MattHawkins Online - Film Making Forum

Ever heard of an implication? It will cut 5 minutes of repetitive macking hooblah from your film and the story will continue. A lot of them are unnecessary and are just box office boosters for the male viewer (mostly male). So unless it is a crucial impact on your storyline, I would suggest just implying it.

I've never understood actors who go "I'll do nudity if it's vital to the story", because I've yet to see it be vital to a story!

Saying that, Jessica Alba made this very point recently explaning her 'no nudity' clause in her contract. I shed a good 7 tears.

Sex and nudity is perfectly natural in film too though, just not usually for most of the adolescents to use it in their first / early films lol because there simply sexually and emotionally immature.

The older you get the more comfortable most filmmakers get with sex (unless you are some kind of extreme social conservative...)

Sex can not only be important to the story, it can sometimes 'be' the story. When we see irrelevant sex it is often in genre films -like for example to prove simply that our hero is not gay... (seriously) all those commercials where you see a pretty young woman for our male gilette shaver or beer/spirits drinker etc.

However, because sex is vital for procreation, and represents often a height of recreation, and to most people a form of spirituality akin or the same as love etc. It can also be used to inflict pain in the most intimate emotional even physical way - for example adultery or worse still rape / abuse etc.

Sexual humiliation is a massive part of Orwell's 1984 (a political film) the core of the theories of psycho-anlaysis by Sigmund Freud (the driving force of all characterisation present in western literature still thus far!) Film's like Salo are shocking examples of sexual explicity it cinema.

There are so many ways that sex is core to human life hence film - the art like all arts that reflect it - that it is acceptable for it to be explored. This is different though - to the unnecessary score pointing sex (a bit of t&t) we might see in a horror movie (a shower scene - though even psycho used this to enormous effect!) ala voyereurism.


Finally as an actor (And one who works with professional actors too) i can tell you what they mean by that ususually is that they will do it for something of artistic credibility (and can even go quite far!) but want to avoid nudity for sake of genre sex selling. Incidentally the Guerilla Guide to Filmmaking often cites that distributers will ask promising films submitted to them to go back and include more sex... Interesting to note i think.

Ornsack wrote: Saying that, Jessica Alba made this very point recently explaning her 'no nudity' clause in her contract. I shed a good 7 tears.

she was naked in FF... nothing shown... but she was fully naked

I will not speak of the no nudity clause. I will not even tolerate being around people that speak of it. So let's just drop it. Kay?

Kentertainment hit the nail on the head. Sex scenes are almost always gratuitous - sure the act is a vital life experience and all that, but how are you supposed to put any sort of character development, or even make some kind of statement (besides the ironically juvenile "f*** the establishment" thing a lot of indie filmmakers are into these days - say what you will, there's always that crowd of douche bags that think extreme gratuity in all forms is somehow being courageous or bold) by showing a couple gettin down?

Just start with making out, as the clothes start coming off, pan away and fade out. Nothing's lost from not showing, nothing's gained from showing.

I think thats rather conservative Padrino,

I agree completely that most sex scenes are gratuitous (mind you isn't most sex haha) - i think the kind of sex scenes people are talking about are different to an extent.

In this forum folk talking about sex are asking about its implementation in mostly adolescent directed genre films hehe...

Sex is an important human aspect, like for example death. Death in a film isn't treated with just a Fade to Black is it - its complex and deserves exploration. Death like sex though is usually gratuitous in its exploitation.

But note we hear no protests over that here? Forsooth as we don't shrink in outrage at the death rate of Die Hard hehe (well, it could be higher hehe!)

Sex puts the willys up us! (phwoar.)

Sex, is at least as important as death, as is birth, sex can be related to death, birth, love etc.

Any one of those conditions usually death, can be made to look cheap and tawdry. However unlike death moral terror makes us rush away from sex and exploring it.

True, in more bohemian minded artistic circles (less scared of sex) it is explored.

While you scumbags make s*** in your garden heres what one women did with a zero budget - a metaphorical film about sex (and without even gratuitous naughtiness)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=sbJKyLXoqXc

Oh further more,

Heres a terrifying film with lots of sex - yet its a great critique of consumer society aieee - called Salo, heres a fanmade trailer
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0o2ul-UwOvU

Heres some bits from the directors other films
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=lvfHxbdUeRg

Um, heres an interesting scene from another director, Ken Russell, from the film 'The Devils'
(its start is in latin) http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=HIGvJLiv3Uc

Death's actually a very good example. If the main character, who you've gotten to know and have connected with over the movie, say kills themselves by putting a shotgun barrel in their mouth, which is better - full straight on shot of his head being taken off, or a fade out/gunshot.

If the director can use the scene to say something about the characters or make a particular statement, then yeah that's fine. Otherwise, what's the point other than shock value?

Yah quite right, true true - agreed there!

On another note it is interesting though, sex in pornography is obviously HUGELY popular, and so is death (albeit delivered in fictional work) despite death related material (real and horrible ogrish type stuff) being the 2nd most popular after pornography presently (lets er hope thats soon supplanted)

Incidentally the reason a lot of exploitation genre films have unnecessary sex/violence is just cos thats what the distributers want really. I mean there made entirely for that purpose (no other deep meaningful artistic merit.)

While that seems innocent with a kung fu movie (what guy can't love them hehe)

It seems more shocking if theres lots of loose nudity around (that seems akwardly unnecessary ie. girl takes 3 mins in scene to undress, camera fetishises her body.) Actually Padrino if your interested in a very illuminating perspective of sex in cinema and the representation of women check out the writer Laura Mulvey (she'll have some free stuff online somewhere!)

I just hope one day porn becomes so much more prolific that it won't have to be interfere needlessly in films (but lets keep it artistic purposes)

I also think the no nude clause is somewhat wimpish for actors (most actors feel this way too) but naturally they are very discerning for who they strip off for - sorry Rhys...

Make sure your male actor wears spandex boxers that are tight and maybe a few undies underneath in case he gets a boner. Now that would be a story in itself

Lol - loved that random scene.

Make sure your male actor wears spandex boxers that are tight and maybe a few undies underneath in case he gets a boner. Now that would be a story in itself

LMAO! That reminds me of Underworld: Evolution. The sex scene between Selene and Michael, he taped his penis to his leg incase he got a boner, and he did, but he put it on too tight and he was in pain for the rest of the scene. I dunno if its true (a friend told me) but its funny.

Lol

Ornsack wrote:I've never understood actors who go "I'll do nudity if it's vital to the story", because I've yet to see it be vital to a story!

Ever seen A History of Violence? Monster's Ball?

Well, maybe not that last one, I think everyone saw the movie simply to see Halle Berry getting completely drilled.

This is an interesting discusison. Sex is one of those controversial issues in film, even more so than violence (which i find weird but whatever. To each their own).

I have been thinking about this recently. I am planning a film that is VERY loosely based on my last year of high school, where a friend and I moved out and lived by ourselves to avoid large bus trips for our final year. I am planning a film about these two guys who deal with everything growing up and independence brings, but it is all exacerbated by the fact they don't have their parents there to help. it's like a "coming of age" film of sorts.

Anyway, one of the characters has a girlfriend whom he has been with for ages. They have sex. I'm not planning on showing it because I don't think it is needed. i'll prob just show them talking in bed next to each other, implying that they have/will have sex. It's not that important. The other roommate, however, is gay. The other character does not realise this when they move in and he finds out later in the film, highlighting understand and how people deal with issue such as sexism and homophobia. I was planning to portray that character having sex (in the scene where the other guy finally realises the guy's gay). I'm not planning to show it like some low budget porno. I'm thinking tasteful audio and filming the other character's perspective (walking past the room, listening in, perhaps peeking in the door to see shadows moving, etc.).

Doing it this way suits my needs for the scene. I want one character dealing with something he doesn't understand or like, at the expensce of someone else. However, if i was after a Brokeback Mountain scene showing the emotional connection of the gay housemate and his partner, i may have scripted more a graphic (yet still tasteful and un-x-rated) scene showing how much they care about each other. Filming would prob be a large problem, but that's not the point. If i felt the scene needed it, I would write it in and deal with the issues later. But as I said earlier, this is my approach and to each their own. If someone doesn't want or see the need to put a sex scene in a film, that's their perogative. And that's prob a good idea in a lot of cases. there are far too many sex scenes and nudity in some films where it is really not needed (I wouldn't object to a nude Jessica Alba, but not at the expense of the film).

End "opinion, turn rant".

P.s. Has anyone here seen Shortbus? I have and that film revolved around sex. And without the sex, the film would have no point as the whole issue was how people deal with relationships and the importance of sex in those relationships. Interesting flip on the debate, i thought.