Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Sex In Films

Straw Dogs is the classic example of this. The cuts they insisted on removed some nudity but made the whole scene look far more brutal and explicit than was intended.
Like when they banned Relax. It went from being a track with ambiguous lyrics to something us pre-teens wanted to know more about. Thus defeating the object of whatever they were trying to do.
 
This is bollocks.

I said that the graphic portrayal of the rape in The Accused, was totally unnecessary and gratuitous; and that as a legal/courtroom drama they could have dealt with that scene differently.
I've just rewatched that scene again, all seven minutes of it. It is more explicit than I recalled - I thought they didn't show any of a naked JF, but there are about ten or fifteen seconds of her nipples showing. There is far more nude male arse, which was and still is a great rarity for any 'sex' scene.

But there is absolutely no way it was unnecessary or gratuitous. The sheer length of it, turning from a bit dodgy to utterly irredeemably vile is important. While I don't think there should have been one millisecond of a nipple on display, it overwhelmingly concentrates on faces, on how Foster changes from having a good time, to her thinking he's gone a bit too far to absolutely horrific, soul destroying brutality. You have to see the faces of the rapists transform from 'mere' letches to animals, to grotesques. Because that is what rape is. Cutaways and meaningful silences just don't cut it.

It's a brutally hard watch, but that scene changed things, at least for a while. And even if nothing had changed behind the scenes.

(I would have said thats 'its hardly a scene you could wank to' but the site I found it on - I won't link, but it seems to be the only one that shows the whole scene - appears to be built just for people to do just that.)
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: Sue
Sex scenes in films have been ruined by The Specialist. I've never recovered from the sight of Stallone's wobbly arse pumping up and down on Sharon Stone, no-one called for that.
 
This is bollocks.

I said that the graphic portrayal of the rape in The Accused, was totally unnecessary and gratuitous; and that as a legal/courtroom drama they could have dealt with that scene differently.

One of the best films on a similar subject is Time To Die, which is far more powerful than The Accused, and doesn't need to show graphic rape.
I tend to agree with Belboid. I don't think it was gratuitous, and I do remember that for its time it felt like an important film in terms of addressing this issue head on.

I'm not saying you or anyone should watch such films. I'm not a fan of trigger warnings - they give away the plot half the time - but I would favour a system of optional trigger warnings so that people can choose to be warned if they want. You're not the only person I know who can't watch rape scenes, and I think it's totally understandable.

It's not even about the explicit nature of such scenes necessarily. The rape in Once Upon a Time in America isn't explicit at all, but it's deeply horrible (how could it not be?). I'm not sure if it was Leone's intention, but it made me hate the de Niro character and really resent that opium smile at the end. Left a bad taste about the whole film in a way that I don't think was the director's intention, although I could be wrong. Maybe he wanted us to feel shit about the three hours we've just spent watching his film about gangsters.
 
You bunch of prudes. Of course there are some awful generic sex scenes that don't add anything, but in general I don't think they're a bad thing at all. Personally I prefer it where they manage to capture something about the reality of sex that's missed in porn, or where the sex itself (good or bad) reveals something about the relationship between the two people. And when it comes to gay sex, it's still fairly novel to see it on screen and rarely done particularly well. It's a pretty fundamental part of life, I think it should be captured in art forms, personally. Perhaps it's not always necessary in some bog-standard Hollywood thriller though.
 
I think many films are ruined by crap sex scenes.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not anti-sex. I've even had it myself a couple of times. But often, the tits, knobs, and bonking are completely superflous and simply done to shock or titilate.

An acquaintance of ours is a very minor film producer/director, and we went to see his latest effort last night. It's basically a porn flick. Fuck knows what was going on plot-wise but I got kicked out (by my wife) for laughing and taking the piss out of a facial shot of ecstasy when the protagonist got a cock up his bum.

That's an extreme example but gratuitous shagging does seem to be on the mainstream increase too.

Down with this sort of thing! :mad:

What say you?
More often than not it's all about the rating.
The industry has gotten it into its head that a demographic won’t attend unless the rating reflects their expectation. A film for adults must have an adult rating, for families a family rating.

Maybe they are right but they have made it that way and they could break cycle if only they had the guts to get together and do something about it.
 
You bunch of prudes. Of course there are some awful generic sex scenes that don't add anything, but in general I don't think they're a bad thing at all. Personally I prefer it where they manage to capture something about the reality of sex that's missed in porn, or where the sex itself (good or bad) reveals something about the relationship between the two people. And when it comes to gay sex, it's still fairly novel to see it on screen and rarely done particularly well. It's a pretty fundamental part of life, I think it should be captured in art forms, personally. Perhaps it's not always necessary in some bog-standard Hollywood thriller though.
Carlee Gomes agrees with you at great length in the article posted above.
 
More often than not it's all about the rating.
The industry has gotten it into its head that a demographic won’t attend unless the rating reflects their expectation. A film for adults must have an adult rating, for families a family rating.

Maybe they are right but they have made it that way and they could break cycle if only they had the guts to get together and do something about it.

You'll have a hard time convincing me that they include shag scenes in to up the rating. They could do that in loads of other ways, if it was a thing at all.
 
You'll have a hard time convincing me that they include shag scenes in to up the rating. They could do that in loads of other ways, if it was a thing at all.
It’s one tool out of a toolbox along with violence, language etc.
Some film scenes are filmed with no intention of ever making the Final Cut but as sacrificial lambs and bartering tools so the censors feel they’ve done a job.
 
I've never understood why explicit violence seems to be so much more acceptable than even mild sex/nudity in films. Surely it would be better to normalise nudity and consensual sex than to show extremes of violence?
 
I've never understood why explicit violence seems to be so much more acceptable than even mild sex/nudity in films. Surely it would be better to normalise nudity and consensual sex than to show extremes of violence?

The thing is, you very rarely get completely superfluous violence, and if you do it's almost always in a film that's known for violence or perhaps has even been sold on it. It rarely comes as a surprise. You KNOW that a gangster flick or war movie is likely to contain violence. Shagging however, rears its boring head completely out of the blue, often with absolutely zero context, or worse, completely out of context. We watched A History of Violence a week or two ago. The film has nothing to do with sex or even the relationship between those two, but they still manage to slip in 2 or 3 shag scenes, one quite graphic.
 
The thing is, you very rarely get completely superfluous violence, and if you do it's almost always in a film that's known for violence or perhaps has even been sold on it. It rarely comes as a surprise. You KNOW that a gangster flick or war movie is likely to contain violence. Shagging however, rears its boring head completely out of the blue, often with absolutely zero context, or worse, completely out of context. We watched A History of Violence a week or two ago. The film has nothing to do with sex or even the relationship between those two, but they still manage to slip in 2 or 3 shag scenes, one quite graphic.
I agree about the inappropriateness of a lot of sex scenes.
 
I used to enjoy sex in films till that time my girlfriend of the time and I got thrown out of Cinderella…
 
Gen Z wants less sex on screen:



(And they're drinking less, too, by the by)

 
Gen Z wants less sex on screen:



(And they're drinking less, too, by the by)

How much porn are they watching though?
And what other drugs?
 
The two best sex scenes I can think of are 'The Tall Guy' (funny and has Jeff Goldblum) and 'Farinelli' (sexy and featuring two hot Italian men and a hot Italian woman and lots of silk sheets).

I've noticed fewer sex scenes in films - I mean, it makes sense, if you want actual sex you an get it online anytime, no need to hold up the plot of a film with shagging so your (male) audience can get its kicks.
 
Gen Z wants less sex on screen:



(And they're drinking less, too, by the by)

I imagine those same general trends probably exist here too, but would be interested in how they compare from country to country.

Anyway, another thinky article on the subject:
 
I tend to agree with Belboid. I don't think it was gratuitous, and I do remember that for its time it felt like an important film in terms of addressing this issue head on.

I'm not saying you or anyone should watch such films. I'm not a fan of trigger warnings - they give away the plot half the time - but I would favour a system of optional trigger warnings so that people can choose to be warned if they want. You're not the only person I know who can't watch rape scenes, and I think it's totally understandable.

It's not even about the explicit nature of such scenes necessarily. The rape in Once Upon a Time in America isn't explicit at all, but it's deeply horrible (how could it not be?). I'm not sure if it was Leone's intention, but it made me hate the de Niro character and really resent that opium smile at the end. Left a bad taste about the whole film in a way that I don't think was the director's intention, although I could be wrong. Maybe he wanted us to feel shit about the three hours we've just spent watching his film about gangsters.

Yes, it wasn't gratuitous. It was there to show us how fucking horrific it is. And it was shown in a way that wasn't in the slightest bit "sexy."

It is the kind of film that deserves trigger warnings, but trigger warnings only mean "this is going to happen." So if you thought it was a sedate courtroom drama you're warned ahead of time.

If it had been a courtroom drama it would have been forgotten. There have been hundreds of those. This movie was brought up a lot at the time and for years afterwards when it came to discussions of consent.

But TBH it shouldn't really be in a discussion about depictions of sex in movies. It's violence that includes sex, it's not a sex scene.
 
Anyway, another thinky article on the subject:

Keeps banging on about Starship Troopers shower scene and only hungry for war.

Completely ignores the how horny Rico is for Ibanez. She keeps fobbing him off until he is so desperate for her he joins up. Then he gets to stay over.

The testosterone’d cockfighting between Rico and Zander over who gets the girl.

Then the scene with Rico and Dizzy where they have 6 minutes to have sex and rush to sate their desire.

Their blinkered view of Troopers undermined and led me to not value their perspective of the topic.
 
Back
Top Bottom