Members Only
Viggo Mortensen Is Fighting Naked! Guys, ‘Get Used to It,’ Says HBO Producer Cynthia Mort. Yipes! ‘It’s Time,’ Says Darren Star
In one of the many (many) startling scenes in the new HBO drama Tell Me You Love Me, which debuted Sunday night, a young, attractive married couple sit side by side on a sofa, watching a boxing match on TV. The wife unbuckles her husband’s pants, and after some noisy kissing, she pulls away and says, “I want to see it.” She sees it and—holy cow—so do we.
Over the past few months, the breathy buzz on the show—about married and almost-married couples in various stages of intimacy-related despair and dishabille—has centered on the amount of its frank sexual content. And it was there all right—from minute two, when a man masturbates under the covers, to real-time full-monty couplings, to angelic, white-haired Jane Alexander kissing meaningfully down her husband’s graying chest. Throughout the hour, as bodies moved and eyefuls of flesh and bikini waxes flashed, it was still the sight of that erect penis being clinically manipulated into a graphic orgasm that prompted did-I-just-see-what-I-think-I-saw gapes from less action-packed couches nationwide.
“That scene … who knew that would be the most shocking?” said Tell Me You Love Me’s 47-year-old creator Cynthia Mort, a day after the show’s premiere. She insisted that when she wrote the pilot, she was not thinking about sackfuls of sex on the show. “I have to say, some of the guys [actors] were more squeamish than the women were about taking their clothes off. They’re not used to it. They’re not used to being exposed in every way,” she said. “One thing the show is doing, I hope, is giving guys a voice emotionally. You can’t do that unless you’re honest and authentic in every way. If that means showing them in bed nude … well, I don’t know a guy who has sex with his underwear on.”
But if a casual survey of initial male reaction to the show is any gauge, many men may not be so keen to be given a voice emotionally if it also means the male member is going to be on conspicuous, prime-time display. Just as the cinematic baring of female breasts led many women to compare themselves and despair, putting the male organ out their for public consumption may strike many men as disempowering, deflating and just plain icky.
“Male nudity—full-frontal nudity—has always been considered a lot more taboo than female nudity,” said Darren Star, executive producer of Sex and the City. “As far back as I can remember, there’s been a double standard between men and women. I think it’s time that men get equal time in terms of nudity.”
Ask and ye shall receive! Slowly but surely a seismic shift is occurring across the entertainment landscape: men are dropping trou, and penises and testicles are seemingly everywhere, flapping in the breeze. This year, major franchise players like Lord of the Rings’ and X-Men’s Sir Ian McKellen (“Gandalf’s Gonads!” cheered the British press) and Harry Potter’s Daniel Radcliffe have continued the theater’s (always ahead of its cinematic cousin) tradition of disrobing on the stage. Three movies currently working the festival circuit, and pointing toward award-show glory, all offer an eyeful more than what we’re used to from established actors. There’s Ang Lee’s NC-17-rated Lust, Caution, which this week snagged top honors with the Golden Lion Award at the Venice Film Festival despite the film’s graphic sex and partial male nudity (compliments of famed Hong Kong star Tony Leung). Into the Wild, written and directed by Sean Penn, contains a scene of Emile Hirsch (certainly all grown up from his The Girl Next Door days) floating au natural down an Alaskan stream. And Viggo Mortensen heroically fights for his life wearing only his tattoos in one of the more gripping scenes in the David Cronenberg thriller Eastern Promises. One could be forgiven for wondering: Is the scrotum the new cleavage?
“David [Cronenberg] is great,” said Mr. Mortensen, via phone from the Toronto Film Festival. ”He said, ‘It’s got to be like this, if you’re okay with it. It’s uncomfortable, but it won’t be exploitative. It’s integral to the story and I will do my best to make you as comfortable as I can.’ And I knew that.” Mr. Mortensen’s ballsy moment takes place in a London bathhouse as his character, an enigmatic toughie rising through the ranks of a Russian mob family, is taken by surprise when attacked by two fully clothed men while wearing only a towel (which falls by the wayside during battle). The savage scene is made more poignant by the sight of Mr. Mortensen’s soft exposed parts; it’s an added layer of vulnerability that throws the brutality of physical violence into sharper focus. “[David Cronenberg] said, ‘You know, there’s this scene in a bathhouse, and there’s a towel, and I don’t know … in the script, all it says is that you’re attacked. How do you see that?’ And I said, ‘I think it should be as realistic as everything else and what everyone else does in this story. There’s no reason to make it look pretty, or conceal, or be vain about it. It should be as awkward and vulnerable and ugly as it needs to be.’
“It has gotten people’s attention because it’s unusual. And it’s also unusual to see it in such a straightforward manner,” Mr. Mortensen continued. “It’s not glamorized. I guess it’s not the most attractive of things to see … but it’s what it needed to be.” Next Page >
It's about time. We have nothing to fear from the human body. men's bodies should be celebrated as much as women's. A penis is a beautiful thing.
Cinematheque Films puts its dramas and art and explorations into film and identity on YouTube. Our stage is digital. There is nothing whatsoever pornographic about what we do anymore than an artistic rendering of the human body is horrifying to see. Yet we are very careful not to show anything unclothed or YouTube will not hesitate to shut us down. Often, it does feel like we're back to living in the 1950s and self-imposed censorship does have the effect of not just dampening the work we try to dramatize, but it's like a moral straightjacket and what we often wind up with is stuff that conveys not discovery but explorations that lead to sadness and containment and despair. There is no way to overcome this. YouTube is the digital law and outside of that the culture itself puts you in the Bad Box from which there is no escape.
Ironically, this morning I left a comment about this article; focused on how YouTube censors. And then I receive a notice that my comment is spam! WAIT A MINUTE! It was NOT SPAM. I was addressing the issues of censorship and creativity. How hypocritical to have a piece that tiptoes around the issue of censorship and then the NEW YORK OBSERVBER practices it. I RESENT being told my comment was spam. You are WRONG. Censorship reigns.
Well, my my my! It's about time. And I am just so sorry for all the poor poor heterosexual men out there who think it's just fine to objectify the female body, while hiding there own genital selves under the stupid covers. I'm gay. The female form doesn't do all that much for me- but it has been splashed across drawings, paintings, movie screens and television for a long time. But add in that male member- and suddenly- it's pornographic- virtually horrifying- when all it really is is realistic. Many thanks to Ms. Mort and all others out there who are finally allowing equal time for the entire male form- penis/balls/scrotum included- flaccid or erect. The amount of sexual Victorianism still being shoved down our throats these days by hypocritical religious moralists continues to disgust me on a regular basis.
Yeah, fair enough but how boring, how adolescent...
personally, I want to see good drama - not neccessarily peppered with concerns about the shape of some actors hairy ass or member. I also think some thingss are best left private - like I don't enjoy turning on channel 5 and seeing someone having their asshole bleached. I find it all very gratuitous and shallow, Keep your clitori, your balls and your asshole to yourself. it is not big, it is not clever and it is not interesting.
So the powers that be think it's time to give as much nudity time to the males as they do to the females? Maybe it's time they ALL put their clothes back on and let the audience rely on their own imaginations which frankly I believe are better than the ego based directors sense of artistic interpretation!
P.S.
And my friend Loriah adds"
doesn't the camera add 15 lbs. to whatever it is
capturing!!!! OOOOh,La La, Now we're talking some
serious girth!
See one, seen them all...oh please, put your trousers back on.
Leave a little mystery, please!!!
While there has been a lot of close ups of penises I still haven't properly seen close ups of vulva in the movies or on TV. No we're even showing erections? Where is the gaping vagina?
The problem with male nudity that includes erections and ejaculation is this: unless it is faked with clever prop genitals, it is not acting, it is an invasion of the actor's personal life. It's hard enough to get cast in a role without having to masturbate in the audition. Losing a role you are perfect for because you have a small or floppy or oversize penis? The ultimate in worthless discrimination.
The art of acting is in becoming another person, creating and enlivening a persona, not being yourself. It involves makeup and costuming. If you have to use your own genitalia and body fluids, how can you pretend you are in character? In fact, the actors who usually do this in a role are never seen again, but the director bravely continues to find other talent to exploit. It is taking advantage of actors too young to know better, or too desperate for work. It is a continuing degradation of what was once an art and is now merely prostitution. Let us not forget that having sex for money is prostitution. Putting it on screen and calling it film does not change that. It crosses that all-important line of pornography: the depiction of sex acts, not the suggestion or simulation of them. Likewise, opened female genitals, aroused breasts, should all be taboo again. The faking of reality is always more effective and shocking than the actual thing.
Shame on HBO for crossing the line of respect for others (again) and for being so tacky (again) and exploitve (again), for the sake of profit. Don't forget that this is all commercial entertainment (for profit), not art of any kind. I have seen movies that used "stunt weenies" like Eating Out: Sloppy Seconds, and it is completely effective. We don't need more entertainment like Shortbus or Nine Songs (begs for a version called Nine Schlongs).
To call it a righting of wrongs because women have been exploited for nudity is wrong. It only makes things worse, and the transformation of the penis from soft to erect is not comparable to anything in women.
Nothing to do with drama and everything to do with ratings-hunting and creative bankruptcy. I have no problem with hardcore pr0n, but please don't pretend that this is supposed to be anything but titillating, same as female nudity has been since whenever. The quote was that nude ballet would be OK if bits of people's bodies stopped when the music did. Same thing here - it becomes about the nudity, not about the drama.
I say it's about time! For years and years we have been inundated with depictions of female nudity. Yes the female nude form is beautiful. SO IS THE MALE NUDE FORM. I know many people don't see it as 'art.' Yes I saw "Shortbus." Yes it was a beautiful depiction of real life. Yes it did contain graphic sex. Not it did not detract from the story. It moved the story. As for more males going full frontal, I say more power to them. They are comfortable with their bodies and have no problem 'baring it all' in film. I say keep it up.
Pat has a point. Where are the vulvas? Sure, there is ample full frontal female nudity, but there are virtually no movies that dare show the actually vulva, much less the vagina. You see a mound of hair. (Caligula, an old Hollywood movie many would categorize as porn does show some female genitalia, same with Nine Songs). Newer American movies are showing full frontal male nudity, which always presents the viewer with the complete viewable male package (not hidden by hair). Shouldn't shaven vulvas begin to show up in films? After all, at least 3/4 of the American females, and many others worldwide, shave their nether regions. I think there has been a double standard in terms of nudity in past films, but that in the upcoming years, their will be a reversal of this double standard, one in which the penis and scrotum are visible, whereas the vagina remains hidden behind hair. It seems to me because of the insecurities of women and the fears of men of the vagina, that it will never really be shown. Hmmmm... Does anyone ever this of this?
Two things:
1) Men like breast, but they don't judge women solely on them: even if your breasts are the size (or even the shape) of a set of pears, there are still lots of other things one might base sexual attraction on. Hair, skin, shape, even body language. Women out there, please do the following: picture a celeb you'd "do" in a heartbeat. Now imagine you know for a fact that his equipment is 1 inch long when erect- is he still do-able or is he, at best, a charity case? Men don't feel so much objectified as *judged*. Breasts are nice, but they aren't a sexual deal-breaker.
2) A LOT of women don't grasp that there can be a HUGE size difference a flaccid penis and an erect one- being seen flaccid is, thus rather embarrassing. I once heard a woman compare the post coital male anatomy to "a lion turning into a mouse".
Likewise, one womans review of Jude Law's anatomy went like this:
"He has his father's eye's, and his *mother's* penis." Charming, ain't she?
I was actually going to say more, but other people have already said it here.
Equal times in terms of nudity? It sounds like the director of Tell Me Like You Love Me is but another average US female who thinks males should be exploited. The question begs: should more male nudity be added to films for the sake of equalizing nudity between genders? No, of course not, would be an appropriate answer. Nudity in films should not be a medium by which to put a gender in their place, or to shock people. It should be used like many European film makers use it...artistically and tastefully. The US is well-known as a country that is very closed to showing the human body in all of its glory. America is a prude. Hell, most American men are fixated on breasts, which is about the most infantile thing. As more male nudity is shown on screen, I question whether the American populace can handle it. It seems like too many women would use male nudity against men (as a lack of maturity, and because all the manhood is out there for scrutiny). Furthermore, should a vulva ever be shown on screen, will it cause a pandemonium? (Despite how many people claim the entirety of the female body is shown on screen, it truly is not. Name one film in which a vulva was shown- not pubic hair!) It should be interesting to see whether these films with more nether region male and female nudity will be excepted by America, and in turn allow America to become less prudish, or be rejected in some way, allowing America to retain its prude demeanor.
Ms. Mort is another female without any common sense or logic. Why do Homosexuals and females who want to show male full frontal nudity compare a penis with breasts. A Vagina is comparable to a penis, not a breast. I have never seen a vagina in a movie, ever! Why doesn't Ms. Mort, for the sake of equality, show a woman with her legs spread so we could actually see what a woman has. It won't happen and any movie that would try to show that would get an NC-17. There have been numerous movies that have showed a penis and received an R-rating. Ms. Mort says, " I would never show a female nude without showing a male." What kind of logic to a story line does this have. Why not the reverse. If she is going to show a penis, why not a vagina. Directors and producers all say that it is not about shock, but it adds to the story. The only thing people talk about when they see these type of shows or movies with male full frontal, is the full frontal, so it takes away from the story. The only reason people are talking about Ms. Morts's show is because of the male nudity. It is a piece of garbage, both boring and dull. I know many people who say they watched the 1st 3 episodes and tuned out because the show is just bad. The nudity is distracting and there to exploit men. Not many people are watching anymore. Maybe Ms. Mort should focus on better writing instead of showing a penis, just like many directors putting out garbage just to try and shock people should do. Eastern Promises is talked about because of the male nudity and not the type of movie that it is. How smart for a director to want that. Nudity is not enough to get people to spend their money on. They want a good story. Why did Hostel 2 flop so bad even though they had graphic male full frontal nudity. It was because the movie was terrible. Ms. Mort needs to get out of her adolescent days and start putting out better shows, or are you not capable of doing that Ms. Mort?
The only reason people want to see male full frontal nudity is because they say that women have been exploited so why not start to show men nude. It is all about revenge. A women has never been exploited to the point of showing their vagina. Women argue for their right to go topless in public like a man could because breasts are not sexual. Women show cleavage all the time. It is a simple fact that breasts are not a sexual organ or shocking to be seen. A man loves breasts because they are an attractive part of a woman, just like a woman loves a man's chest because it is attractive to them. A penis is much different and this is all being done to exploit men. How immature could these directors be. I want to see a vagina on screen if I have to see a penis. Only then will we have equality with nudity. What a joke. Congrats to Ms. Mort for becoming a soft core porn director. Your work is garbage and you are a feminist ass! Grow up!
It's true that full female nudity was shown in past movies, but not anymore, now it's like directors are putting attention only to full male nudity even with full close ups; waht makes me wonder why ratings allow the penis to be seen while showing the vagina is totally forbidden, because female nudity never includes the showing of the vagina or close ups,(there's always pubic hair covering the vagina) you only get to see breasts or rear female nudity, that's all, while showing a penis is totally acceptable nowdays.
So the showing of full feamle nudity is still a taboo (you can only see the vagina in porn movies), while once again the showing of the penis with close ups and for long periods of time is seen in a lot of "R" movies. WHY ?, WHY ?, WHY ?, WHY ?, WHY ?, WHY?, WHY?, WHY ?.
If we are going to talk about preferences for showing full nudity the women want because they can get to see the PENIS while the VAGINA is still and will be a TABOO.
To all men reading this: every time I know that a male nudity is going to be seen in any show or any movie, I just don't go and see it or change the channel for that matter, because it is frustraiting to me that now all most movies and shows are focused only on male nudity that includes full male nudity with close ups of the penis, that whoever the censors are allowed them in these movies or shows, while the showing of the vulva is still unacceptable.
DO NOT SPEND YOUR MONEY ON THESE MOVIES OR SHOWS AND LET THE CENSORS AND THE HIPOCRIT DIRECTORS KNOW THAT IF "VULVA" IS NOT GOING TO BE SHOWN, SO NEITHER THE PENIS SHOULD BE, and belive me "money talks", if you know that a movie is going to show full male nudity DO NOT GO AND SEE IT TILL THIS ENAQUALITY CHANGE, so directors: YOU ARE GOING TO SEE YOUR MALE AUDIENCE.
These are the most intelligent answers to an old question I've ever seen. True, it can't be an equality issue since the vulva is not shown. True, females feel exploited and want to exploit males more for revenge than for artistic reasons. True, it's all about money. Over the last couple of years, the movies I have enjoyed most have no nudity at all. Obviously, great movies can be made without nudity and do very well at the box office. As a teenager, I never understood females feeling uncomfortable when female nudity was in movies because I thought girls had all power over sex. If a girl wanted sex, 9 out of 10 boys she might ask would say yes. If a boy wanted sex, 9 out of 10 girls (or more) he might ask would say no. I thought, With this power, how could a girl ever feel intimidated by celluloid female nudity. Obviously, my thinking was seriously flawed. Obviously, girls don't think like boys. How else could you explain their "equality in full-frontal nudity" argument. While I don't have a problem with male nudity, I don't believe showing more penis is going to make females more acceptable to female nudity. We have two options; 1) Show less nudity on both genders, or 2) Make nudity so mainstream that no one gives it a second thought. Since nudity oriented materials is available anywhere anytime, I'm perfectly happy with option 1. Now that I'm 40 years old, I've tried a nude beach and found it to be totally invigorating and completely non-sexual and therefore I'm equally comfortable with option 2. What are your thoughts?
I agree with the fact that female frontal nudity is far and few in mainstream movies, especially in this day and age. Very rarely do you hear as often the slang words of female anatomy compared to male anatomy even on regular T.V. shows. Here's something to think about….years ago the female frontal nudity only consisted of the breasts. Later it became a few quick peeks at the full frontal female body. Mind you with hair on the female genitals which act as a PATCH as far as I am concered. Now that we have entered into the 21st century we STILL see this same patch (hair) on the female genitals in mainstream movies. Again basically a patch is what we are looking at. Men do not have this advantage so you see the real deal flesh. My point is and I speak from experience that many if not over 85% + of women shave their vulva and leave a small patch (mohawk) at the top of the pubic bone. They do this not only for the fad of the times but for a cleaner smoother and non-smelling reason. YET in any mainstream movie I have yet to see a full frontal let alone close up (compared to what they show on male frontal nudity today on mainstream) of a shaved meaty vagina and it's the 21st century! God let alone what would happen if a well endowed women had a large clitoris protruding between her vulva for all viewers to see if even a mere millisecond! The women of this country would go ballistic! But its ok for all the male frontal close-up even erections are ocassionaly displayed huh!!?? I am sorry I am not a breast man they do nothing for me and even in movies to me it's minor nothing compared to when the lower genitals are exposed. Sorry ladies breasts do not count. Don't get me wrong I don't go to a movie for the sole purpose to view nudity. You can very rarely today even see a female buttocks for a millisecond in mainstream movies anymore. Not only that even when a documentary on child birth they even pixel out the view and this a common human fact of nature. How many women would be up in arms if the showed the vagina opened up wide on the verge of delivery! The men of this country should complain and have every reason to including the boycott of this overly amount of male nudity in the movies to the Board that passes and ok's what can be seen in a movie before it is released. I am sure many women in the past have complained and done this and maybe this is why the lack of female frontal nudity close up does not happen as often. For pete sake us men are called perverts for going to a strip joint or looking at a girly magazine. Women, don;t hate me hate your GENDER that display their goods! Maybe us men are a bit more open about sexuality but we don't play the goodie 2 shoes role either then like these same women that secretly get on the computer and check out porn when no one is around in your own homes. Sorry I have caught a few female friends of mine doing this so don't even go there that it's not true...you know the truth. Many of you do. Anyways, Unless these producers of these movies today could very well be swinging the other way gay maybe. My point is I would Love to see a 3 or 4 second scene in a movie where a well endowed woman unzips her pants and pulls out her 2 inch clitoris from between her vulva (in a big title promoted movie) to show the viewers and puts it back in like the male scene in Boogie Night. I'll bet holy hell would take place with the female community on that! But its ok the other way with a male doing it isn't? Where's the appalling voices from females on this. You want your cake and eat to, or can I say you want your "pie" and eat it too. Then there's the masterbation scenes. Jeeze let me tell you something every women I have met does it but in the movies it's always the guys they depict. Like women are goody goodies. Bunch a bull. If they do show it for a female it's in a romantic scene bathtub with 6 foot bubbles in the tub. Bunch of bull. I know as a male I'm tired of being degraded in the mainstream movies.
Don
The fact that female directors and producers are showing full male frontal nudity and not female is a testament as to how acceptable male frontal nudity is. In Anatomy from Hell there were shots of the female stars vagina, albeit her actual vagina had been substituted for a stand in vagina as the stars vagina was deemed to be too ugly. A real life vulva, as opposed to the ones that are touched up for the porn cameras is the ugliest part of the human race. To say that “You smell one you have smelt them all” is not true, as this fishy smell can range from barely tolerable to making you physically sick. Apart from the sickening smell and it being so ugly, it also oozes blood, dribbles urine, and creams clothes. Even the so called female ejaculation as opposed to the male serves no purpose what so ever.
So girls do enjoy male nudity as your private parts are not wanted in mainstream movie as we men like to enjoy our pop corn that does not acquire a stink of fish.
Showing a breast is NOT the same as showing a man's genitals. Showing a woman's genitals is it's equal. Where do you guys get the gaul to compare what we men see in the media compared to what women are allowed to see? ALL genitals should be rated X or NC17 not just vaginas!! It really pisses me off when I hear this crap about trying make things EQUAL. I am 59 years old and I have yet to see a graphic view of a woman's genitals in the mainstream media. But they have shown hundreds of views of male genitals while speaking this nonsense about women being shown this way for years. I'll trade off the breast views for the vagina views anyday.
I agree. There has been nothing but male frontal nudity without any equal amount of female frontal nudity. It is long past the time when writers, directors, producers, etc. realize that men want to see as much of women as women see of men. Women have alaaways wanted equality but it appears they are only interested in it when it benefits them. As far as the last taboo goes: How about showing the labia a few times ???? It is time that men let their feelings known and stop accepting this breasts are equal to genitals discussion and stop viewing movies, plays, and every new HBO series that features only male frontal nudity.
I know a lot of men that are very upset that Hollywood TV Executives are justifying all of this full frontal nudity of men by saying that women are shown nude all the time. What crap. I have yet to see a graphic view of a vagina on the big screen. However I have seen hundreds of penises on the big screen. Any fair minded person knows that only a woman's genitals are equal to a man's genitals. America is NOT afraid of a penis but Hollywood is afraid of showing a clear view of a vagina.
Hollywood and the above female TV executive needs to wake up and start showing vaginas or they are going to have an uprising by the men in America who have taken this unfairness long enough. No one can tell me to get use to something I dislike.
1
1