Sex Scene?
It says that it has a strong sex scene. How "strong" is it?
shareIt lasts about 6 seconds. There's no nudity. Its not really necessary to the story of the film so I dont know why its in there. I guess the director just wanted a sex scene in the movie.
shareUm, sorry.
It lasted a LOT longer than 6 seconds and, YES, there was nudity.
But I agree--I think that it was TOTALLY unnecessary to the story. It really didn't need to be there.
Okay, there are certain rules that need to be followed in horror movies and one of them is there has to be a sex scene. The longer and more nude it is, the better. I will back up my statement with the fact that I've seen the entire horror section in my local video store with my friend Allison and my roommate Angela.
And why aren't any of you commenting on the playing card montage or the action figures? Those were fecking awesome. There were three things that stood out in my mind after watching this movie, mostly in fast-forward. The first was, obviously, the action figures. It was the first thing you saw, and come on, if those didn't strike fear in you, you're an emotionless, unfeeling bastard. Second. The playing card montage. What the hell was that about? All of a sudden people are playing cards and woah! Look, it's a queen... no.. it's a JACK! Alright. And lastly, the very scary tree face. We had to rewind that one twice, just to watch it over.
Anyway. I can't believe that so many people saw this movie and that some think it is "brilliant." That's just scary enough right there.
The only reason you need a sex scene in a horror movie is to distract two characters while the monster/slasher sneaks up to kill them.
As for watching it in fast forward, I suggest you do the opposite, at least in some places. I've slowed the movie down and frame-by-framed some of those flash-picture montages, and there are some really creepy images spliced in.
People who follow the "rules" often end up making make boring films. The arbitrary
inclusion of a sex scene seems a bit ridiculous
>>But I agree--I think that it was TOTALLY unnecessary to the story. It really didn't need to be there.
the point of the scene was that Otis turned out to be hanging around, possibly watching.
I thought the Sex worked. it set up Otis as even creepier by peeping on them. and I thought it help set up the connection of the between the characters, who are both likable .
shareNo, because Jake Weber was in it, the sex scene WAS necessary. lol He's soooo hot.
shareThere was nudity...if by nudity you mean bare backs and bare legs, and Jake Weber's bare side buttocks.
NIIICE.
I disagree.
These were 2 people who were not really getting on as a couple, and the retreat to the cabin was a sort of a 'last ditch' effort.
In this context, the sex scene worked very well to stipulate the emotion -or rather the absence of emotion- between them.
In other movies, you'd see soft-focus, slow motion 'making love'. These 2 people were simply 'grunting', and that somehow heightened the desparation in the relationship.
[deleted]