@maxdancona,
I don't think it's necessarily a question of gratuitous nudity ruining an otherwise good movie, but it is truly gratuitous than it could very well ruin a cinematic masterpiece.
Regardless, no one needs to apologize for or explain their disdain for gratuitous inclusions of scenes or themes that do not support and/or enhance the theme or advance the plot. It is a perfectly valid criticism.
A film is, at it's best a work of art, that, like all art, has fairly defined, and definitely limited parameters. Artists who work with the medium of film must possess a certain degree of economy if they are to be successful. It's not simply a matter of intent. Just as you will never get an engine to run if you insert, at random, functionless parts throughout its structure, a filmmaker will create a seriously flawed work if he or she inserts functionless scenes, dialogue, or images throughout their movie.
Nude scenes are rarely functionless of course. They are either woven into the film because they are necessary to advance the artistic goal of the filmmaker or they are inserted to titillate audiences and sell tickets. Nothing morally wrong with the latter, but the filmmaker is engaging in pornography, not art. Plenty of movies with gratuitous pornographic (soft or hard) scenes make a lot of money and even receive some critical acclaim, but they are not as good as they could have been and very few, if any, will be found in a list of the greatest films of all time.
The title of this thread involves the word "annoyed," not "outraged" or "offended." Unless you are a member of the particular audience group the filmmaker is targeting with gratuitous scenes of any kind (nudity, violence, psychedelic imagery etc), they are bound to be
annoying.
