|Index||7 reviews in total|
This film isn't bad for what it tries to do. Educating Julie presents an overview and history of social nudity within a story about a timid student who has been assigned to write a research paper on "Nudity in the 1980s" In the course of her research she, and her boyfriend visit nudist camps in England, the south of France and Florida. More travel log / advert than movie, but fun and informative. This was the first "major motion picture" endorsed by the British Naturalist Societies.
"Educating Julie" is part documentary, part romantic comedy, and mostly
It should be noted up front that this is a picture about nudism and nudists, and lots of people of all ages and both sexes are seen naked. That includes Gail Ward, the fetching blond who plays the title role.
Julie is a British college girl who researches nudism for a sociology class project. That gives her the opportunity to visit several nudist resorts and interview some of the members. That's the documentary part.
The romance-comedy part centers around Julie and her boyfriend, and how they cope with their different attitudes toward nudism.
An interesting quasi documentary / feature film. Julie goes around
studying nudism in Europe and then later in Florida. I just liked this
film because it was quite unconventional and took a relatively
objective look into social nudism.
Not much of a plot, and tends to meander a bit, but since its a pretty rare and authentic addressing of the subject matter I can't help but to forgive its few deficiencies and look at the interesting boldness of it all.
The copy I watched of this was rather oldish VHS style. I wish they would maybe do a remake or a sequel to further explore this interesting facet of society.
There are not too many feature films made about nudism and naturism these days, but in its day this was hailed as one of the best. Looking at it today it does look rather dated with the hairstyles and the devices that they used (e.g. dial phones and typewriters). It's a very straightforward story: young sociology student Julie Potter is set a thesis to write for her masters, and she is tricked into doing it about 'Nudity in the 80's' to the scorn of her classmates. After her boyfriend offers to help her out with it, they both explore the world of nudism and how it works. The acting is good, but hardly that of an Academy Award standard. Julie is an initially shy and mousy person prior to doing the thesis and becoming a nudist changes her personality and outlook radically. For people who often criticise and stereotype nudists as being a bunch of cranky old pagan hippie swingers, this film does a lot to dispel those stereotypes as they are shown to be your everyday people who just like to bare it all in the sun on the weekends with no other motives. Unpretentious and unsensational in the main, it's one that naturist movie buffs rather than the general public will enjoy for the most part if only for the nostalgia value.
Recorded in actual nudist resorts, this story covers a lot of territory. As mentioned previously, it is an older movie made in 1984. Styles are different, appliances are different, the places have changed. Where is Julie (Gail Ward) today? That is a good question that would allow a follow up to this story and to the actress. I just saw this movie on uTube. I knew that it had been out a very long time but my favorite nudist film has always been "The Nudist Story" but that is a different review. This Julie is also a British girl and she gets to travel to different resorts where she interviews the guests for a school project. Her boyfriend is something of a sideshow character and is comically reluctant to participate in nudism. He could have been left out as he brings very little if anything to this story, except the male penis. There is no romance shown here. He does place his arm across her back as they walk together once. Therefore, Julie is what we are mostly interested in. She actually looks better with her clothes off and looks unfashionable with her clothes on. Her naked body is interesting but not super. I did not like how it took Julie so little time to adjust herself to public nudism and how uninterested she seemed to be in the various nude males throughout the film. Aftwer all, she was never shown nude in her flat, the first place to try being clothes free. In other words, so little passion was present in this movie. There could have been more enthusiasm and more real emotions. Instead, it is too much of a stand back documentary to my taste. Some of the nudist interviews were interesting.
I don't think nudity per se is bad for children, but this is still not
a children's movie. It doesn't have the charm and joy typical of such
movies, and is flat-out boring at times. I can't imagine teenagers
would be terribly interested either, except for the nudity factor (in
which case they would be missing the whole point of the film) and I as
an adult found it trivial and boring.
The movie consists of Julie visiting a bunch of resorts around the world and learning a little about the history of them, under the guise of writing a report. It's like a lot of nudist material that amounts to tales of people's holiday adventures: that's all well and good, but it isn't interesting unless you're their family. There's also a silly romantic subplot that doesn't go beyond the standard "boy meets/is dating girl, they have a falling-out, they get back together". There are a few asides about the report Julie's writing and her relationship with her parents. These are like the subplots in a Shakespeare drama, except they don't even rise to the level of comic relief.
No one who is not a nudist will be convinced to try it by this movie, and people who are nudists cannot gain anything from it that they do not already gain from the practicing it.
Is this movie "bad"? No. The acting and camera work are acceptable; the filmmakers certainly seem to understand the medium of film (unlike, say, "Birdemic: Shock and Terror"). But it lacks a defined role capable of pushing it into the realm of "okay".
Stay clear of this movie.
They couldn't produce this movie today the same way it was done when they originally made it. For one, the laws are different, much different and much more strict today than they were at the time this movie was made, that should explain the producers' lack of responsibility for the content of this film- actually since it was initially shot on video it can't even be called a film, so- lack of responsibility for the contents of this sore excuse for a movie that is actually more of a shameless plug for naturist resorts and vacation spots.
In addition to that I would even venture to say that anyone following naked children around with a camera should be considered a pervert and a rather dangerous person for the reasons he chooses to follow little children around and want to photograph them for the world to see, inviting an endless lifetime of embarrassment for the unfortunate children who get exploited in that manner. Show a sense of responsibility and keep the cameras away from children during the making of naturist films, that's why there are laws that prohibit such things these days.
Aside of that the acting was fairly dry and the storyline was predictable, something of which I can get around in most movies that have any artistic value but I'm afraid this movie, if you want to call it that, has none, so only one out of five stars.
How I wish for a film whose storyline and plot based on naturism doesn't turn into shameless exploitation and arrogant commercialism.
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|External reviews||Parents Guide||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|