Another contender for scene of the year.
A clear full-frontal and rear from Baquero, the brunette.
Jamaica Vaughan and Ivana Baquero naked in episode 3 of The House of Ashur
Other Crap
Uncle Scoopy's world-weary musings about naked celebrities, sports, humor and other important, manly things.
*faints and cums*
I think they’re big prosthetic tits on Ivana?
They’re implants. Why would they intentionally make her tits look fake for a show set in ancient Rome?
They had plastic surgerons in Ancient Rome?
Is that a serious question? Ivana Baquero has implants. They aren’t prosthetics like that guy said.
Well, obviously it’s silicone
Obviously. But they don’t look like implants. They look like Margaret Qualley in The Substance
They do look like silicone. They’re very different from Margaret Qualley’s breasts in The Substance, very different. And you can tell they’re exactly the same breasts she showed in the Netflix movie A Widow’s Game; yes, the actress uses silicone in real life. If she were to use fake breasts in his série like Margaret Qualley did, she wouldn’t have such large breasts, right? Especially since silicone didn’t exist in Rome centuries ago, lol
They’re way bigger than what we saw in Widow’s Game
No, they’re the same size… Even the shape is the same. The only difference is that in the Widow’s Game scene she was filmed up close, with better lighting, etc., but you can tell they’re exactly the same breasts. As I said, if they were fake breasts… They wouldn’t be so big because silicone breasts didn’t exist in Rome, lol. Besides, if they were fake breasts, they would certainly have reduced her breast size with CGI to maintain the realism of the time period in which the series takes place, but they didn’t do that; they’re her real breasts.
Literally just different lighting and maybe some makeup
No bro, they didn’t sculpt her fake tits just for this show.
It seems that your understanding of female anatomy may not be as deep as you think it to be.
What’s up with calling it full frontal? Actresses wearing bikini is not a frontal but wearing merkin is? I see no difference.
They all say historically women have more been subjugated to ff scenes, but almost all of them were with merkins, in contrast even if men did comparatively less scenes but there were no prosthetics.
Full frontal scenes are actually rare for women, Llewellyn Reichman’s recent scene is an ff, doesn’t need to shaved, but you should actually be able to see the real thing, for example Emily Browning in summer in February, other wise it is just bikini without strings.
No?
No, technically the actress is completely naked… Merkin is a simulation of pubic hair, only fake. But yes, the actress is completely naked, it’s as if she hadn’t shaved. It’s not like she’s wearing bikini bottoms. And yes, most scenes of male frontal nudity in movies and TV shows nowadays are prosthetics, in that series they are very fake prosthetics, you can easily tell, and that’s if they aren’t CGI penises… Because it could be (they are very poorly made penises lol).
The point is that the audience can’t see the real thing, whether it is because of merkin, pubes, cgi, camera angle or lighting. Though in majority of the cases it is really the merkin, and if you go back the famous 70s-90s era everyone talk about, those look clear fake merkins. So majority of full frontals listed on sites like mr. Skin etc are those where you can’t even see the real thing. Even a side angle showing fake pubes are counted as ffs.
In contrast, this prosthetics in male actors are a recent thing. Thus If you count genuine ffs of female actors where you can actually see the thing are very little. I am not talking about shaved stuff, there could be pubes but not jungle, if you can’t see the real thing its not ff scene, just topless.
You are just making things up. Majority of FF scenes were not merkins in the 70’s-90’s. Now they usually are but not back then.
Actually, at that time it was already common for actresses to have merkins lol much more than you imagine, but this wasn’t mentioned in interviews by the actresses, although many were already using them.
@Ric10
You have made this claim before and I know you have no source or proof for this false belief. They were rarely used prior to 90’s – 2000’s especially outside of Hollywood.
I fail to see how it’s much different to underwear or a bikini given that the same amount of skin is covered up by the merkin. The only difference is that the simulates nudity whereas one is a piece of fabric not disguised as very thick pubic hair, but that’s a difference of purpose – Haren is referring to visibility, and he’s correct. Yes, they would potentially be fully nude from the rear whilst wearing the merkin (at least, they would be in cases where they weren’t wearing those stupid clear straps that get CGI edited out later). But he’s talking about full frontal nudity, not rear nudity. IMO, if you’re going to count merkins as full frontal, there needs to be 2 categories – simulated full frontal (for people happy to kid themselves the merkin isn’t real and consider it more interesting than a fabric underwear/bikini covering) and actual full frontal, where they go genuinely nude with or without pubic hair (more common in European productions, rarer in mainstream English language productions).
All the dicks this season seem to be fake as well if it makes you feel better
Exactly, that’s the point lol
But dicks look real lol. Merkins not.
Lmao – just told on himself
JamesO
merkin has always been used, buddy. Long before you think, it’s an ancient thing in human history and has always been used by women (even before cinema existed). In movies, you find actresses talking about it since at least the 80s. And another thing, you’re crazy if you think European women don’t shave, especially young European women, they’re shaving more and more, in some countries they shave even more than in the US… It’s an urban legend that you think European women don’t shave and therefore don’t use merkin lol. You prefer to delude yourselves.
Why do you think that it is necessarily a merkin? Lots of women do keep their natural pubic hair, thank goodness, and even more so among European women (Baquero is Spanish). By your definition, the only thing that would count as a full frontal scene would be if the actress was shaved down below, which would be sad. Sure, wearing a merkin, rather than having the real thing, is pretty sad too, but I would not just assume that this is what she is doing.
No, not necessarily shaved, but the actual thing should be visible to be eligible for an ff scene. Sure you can have real looking merkin or pubes enough to not let the vagina visible. But don’t call it an ff scene equivalent to male ff scene.
Given the nature of female anatomy, you would pretty much have to have a close up pussy shot to see the ‘actual thing’ by your apparent definition. That’s not going to happen in a lot of (non-porn) movies or cable/streaming TV shows. Obviously this is different in the case of male full frontal nude scenes. This is turning into a strange and essentially pointless debate.
Again, however you want to put it, merkin, angles, lighting and add female anatomy to it, the point remains, it is not equivalent to male scenes. When you can’t see the actual thing, nothing matters, it’s simply hidden. Those scenes should not be equalized with male ff scenes in myriad of “female ff scenes are more” articles these days. That ff is not an actual ff. We can’t see the thing on bikini clad actress and the same goes for merkin, pubes and whatever hiding way they use clad actress.
Full frontal = not wearing clothes, and you can see the front of the body.
I’m not sure why you’re trying to redefine the words but you’re being incredibly stupid.
I’ve worked in film and theater production before and that is 100% a merkin. I’d bet my life savings on it. She may or may not choose to keep her natural pubic hair in real life, but even if she left it in that kind of triangular shape it would look subtly different. You can just tell if you’ve seen plenty of merkins before. And I can tell that just from the look of it – statistically, if you look at the production standards of American TV shows like this, merkins are pretty much the default standard for nude scenes like this (the main Spartacus series was well known for them – House of Ashur isn’t going to be any different). Claming anything else is wishful thinking I’m afraid. I hope we see real full frontal from Ivana one day (perhaps in a European film) but this isn’t it.
So you’re saying that if no lips are visible then that must mean a merkin is involved? All throughout the history of filmed nudity?? That’s some serious tinfoil hat stuff man. As someone who’s seen a lot of women naked (and photographed many also) I can say from firsthand experience that reasoning isn’t sound.
Well said.
“I”VE SEEN PLENTY OF SHAVED PUSS, MAN” he said while choking down Mountain Dew Code Red in mom’s basement
I am not saying that, I am just comparing it to male ff scenes and the comparison that is made resulting in erroneous outrage. Female ff scenes could be more but the scenes where you can actually see the things are very rare. The factors that prevent audience from seeing the real thing could very well actually be real pubes though majorly it has been merkin, lighting and camera angles.
If you can’t see the damn thing, it is not equivalent to male ff scene.
I am not saying that, I am just comparing it to male ff scenes and the comparison that is made resulting in erroneous outrage. Female ff scenes could be more but the scenes where you can actually see the things are very rare. The factors that prevent audience from seeing the real thing could very well actually be real pubes though majorly it has been merkin, lighting and camera angles.
If you can’t see the damn thing, it is not equivalent to male ff scene.
What outrage? Who is still writing those type of articles when, regardless of the debate over what is fake or real, FF scenes have been overwhelmingly male for a number of years. I thought the media gave it a rest by now. It is usually just stupid internet commenters who I still sometimes see claiming the opposite.
I don’t think he said that. I think just meant they were common. Which is true – they were, although I believe they are probably more common now. Whilst they look more convincing than they used to, this particular scene with Ivana was definitely a merkin, unfortunately – not just because her ‘lips aren’t visible’ but because of subtle differences in the way it looks vs. unsimulated pubic hair on film (plus the fact that merkins were widely used in the main Spartacus show, and House of Arshur isn’t going to be any different – they’re using very similar production standards). The only question for me is whether it was just a standard prosthetic, or if they were using CGI to ‘enhance’ the details later on, which I’m fairly sure they did – this is actually done quite a lot these days. I remember once reading a rather tedious breakdown of Jennifer Lawrence’s simulated ‘full frontal’ nude scene from ‘No Hard Feelings’ where they showed how a bunch of transparent straps holding on ‘privacy coverings’ for a few intimate areas had been edited out post-production to make her look fully nude, whereas in reality (although she’s lied about it a few times) Lawrence didn’t actually film the scene whilst fully nude at all. Understandable, but a shame, obviously it’d be nicer to see the actresses genuinely nude.
peter
Yes, there are differences in lighting, and there might be makeup involved as well. I couldn’t open the photo in the link you sent, but you can send the images here in the comments if needed.
It’s just like the Oscars® where they release the best stuff at the end of the year. They’re clearly campaigning for Scoopy’s Best Nude Scene of 2025.
Guillermo del Toro has suddenly subscribed to Starz
USA is a country that can’t show a realistic pussy, even a prosthetic one. But they can show erect dicks. What a country of contrasts.
Ivana is SO hot!
I’m starting to get a bad feeling about this show. I hope all the nudity doesn’t come from the same two girls
Well, the trailers hinted at sex scenes involving Jamie Slater and other actresses… So, we’ll see. There are still many episodes to go, buddy.
First episode had the other slave girl banging the young gladiator AND the rich widow taking a naked bath for no reason at all.
And a huge orgy. And background tits in the arena scenes.
They aren’t skimping on the nudity at all.
I didn’t say they were skimping on the nudity.
Those are all extras and side characters. As far as “main’ female characters go, it’s been nothing but these two, which is what I’m worried about. They even had an opportunity to show Tenika Davis nude and avoided it.
4 actresses from the main cast appear naked, buddy. As I said, the series is still in its begning and probably other main actresses will appear nude, according to the trailers at least
Glad to finally see Ivana’s ass, & her ridiculously fake hooters just make it that more of a 90s Showtime “Late Night” throwback
I enjoyed that scene too, although it was only an angled side view of her butt with one side partially obscured. I was hoping we were going to see complete shot of it in good lighting, like we did with that rich widow character in that scene where she was getting out of the bath. Beggars can’t be choosers I suppose.
The quality of beautiful actressses like katrina law and viva Bianca declined. But one thing remained same that the vagina is still not visible. Atleast game of thrones showed full on labia of some of the actresses like Charlotte hope and esme Bianco.