MovieChat Forums > Grande école (2004) Discussion > Exploitative Gay Cheesecake

Exploitative Gay Cheesecake

posted 14 years ago by kellycastlebridge
3 replies | jump to latest

This film was nothing more than exploitative gay cheesecake. It was not an "art" movie; just an excuse to show several gratuitous, exploitative, over-the-top locker room scenes involving over a dozen naked men. The camera zooms in on the men's asses and penises as they are portrayed for several minutes with their dicks in full screen view. There are several scenes in this film showing cock after cock. It gets redundant REAL fast and makes it impossible to take this film seriously. I was wondering if I was watching a Playgirl video by mistake. If these same scenes were filmed using women (ex: totally naked and showing their vaginas repeatedly) it would be quickly dismissed as just softcore porn and an excuse to show a lot of eye candy...which is all that this film is. Any artistic merit got flushed down the drain of the gay ghetto mentality. Just cut to the chase and rent a gay porn instead.

[–] mattfg 14 years ago

All, kelly, we can always count on you to complain about the unfairness of showing men's dicks in movies while not showing close-ups of vaginas. Of course, the inherent illogic in your argument is that it's impossible to show such close-ups of female genitalia without it being so obviously pornographic. It would be strange for a camera in a mainstream movie to zoom in like that on female genitalia, hence it doesn't happen.

Yet mother nature has been kind enough to put men's genitalia nicely outside the body. And when an actor does some casual nudity, his penis will be readily visible. So a guy without any clothes facing a camera will be seen in all his glory, while a woman without any clothes facing a camera will be seen in most of her glory, while her genitalia will remain naturally unexposed. Same shot, different exploitation.

Yet I don't think this is any reason to refrain from showing male frontal nudity. If guys like you don't like it, too friggin' bad. Don't watch it. I'm surprised you'd go out of your way to watch a movie like Grande Ecole when it's marketed as a gay French movie. And you're shocked by the abundance of male frontal nudity?

For me, this movie is a gay nudie movie classic. Sometimes you want something more high brow than porn. Sometimes you want to see very attractive actors take it all off in a dramatic setting. And this movie provides us with these pleasures in excessive amounts. It's been 6 years since this movie came out, and no other movies since have shown this much male nudity without apology. I'll be watching this movie over and over again when I want something erotic but not too pornographic. Yay for penises on the big screen!

[–] kellycastlebridge 14 years ago

Mattfg, the unfair double-standard that I speak of regarding the showing of penises in R-rated films and complete avoidance of vaginas is a completely sound and logical argument. It is NOT difficult to show a women's vagina; the woman merely has to be in a natural body position. Directors actually have to take great pains and use careful camera angles and editing to avoid showing vaginas. A woman could easily be on all fours, or bent over, or in any number of positions with her legs apart for her vulva to be visible.

The fact that we NEVER see any of these positions, and NEVER see a woman's vulva in a mainstream film, is absolutely ridiculous! It is impossible for this to occur without a strong, concerted effort to avoid showing vaginas/female genitalia. This is particularly unfair when penises are shown in numerous films. Similar camera tricks/angles could be used to avoid showing male genitalia (such as side nudity, rear nudity, having an object obstructing the camera view, etc) but these devices are NOT employed. So it is the unfairness of this situation that appalls and disgusts me. I'm surprised that more men haven't figured it out yet and complained about it. If I were a director I could EASILY come up with a scene that would show a vagina and not be "obviously pornographic" as you claim. It only takes a little imagination. Just as homosexuals like to look at penises and balls, us heterosexual men want to see a woman's vagina or anus in a mainstream film too!

I do agree with you that there needs to be more erotica (for both straight and gay audiences) that is more high brow and not just porn. Porn is often boring, mechanical, and redundant... while erotic nudity in a legitimate film can be far more exciting. But at least the gays get that with movies like this. You can see erotic male genitalia in this film, which was only rated UK-15. There is no film anywhere that shows several clear vulva shots that is rated UK-15. If I want to see a woman's genitalia (vagina or anus) I have to rent a porn....that is completely unfair. I would like to see more mainstream films that have a legitimate plot and feature female genital nudity. Anyways, I don't have a problem with anyone who watches this as a good gay nudie flick (which I agree it probably is), I have a problem with people who pretend this is just an art film and not cheesecake. It also bothers me that there are not similar films showing equally graphic female genitalia.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]