Some Nudity Required

Some Nudity Required (1998)

*** (out of 4)

Odette Springer was the mind behind this documentary that takes a look at "B" movies and the certain requirements that are expected out of women. Springer got her start working for Roger Corman but she soon realized that those type of "B" movies required the women to appear naked. The documentary features interviews with the likes of Julie Strain, Jim Wynorski, Roger Corman, Fred Olen Ray, Samuel Z. Arkoff, Andy and Arlene Sidaris and Brinke Stevens.

SOME NUDITY REQUIRED is a pretty strong documentary that questions some of the things that are required out of women. There's no question that the movie wants to attack the fact that women are expecting to look a certain way and the documentary wants the viewer to question why they watch these types of movies. At the same time, you've got directors like Wynorski on hand here offering up rather truthful comments including him saying that the majority of the people renting these movies aren't housewives but instead men who want to see beautiful women naked.

The documentary tackles various subjects and it remains extremely entertaining throughout. Obviously, the film puts down the fact that nudity is required yet there's plenty of nudity throughout the running time including getting some behind-the-scenes footage. If you're a fan of these types of "B" movies then this documentary really does a great job at taking you into the pre-production of these films and what decisions are made before the cameras started rolling.

Ms. Springer obviously has a bone to pick with the industry and she has her right to do so, of course.

However, not all B erotic movies are filled with sex coupled with violence to the extreme, as she seems to suggest. Some are well done with fairly high production values for the genre, excellent acting, and even decent plots; for example, "Secrets of a Chambermaid," "Testing the limits," "Lolita 2000," "Virtual Encounters," and many more. I believe some actresses, such as Nikki Fritz, take their roles with a professional attitude and are to be admired; there are others, such as Kira Reed, Amber Newman, Brandy Davis, Jacqueline Lovell, Samantha Phillips, and Regina Russell, who also do quite well and need not be ashamed of their work. These women, after all, have not gone into hardcore, although I'm sure many of them could have.

I notice that Stephanee LaFleur. one of the better actresses in this category who either voluntarily or under pressure has her breasts grossly augmented through surgery, provides a negative comment below though

I don't think I am way off base here, but if so, send me a response.

I caught this documentary by chance, and it was an eyeopener into the world of B-Movies. This genre being nothing more than filmsy scripts, mediocre acting, and of course the all important sex(nudity,and all that encompasses) and violence. Some may say that how is that different from a Hollywood movie. I would argue mainly that it is the budget that is different. But apart from that this documentary looks at how hard it is for women particularly to move from the world of showing their body to actual decent to good acting in the mainstream cinema. Anyone who sees it, will think twice when viewing these movies.

Being a fan of typical "bad" movies I was very interested to see this documentary. I have seen numerous of the movies that were featured (I have to admit) but never really thought about the people making the movies. One thing that amazed me was how good the at acting the actors became outside of the movies. Julie Strain displayed more emotion and feelings in the few minutes she was featured than in all of her other movies combined. Of course in those few minutes she showed what a shallow person she is. As most of the directors and producers seem to be. They all seemed very paranoid about their movies being called exploitative.

Overall the movie was quite good. I could have done without the home video of the little girl naked (flashback to molestation of Odette as a child). Also it seemed that the footage of Maria Ford (one of the main interviewees) was overdone. I am a fan of hers but it seems that she was exploited for this film to make it more gritty. Many of the others interviewed didn't see a problem (being more concerned about making money).

7/10

When i saw this documentary some time ago, i found it really irritating. It is in many parts Odette Springer's annoying tribute to Odette Springer with it's to many "i'm-a-extremely-fantastic-and-talented-person-but-nobody-understands-it" scenes. What makes it more annoying is that Springer looks down on the people she wants to depict (Except Maria Ford who is "a-extremely-fantastic-and-talented-person-but-nobody-understands-it".) and sometimes steps on them. It is also filled with faked documentary scenes like the ridiculous scene where Springer looks at a violent video and gets "excited" what leads us to the scene that gave me a bade taste in my mouth- in the end of the movie tries Odette Springer to find a reason to why she got "excited" when she saw the violent video and from the clear blue sky the truth falls over her (and the poor audience)- all of a sudden she remembers that she was subjected to sexual abuse by her grand parents. What makes me feel bad about that scene is that she don't presents any real evidence and that the grand parents both are dead so they don't have any chance to defend themselves from the accusation.