Radcliffe looked like he was taking it DEEP.
Yet wasn't it meant to be his first time? Didn't seem like he was in pain
shareCant believe this guy is so desperate to be taken seriously. First he goes on stage fully naked in a semi explicit scene with that True Blood/Pitch Perfect chick. But in this movie, he debased himself by doing that scene. And for what? it's not even that good of a movie to make such a semi explicit scene worthwhile. Yeah, I know it's acting, but man, you are still have a naked guy on top of you in that position simulating sex. They couldn't find a real gay actor to be Ginsberg?
shareYou are such an idiot. He debased himself? No, you're debasing yourself by saying such stupid garbage. Yes, it is acting and having a man on top of him while acting is still just that..acting. It's pretty clear you're a major homophobe and possibly an outright bigot since it bothers you so much. I bet you'd be shocked at how many straight men have played gay characters and some in scenes where they had to kiss another guy or simulate sex with them..and guess what? They're still straight and it didn't bother them to do it? God, you're stupid.
I know it's acting, genius. You still got a naked guy simulating sex with you. Ugghhhh. There was no need for that scene. And yes, while I support gay rights , gay sex disgusts me. Funny thing is if those were two gay actors, I probably wouldn't cringe as much.
share[deleted]
Aesthetically, it is kind of gross for me. I never said no one should have gay sex. If that's what is of appeal to you , more power to you. I would prefer to see gay actors in such roles. Hell, gay actors need more roles anyway. ALl I know is if I am actor and I was asked to do such a scene, I would liken it to a scene where I would have to eat crap in a JOhn Waters movie. (I love JOhn Waters, by the way).
share[deleted]
I think the poster might think that they actually had sex. But they didn't. They were only acting the sex scene. So, we can return to normal. No gay sex took place. Only pretend.
I don't think the threadstarter did, as he/she wrote;
Yet wasn't it meant to be his first timeNotice the use of the word "meant" .
I however thought one could actually see a hint of acted pain, but only alittle. Maybe he was supposed to really want it, hence being relaxed enough for it not to hurt too badly. share
I don't try why it matters. Gay sex is still sex. So let's do the extra adjective eh? And second its acting. Whether it's a man on a man or a woman on a woman which no one ever seems to have issue with. I'm sure there are a ton of women that hate having dudes on top of them when they are filming for one reason or another but it's ACTING. A job something you get paid to do is not like they sneak it in on you either you know what you're getting into. Get over it
shareYes Dumbo, there was a need for that scene. It's just your simpleton mind can't comprehend past action movie level acting and plot.
shareI agree 100%. I fear Daniel might just have type cast himself as gay for the rest of his acting career after this. Couldn't he have at least got a body double for the sex scene and hidden his face from view ? Or perhaps they could of used CGI to put a naked butt baring body onto Radcliffe's figure, so that he could retain some dignity in knowing that he was still actually fully clothed in real life during that scene, LOL.
shareGood God it was a movie scene it's not like he took it straight in the pooper...
That's like saying Ving Rhames was typecast forever as a BDSM victim because he got butt slammed by Zed in Pulp Fiction