Today as I did my usual rounds, I came upon the following article which prompted my attention –
http://www.buzzfeed.com/louispeitzman/movies-with-unsimulated-sex
Accompanying the post of the article was the following quote – “Just because the sex is real doesn’t mean it’s porn.” Actually, I’d say elements of Caligula actually DO make it porn, but moreover, reading the piece made me muse on the once-controversial, now more frequent usage of real, unsimulated sexual activity in movies intended for mainstream consumption. In a nutshell… I’ll pass, thanks.
The pivotal moment of “The Brown Bunny” – Daisy becomes fascinated with Bud’s belt. You can see what the fuss was about.
This is going to sound strange coming from a self-confessed watcher of actual porn, but I don’t care for the use of real sex in films where the principle purpose of the picture isn’t sexual arousal. I don’t see the point, and I feel very awkward for the actors having to engage in such real intimacy with relative strangers for the sake of “the art.” Well, apart from Chloë Sevigny in The Brown Bunny, who had previously been intimate with Vincent Gallo off-screen anyway, Basically being asked to shoot porn without it being labeled porn, to my eyes. It strikes me as incredibly lazy storytelling, reverting to the explicit/gratuitous.
I always get tempted when I read about a film containing explicit scenes of real sex, to write it off as a cheap ploy to get people into the cinema. When I read the synopsis of Nymphomaniac I became interested in the story and thought about going to see it, and I have read that Charlotte Gainsbourg turns in a great performance, but I have found out today about the digitally added real sex, and I find it disappointing. Yes, the sex is critical to the story, and I always scoff when people have problems with nudity or sex scenes appearing in a film for adults. However, just as one can easily interpret a fatal gunshot without actually seeing a bullet entering the tissue of a vital organ, or a visual of the heartbeat stopping, a skilled director can easily shoot effective scenes of beautiful lovemaking, wild, unbridled passionate sex or should the need arise, torrid kinky no holds/holes barred fucking, without the viewer having to be force-fed visuals of “it going in” as we used to say as kids.
“I CAN feel three types of softness!” – Kathleen Turner, “Body Heat” (1981)
9 Songs told a decent story, but it could have told the same story without asking the two leads to actually fuck each other, just as other films have with sex as a major factor in the storyline – Last Tango In Paris, Body Heat, Basic Instinct and so on. I don’t expect fans of “the arts” to agree with me, but I simply don’t see what filming real sex (with shots of the interaction with each others’ genitals) achieves that a skilled director and talented actors couldn’t effectively simulate…. other than a few extra column inches (oo-er) in the sensationalist tabloids, and pursuit of extra box office success as a consequence of the attention the sex will get you.
Wait…. with that last point, maybe I’ve nailed it. So to speak.
Pastries And Cakes 