Sex

TheYankee said:
I think once you get into penetration and sex on film (rather than acted sex on film) that is where the line gets crossed.
Click to expand...
And that's where the line was crossed in In The Cut. Simulated it one thing, explicit is another. My imagination is pretty good.
 
Yas Kassana said:
Anyone here seen the movies of Catherine Breillat? It's not art, it's just boring.
Click to expand...
what do you mean "it's not art"? that's just a dismissive way to avoid saying anything constructive.
 
Last edited:
it is all about the context for me. i will watch people ****ing if it works for the film. give me penetration if it works for the film. i dont mind. so what. if it is done badly and is a time waist then what is it worth.... if it is pointless then it would be better to watch a porno. bring it on if it works for the film.

now "get the butter"
 
John_Hudson said:
How about the Brown Bunny Gallo film ? What the poo poo was he thinking ? That was porn. .
Click to expand...
whatever you think of the movie as a whole, i thought that scene realized a typical male fantasy in one of the most frank depictions i've ever seen.
 
Subquestion . . .

Can anyone give an example of where nudity -- or graphic sex -- is truly *necessary* to the script? Meaning, the story fails unless it's there?
 
David Jimerson said:
Subquestion . . .

Can anyone give an example of where nudity -- or graphic sex -- is truly *necessary* to the script? Meaning, the story fails unless it's there?
Click to expand...

Irréversible - is the first that comes to mind.
 
KOVAROVA said:
it is all about the context for me. i will watch people poo pooing if it works for the film. give me penetration if it works for the film. i dont mind. so what. if it is done badly and is a time waist then what is it worth.... if it is pointless then it would be better to watch a porno. bring it on if it works for the film.

now "get the butter"
Click to expand...

I was going to write something, but KOVAROVA pretty much summed my thoughts up. Amen Brother!

Similo had a great classy sex scene in it that was done beautifully. If I would have seen penetration in that film it would have still been beautiful.

I had a discussion with my dad today about how the USA is so prudish. In europe sexuality and nudity is more out in the open. It's not something to become obsessed about because it's just a part of life. We americans, for the most part, are raised to deny our instincts. That only serves to make the fires burn hotter. It makes us more irrational and pointlessly obsessed. It's like the drinking thing. In Germany they just drink, it's no big deal. It's nothing to say, "tee hee hee" over as a teen like we have here. It's not something cute or cool, it just is.

Yas, if your girlfriend is in a role calling for her to kiss, that's just a role. If she gets a little too into it, then it's not your problem, or her problem. Your relationship just wasn't that strong to begin with.
 
David Jimerson said:
Subquestion . . .

Can anyone give an example of where nudity -- or graphic sex -- is truly *necessary* to the script? Meaning, the story fails unless it's there?
Click to expand...
Nudity itself sometimes is truly necessary.
I agree with you on graphic nudity/sex...it is often a cop out. Besides, less is more (more erotic that is.)
 
CallaghanFilms said:
Nudity itself sometimes is truly necessary.
I agree with you on graphic nudity/sex...it is often a cop out. Besides, less is more (more erotic that is.)
Click to expand...

I haven't actually made a statement to agree or disagree with. Just asking what others thought.

But . . . I can't immediately think of an example of how a story could fail if you don't have the nudity.
 
I know the thread itself is referring to nudity in relation to sex.
But-
3 that come to mind right off the bat...

-Schindler’s List
-The Pawnbroker
-Women in Love

(like I said non-graphic nudity)


Edit:

Also...
My thoughts on Kubrick should be fairly clear by now (my feeling that he is overrated as a director save for a couple of films.) However, even though I'm not a fan of the film, I'm sure Eyes Wide Shut could be added.
 
Last edited:
I'd say the bare-breasted scene in Witness was well-done. It showed her lack of shame, and innocence. The reaction shot of Book WAS shameful. It added to the story. But really, it wasn't necessary. Great film either way
 
when that woman gets out of the tub in The Shining.. **** it would have been different with a bathing suit on.
 
KOVAROVA said:
when that woman gets out of the tub in The Shining.. poo poo it would have been different with a bathing suit on.
Click to expand...
I agree. That is an excellent example of when nudity advances the story.
 
that scene ****ed me up forever. i can still see it clearly in my head.. almost like hitting a play button.
 
I can;t fathom certain films without nudity and I suppor unadalterated lesbianism (If they are hot)...

But serious; all of these are very supportive. Witness being a great example (You know they cut out this major love scene?).
 
But the question is (to me) can you get the same, or better emotional response without showing the sex? Yeah, the 14 year olds gt the obligatory priapism, but, like excessive violence I think it is too often relied on as a crutch. Maybe it's because I consider myself a writer first, so subtext and implication are very important to me. Using Sideways again as an example, when Maya takes Miles to her apartment and they close the door, you know where they wound up...why isn't that enough? Or is the adolescent boy in us THAT strong?
 
Anyone seen The Dreamers by Bernardo Bertolucci? This film makes me flip-flop on Jimerson's question. I thought some nude parts actually helped convey symbalism, tone, theme, and inner workings of the character. Sex and nudity were central to a lot of the plot...and I had no problem with it. But there came a time when I thought it was gratuitous and was actually distracting. Now, we see the same amount of flesh, but sometimes in the the flick it feels different. "You'll know when you see it" sounds like a crap subjective definition...at first. I can't explain in words why I felt these scenes were different, but I know the feeling was different in the two. So actually that definition works for me...

Sure, Bertolucci could have made this movie without one single pepperoni shot. He could have used a different 'shortcut' to show freedom in the sixties, conformity, etc etc, whatever. It might even have been the same themes touched on in different ways, but it sure wouldn't have been the same movie.

I aint no prude, but most of the time I can come up with better fantasies than what I actually see in the theater (Obvious exceptions though). I don't think Basic Instinct would have worked without the sex. What else would make you risk your own life other than sleeping with a probable hott/bi serial killer that was the F*ck of the century? Sex, in this case, is the only thing that would work in order to play off that tension so well. Sure, there have been other thrillers that didn't revolve around sex to build tension, but in this case, it was a great choice. For me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top