A former composer for b-movies sets out to reveal the darkside of independent filmmaking and find out directly from the source what it is like to be a woman in the industry.
Before I start this review I'm going to warn you, I absolutely tear this so called documentary apart. I probably wouldn't waste the web space acknowledging "Some Nudity Required" but it pissed me off beyond reason. I've been mad at movies before but this is without question the most irritated I've ever been with a movie. I found little to no redeeming qualities within this biased piece of trash so this is going to be a pretty one-sided review for those who may want to skip reading it altogether.
Supposedly what "Some Nudity Required" is about is that it takes a look at what it takes to be a star in b-movies and the "damaged" people involved in them. What it really is, is a pro-feminist or rather a supposed pro-feminist stance against b-movies and about how they and the business exploit women. When I say that this is supposedly a pro-feminist movie, what I mean is that this really boils down to is that the creator, Odette, is trying to make a name for herself. By demonizing an industry that gave her a career where she had none. That's where a lot of annoyance comes from: first it lies about what it covers, and then it also doesn't set out to do what it thinks it does. It's the product of a slimy two-faced woman who wanted to leap frog to fame by stabbing those who gave her a career in the back. It makes claims of covering b-movies, what "Some Nudity Required" actually covers are softcore skin flicks with an occasional T 'n A style b-movie thrown in. It doesn't actually cover the whole b-movie spectrum, only those that involve nudity. Just more of the movie's obvious biased nature that shows through. It also makes it seem quite redundant for the fact that it's criticizing movies that are made solely for their sex appeal.
I'm not going to make excuses for the lower grade movies as a lot of them do exploit female nudity for sales; this is not a revelation or something new. It certainly wasn't anything new for 1997 either as exploitation and skin flicks have existed for several decades and wasn't something that merely popped up when video cassettes did. So this movie could have made a point it could have explored the idea of women being used for their looks and what not, but it just barely skims the surface. Any point that is made regarding women being used, Odette manages to turn it into how it affected her in some profound way. That's all she accomplishes at doing in the movie; merely pointing the finger at the movie industry blaming them for this or that while shamelessly tacking herself to everything that occurs. No reasons are covered or explored; she paints an image of this being merely black-or-white situation and simply being cut-and-dry. This issue is anything but simple and can't be so easily defined. The people she interviews bring up more points and more questions that should have been asked by this movie, but then Odette wouldn't have been able to continue to spend time making it seem like she is this horrible victim of an awful business.
Amazingly she has two actresses that strongly contradict one another. Julie Strain is a voice for the b-movies; she doesn't believe she's being exploited instead she believes she's exploiting the movies to get her where she wants to be. Then there's Maria Ford, an actress who seems to have only stared in softcore porn movies who believes that she isn't being allowed to move forward as an actress because of the way she looks and can only do movies that require nudity. These two women alone could provide enough arguments for both sides to make "Some Nudity Required" be the documentary that it should be, instead of a biased soapbox for some scorned-failed singer. It's also interesting to watch the incredibly polarizing attitudes between the two women: Julie is a very forward and bold woman who has no problems going all out and actually views acting as being an outlet for her. While Marie is clearly a woman on the brink of a nervous breakdown and has an incredible number of personal issues regarding nudity and sex, but also views herself as a victim of the system much like Odette. Though I can understand Maria's stance and view of the business a lot sooner than I can Odette since Maria's the one who actually has to get naked in front of a camera.
There are a number of other people interviewed, like writer of "Slumber Party Massacre 3" Catherine Cyran who oozes with a pompous self-righteous attitude who blames the entire movie industry for objectifying women but has no problem in taking part of it. Like Maria and Odette, she considers herself a victim of circumstances as well and refuses to take any responsibility for anything. Interestingly enough, Odette targets a number of directors and a couple of actresses who on camera point out that Odette is trying to lead them into saying that women are exploited. That right there lets you know you have a fucked documentary when the interviewees can tell when someone is being biased and then calls them out on it. It's particularly funny how Jim Wynorski, a man who is unapologetic about making the movies he does and is heavily targeted in the movie, appears to have more scruples than Odette. His attitude almost makes you want to hate him but compared to the movie's creator, he doesn't seem so bad. He makes no excuses about what he does or being objective about the women he hires. Where as Odette, Maria, and Catherine give every excuse in the world about working on these movies even though they are disgusted by them.
That's where my other big issue with this worthless tripe comes from. There are some women, like Brinke Stevens, who have no problem with acting in these movies but stand their ground on what they will and won't do. As compared to Odette, Maria, and Catherine who would have you believe that they all had guns held to their heads and that they have no choice to make these movies. A major case of people who want to have their cake and eat it too. They want the careers and will do what they can to get it, even if it means sacrificing their morals but choose to portray themselves as victims. Rather than actually sticking to what they believe in, saying no, and maybe just maybe working on movies that don't require the outlandish things that these movies ask for. But then if they did that, then who would they have to blame for their short comings?
As both a man and the target audience for the movies that are talked about in "Some Nudity Required", I will never be able to understand what it is like for a woman who acts in these movies. "Some Nudity Required" could have illustrated that for me, it could have helped me to understand what it is like. Instead all that is meant to do was to put Odette's name out there and recklessly blame the low-budget side of filmmaking for everything, all for the sake of making her famous. This movie has very little to do with b-movies and those who make them and has everything to do with the director wanting attention for herself, and nothing else. She goes so far as to make the excuse that she worked on these movies because she was sexually abused as a child. Not unbelievable but quite coincidental and questionable given the circumstance. Then to have to listen to the pretentious nonsense spew out of the mouth of a two-faced hypocrite like Catherine Cyran, makes watching the movie all the more frustrating.
This is a great example of dangerous and irresponsible filmmaking. It takes a subject that could be heavily analyzed, debated, and brought into question but turns out it's nothing more than a pathetic cry for attention from somebody wanting to take a shortcut to being famous. It never looks at the positive side of b-movies and that it's giving people a chance to make movies that otherwise would NEVER have chance. At the same time it never accomplishes at properly covering the sexist nature of these movies like it was suppose to. It blindly makes accusations and blames movies for the short comings of people and never stops to ask the question: Can these women not make it because it is a sexist industry or is it because they are not good enough to make A-list movies? That may sound a little mean but it is still a legitimate question that should be asked. There is no reason for this documentary to exist; it does nothing, it accomplishes nothing, and has nothing to say when there is in fact plenty that should have been said and discussed.
It may be an immature stance but honestly, I'm happy to see that making this documentary destroyed Odette's career and put her on a blacklist, couldn't have happened to a worst person. Odette can go fuck herself and her self-righteous bullshit. Catherine Cyran can go fuck herself too. I apologize for those uncalled for remarks but those two women managed to get my blood boiling.