A
A couple of weeks ago, Henry Cavill gained attention for stating his dislike for filming intimate scenes. With the abundance of movies and shows featuring nudity, Cavill appeared to be the only one speaking up, a solitary moral leader standing tall amid the filth.

However, a new person has joined him. A seasoned actor, who has experienced multiple periods of relaxed censorship in media, and possesses a deeper comprehension of the jaded motives that prompt an actor to expose themselves for the sake of art. I hate to disappoint you, but chances are slim that Joanna Lumley will make an appearance in a future episode of Euphoria.

Lumley expressed to Radio Times her desire to eliminate sex scenes entirely due to the objectification that occurs when actors undress, causing the loss of their character and turning it into a playground situation. She believes that cutting sex scenes would improve the pace of the show and eliminate their offensive nature.

It is intriguing to hear Lumley’s perspective, having likely faced many requests from questionable producers to undress during her career. In fact, she shared with Radio Times that nudity was expected from all female actors. “Even Vanessa Redgrave and Julie Christie had to expose themselves. It was a form of entertainment at the time,” she stated.

Previously, it was thought that nudity in movies would soon become a thing of the past. However, a new study reveals that films produced in the 2010s featured less nudity compared to any other decade since the 1960s. One possible explanation for this is the changing context in which these scenes are viewed. In the past, directors would not hesitate to have a popular actor undress simply for the sake of titillation, but now performers must consider that their nude scenes will remain accessible online indefinitely.

Lumley appears to have captured the current trend. A study done by UCLA’s Center for Scholars and Storytellers in October surveyed 1,500 teens and suggested a decrease in interest for watching sexually explicit content on-screen. A large portion of participants expressed that sex was unnecessary for progressing the plot in movies and TV shows. Additionally, many desired to see more emphasis on non-romantic friendships.

Despite ongoing discussions about its level of misogyny, the film “Poor Things” centers around a woman who uses sexual behavior to create her entire identity, making it difficult to justify removing any nudity. However, without the scene in Oppenheimer featuring Florence Pugh removing her top, the film would essentially be a shorter, but identical version. It’s clear that the importance of the scene is not just for shock value, but rather integral to the story.

The television show “The Idol” on HBO seemed to prioritize nudity over any other elements, and it ultimately failed due to its singular focus on naked scenes rather than character development, plot, or technical proficiency. The series seemed to be aiming for shock value and audience attention, but it fell short because it lacked substance. As actress Joanna Lumley once pointed out, this approach can be off-putting. With the plethora of explicit content readily available on the internet, why would anyone pay for a pricey streaming service to watch a traditional narrative drama when they can access it on their phone for free?

It’s possible that Lumley is correct. If the scenes are not essential to the story and the overall structure can stand without them, then it may be time to eliminate them.

Source: theguardian.com