MovieChat Forums > Mammoth (2009) Discussion > Did HE wear a CONDOM to avoid AIDS?

Did HE wear a CONDOM to avoid AIDS?


For a movie which presented some big issues for the viewers to think about, I found it frustrating and careless to ignore the importance of whether or not the male character wore a condom when he slept with the prostitute.

Perhaps the direct did not want to typecast Thai prostitutes in particular as AIDS carriers? Or could it be that he didn't think it was a detail that mattered?

Well I think we needed to know if he wore a condom or not, it was perhaps one of the most important issues in the film! Did anybody else find the omission of that detail strange?

reply

^Another important issue in this movie is whether or not the prostitute really had an orgasm or whether she faked one.

reply

Sarcasm? Or a silly bump? Or dissin on the safe-sex thing?

My point was that the other big themes had closure but whether or not he took AIDS home to his wife was conspicuously ignored..

reply

As far as we can tell it wasn't a tranny, and AIDs transmission from female to male is difficult. Anyway, he'd probably die of it before he gets a chance to have sex again with scalpel-bitch.

reply

..."and AIDs transmission from female to male is difficult. Anyway, he'd probably die of it before he gets a chance to have sex again with scalpel-bitch."

Mind blown. Are you really this naive? Dear god... I weep for te future.

reply

No, it's kind of true. It's a lot harder to transmit AIDS via vaginal intercourse than anal, there's plenty of information out there about this. Even with anal sex, it's not quite as easy to transmit as some seem to think.

reply

Are you serious? You should go teaching safe sex and AIDS protection in schools.

reply

I thought the same thing too when I saw this movie. It kind of added to the suspense. I was so shocked he actually slept with her that the no condom part just added to everything.

reply

I think this whole discussion is ridiculous. Talk about injecting your own personal issues into a movie. They didn't imply that he did or didn't wear a condom. SO WHAT? I understand that you want to know, but the people who made the movie didn't think it was important to their story. Yeah, that's right, it is their story, not yours. Any time you watch a movie and there is a sex scene, do you wonder if a condom is being used? If so, that's either sad or twisted. Or maybe you don't wonder that, if the sex is being had in the US between two white people. I realize that the fact that she is prostitute makes a big difference, but how about we just say that he did for that reason. Or how about we just say that SHE had him wear one for that reason. She also has to care about her own health.
Do you take notice when someone drives a car in a movie and doesn't wear their seatbelt? Also an everyday occurrence that can mean the difference between life and death, or years of tortured existence.

reply

Thanks to y'all for your thoughts.

Obviously a question that confronts the taboo of AIDS. Hence my curiosity at Moodysson's failure to provide an examination. Somewhat against his track record.

bbonacci-1, although your skill in redirecting the issue and making it a personal attack on myself/my culture/ideologies outside of your own, i'm sorry to suggest that the weight of numbers in relation to deaths from AIDS renders your critique indulgently artistic and little more. I enjoy imdb, youtube etc for the refreshing honesty users provide in their feedback; your indignant defence of the right of Thai prostitutes to be beyond judgement is slightly less humorous than it is disturbing..


So Lukas, are you out there? Would you care to answer my question ?

reply

I love your reply

reply

I agree, I think it is irrelevant and doesn't have any place in the story. The main point is about his cheating, not whether he had safe sex or not.

reply

He pulled out

reply