is it legal if you...
 

Is it legal to have a girl who is over 18 that is acting as a 15 year old and then show her nude and having non-explicit (Rated R) sex?

Not made to look like 15, but actually stated as being 15.

i think 2257 have answer on that or not? :2 cents:

Don't see why that would be illegal... probably has been done numerous times. Also, there is a movie coming out w/ Dakota Fanning getting raped or something and she is like 12... so..

I am not talking about porn sites, just in general. The reason I ask is because I just finished watching Fast Times at Ridgemont High for the 100th time, and the girl in that movie is playing a 15 year old, yet they show her nude have sex.

Portrayal is apparently ok... I'm sure they checked the laws/censors before releasing it..

Umm there are a few movies where the actress was actually underage and was nude and or having sex. Check pretty baby.

Titantic... Rose's age is set as 17 in that movie.

I think the term in play here is "prurient interest". Enjoy.

I can't really see what that should be illegal other than it might make people think its legal to do so..

now its just about the point of look and at the first place it depends on country where you live :2 cents:

illegal.... somebody dig that shit up. i recall this coming up in some other thread... i'm too lazy to use the search feature

Anybody seen Not Another Teen Movie?

Hell go back to Fast Times At Ridgemount high.

Supposed high school aged girl

http://www.trashcity.org/BLITZ/BLIT0101.JPG

wait wait... my bad, i skipped the "r-rated" sex part.... probably legal. hell, how bout that movie with dakota fanning's character getting raped? must be legal... nobody's being prosecuted for that.

Read much?

And she's English. And in England we can fuck at 16 :)

The girl is 18 and not made to look like a 15 year old? Don't understand the "but actually stated as being 15"....

Throw ya a couple of considerations - (and this has nothing to do with legal/illegal - more broader, tho legality *may* enter into it) - If the content has some artistic merit - ie a genuine storyline, and the overall finished product is not relying on sexual activity or.. dunno, possibly suggesting underage - chances are this could be defined as "acceptable" (it is most likely legal since the girl is over 18 - tho depends on jurisdiction).

If on the other hand the overall finished product relies on a sexual appeal and it is stating/suggesting the artist is 15 years of age - although actually 18 - this would be illegal in prob most western countries, tho understand it may be legal within the US.

the girl looks 18...?

the motion picture industry has a much bigger lobby and give more money to politicians than us so they can get away with it.

In the movie they say she is 15, but the actress is over 18. So they are portraying a 15 year old being nude and having sex.

Ya hit the nail on the head Tony :thumbsup

There are also very strict guidelines on this area and if it ever comes near it during a production, 99.999% the lawyers and editor have went over every frame on anything with may be considered "sexual" in nature.

I don't think thats illegal, but why the hell would you do that? That's just wrong, and shows what's wrong with some of the people in this industry

It's in the movie Fast Times at Ridgemont High, maybe you've heard of it? :1orglaugh

Got ya aico!

Mmmm... really depends on the actual product. Can see there would be acceptable ways to portray this on film without causing a major rumpus :-) If the finished product is a "porn movie" - totally different story.

It's really all a matter of judgement and if ya can stand back and have a broader look at the finished product and ask - if I was indicted, can I stand up in court with a straight face and defend the product on as many valid grounds as possible? If ya feel "uncomfortable" with any of the finished product - chances are your gut instinct will be correct :)

Can remember seeing... actual fucking on a cinema screen about 20 years ago - and this was playing in a main city theater. Years later, I met the old guy who was the movie censor and vetted all screen content. Asked him why he let it go thru without cuts - he replied, that it had valid production values and was of literary merit. Tho apparently he had cut some elements before granting release - but not particularly the sexual content.

What the fuck deos that mean?

Why?
Are you filming your girlfriend?

It's common courtesy to insult someone in their native language, for the record I speak English.

Is it moral?
I mean what's the goal. To get pedo's to sign up to your site?

I am not asking because I want to do it, I am asking because I just watched Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and the main girl in that movie is a 15 year old highschool freshman, they show her nude several times and having sex twice, one time is more "explicit" than the other.

Just wondering if the powers that be have made that sort of stuff illegal or not, since it is an older movie and I haven't seen that in any other movies since.

By the time you repeat that on the eighth occasion maybe you won't have to explain :winkwink:

I imagine they'd say it's "artistic" since it's in a movie. Though one. I am personally not interested at all, they could just "suggest" it. It's not like 15 year olds don't have sex in real life :)
On the other hand if the sole purpose is to sell a paysite only showing that, then I think it's totally wrong. My :2 cents:

btw, fast times at ridgemont high starts in 30 mins on the comedy channel, although the nice scene in question will most likely be edited somewhat..

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh
I must be fucked in the head, but i found that to be the funniest shit ever.

I would be carefull. If its in the adult space you could become a target. This is coming from personal experience. In this business measure your risk vs reward and always save for a rainy day.

Phoebe Cates was so damn cute :thumbsup