Free the Nipple

To be fair I turned this movie off almost at once. If you want to make a film about women's rights to be legally equal to men, and you title your film after a political movement to show breasts are not offensive, sexual or shameful you don't blur out the women's breasts. By doing so you are sending the exact opposite message. By blurring out the breasts this film is saying that they should stay covered because it might offend someone.

This film is a waste of time and money. It works in direct opposition to women's rights.

If you want to make a film like this you must have the courage to actually free the nipple. Otherwise, don't bother.

Anyone would think in certain parts of the world women aren't being, sold as sex slaves, beaten, raped, stoned, allowed any freedoms. DAILY. If women seriously cared about equal rights you would think they would put energy into preventing these things rather than exercising their right to bare nipples. It's sad to see women plights in modern countries incomparable to other countries where culture and religion are ruling negating human rights.

Oh well women keep up the good fight.

I guess your equal rights voice is watered down to nudity, when the real volume could be found elsewhere.

I wonder if a woman who has had acid thrown on her would trade places with any of these oppressed and tortured women in the film?

The people exclaiming this was somehow about more than just the right to have bare breasts in public - where exactly was that in the plot? You, like the movie, are romanticizing and over thinking very petty things.

I think it's a great cause - women should definitely be allowed to walk around topless in any state of this nation. However, to say that they were somehow pushing for some grander agenda that went as far as being called a revolution? Come on. Their agenda didn't even register as a microscopic piece of dust on the radar of "revolution".

There wasn't much of a plot to this story, other than "let's get super insanely cool looking shots, mostly in slow-mo, of us girls looking insanely cool and counter-culture like", to that end, they did that in spades, and is the only reason I gave this film one more star than 1.

There is a tiny love story between the two protagonists, which never exactly reaches an arc, and is just forgotten about by the end of the film - there were too many shots of women looking empowered and cool in slow motion to be had, I guess.

The whole film is just a self indulgent "look how cool/edgy I am" montage, with barely any kind of a story behind it. Three of the main characters you sort of connect with, and the rest are almost non-existent.

The funniest part about the whole story, is that they never even achieved any of their goals, but the ending ends like they indeed created some sort of cultural revolution. No, you just wasted a bunch of money that was invested in you, by spray painting and stickering public property. No legislation was changed, no social movement started to gain momentum. If I had invested money in those girls, I would be pretty angry - just like whoever invested money in this worthless film.

There are many things in the society are considered as "rule of thumb". In the modern society, we are still using the moral standard from our ancestors back into the feudal society. If you think about it, it doesn't make sense especially on sex.

Another related controversy would be should mothers cover their boobs when breastfeeding their babies in the public area. Some people may accuse the behaviors simply because it will make them feel uncomfortable. But who would like to be covered while eating? My guess is normal people won't like it.

Despite the purpose of this movie, the story tells a clear idea of looking at things in a different angle.

This low budget production is based on a true story. It was produced by, directed by, and written by Lina Esco. The story is about activism in New York City to establish the right of women to show their breasts in public. The courts already said that women have that right, but local police still harassed women who go topless.

By the end of the film, the cause is broadened to emphasize all censorship, including film censorship. This is how it should be, as the display of female anatomy is part of the larger issue of self-expression and the libertarian viewpoint that we all have the right to act however we wish as long as we are not hurting another. As the film rightfully points out, religions play a central role in the creation of taboos and the exercise of censorship.

But the best part of the film is Lina Esco, whose presence as the central character of this film has an energy that reminds me of Angelina Jolie or Katie Holmes.

I did find it confusing that the film sometimes pixelates the topless women. Obviously, this was done for artistic reasons, because the film does not shy from the display of nudity, per its purpose. But this is a minor confusion; it does not dampen the film's enthusiasm for its cause.