Quote:
Originally Posted by TF-Viewer
Shrinking out of clothes doesn't automatically make anything R-rated though. Alice in Wonderland didn't become R-rated because of the out of clothes shrinking or growing. Implied nudity is still a thing, convenient censorship is still a thing. TV has been using those elements for years to have nudity in a scene without actually having nudity in a scene. A person is shrunk out of their clothes, you don't see their naughty bits though and they quickly find some tiny piece of cloth to cover themselves with for the rest of the show. I'd have trouble counting all the times that stuff happened on television, so let's not pretend it's not totally an option or that out of clothes shrinks would jump something up to an R rating.
|
In bold, I couldn't have said it any better myself. It can work, I mean why did Monsters vs Aliens and the new Alice in Wonderland even bother throwing in clothes rippage at all? The original Disney Alice in Wonderland didn't even have clothes rippage, it just grew with her. In the new one she was nude in the garden! Granted it was cover nudity and it was PG rated. So nudity doesn't mean a automatic PG-13 or R. There is a audience out there, they just want decent process and none of this poof now I'm giant or doll sized. And no clothes changing with them either. It can work, if done right.
Honey I shrunk the kids would have been better if the shrinkage was WAY slower... granted I know they couldn't do nude given the age of some of the actors, but a slow process would have been better, instead of an instant poof. However I did like how the movie made everything seem HUGE to them, that was nice.
But that's all I wanted to add.