The Sunday Giveaway: Two Tickets to Breakfast at Tiffany’s

Remember that time I blogged about Game of Thrones?

Well, did you know that Daenerys Targaryen aka Emilia Clarke is on Broadway this very second?  The Mother of Dragons is currently starring in that novella-to-screen-to-stage-adaptation of Breakfast at Tiffany’s by Truman “Tru” Capote, along with George “Norm!” Wendt and big-time-up-and-comer-and-soon-to-be-in-lots-of-movies-I’m-sure Cory Michael Smith.

But all the attention is all Daenerys/MOD/Emilia.  Why?

Well, she’s playing the iconic role of Holly Golightly, of course . . . and this title is supes popular with tourists (I ran into a gaggle of French tourists the other day who said, “S’il vous plait . . . ou est . . . Breakfast at Tiffany’s?”

And the other reason the show has gotten a lot of eyeballs and play in the press…

She’s . . . (gasp) naked!

Big deal, right?  Or is it?  When you heard that she appeared in the nude were you shocked?  Intrigued?  Could care less?  What about the fact that Mr. Smith sheds down to his skin as well?

Is on-stage nudity a big deal anymore?  Are you a fan?  Against?

Give me your opinion on on-stage “buffness” below and you’ll be entered to win two tickets to see Breakfast at Tiffany’s on Broadway!


(Got a comment? I love ‘em, so comment below! Email Subscribers, click here then scroll down to say what’s on your mind!)

_ _


– Read The Associate Producer’s Perspective!  Click here!

– Only 67 performances of Macbeth remain!  Get tix.

  • Jess says:

    I just don’t understand why nudity is considered a big deal as long as it can be justified.

  • alex says:

    Megan Hilty’s character did Nudity last night on Smash. It was clever how they did it, Megan Hilty’s character chose the moment so it didn’t seem exploitive. But the producers wanted it to generate press and sell tickets.

  • Jackie B says:

    Nudity not a big deal. People get naked in real life at certain times.

  • Jewel says:

    I personally have always found nudity distracting. You end up staring at their nipples which takes you away from the story!

  • Michael Reed says:

    I think it can be another thing to create buzz and interest in the show. As long as its fine in a tasteful way and gets more people in the seats – I say do it!

  • Jeff says:

    I’m fine either way on nudity, but some of the things done to not do nudity call attention to themselves just as much, like the L-shaped sheet that goes to his waist, but her sternum; or when people who were just intimate get all coy and won’t leave the bed naked, but have to have things handed to them to put them on under the covers, etc. That is a much bigger annoyance. If they are just natural about it, and it has some justification, seems fine.

  • Connor Coleman says:

    As most people here have been saying, nudity is good if it has a specific artistic purpose. However, it needs to be a clear purpose, because I’ve seen plenty of shows where a character’s nudity is poorly executed. As an audience member, I need to understand something about the play or the character if they are going to be naked, otherwise it’s just uncomfortable… unless that’s exactly what I’m supposed to feel.

  • Emily says:

    In terms of shock value nudity on stage is certainly not as big of a deal as when it started really gathering momentum in the 60s. I believe it is still much more powerful onstage than film. Film has is an implied “peak into a private moment”, where taking off one’s clothes with an immediate reaction from an audience of hundreds, that’s a reveal!

  • Aaron Deitsch says:

    I think that nudity can serve a purpose, but can be VERY distracting if it is there just to sell tickets. The best example of nudity done tastefully that I have seen live was in Spring Awakening. That moment would have felt so unnatural if there was no nudity and the way they did it had such class that the nudity came second to the storyline. It did not distract from what was happening, it only enhanced the storytelling

  • Sara Lou Wolter (@itssaralou) says:

    Done in context with the script, and executed cleverly
    nudity is wonderful. Doing nudity for shock value no longer has the impact in 2013 as it had in the 60’s and 70’s. Nudity in a show would not influence my decision to go or not to go….the book, stars, music are still my criteria….

  • Jere says:

    I honestly don’t care one way or another. It’s like any other production element…sometimes it’s going to work, sometimes not. You must honestly evaluate what the scene calls for, just same as you might do with costumes, lights, and sets. For example, the play TAKE ME OUT takes place largely in a locker room and is about the impact on a sports team when one of the players comes out of the closet. It would be highly dishonest to stage that play without full frontal nudity. It’s a locker room. The audience has to feel what that is like. On the other side of the spectrum, there was a short-lived play on Broadway called TALLER THAN A DWARF, written by Elaine May and starring Matthew Broderick and Parker Posey. There was a scene early on, where Broderick’s character is alone in his apartment and goes into his bedroom and master bathroom to take a shower. Afterward, he comes out of the bathroom completely wrapped up in a towel and turns upstage, sits on the bed, and pulls on his underwear up under the towel. Now, what actual human being alone in his own home would do that? This bit was so clearly designed to make sure Matthew Broderick didn’t have to show his penis that it took me completely out of the scene. Had Broderick walked out of the bathroom completely naked and then gotten dressed, it might have been shocking for a moment, but the scene would have been honest. (It was a terrible play, badly done all around, so a bit of honesty might not have helped it, but it certainly wouldn’t have hurt.)

  • Meryl Federman says:

    Nudity is pretty much a neutral thing; as long as a show is “rated” appropriately, with notices about what ages are not allowed/recommended in the theater.

    But not all instances work, as Jere said, it’s like any other show design element that may work or not. Since strangers’ naked bodies aren’t something we likely see every day, however, the inherent shock of the moment has to be factored into the effect it will have onstage.

  • Sara says:

    I say if nudity adds to the play in some way–if it’s artistically or thematically relevant, go for it! If it’s just in there to shock audiences…well, it’s just ineffective. Nudity just isn’t that shocking. Ever been in the locker room of crunch gym? There’s a lot of naked ladies, but I wouldn’t call it avant guard.

  • Stephanie P says:

    I’m all for nudity. For comedic purposes, for emotional moments. As long as it’s not totally inappropriate for the show then why not? I’m surprised it still creates as much buzz as it tends to. Bodies are bodies. People going to the theater should be mature enough to see it.

  • Jakob W says:

    I would argue two cases on nudity based on the avenue. Theatre has a much more difficult time getting away with, dare I say it, frivolous nudity. Theatre audiences are, on average, more intellectually driven than the *average* movie goer. So I think it is – 99% of the time – a strong aesthetic choice in theatre. Film, however, has a reputation for using it as a selling point rather than an underlying ideological concern.
    Overall, it’ll get me to a theatre because I know it’s likely used for a daring, inventive purpose. In film, however, it will turn me away, making the film appear too commercial.

  • JamesB says:

    Growing up, I remember my grandmother telling me how the big Broadway musical comedies always had a little something risque in them … like Electra, Tessie Tura and Mazeppa in Gypsy. So since I always listened to my grandmother, it seems like it’s just normal when it happens. I mean, as long as it furthers the plot in a way that makes sense, why not?

  • Becca P says:

    Nudity is always going to offend someone, just as foul language, dark topics, and satire will always offend someone. That being said, it also has the potential to draw audiences, just as foul language, dark topics, and satire can sometimes do.

    In the end, it comes down to justification. If there is nudity in a show solely for the “sex sells” aspect, it is usually apparent on stage. It feels forced and often unnecessary. But like any other theatrical element, if used when the scene calls for it, it can add a great deal of honesty to the moment.

    Theatre is meant to be a reflection of real life. People are fully or partially naked at numerous times in their real lives, so why not honestly show that on stage?

  • judy gentile says:

    if nudity is truly necessary, then toward that end I don’t have an issue, if it is there for shock value only, then I can do without it.

  • Lauren Ensor says:

    I think if it is tastefully done, nudity is most definitely acceptable. Emilia has done it before in Game of Thrones, so it’s not as if she’s bein introduced to the idea, brand spankin’ new. If it fits the character, the show, and the actress, I say nudity is ok. Emilia Clarke is one of my favorite actresses. She can pull anything off, even if it’s her clothes.

  • Sue says:

    On-stage nudity is not a big deal any longer. I for one feel much better about it when males are stripping down along with females. That will raise the comfort level of this woman in the audience!

  • It amazes me that we have such hangups about nudity to this day when violence is everywhere and it is so much more graphic. I could care less. If it actually serves the story and isn’t just there so people can all get their panties in a knot, it’s find. I would say recently that the best use of nudity in a totally story-serving nonchalant way is Girls on HBO.

  • It’s interesting that you bring this up as I just saw Testament of Mary yesterday. There is a brief time toward the end of this one-woman show where Fiona Shaw takes her clothes off and jumps in a pool of water onstage. While the performance was rather engaging and powerful, this naked display came out of nowhere and did not enhance or enrich the storytelling at all. I was rather distracted by the nudity and found it difficult to understand its significance. So that is my criteria: nudity with purpose to the story and a useful agenda.

  • Randi says:

    Not a bid deal anymore but I know many people are bothered by it!

  • Teri says:

    I’ve been to plays where there has been nudity and to me its not a big deal. If its a great show then I have no problem with nudity.

  • Cameron K says:

    To me nudity in shows is not a big deal as long as they do it tastefully.

  • Kyle Abraham says:

    On-stage nudity is still a big deal, especially outside of NYC. I’m personally a fan.

  • Elise says:

    I feel nudity is fine if it advances the storyline or reveals (accidental pun) something about the character(s). If the nudity becomes the focus and not the storytelling, then it needs to go in my opinion.

  • John P. says:

    I just think it’s unnecessary unless in a rare circumstance central to the story which in this case it is not. If “Last Tango In Paris” was presented on stage, it would seem wrong if the young woman was not in the buff.

  • Christina T says:

    If it happens in the movies, why would it be okay to say it can’t happen on stage? Personally, if it fits into the story seamlessly then I don’t have a problem with it, especially if it is known by the audience ahead of time. I think the shock value would only happen if I didn’t know the show contained nudity!

  • Steve Marmon says:

    It may not be a big to me or others on this site, but it can offend many people. I think it should be done sparingly.

  • Laurie Bloom says:

    I do not mind nudity if it is necessary to the story/style/reality of the play…but I think a lot of productions hire a celebrity to get naked and then sensationalize it. For example: Nicole Kidman in The Blue Room. When that play opened it was a HUGE deal that she stripped and showed her butt….and despite mediocre reviews the ticket sales were tremendous….meanwhile, the other actor in the production, Iain Glen, did cartwheels while completely naked and that was hardly mentioned.

  • Ed says:

    I’ll probably be the only one that speaks honestly, but I love seeing the actors nude on stage. Let’s face it. A well toned body either male or female is beautiful to look at.

  • Ryan Lewis says:

    If it is necessary to advance the plot, I accept it. If it is a ploy to sell a couple of extra tickets, I prefer it be left to Hollywood and not Broadway.

  • as long as it’s justified then there should be no problem.

  • Sam says:

    I am totally in favor of Cory Michael Smith taking his clothes off. Wait, what was the question?

  • Robin F says:

    Nudity is useful when it is called for by the story and furthers the plot. Nudity of its own sake usually means there is a weakness in the production and they are hoping people will be too busy looking at genitalia to notice!

  • Billy Recce says:

    I find that if it suits the story and that it is there for a dramatic purpose, there is no problem. In my opinion, almost nothing is off limits when it is being done for art. I have also heard that Fiona Shaw strips down in Testament of Mary but that nudity hasn’t generated any buzz.







  • Nudity is fine, for whatever reason. Obsessing over nudity is the problem, especially these days. If nudity piques interest which leads to ticket sales, who cares? It’s nothing new. Oh! Calcutta! did over 7,000 nude performances in the 70’s. Hair was notorious (at first) for it’s single nude scene. Come for the T&A – stay for the story. If people buy tix to Breakfast at Tiffany’s because Emilia Clarke is nude – so be it. But as Ken pointed out, Cory Michael Smith is, too (but nobody mentions him). In the latest revival of “Equus”, a big deal was made about Daniel Radcliffe’s nudity — but hardly anyone mentioned Anna Camp’s equal (if not more extensive) lack of clothing. Surprising nudity is always welcome(‘Seminar’, anyone?) and one of my first surprise encounters Anthony Perkins, in 1980’s ‘Romantic Comedy’. And don’t even get me started on Off-Broadway!

    Bodies are just variations on a theme — something to be admired for what they are, not something to fret over.

  • Nancy Sharpe says:

    I have seen several shows with nudity, La Ronde, Oh Calcutta, Frankie and Johnny in the Clair de Lune to name a few. I don’t think it necessarily adds to or detracts from a show; however, I do think it can be distracting as in Frankie and Johnny. In Spring Awakening it was absolutely appropriate and I was sitting on stage.

  • Andrew Beck says:

    Nudity, Ken, is fine with me. I don’t see why people feel so repelled by it. There is no commandment that says “Thou Shalt Not Go Naked.” People take baths naked in real life, have sex naked in real life and sleep naked in real life. So why should theater not depict real life as it happens? Plus it creates memorable theatrical experiences that you carry around with you all of your life. How many people still talk with pride about being at the Anspacher Theater when Maxwell Caulfield laid on the sand naked in “Salonika.”
    They don’t remember that Jessica Tandy was in the cast, but if you say “Salonika” to a theatergoers of ascertain age, they’ll recall their experience with fondness.

  • Claire says:

    I’ve got no problem with nudity if there’s a good reason for it.

  • Justin Dormady says:

    If it adds to the emotional connections between the actors and audience, strip away. For this show specifically, I think it will be interesting to see the passion between Holly and Mr. Smith, though a romantic kiss in the rain from the original film got the point across too. It’ll be interesting to see how it translates and maybe paints a new picture of their relationship. Thanks for the chance!

  • Karen Campbell says:

    I like to sit close to the stage so nudity – heck, even undressing, can sometimes be distracting and uncomfortable, but when it has a dramatic purpose it can be natural and necessary as it was in “Equus”, “Hair”… and how could you have a bathtub scene without nudity? But when it’s used gratuitously, as it was in the full frontal shower scene in “Golden Boy” it seems ridiculous.

  • Cheryl Dzubak says:

    Nudity? No big deal. It’s been done before on Broadway, Hair and Oh! Calcutta. As long as it is done tastefully. There is a big difference between nudity and outright pornography.

  • Leslie Rosenberg says:

    In 2010, my boyfriend and I saw The Deep Throat Sex Scandal. There was nudity- a good deal of it, but it totally fit with the story.
    Nudity should be used- or not used, if it will fit in and/or advance the story.
    Nudity for publicity/to sell tickets/shock value, is frankly quite stupid!

  • Bruce says:

    If nudity is pertinent to the story, then it’s fine. If not, it’s just there to sell tickets and I’m not for it.

  • As long as it is in good taste, and is not being used to sell tickets (because then you get into the whole ethical debate of how close that is to selling sex, etc.), and the show is being marketed to age-appropriate audiences, then I say rock on.

  • Miriam says:

    Nudity can certainly be distracting, positively or negatively depending on how it’s used. It’s obviously still a big deal or we wouldn’t even be having this discussion!

  • Ed from CT says:

    Like many who have responded, I am fine with nudity if it is relevant to the story line. I have read more than one critic state that the nude scene in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” was gratuitous.
    But I admit I am curious to see if they are right.

  • Brian says:

    Nudity can be distracting. In The Nance it just seems gratuitous. In Love, Valor Compassion and Take Me Out it was essential to the plot. There is no set rule.

  • Jeremy Terry says:

    I think there’s a time and a place for everything, but on stage (just like in most movies and tv shows) there is rarely a place where nudity in any way serves the story. I’m a fan of cutting anything that is not essential to the show. I think that’s the best way to trim scripts, sets, budgets, you name it. If something doesn’t help the story, then it is not necessary.

  • Brandon S says:

    Yes, please. 😉

  • Rosie says:

    If nudity is purposeful and is appropriate in that it advances the plot and adds to the overall production–THEN IT IS NO BIG DEAL! If it is gratuitous and in poor taste, the audiences will hold their noses and vote with their feet–STILL NO BIG DEAL!

  • Ellen Orchid says:

    I think it’ll bring in business and there’s nothing wrong with that. Those performers are gorgeous so it would be a pleasure to see them in the buff. I like that both of them will be nude, not just the woman as so often happens. As long as it fits the story and I don’t find myself feeling embarrassed for the performers, I’m fine with it.

  • Nick Leshi says:

    Back in the 1960s and 70s (before my time), judging by many of the plays of that era, nudity on stage seemed to be more prevalent. But even with the passing of time, it still seems to serve more for shock value than as an integral part of the plot. It seems gratuitous — take out the nudity and the story isn’t really impacted one way or the other. I do find the double standard a bit alarming though. Remember Nicole Kidman’s much hyped nude scene in her show The Blue Room? I fell for the hype and went to see it, even though I likely wouldn’t have seen the play otherwise. Shame on me, but, hey, it was 1998 and I was young. The kicker was her nude scene was pretty subtle and her male co-star did a full-frontal naked CARTWHEEL on stage, but I hadn’t heard a peep of buzz about that. Now, as you mention, there is some male nudity in Breakfast at Tiffany’s but everyone is fixated on young Emilia Clarke’s bubble bath. Something to think about. (And I hope I win the tix because I would love to go see the show and judge for myself whether this is another example of gratuitous exploitation or if it really serves the play.)

  • Rick Shulman says:

    I have no problem with nudity on stage. I like the shock value of a live person naked in the theater as opposed to a taped version on a movie screen.

  • Elliot says:

    I have no problem with anything occurring on stage (including nudity) as long as no one is in real physical danger and it’s justified and makes sense for the story the director is trying to tell. So, really I’d have to see this show to give you a more solid answer 😉

  • Solange De Santis says:

    Sometimes it can feel awkward and embarrassing to be in a big room with several hundred people watching someone get naked. However, I vividly remember seeing “Wit” in Toronto starring the great actress Seana McKenna. At the end of the play, as the main character dies, she rose from her hospital bed, looked up toward a bright light, and the hospital robe slipped to the floor. There were a couple of exclamations in the audience but it was so obvious why she was nude. Naked we came into this world, and naked we leave it.

  • KENI FINE says:

    I like it better from the orchestra than the balcony.

  • When I went to see HAIR, all of the actors you wanted to see naked kept their clothes on. All of the actors you didn’t want to see naked stripped.

  • If its needed to tell the story go for it, although I’m very curious because I can’t imagine Audrey Hepburn doing the same thing, I’ll just have to see to decide!

  • Stephen F. says:

    Unless you’re sitting very close to the stage I don’t find nudity to be distracting. I find it pulls me out of the action much more in movies than on stage. Sometimes it can enhance a character’s sense of freedom, make a moment sexier, or simply shock us. Fiona Shaw is currently doing a bathing scene totally naked in Testament of Mary and I found that it really added to the reality of her character. I’m eager to see how they deal with it in Breakfast at Tiffany’s!

  • T says:

    As long as it’s justified by the story. Sex sells.

  • Samantha O says:

    I think we should strive to create real truthful moments on stage, and there is certainly a beauty in the natural body. If nudity is used for the sake of telling a more truthful story then I think it is fine.

  • Emily says:

    In the words of the late, great Ms. Shelley Winters, “I think on-stage nudity is disgusting, shameful and damaging to all things American. But if I were 22 with a great body, it would be artistic, tasteful, patriotic and a progressive religious experience.”

  • As long as it is not gratuitous and appropriate to the story, I don’t see this as an issue. I have yet to see “Breakfast….” but I saw “Hair” in 1969 when there was quite a buzz about the show’s nudity (again, this was 1969!)and gotta admit, this was much ado about nothing. You would think by 2013 people would be a tad more sophisticated, as long as it advances the story. I read that everyone grabbed their cellphones for pictures during Amelia’s bathtub scene. Yet that was hardly the case for Fiona Shaw’s bath scene, no one flinched we understood the power here.
    Grow up people. This is more a commentary on the audience(s) for a show, then the production.

  • john presutti says:

    Bottom Line….if nudity adds to a story and makes sense it should be used and if not keep the clothes on… There is so much nudity in the arts and entertainment world today that it can be distracting in certain plays as well as in movies and Televison. It no longer shocks an audience and it no longer get press unless its a major Hollywood star…

  • Albert says:

    We’ve come a long way since the prospect of actually unclothed actors was the comical impossibility driving YOU KNOW I CAN’T HEAR YOUR WHEN THE WATER’S RUNNING. And the original HAIR turned that ludicrous hypothetical into fact, drawing patrons for years, first at the Public, then on Broadway. TAKE ME OUT’s copious nudity may have taken a few people out of the play momentarily, but it was an intrinsic, organic element. Nudity has long since lost its shock value. I very much doubt it draws the curious as it once did–but I couid see a resurgence if suddenly Big Names took the naked plunge with regularity.

  • Alexa says:

    In general, I am all for nudity…but I’m getting tired of the uncomfortable, I’m naked just because it’s awkward that I’m naked, nudity of shows like Girls.

  • Brittany says:

    I work in downtown dance, so I am more surprised to see performers in costume than in the buff.

  • Paula says:

    If it’s integral to the story and tastefully done,
    that’s acceptable. If nudity is integrated into the
    play for shock value or curiosity, then, in my opinion,
    it’s not acceptable. It does seem that more and more
    shows have found it necessary to climb onto the “band-
    wagon”, so to speak.

  • Philip Iannitti says:

    The only time when I would not be okay with nudity is if it is not called for by the piece. I feel that in order for a nude scene to occur, it needs to be organic and needs to be a decision made not for wow factor, but to better strengthen a character or a scene. Some people will say it needs to be “tasteful” but sometimes a piece may call for untasteful nudity, say in a rape scene or something. While it would be disturbing to watch, it may emphasize the victim’s emotions or contribute greatly to an overall theme to the piece of work.

  • Nudity creates intrigue, in my opinion.

    Plus that’s the only action I’m gettin these days, so I say definitely disrobe, people! Take it all off!

  • vania says:

    An actors job is to give himself entirely to the character he is playing, to serve the story to bring life and everything that comes with it
    Nudity is part of life , it’s beautiful when it serves the story , it’s brave

  • Nanda Douglas says:

    Nudity is definitely to be used sparingly, if anything so that the audience can stay focused on the play at hand rather than the physical beauty of the actors. And there’s something a lot more personal about undressing in front of a live audience as opposed to your average, sex-filled Hollywood spectacle.

  • Dave Cackowski says:

    I don’t have a problem with nudity at all. I mean it’s been around certainly since Hair and Oh Calcutta and it may have been shocking at one time but now it is passé. I do agree however that producers use it to sell tickets especially if it’s a well known actor or actress, and that’s not a bad thing.You want everyone to see your show so go for it.
    I’ve seen some great shows with nudity including Hair and longer ago Equus and The Blue Room with Nicole Kidman and The Graduate with Kathleen Turner. There was even a great show Off Broadway called Naked with Mira Sorvino that I just loved.I will say though that you must have a good story or all anyone will remember is the nudity and that’s not a good thing.

  • Tim Realbuto says:

    Nudity is definitely not a big deal anymore, especially if its done tastefully. For example, I found the nudity in ‘Hair’ to be extremely beautiful. I also found it necessary in ‘W;t’ and ‘Equus.’ But let’s be honest… we all find it intriguing if its an actor we want to see!

  • Alan Langguth says:

    Who are you asking?
    Actors will be actors…writers will be writers…producers will be producers…BUT audiences will ultimately decide who’s right and who’s wrong!

    What works in NY might not work on the National Tour…but that can be said of any show that has the lest bit of controversy about it (nudity or otherwise).

    Life is life, art is art, and the human body is both.

  • Brian says:

    I don’t think that nudity is a big deal anymore thanks to shows like “Hair” and nudity with celebrities I think does still draw some crowds, but overall it’s not a big deal. The nudity with celebrities was an issue with this show specifically according to early reports that “Game of Thrones” fans were specifically going to the show to see her get naked and to try to snap a picture. I believe that those people can make it a big deal, but if a show has nudity it’s normally because it is needed to move the show’s plot forward or makes for an important artistic moment.

  • Jo says:

    I done have any issue with nudity on stage *if* it’s suggested by the script. In this case, Capote’s Go-Lightly was nude in the story and it fit into her characterizations. If it’s a publicity stunt only to get audiences in to see a star nude I don’t feel it has a place on Broadway and suggests something lacking in the show that this was all the producers could come up with to get people in the seats..

  • Amanda says:

    I don’t have any problem with it as long as it seems natural or justified. The only problem I have in particular with nudity is when some people cannot handle it like a mature adult. Those that make comments or take photos (!) should be ashamed. And I still can’t understand why nudity has to be a big enough deal that someone would decide to not go to a show – if you think the show sounds interesting or is something you would like, then just go and don’t let a little anatomy get in the way of buying a ticket.

  • consuelo carpenter says:

    Nudity does not bother me in general. I do think that a show should be billed on it’s own merits and not for the shock value of a nude scene.

  • Elizabeth says:

    I feel as long as its used to truly enhance the story, then it’s great, but to just throw nudity into a show to sell tickets is unnecessary.

  • John Dallal says:

    I think when nudity
    Is shown for one and all to see…
    And done in the name of ART,
    In good taste,should stand apart
    From that which shouldn’t be displayed
    In a film…or in a play.

  • Michael B says:

    Naked is in the eye of the beholder….everyone is a bit titillated by flesh, especially seeing it in person. When nudity is part of the theater experience, I find it more of a distraction in most cases.

  • Rachel Elizabeth says:

    If it furthers the storytelling, then who cares?! I find it much more distracting when great efforts are made to create the illusion of organic nudity, such as the scene when John Lithgow was getting out of bed in The Columnist. I have no idea what even transpired during the scene, because I was too busy fixating on whether his “under the sheets to bathrobe” maneuver would prove successful!

  • Mary says:

    If nudity on stage is tastefully done and pertinent to the story then I am all for it (as in the case of Emilia Clarke & Cory Michael Smith)!

  • Cullen K. says:

    I think that if the nudity is part of the story line and if it makes sense to add it in then it is not a big deal. When shows add it in just for a raunchy effect or to rouse the audiences it gets to be a bit unnecessary.

  • Nick V says:

    I feel like we’ve been down this road before with every other show that opens with a hint of nudity. Lets face it, it’s nothing we don’t see in other forms of entertainment like film and television. In fact, premium channel shows like GOT and Spartacus are drawing fans because of it. People got naked in Hair and nothing happened. We saw some skin in Rent and Spring Awakening and the sun still rises every morning. After all, is’t art supposed to imitate life?!

  • Cathie A. says:

    Just saw [phenomenal] Macbeth, wherein Alan Cumming [as Macbeth/Lady Macbeth] appears nude. I have no problem with nudity in a performance, as long as it makes sense and moves the story along. [Which it totally did, and in a comical, tasteful way] I would say, that it pays to do your homework, and find out if the play/musical has nudity, prior to buying your tix, esp if you don’t approve, or will be bringing a teen. ps, see Macbeth while you can!

  • Robert H-P says:

    I don’t remember the first stage nudity I saw, but I remember the first time it was controversial. I was living in Phoenix in the early 90s, and M. Butterfly rolled through town. Protest groups were formed, letters were written. It became very clear early on that what made the nudity offensive to those offended was not the nudity itself, but that it was in the form of a gay/transgender man. However, those of us who saw the performance, saw a beautiful, elegant character stripping away not just his clothing, but also his defenses and laying himself out honestly on stage. There was just the right amount of humor at the end of the scene to alleviate any tension.

    Oddly, watching Alan Cumming in MacBeth this week, it struck me that his partial nudity was, while exposing the primary character (the inmate), came off as somewhat self-aware and fourthwall-building, because it *wasn’t* full nudity.

    What’s telling about our society is that Ms. Clarke is regularly seen in the buff in Game of Thrones, and yet because she’s “live,” and in an ostensibly non-shocking play, it’s causing a kerfuffle. Or more accurately, the classlessness of the modern theater audience is causing the kerfuffle by pulling out their cellphones. We accept nudity in some circumstances and not in others, in a very conflicted way.

    All the more reason to explore the topic on stage in a variety of moments.

    Robert H-P

  • Jared says:

    Onstage nudity hasn’t been considered “shocking” in a very long time, and I have no problem with it, provided it is appropriate to the story. But when it is done merely for shock value or to generate press, then it feels tacky and unnecessary.

  • ECP says:

    No objection to stage nudity. And since its appearance in a production is often widely publicized pre-opening, I have little sympathy for ticket-buyers who are distracted or shocked or alienated. (Actually I think stage nudity is being presented more creatively and engagingly lately.) Some productions might considers advertising: NO HUMAN NUDITY AT ALL IN THIS SHOW.

  • David Rigano says:

    Ultimately I only find it distracting if it’s superfluous. If it’s done well and there’s meaning behind it for the story or characters, it should work. As with most things, taste is important and plot/theme is key.

  • Arnold Kuperstein says:

    Nudity certainly was valid in Danny Boyle’s production of FRANKENSTEIN at the National Theatre.

  • Joe G says:

    I was about to say how its a great way to sell tickets and more people in seats means more people seeing Broadway shows… something everyone wants right?

    Except Breakfast just announced their closing date… perhaps not enough people knew? Would that even be a selling a point for this kind of show?

  • Hannah Weitzman says:

    Nudity should only be used when it helps the story/ has a reason. The nudity in Hair made sense, but Mary Louise Parker in Hedda Gabler did not. Nudity can be very powerful, but too much and without reason tends to take away.

  • David says:

    Nudity is a necessity in cettain instances . . . like the characters in Hair . . .

  • Donna says:

    I’m fine with it but, as with every aspect of theatre, there should be a valid reason for it.

  • Charles says:

    It depends, if it is in the right context,it can add a lot of value.

  • Jennifer says:

    If it is applicable to the story, then I don’t see there being an issue.

    If it is nudity, just to have nudity…then what is the point? I’m not a fan of a show putting nudity in just to sell tickets. Solid writing, good direction and fine acting should sell tickets.

    I saw Emilia interviewed on David Letterman and she indicated that she didn’t understand what the big fuss was about as you certainly see much more of her in “Game of Thrones.”

  • Eugene says:

    Since “Cock” had none, nothing surprises me anymore.

  • Preston G. says:

    Nudity = GOOD!! We are born nude, sometimes we die nude, why do we freaking care anymore? I have recently been to a show which featured full frontal male nudity, and I witnessed the audible intake of breath when the NAKED man stepped out of the bathtub…the HORROR! I think the problem is that in this country there is a stigma surrounding the naked body that the only way we see nudity is for pure shock value, and not art, and God forbid not for realism. Well, if I’m watching someone on stage casually stroll across there bedroom naked, isn’t that what most people at home do when they’re alone?!? Get over it people!

  • Shannon D. says:

    I honestly don’t care either way…
    However, some good points were made that it is actually distracting to the story or I hate when it’s used to sell tickets. But if that’s how they choose to create ticket sales, instead of actual depth and story and credibility, who am I to object.

  • Natalie Randall says:

    I think nudity is completely fine…but only if it makes sense for the plot. Nudity for the sake of nudity is not cool. Unless it is a really hot actor like Aaron Tveit or Jeremy Jordan…then it’s a free for all and I could care less if it has to deal with the plot!!

  • Lana M. says:

    Nudity is usually not a necessary element of a show. It is more of a distraction in a play. A lot of people may also get offended by nudity.

  • Emily Herschbein says:

    Nudity, when done tastefully, can add a dynamic to the show that otherwise could not have been achieved. It can’t just be nudity for the sake of nudity, however. In that case it would be considered a distraction. The usage of nudity to further a plot or add new layers to a character, is completely okay.

  • gjc says:

    Is on-stage nudity a big deal anymore? ALWAYS a big deal. Are you a fan? ALWAYS a fan. It takes the theatrical experience to another level of intimacy and gets the prudes/kids out of the theater once and for all.

  • Amy O'Hara says:

    It’s so much part of the norm but I actually wish broadway didn’t do it. Illusions work just as well, look at the recent Classic Stage production of Passion.

  • Valerie Thompson says:

    I believe that nudity is an art-form in itself and should be respected. I don’t think that it is distracting from the piece, instead, it adds to the human nature of it. A lot of people are against nudity, just because they are not used to it and haven’t been exposed to it, or can not accept it maturely as an art form and not just a naked body. We are humans, and humans were created naked, and us humans are walking art and therefore nudity is an art form. How many famous paintings do you see that has had a nude model? Especially dating back to the Greek art history period. Nudity should be used in the correct way during a show, or tv show, or movie. Getting naked for the sake of just getting naked is disrespectful to the artform. It should be something that adds to the piece of theatre and contributes, not distracting or taking away from the piece but it must be necessary and add to it.

  • Norman Golden says:

    People go to the theatre to be entertained and feel emotion. Nudity can be very emotional.’Nuff said!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *