Eva Green Defends Her Controversial SIN CITY 2 Poster; Edited Version Released

Eva Green Defends Her Controversial SIN CITY 2 Poster; Edited Version Released

The MPAA pulled the first poster for "nudity - curve of under breast and dark nipple/areola circle visible through sheer gown". Shocking stuff! So if that offended your sensibilities, there's a tamer version past the jump. Green also comments on the MPAA's decision.

Well, we can all rest easy now -- there's slightly less nipple! While speaking to Vanity Fair about the poster, Eva Green echoes what most of us were thinking at the time of the banning. "I find it a bit odd. It seems like it's all just publicity - a lot of noise for nothing.” She adds that she personally found the original poster 'really sexy' and that it pales when discussed alongside the violence in the movie. “You have so many more violent things in the movie business,” she stated.
Posted By:
Mark Cassidy
Member Since 11/9/2008
Filed Under "Sin City: A Dame to Kill For" 6/5/2014 Source: Via Yahoo
DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]
1 2 3
remembertheking - 6/5/2014, 1:58 AM
well obviously it was taken down for publicity purposes. someone in the marketing dept for sin city 2 knew someone at the MPAA and told them to take down the poster. This has had a lot of attention. more than it would have if it wasnt taken down. good move.
Jollem - 6/5/2014, 1:58 AM
it's just a nipple. they can't hurt nobody
Jollem - 6/5/2014, 1:59 AM
love the comic book caption on the poster
Vegeta - 6/5/2014, 1:59 AM
Eva Green...

Jollem - 6/5/2014, 2:01 AM
...i'm with shannon
Alien - 6/5/2014, 2:04 AM
Yeaaaahhh boyz

spring breakers animated GIF
Hulkson - 6/5/2014, 2:05 AM
'murica, guns hooray, afraid of boobs. :D
RamonSuarez - 6/5/2014, 2:12 AM
She doesn't have to defend her boobs to me.......ever.
maxleresistant - 6/5/2014, 2:13 AM
I had to search for the original version of the poster to see the difference.
I guess it's pretty much the same, even if I think it's a crime to hide such beautiful breasts. I mean it's almost a work of art, should we hide the breasts of milo's Venus too?
staypuffed - 6/5/2014, 2:14 AM
I see no difference.
JediPhilosopher - 6/5/2014, 2:18 AM
Starkasm - 6/5/2014, 2:26 AM
But you can have a shirtless dude in the poster with no dramas.

It's just extra tissue, people.

*insert Craig Robinson meme saying take yo panties off!*
Alien - 6/5/2014, 2:32 AM
Yo, MantiniumMan

MightyZeus - 6/5/2014, 2:37 AM
Are people actually forgetting that kids will see the poster when they walk by the theater?

I guess it's okay to show nudity to under aged children. Damn that woman is dumb. Kid's won't be able to see violence in a film because they won't be admitted into the film.
NostalgicYouth - 6/5/2014, 3:11 AM
Actually @MightyZeus kids now a days don't have to govsee a rated-R movie to see violence, heck they can see it anytime on tv.
Kyos - 6/5/2014, 3:14 AM
Yup, kids probably might catch a glimpse of Eva Green's nipples on that somewhat artistic poster. What could the harmful consequences of that actually be?

I'd say younger children simply would not care about it, unless they're specifically brought up in a way to make them uncomfortable about the human body.

Older children/teenagers, who are, you know, actually interested in such things would likely react like... well, teenagers.
sameoldthing - 6/5/2014, 3:17 AM
Kids grow up sucking the nipple.
Unless your a bottle freak.
sameoldthing - 6/5/2014, 3:18 AM
I want to breast feed on Eva. Yum!
BoomTubeB - 6/5/2014, 3:19 AM
I wish the poster was scratch & sniff!

CrimsonFlash - 6/5/2014, 3:26 AM
I will also defend it
CrimsonFlash - 6/5/2014, 3:27 AM
She's absolutely right though. A slightly naked woman gets banned but a whole bunch of violent men with guns or whatever are totally fine. Priorities are so messed up.
denotsip - 6/5/2014, 3:31 AM
"Hit the jump", "Past the jump" …. the hell does that even mean?
damntree - 6/5/2014, 3:41 AM
I don't see how anyone could be offended by Eva Green's amazing tits.
marvel72 - 6/5/2014, 3:58 AM
censorship [frick]in sucks! :)
mgeoff88 - 6/5/2014, 4:08 AM
Ummm... her right nipple is more visible than it was in the uncensored poster:

@MightyZeus You're overthinking what she is saying. She is trying to say graphic violence is worse than nudity. She is right.
Robe - 6/5/2014, 4:11 AM
Double standards male nipples okay while female nipples not okay. If it was the other way around feminists would have it overturned.
mgeoff88 - 6/5/2014, 4:13 AM
I'm a bit drunk right now, so there's a good chance when I wake up tomorrow and see my comment, I'll think I was stupid for saying it.
SuperCat - 6/5/2014, 4:20 AM
Enphlieuwince - 6/5/2014, 4:23 AM
I can see both sides of the argument. I personally think it's a bunch of fuss over nothing. I mean, she's just standing in a robe. It's not like she is in some sexually provocative pose like a porn ad. 

Much like violence, which has very much become mainstream and acceptable over the last few decades, the human form would cease to be taboo if ppl stop treating as such. Now, I'm not saying that it should be open season on full frontal nudity any and everywhere, however, this is far from being that. 

When we as comic book (movie) fans have become so conservative and politically protective of women that the idea of the iconic Wonder Woman costume, with the simple exposing of thighs and arms, has become unpopular, something is wrong. This isn't about fairness and respect. Like someone else mentioned, if this was a guy with his shirt off, no one would have said anything. That's right. Conan, Tarzan, and Hercules are still running around in leaves and loin cloths but Wonder Woman needs pants to be respectable and to prevent be objectified.

Starkasm - 6/5/2014, 4:34 AM
You can have trashy advertisements that are purposely sexually provocative but a slightly see-through robe is absurd?
Give me a break.

As I said, it's just tissue!
loki668 - 6/5/2014, 4:42 AM
Nobody puts Eva Green's breasts in the corner!
batcheeks8 - 6/5/2014, 4:51 AM
Not surprised..

When will America accept that breasts aren't sexual organs?
GeekyCheekyChic - 6/5/2014, 4:55 AM
So for the MPAA this is totally cool:


Jer3miah - 6/5/2014, 5:14 AM
The MPAA are ridiculous. Most of the things they allow, kids should not see, so this is no exception. Hypocrites.

The whole sh*t is backwards. O_o
KingOnslaught - 6/5/2014, 5:15 AM
this should help

diabolik - 6/5/2014, 5:26 AM
Is the year 2014 and we are still complaining about a nipple siluette
GeekyCheekyChic - 6/5/2014, 5:30 AM
the people using the "kids might see the poster at the theater" argument SEEM to conveniently forget some of the disturbing Horror Movie posters that the MPAA has zero problem with:



Rape before death

"We don't want parents to have to explain the nipple to their kids but this bloody killer is totally acceptable"

DocDangerous - 6/5/2014, 5:35 AM
The Baroness89-
That's what winning an argument looks like. Well played.
marvel72 - 6/5/2014, 5:40 AM
@ thebaroness89

exactly,well said.
miklonus - 6/5/2014, 5:52 AM
MightyZeus you stupid f_ckin' retard: "KIDS" are f_ckin' playing Grand Theft Auto V online. They play Call Of DUty, and every other M-rated game in existence, online. How the f_ck are you gonna say "kids won't be allowed in a theater" or "kids won't have access to blank"?

Access is exactly what kids have and always "HAVE" had for at least, at least, 35 years and definitely longer.

F_ckin' retards like you populate this site.
1 2 3

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.