3

John Wick 2 is a solidly R-rated movie that delights in plastering the screen with gritty blood-and-guts. In a dramatically key scene featuring a very intentionally nude woman, every shot is awkwardly staged or edited to avoid actually showing any nudity above a PG level. Why?

The casting script must have clearly indicated that the most significant scene for the role called for full nudity.

Is there a business reason to avoid bringing R-rated nudity into an R-rated blockbuster action movie?

Or is nudity known to be a hang-up with any individual with executive authority in this production?

closed as primarily opinion-based by Mr. Kennedy, Paulie_D, mattiav27, DForck42, sanpaco Nov 28 '17 at 18:25

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    I didn't watch the movie, but maybe she didn't want to show everything. – Anne Daunted Oct 22 '17 at 17:09
  • 1
    @AnneDaunted I know that every actor draws some line on nudity and sex. But the script called for exposed nudity on this character in the most substantial of her three scenes. The role was amenable to a wide variety of actresses, so I would be surprised (but fascinated to learn if this does in fact happen) that after casting an actress could object to the scripted nudity. – feetwet Oct 22 '17 at 17:24
  • 1
    @feetwet - She could object to it, but it's likely that they told her it won't be shown in the movie. As I said in my comment, I believe it's the filmmakers not wanting to go to far with sex and nudity. – user58206 Oct 22 '17 at 17:30
  • 4
    @feetwet - If the actress had a problem, highly doubt she would have taken her clothes off even if the viewer doesn't see everything. I think she was fine with it, but the film makers decided not to go further with it. For me, it was fine, I didn't go into JW2 to see nudity, I went for the violence. – user58206 Oct 22 '17 at 17:40
  • 2
    The character is metaphorically "naked" before a killer - naked in the sense of vulnerable. Any graphic nudity satisfying voyeuristic desires would have simply been gratuitous, especially as the character is committing suicide and being murdered. As written, this question, however, is merely soliciting opinion and should be closed or reworded to solicit knowledge claims. – Mr. Kennedy Nov 25 '17 at 3:56
0

Sort of all of the above. Overall, sex or romance is clearly not part of the story, so showing a nude becomes gratuitous.

It does depend a lot on the story. If it has a host of questionable characters, such as a Jim Thompson book or perhaps Hubert Selby Jr.'s "Last Exit To Brooklyn", things such as nudity or physical sex are more likely to be accepted.

In general, the Puritanical attitude still has a grip of sorts in U.S. culture, and this shows up in the mainstream media. That's why there's no issue with violence, but when it comes to physical intimacy, you're starting to tread in murky territory.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .