Nude

This movie could have been simply an experience of wallowing in female nudity. But the moderately revealing scenes are woven into an engaging plot following an expensive nude photography project jeopardized by clashing esthetic and business views. The the photographer's search for adoration and the models search for expression collides with the constraints imposed by the project business lead, resulting in contentions over the borderlines between beauty and obscenity, expressiveness and provocation, safe business choices and daring artistic choices. The clash culminates at the art display where the project final result is revealed and all participants speak their mind with little reservations.

Beautiful flesh on view, but most of this is a dull and often indecipherable monologue by the pretentious photographer. He mutters, barely moving his lips, and has a heavy French accent. And it is all 1960s cliches adding up to nonsense. The models pretend to be impressed by his "insight."

"Nude" is an extremely bold but surprisingly charming and intriguing documentary. It follows David Bellemere, a professional photographer known for his risky photography, to photograph selectively attractive but shy young women with a popular modeling brand pursuing sales. David's mission however becomes more challenging as his knowledge and resources are heavily tasked. Throughout this documentary, viewers sink their eyes into what appears as the depths of modeling and photography involving attraction, expectations, and imagination. It's sometimes surprisingly heartbreaking as the personal dilemmas and outcomes from decisions made by the photographers and models are explored.

But its most glaring feature, immediately from its introduction, was its presentation of the human anatomy. It explores nudity in a way that prudish viewers may find shamelessly distasteful while others could appreciate its context. The vast beauty of the women involved in this moderately tense experience gives audiences a thoughtful interpretation of confidence and peering what's beyond their flesh. They're equally treated as delicate art opposed to aggressively demeaning inanimate objects. Their bodies, from every lingering camera angle and eyesight, are naturally exposed with wonderfully immersible environments. Before the documentary ends, audiences will feel closer to David and the models in ways that cannot be explored through censored televised broadcasting.

This presentation isn't for the easily offended or those seeking "tasteful" content with less revealing scenery. It was a raw, emotional, and original story about a misunderstood individual associating with either unchallenged or ambitious models showing the world there's truly more that happens before, while, and after the cameras record. It's highly recommended that this beautifully crafted experience is seen for what it was bold to do and wouldn't restrain itself for any individuals or reasons otherwise.

This is a marvelous film, an excellent docu-drama but slightly flawed. In documentary fashion, we follow the photography assignment of renowned photographer David Bellemere. To the unitiated, he indulges in the male gaze, engages in personal relationships with his models in order to get the perfect shot, his own unique vision to put on canvas while navigating the business side of commercial photography.

Which in his case is to tell his bosses to shove off.

I can respect that. I can also respect the way he works. Because from an artistic viewpoint, it isn't the male gaze at all. It's all about the way he sculpts the human body like a statue to fill the space and convey an emotion, to create an impact that the model communicates to the viewer.

There is nothing prurient in this photographs; they are sensual with a hint of sexuality coupled with a bit of innocence, given the young ages of his models.

That being said. This film gets more interesting when we see the conflict between artist and business managers. Artists vs. Models, and I would have loved to see even more of that.

Bellemere's style can be seen as objectifying and toxic in today's climate. There may be some truth to that. Sometimes I would scream, "You need a contortionist! Not a print model!"

But when it's all laid out for the talent to do her poses, we understand they had some inkling of what they were getting into.

Another flaw is the lack of diversity of the models chosen, but that is the nature of the beast. There is one curvy model but she was hardly a "plus-size" in mundane terms. There were poses that busty, "Playboy" type models would never be able to pull off, so I get it.

Is Bellemere's art beautiful? Yes. Is it impersonal? Also, yes.

Does it also show the world a realistic side of nude photography that isn't connected to adult entertainment? Absolutely. But I did wish there was more of this discussion from the model's POV.

I love this movie becuase it gives a new presecption about nudity very educational. I think that david is gonna suced. thank you daivd you taught the world more about art.