Bizarre.
Nice film but I think it is lost amidst it's need to show the characters as overly sexed individuals. Whether this is some metaphor towards viagra... no idea but it didn't work for me if it was.
[deleted]
Is it necessary to fock daily ? No
Is it necessary to sheet daily ? No
Is it necessary to watch this movie ? No
Yes, let's take two people who are overly sexualized characters, who sleep around to escape the way their lives are and who they are, and let's NOT show them naked, let's pretend they're not really having sex all those times in the bedroom/back room/bedroom/restaurant/bedroom.
Bloody idiots.
It's not necessary because being naked and having sex says something completely different to the essence of this film. You don't have to show people having sex and being nude to give the impression of them being aloof.
Although, if you want to sell a film where people having sex to people, well, let's have them having sex. In this film they do.
Therefore... they had sex so boys out there (and maybe girls) will get it to get off on.
I can't believe Anne and Jake were up for Golden Globes. They were hardly ground breaking performances. They are both fantastic actors but Golden Globes?
How old are you?
I would not say the characters were overly sexualized. If you were to film most normal people in the first few months of a relationship, you would see just as much if not more.
You people kill me. Half of you complain about unrealistic dialogue so the movie is unbelievable and then half of you complain when they show realistic scenes where nudity is seen and say "they could have done it by showing the essence of nudity to lead one to believe that sex has occurred."
Are most of these types of post by young people who still have an idealized version of how love and sex should be or young people who have watched too much porn on the internet and believe that all women are shaved and all breasts look like silicon balloons.
Course I could be wrong.
I agree with you. This was a film for grown ups, and I''m wondering about some of the people posting on this board and how much they know about real life and real relationships. This movie depicted a realistic relationship, rather than the usual formulaic crap you see in every rom com. Most relationships actually do begin with with a huge emphasis on sex, and this movie shifted tone halfway through to focus more on the emotional side, once the honeymoon period was over. I'm happy that it was a sexually honest film. We need more of them.
I simply am not there...
Tribbiani, you make me wonder if perhaps kids should be commenting on adult films. They should have age restrictions on R-Rated commentary for minors on this site.
-This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
[deleted]
I don't know whether Joey-Tribbiani meant about this couple was having too much sex or actually showing all the moaning or making it the main point of the movie because that is what appeared to me, the storyline (if there was one) was left in a secondary place. If I knew this was a soft-porn-movie-like I rather watched a more realistic one... this movie was ridiculously not a soft porn nor a comedy nor a drama nor nothing... completely pointless.
shareI felt like the sex was definitely necessary for the film. It was the basis of their relationship for a good portion of the film, so it would be theft to remove that from the movie. I will say that I feel that it lengthened the film to a tedious running time and started to drag on. I think maybe removing a bit of the sex could have helped this problem, but either way, some sex was necessary.
share[deleted]
Really? The movie is about Viagra? Maybe you should watch it again...
shareHow much nudity and sex is there in your romantic relationship? Seemed appropriate to me - as I recall, good-looking (and not so good-looking) young people (and old people), enjoy having plenty of sex together. Just an observation, not a judgement...
shareTo everyone who is mocking the OP... Just think about it from a different perspective...
You can build the characters as sexual characters who use sex to escape their lives... sure... but you don't have to show them naked and sexual. I think sex/nudity was probably a good 40% of the movie -- maybe more.
My point -- you can still have a sexual romantic relationship without showing so much sex and nudity.
Besides, we ALL know that one of the reasons the makers put so much sex/nudity in there was to draw audiences. So let's not pretend it was some creative necessity.
Yours in Christ,
~Molly~
www.hcdoxies.com
No it is not necessary at all. Just like you writing a comment or asking this question is not completely necessary at all. But you are writing and they are making movies with nudity.
Why are people so afraid of nudity? This type of approach is making everyone else make fun of Americans.
[deleted]
Yes, anyone but a backward American will see this as a G-rated film.
shareFirst, let me clear something up: I watch my fair share of porn, so my problem with the excessive sex portrayed in this movie is far from some moral discrepancy, my real problem lies in the films lack of consistency in tone. It couldn't seem to decide whether it wanted to be a tasteless sex comedy, a romantic comedy, or a full blown drama. One second, we'll have a ridiculous scene involving Jamie's brother masturbating to his sex tape or some slapstick-y scene involving Jamie running through a hospital with a massive erection, and the next, there will be a 180 degree shift in tone involving some disturbing mental breakdown by Maggie. I'm completely fine with genre mixing--James L. Brooks, Cameron Crowe to name a few--but please, do so with some taste and dignity. Why the screenwriter and the director felt the need to put such an odd spin on what could've been a decent drama (or sex comedy, for that matter), is indeed puzzling. you are reading my signature.
shareI didn't understand all the nudity and sex either. It seems like there is hardly such a thing as an R rated movie without sex and nudity. It seemed like porn. It just is weird as to why so many people would want to see people pretending to have sex. I can understand guys liking it because of Anne's nudity but the sex scenes were a bit contrived. I saw the preview for the movie but never looked it up and it never seems like the movie is all about sex. If I want to see sex I will watch porn at least it is really sex. Movies today make no sense. People are like it's about a relationship or it's about viagra so it has to be about sex but what about older movies like pretty woman? The movie was about a prostitute and hardly showed any graphic nudity or sex. Did Julia and Richard have sex? Yes but did the audience need to see him humping her to convey it? NO! I wish I can see an adult movie that isn't porn.
share[deleted]
I think that the nudity including numerous scenes where Anne Hathaway's tits were exposed were part of the package of seeing this movie.
But I do agree that the nudity did not save this movie from mediocrity.
I like nudity and sex as much as the next guy, but this did not fit movie. It just seemed forced.
shareThe entire movie seemed forced, it's not just the sex and nudity.
The Sex and nudity was the best part of the movie. Also their entire relationship was initially based on sex, so it makes sense that it would be a focal point for the film.
The entire reason they made this movie (or any movie) was to make a profit.
The producers knew they had no story that would sell tickets so they put in gratuitous nudity featuring Anne Hathaway. They made the movie for one reason: to get people to pay to see Anne Hathaway naked.
Really pathetic when you think about it.
"Of course I peed my pants, everyone my age pees their pants. It's the coolest."
"People are naked when they do it."
Not necessarily, oh inexperienced one.
The nudity/sex in this was like 98% crappy. Could have been done with more skill.
I am in a thousand winds that blow,
I am the softly falling snow.