DEBATE Alexandra Daddario - Lost Girls and Love Hotels discussion

Your first part of tis is 100% correct.

Your second part I question as well. I don't know why it couldn't sell unless the amount of nudity/sex was driving people away for some reason.

She does a lot of movies that are independent and don't get major-studio support.

But lets take The Layover with Kate Upton. Eventually it got picked up and distributed, just took a while. I went to the premiere and a Q&A for it after with Alex and William H. Macy. It was not a great movie but funny enough with 2 awesome women where it coulda been picked up sooner. No nudity of course. But eventually picked up. I really do think the level of nudity in the original ties into why nobody wanted it.

 

Not sure I should wade in on this but if you look back on Alex's one and only nude scene prior to this movie, even though it's a super-high quality scene, Alex is actually nude for about 30 seconds, and then there's a couple of "if you freeze frame you can see something" quick shots. Given that she is a solidly working actress, her doing a borderline porn level of nudity and sex seems like it would be unlikely. Far more likely would be that she does the Scarlett Johansson, Jessica Biel, and herself in "True Detective" route, where she does some but is able to say that it's "tasteful" and "required for the story."

So using the "what is more likely" method, I sort of need to come down on the "Rumors because we want it to be so" side.

Of course, I must say that I've never wanted to be wrong more in my life, and I sincerely hope I am completely wrong and that there is an uncut version that will come out!

 

I don't believe anyone was expecting "borderline porn level of nudity and sex"

nobody was expecting to see close ups of penetration or full on stuff just better/more nudity than we got

based on the 3-4 clips we saw where she was clearly nude on set there is obviously at least more filmed of what we saw that they could have used, that is not debateable

when filming scenes you have at least 3-4 cameras rolling at once from different angles, so every scene we saw there are angles of it that show her far more nude than what we see

even if not one single other nude/sex scene was filmed if we had seen better angles of the scenes we know exist it comes much closer to what was previously described

 

That really isn't true
As a former actress the truth is most times there is one camera at a time (movies)
Soaps do what you say and that is why they can shoot 35 minutes a day

 

Anyone have the supposed shots of her nude (censored I’m sure) on set? I must have missed those

 

Any movie with a decent budget does, in fact, have multiple cameras for scenes, that's how many scenes have changes of angles within a scene. I work as an AP for a major studio, I've been involved with dozens of big budget TV and movie shows. Very rarely is there only one camera, usually it's 2-4 cameras. No offense, but I highly doubt that a former actress who has worked on big movies and TV shows is hanging out on here.

 

but a AP for a major studio is?

 

That post proves you know very little
But keep sprouting off as if you do

 

He is lying
Action films tend to have more shots like he said, so they can do less expensive takes.
In a more dialogue driven film they film the multiple angles separately and set up each shot
They do individual shots that cover all the angle/actions.
When it comes to film nudity, there are usually less crew on set.
Thinking there were multiple cameras filming one scene instead of one scene filmed by one camera multiple times proves he is full of crap.
Dialogue driven movies are not filmed like that.

 

^ lolololol over the last few years many films and TV shows are using robotic cameras now... at least at major studios like the one I work at... they are on wheels and move from a joystick in a control room or a person on set taking cues from the director, they don't need cameramen for them thus no extra people for the nude scenes

It's clear you have not worked on a major studio lot, at least for several years

 

An Associate Producer

 

Oh I know what AP means. You said you doubt a former actress would be on this forum, but a AP of a major studio is. Leads to credibility.

 

He is fos
He was caught being wrong and like many tried doubling down by lying and showed his rear (to bring it back to nudity)

 

Actually, with all the color/lighting correcting software out there, once fixed, the angles did Scarlett just fine.
In fact the best corrected version I've seen was at Recapped. They managed to lighten it up without all that iso graininess I've seen from other attempts.
Would love to see Ms 'fine AF' do more nudity, but I'm good with what she did in UTS.

 

I don't know whether either of you are who you say you are, but I have been on a couple of movie sets and music videos. For 95% of the shots there was one camera at a time. Drones and remotes are part of the DP's tools but they focus on one scene at a time. That means one camera. If they need other angles/depth of field/etc, they go "back to one" to shoot, actors repeat lines (have to get it almost exactly the same).

If there is expensive live SFX involved, they may use multiple cameras for that one scene. But that is not like multi camera sitcoms or dramas for TV. It's an economics thing. Even then, one of the big set pieces I saw filmed used a single camera set up and they kept repeating the effect (fake copter crash).

If you were really on a set you would know how long it takes to set up everything including the cameras. Now imagine you have to have everyone sitting while you set up three cameras for one shot. How much time would it take and how much would it cost? It's only going to be used when necessary, unless the director or DP thinks it will be of creative utility.

Some recent indie productions may find the multicamera approach useful I suppose if they think it will save time and money. Maybe they are shooting where there aren't a lot of adjustments to lighting etc necessary

 

Don't want to sound disrespectful, but it sounds like you might not be familiar with the changes digital filming has brought to the movie industry. One of my good friends works on film productions and the use of multiple cameras to provide more coverage isn't unusual at all on movie sets these days. Plenty of productions still use the single camera approach (especially when director's have more control over the project), but just as many use multiple camera rolling at once and have for years.

 

Again (as stated) those are not as frequent for dialogue driven films
Especially films like the one in question and during a nude scene

Like my first post stated "most" are still one-camera


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-camera_setup
Most films use a single-camera setup, but in recent decades larger films have begun to use more than one camera on set, usually with two cameras simultaneously filming the same setup. However, this is not a true multiple-camera setup in the television sense.

Some films will run multiple cameras, perhaps four or five, for large, expensive and difficult-to-repeat special effects shots, such as large explosions. Again, this is not a true multiple-camera setup in the television sense as the resultant footage will not always be arranged sequentially in editing, and multiple shots of the same explosion may be repeated in the final film - either for artistic effect or because the different shots can appear to show different explosions since they are taken from different angles.

 

not wrong about a single damn thing but keep talking lol

 

so, at the end of the day after all the back-and-forth and disrespect we're back to square one essentially

neither of us has proof if they did or didn't use multiple cameras, you don't believe so cause you're a d-level actress with minimal roles of any substance on the back of your headshot and I'm standing by my stance they use at least 2 cameras as an AP at a major studio who has done some work on 23 shows or movies over the last 5-6 years

if all you have to rely on is a wikipedia post and think that carries weight, it speaks volumes

nobody here needs to believe me either, frankly I don't care if they do or don't, but this will be the last I comment on the topic cause this entire argument is going absolutely nowhere

 

Stop. Jesus. This is absurd.