know it works.
What happens to a society when it's politically dominated by narcissistic, older childless women? Does it just collapse as they seek to steal every scrap of attention from their younger counterparts?
Two retirees conspiring for their chance to get a payout.
Also, unless I'm wrong, The scene in question shows nothing of Olivia. Indeed, we see more titty when she's in a bodice than when she's naked in bed.
I missed the clownworld threads