Keira's breasts. - The Hole (2001) Discussion

[–] skywalkr2 17 years ago

Yeah - I just found out she was only like 16... so everyone that looked should feel real bad...

reply

[–] bizman_1 17 years ago

so doesn't this film qualify as kiddie porn or something? can't believe the MPAA even gave it a rating to be played in theaters.

reply

[–] ross2782 17 years ago

I believe it came out in the UK... so the Motion Picture Association of America would have nothing to say about it, right?

reply

[–] pdarbythedude 17 years ago

who gives a *beep* about her age. as long as ur not like some 40 yr old perv, i dunno about america but kids hav sex at young ages over here!

reply

[–] Non-Yellowhead 17 years ago

Hey, now. Leave the poor girl alone, we can't all be blessed with big bouncy booobies.

reply

[–] freebiescrap 17 years ago

Like there's some border on the age of every girl after and exactly 9455040 minutes of age, she becomes sexually ready! Every girl matures at the same speed? And people need cops and state to regulate so that we can't even see naked yung humans? Like the nudity itsef is some kind of evil traumatising experience... I don't get all that.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] AnneBendtsen1 16 years ago

If you're so little that you can't handle that, then you shouldn't be watching this. There are more disturbing things in this movie than Keira's boobies that's for sure (I'm not saying that Keira's boobies are disturbing in any way).

___________________________________
And while I remember it, *beep* you!

reply

[–] phoenix_fever 16 years ago

this film is rated 18 (i think) and so the viewers should actually be mature enough to watch it. i know keira was only young when she filmed this, but it comes back to the whole 'proving yourself as an actor' BS that people go on about. she obviously didnt mind doing it and she had parental consent otherwise it wouldnt have been in there would it!

reply

[–] nlfernan 13 years ago

This is so true. I am from the US and I don't know about other countries but I know that we are far too uptight about nudity but we are so relaxed about violence. Too much nudity could cause the MPAA to rate a film NC-17 whereas something completely violent and gory can be PG13. I know we have all seen This Film is Not Yet Rated, but who cares about a little nudity.

But at the same time.... I sure as hell was not that developed at her age at the time of filming.

reply

[–] WhoisThePrisoner1 13 years ago

The topic is about the AGE of the actress, you idiot. Try to keep up. There are laws involving age for obvious reasons.

And BTW, the US is the porn capital of the world, so do some research next time.

reply

[–] dustypistol 9 years ago

Haha. Nice.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] daryl-b-t 12 years ago

Jenny Agutter did topless in East of Sudan when she was 12.

I'm guessing nudity by itself isn't sexual and doesn't demand the same restrictions. FFS girls of all ages go topless on sunny beaches around the world.

reply

[–] georgegliddy 11 years ago

well ur corect this is like bestality bcos i'ts NOT good and just pls dont do it any 1 ok??

reply

[–] parks212 13 years ago

@SkyWalker: Was she just 16 though? This was released when she turned 16 a month prior, but the film was obviously shot when she was 15...hence 15 year old tits.

Borderline dodgy there imo, not complaining though!

reply

[–] hubble-hallow 13 years ago

WTF is dodgy about looking at keira's 15 year old tits? Its pure f@cking art.

reply

[–] jmbwithcats 12 years ago

People are such prudes, paranoid and ashamed of their bodies, Who cares if Keira shows her breasts? Thora Birch is the one with anything to show.

http://www.imdb.com/user/ur2533227/ratings
www.kittysafe.net

reply

[–] sabenge 12 years ago

The only thing left to say is "Giggity".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://infinityburst.wordpress.com/

reply

[–] denham 12 years ago

The odd thing is, we get to see Keira Knightley's breasts (which are not notable), but we don't get to see Thora Birch's breasts (which are notable). Despite Thora Birch previously demonstrating her willingness to give them an airing (as in American Beauty). Someone slipped up somewhere.

"I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken."

reply

[–] mmw_rocket 12 years ago

Agreed with denham.

Also, the girl is dead in the scene. Not just that but a couple of days dead after extreme dehydration. I don't think it's all that freaky to find a 16-year-old attractive (as long as you don't obsess over it or try to sleep with them), but already decomposing girls hot is freaky necrophiliac *beep*

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lacyrobinson99 11 years ago

No, she wasn't dead in the scene where she bared her breasts. She showed "Mike" her breasts while Geoff was looking away after they both were trying to get her clothes off. That was her only scene with nudity. When she died on the bathroom, she had on pajamas.

reply

[–] HenryCW 11 years ago

The poster was referring to a later scene where the coroner showed Dr. Philippa the "dead" Keira lying on the examiner's table in the mortuary.

reply

[–] kimboland-1 11 years ago

Much prefer small ones like keiras. Think of all the stretch marks thora has on hers if she got them out now.

reply

[–] lazarillo 11 years ago

This was KIND OF a questionable scene (as was a topless scene Thora Birch did at 17 in "American Beauty"). It's not because I want to be a blue nose about it though, and I think a lot of people "doth protest too much" about this particular subject if you know what I mean.

It bothers me though because the MPAA and especially the British Board of Film Censors has gone after a lot of OLD movies from the 70's for underage nudity. For instance, they censored "Der Fan", "Love Letters of a Portugese Nun" and banned "Women in Cellblock 9" outright. True the offenses of these movies were much more egregious, but I think the point should be to protect REAL-LIFE underage girls from being exploited, not to worry that men are just going to lose control if they see a pair of 16-year-old breasts. Knightly was STILL underage when the BBFC was censoring or banning all these 70's and 80's movies (where the real-life actresses in those older movies were in their 30's or 40's by that time), yet they let this just go by.

I am NOT saying they should have censored the rather innocuous nudity in THIS movie, but it's evident the BBFC is less interested in protecting REAL-LIFE underage actresses and models than they are in trying to stop men from committing "thought crimes". The US is just as bad--they actually prosecuted a guy for having a Japanese comic book with "underage characters"! What's next--are you gonna get arrested for fantasizing about the girlfriend you had in high school?

Exterminate the Brutes!

reply

[–] cthulhulurks 11 years ago

Knightley's disgusting quite often.

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Number_One_Birdlawyer 10 years ago

I'm sure roman Polanski loved every second.

reply