|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 21, 2004 13:41:50 GMT -5
The following was posted today in the questbook & though somewhat childish I think I brings up some interesting thoughts since I've seen comments like this before...
Name:
Email:
Date: Sun Nov 21 13:07:47 EST 2004
i think this movie sucked because there were no sex scenes
So what did you think of the sexuality in the film?? I thought the tension itself was just perfect but then I am a female. Did you want more?? Any thoughts??
|
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Nov 21, 2004 14:56:33 GMT -5
Relating this back to the 'Janet Jackson/Ryan' thread...I wonder if this guest thought that SPR sucked too, because there were no sex scenes? ;D
It's a very personal thing to address, isn't it? I don't go see films specifically because this or that actor/actress gets their kit off and simulates sex in an attempt to establish their relationship with another character.
If the scene is relevant, then fine...I wouldn't disagree that there's an element of 'titilation' (no pun intended ) when watching such stuff, but spurious scenes often just hold up the action/plot...and occasionally ruin it. I will never forget the hysterical 'shower scene' with Sylvester Stallone and Sharon Stone in 'The Specialist'. Come to think of it...ANY scene with Sharon Stone is usually pretty funny!
If someone wants to see films with sex scenes, for whatever reason, that's OK...whatever floats your boat...but it doesn't mean that EVERY film has to cater to that audience.
There are many situations where a relationship between two characters succeeds precisely because the chemistry and sexual attraction between them is never acted upon. For example, 'Proof of Life'... with Russell Crowe and Meg Ryan...wonderful chemistry and only one little kiss...
The same is true with Preston and Mary. Theirs is a complex relationship which would have been ruined by over- physicality. I found the scene where their fingers touch spoke volumes. It was highly charged and dare I say, quite erotic in its way.
I suppose I would have liked the inclusion of the deleted scene, for a chance to see Mary caress Preston's face...
As an aside to all this, and a bit of a rant, I think that the majority of mainstream and thus censor-aware films with het-sex scenes, are generally catering to the ego of a certain male demographic (so if that's not you, guys, then the following doesn't apply)...mainly because such scenes often depict the woman as having multiple orgasms just because the man kisses her a bit, wanders south for a little implied... and very short-lived...oral action, then moves in for the brief kill!!! I've been to many a film where female members of the audience have giggled at such scenes, tempered as they are by the constraints of film running time!
If people specifically want sex scenes/films, there are lots of videos and DVDs around... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by ViolentMessiah on Nov 21, 2004 14:58:16 GMT -5
i agee that the sexual tension fit perfectly within the storyline. since life in Libria is based on suppressing emotions it would make sense that most sex between citizens would only take place for reproduction purposes. of course if you're a sense offender, the sky's the limit. but i'm kind of curious how people hook up in Libria. if emotions are suppressed then the entire reason for marrying someone would be a more logical and mutually beneficial union, rather than two people lost in love with each other. anyway there are always things like in vitro fertilization that makes all this moot. the only upside i see to sex in Libria would be never having to worry if your partner enjoyed it. just do the deed and go right to sleep.  |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 21, 2004 15:09:43 GMT -5
... anyway there are always things like in vitro fertilization that makes all this moot. Bingo!! Your clue in the film are the seperate beds. ;D Besides the following clarification by Wimmer... "It brings me to another small point that a number of people have brought up (so the gaff is mine) and that is the institution of marriage. ...this world was only maybe 30 years young and to my mind, this would mean that there would still be vestigial remnants of our own time. So, yes, birth is in vitro but with humans I don't think you can wipe the slate completely clean too abruptly, (the communists had to keep churches around for years, gradually eroding their power) so this shell of the family unit still existed (but, we can assume, wouldn't for much longer) kind of like certain traditions or sayings we have whose origins we no longer remember." See Site's FYI page... |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 21, 2004 15:18:48 GMT -5
I found the scene where their fingers touch spoke volumes. It was highly charged and dare I say, quite erotic in its way. Exactly, I found that scene to be electrifying. Yesterday I was watching The Directors which was about Jonathan Demme. He stated that in Silence of the Lambs he wanted Crawford to only touch Clarice at specific moments in the film to heighten the underlying sexual tension between them. Any contact before those moments would destroy that reservoir that was being built. I think Wimmer manages to do exactly the same in EQ. Those few moments of touch between Preston & Mary are stronger & more memorable than often full blown sexual scenes in most films. Just my hum. op. It just depends on the film. |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Nov 21, 2004 16:08:40 GMT -5
Silence of the Lambs...absolutely. And not only Crawford and Clarice..there's the 'through the bars' bit with Lecter...still implying the same tension, but with an undercurrent of revulsion at the same time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walldude on Nov 21, 2004 18:29:13 GMT -5
Oooh sex, my favorite subject. Ignoring the 13 year old who thought it sucked because there was no sex scene  I thought the scenes between Preston and Mary were done quite well, as Preston got more and more feeling back the sexual tension increased between him and Mary. It started with the look in the mirror at Mary's place and culminated in the finger touching scene. Also not just the seperate beds but the fact that Prestons wife, during the raid, ran to him and kissed him and the Sweepers screamed "Get her off of him" pretty much gave it away that there was no contact whatsoever between husband and wife. I'll have to watch Lambs again, if there was sexual tension between Clarice and Lecter it went right over my head... Honestly, sex scenes in movies don't do much for me, maybe it's cause I'm getting up there in years, or maybe it's because I have a healthy sex life |
|
|
|
Post by TheMacroprosopus on Nov 21, 2004 18:41:09 GMT -5
I find the thought of Crawford and Clarice kinda funny, as in the film he's kinda old. However, in the book, both Clarice and ..uh...what was her roommate's name again? like him, so...yeah. I suppose it makes sense. I agree with the Clarice/Lecter thing though.
Um... This whole discussion reminds me of 1984, where sex was only for reproduction. Although, I don't recall marriage happening... Wait..yes, it did. The woman who needed Winston to fix her heater was with the big guy who smelled bad and had a couple of kids.
In Equilibrium, yeah, the touch was enough. And the look on both their faces. The want for something more was there, but the ability to act upon it was not, which could be viewed as heartbreaking (I tend to be cold and heartless, or at least try to be. I feel kinda comfortable, however, saying that this whole concept sorta got to me.). I think that's about it for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by LoneClericCobra on Nov 22, 2004 3:53:17 GMT -5
This thread reminds me of my old Biology teacher. He won't watch or comment over no Hollywood movie whatsoever on the basis that "you already know that, 20 minutes into the film, the guy and the girl will have sex". ;D Prudish old teachers aside, I reckon is more a matter of why you stage a sex scene than how you do. There must be a _meaning_ behind the huffing and puffing. Case in point: a little ago I rewatched "Terminator". Believe me or not, the sex scene had me genuinely moved. It's just standard hollywood fare for an action blockbuster, but as the "romantic" version of the main theme played out, it made me think about these two human beings, utterly alone (one from the future, the other with a bleak life), scared to death, trying to find warmth and comfort with each other. And when and the end of the day, Sarah tells his son that in the little time fate gave them, his parents were in love, I believed it.  |
|
|
|
Post by Beefie on Nov 22, 2004 4:09:07 GMT -5
Case in point: a little ago I rewatched "Terminator". Believe me or not, the sex scene had me genuinely moved. It's just standard hollywood fare for an action blockbuster, but as the "romantic" version of the main theme played out, it made me think about these two human beings, utterly alone (one from the future, the other with a bleak life), scared to death, trying to find warmth and comfort with each other. And when and the end of the day, Sarah tells his son that in the little time fate gave them, his parents were in love, I believed it. I must say, I have to agree. The sex scene in Terminator was the only sex scene I have ever seen that has moved me enough to cry. Especially the climax (sorry to be blunt!) They release their hands and you just know they will never have that intimacy or feeling again and I get the impression, they feel it too. As for Preston and Mary, the tension is practically the same for me. Mary gives Preston a look and says "my god" and from that moment you can almost feel their passion for each other and the fact that they will never feel it to the full. They slowly move in for the finger touching sequence, and it's like the letting go of hands in terminator. It moved me so much. I can even feel my heart beating faster now just writting this. Better stop for now before I get to overwhelmedby it all. |
|
|
|
Post by Xenia Onatopp- Bale on Nov 22, 2004 6:34:25 GMT -5
Sexuality in EQ? Well, is it needed? Besides, it doen't fit in EQ storyline. And besides, CB as John Preston himself was enough to turn on female audience  . Not all movies should have sex scenes,it really depends on the theme and storyline of the film. |
|
|
|
Post by mawa on Nov 22, 2004 6:47:14 GMT -5
Maybe I won't say anything new, but EQ is NOT a film about sex! If one wants sex, there are many other movies around - and I'm not talking about porn flicks On the other hand - I partially disagree with Xenia. Well, in the relation between Preston and Mary there is sort of sexual tension, no doubts about it. But a sex scene - it would just ruin the movie! The Preston\Mary scenes were speaking louder than words. |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Nov 22, 2004 11:57:27 GMT -5
Case in point: a little ago I rewatched "Terminator". Believe me or not, the sex scene had me genuinely moved. It's just standard hollywood fare for an action blockbuster, but as the "romantic" version of the main theme played out, it made me think about these two human beings, utterly alone (one from the future, the other with a bleak life), scared to death, trying to find warmth and comfort with each other. And when and the end of the day, Sarah tells his son that in the little time fate gave them, his parents were in love, I believed it. Oh, I absolutely agree with this one. That scene was genuinely passionate. But it really had to be, since it rests on the premise that Sarah and Kyle had loved each other...even for a brief moment...because both we and John know that Kyle was John's father. Also it was Kyle's very first time. A 'wham bam thankyou ma'am' would have been inappropriate for the conception of the Resistance's Leader. |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 22, 2004 15:00:44 GMT -5
I think the comparison between Terminator is important because it shows the difference of sex being a key point in the plot & the characters as opposed to not just entertainment value (not that I mind either ;D). In Equilibrium though I just think it would have taken away from the tension because it really would not be essential to the plot.
Other films that come to mind with that tension but no actual sex is Pitch Black, Gladiator, & Last Samurai. The lack of an actual sex scene truly helps to heighten the tension & even the senses of the entire film because the underlying feelings are still there.
|
|
|
|
Post by LoneClericCobra on Nov 22, 2004 15:56:55 GMT -5
...and in another display of mind reading, JenGe beats Cobra in pointing to "the last samurai" for a beautiful example of subtle sexual tension! That was a nice move, ain't it, Nick?
You bet Johnny! Even though I suspect Cobra's reticence is due to a very vocal lady friend of his, firm in her belief that the lovely Japanese countrywife portrayed in Cruise's epic is really a lot more passionate than she acts, teasing Algren throughout the whole movie with her "sad girl in snow" attitude!
C'mon Nick, you know she says that only 'cause she's jealous of Cruise's bearded swordsman persona!
..well Johnny, that doesn't change the fact that this point goes to the webmistress of destruction, the priestess of Gun kata, JenGe! Better luck next time Cobra!
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 22, 2004 16:21:09 GMT -5
bahahahahahah!!! ;D (I just can't come up with anything better right now) Bahahahah!!
ROTFLAGL!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by LoneClericCobra on Nov 23, 2004 2:07:02 GMT -5
You know what? Last Sunday I lost my video card somewhere after renting "so close" (nice hong Kong action movie with an unbelievable hottie as the main lead. I mean seriously. I'm still drooling. She was that awesome. Her gun fu was great too. Would make a perfect Cleric. And did I mention she was unearthly beautiful?  So yesterday, right after work, I found myself in the uncommon situation of going to the video rental before 8:00 pm. They were nice and quick in replacing my card, and _then_ I noticed a big "last samurai" poster hanging in the office (you know, the red one with the battle scene and the humongous Cruise floating head). So I nonchalantly pointed to it and asked to the girl in charge, "do you need that?". She loked dismayed and said, "oh please, don't do this to me.." but since she was standing right next to an even bigger "troy" cardboard thingie, she reasoned a loyal customer like me deserved a little sacrifice and parted with it. (Cruise, not Pitt). So now I have this poster rolled in my trunk. The idea was giving it as a presend to the aforementioned friend, but now I'm not too sure.. I mean, that is one big floating head. Would look terrific in my bedroom. What should I do Jen? |
|
|
|
Post by Beefie on Nov 23, 2004 16:20:18 GMT -5
I suppose I would have liked the inclusion of the deleted scene, for a chance to see Mary caress Preston's face... ....sorry to back track, Libby's comment above didn't register properly until now (I know, I know, bit slow on the uptake).... um! what deleted scene.... Is there a 'copy' of this deleted scene somewhere etc, etc, etc.... Having said that though, I think they were probably right to keep this scene out...may feel different once I've viewed it, but the finger touching sequence was more than enough sexual tension in itself. Anything else may of been a bit too much tension and spoilt it.... |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Nov 23, 2004 17:21:30 GMT -5
....sorry to back track, Libby's comment above didn't register properly until now (I know, I know, bit slow on the uptake).... um! what deleted scene.... Is there a 'copy' of this deleted scene somewhere etc, etc, etc.... Having said that though, I think they were probably right to keep this scene out...may feel different once I've viewed it, but the finger touching sequence was more than enough sexual tension in itself. Anything else may of been a bit too much tension and spoilt it.... Sorry...I forgot that people might not know about this. Briefly...in the original screenplay, Preston gets to Mary's execution in time to speak to her...and the whole tone of the proposed film changes because of what follows (cue gooey 'Hollywood ending') Original Screenplay page 88KW shot the sequence...if you look carefully at the scene where Mary is waiting to be incinerated, you can see Preston in the background...but then edited it out.   (edit by JenGe to fix tags) |
|
|
|
Post by Beefie on Nov 23, 2004 17:37:04 GMT -5
Briefly...in the original screenplay, Preston gets to Mary's execution in time to speak to her...and the whole tone of the proposed film changes because of what follows (cue gooey 'Hollywood ending') Original Screenplay page 88...Yep! I think I will have to agree with my first verdict after reading the script (Thanks Libby for that by the way). I'm glad this scene was cut as it would of definately spoilt the mood. |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 23, 2004 20:41:50 GMT -5
What should I do Jen? Do you really have to ask?? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by LoneClericCobra on Nov 24, 2004 4:57:57 GMT -5
Do you really have to ask?? ;D "on hearing this, the cleric was enlightened"  BTW, I just got around on actually reading the script ending.. wow. it _is_ cheesy just like everybody said. It's kind of sad to see enforced another hollywood cliche', the dumb producer. I would say we should give W credit for going against his master's wishes*, if we hadn't already done it in spades * oh sorry, but I can't get out of my head "duel of the fakes", a hilarious SW fanfilm starring a PA (producer assistant) as a padawan fighting again the evil Emperor Palpatodd... "last chanche PA.. leave behind the bonduaries of your pager and become my producer!" "not like this.. not like this!" ;D ;D You can find it here , but look out for the fanfilm addiction.. |
|
Warpax
Sense Offender
Posts: 7
|
Post by Warpax on Jan 17, 2005 14:50:19 GMT -5
I just found this therad an read a lot .... and thought a lot about it.
I must admind, first I hoped there would be something like a sex scene in it but afterwards I noticed that this would have destroyed the whole tension.
I think that causes a lot more tension that Preston and Mary get closer and closer each time they "meet" but what finally the "climax is, is that they won't come together - no matter how hard they'd try.
And finally it runs off their hands when Mary gets burned. It is like a big game - having and not having something.
Nad - another point: time was simply too short! Imagine: you haven't felt anything since the ay of your birth. Then you start feeling more and more ... I don't think (it would just be primitive) that the first real feeling about a person you get is "I can feel - I want sex!". That would sound to me like a bad porn.
I think the way how WImmer produced this emotional tension, this up an down, this "being together but never become one" is so great I really can't think of doing it a different way.
Warpax
|
|
|
|
Post by wtf on Jan 18, 2005 12:02:14 GMT -5
I guess the guy who posted the "no sex scene" complaint has completely bought into the Hollywood action film formula. Is it me, or do they just stop in the middle of the movie, and there should be John Cleese come in and go "And now the Sex Scene!" and they cut to it? |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 18, 2005 13:05:45 GMT -5
I don't know if it's a "Hollywood" thing or a "male" thing because my hubby wanted Mary & Preston to "go at it" on the table. Personally I thought it would have killed the moment & the tension already built up in the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 18, 2005 13:45:12 GMT -5
I'd say a bit of both, but then again I have never been the typical 'male'...that would have cheapened the whole thing and ruined the movie for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 18, 2005 13:53:01 GMT -5
I don't know if it's a "Hollywood" thing or a "male" thing because my hubby wanted Mary & Preston to "go at it" on the table. Personally I thought it would have killed the moment & the tension already built up in the film. Not only that, but Preston had just realised, from Mary's violent emotional response to his admitting to killing Partridge, that Mary and his former partner 'were lovers'. It wouldn't exactly have been an appropriate moment to get so up close and personal anyway! People who expected a sex scene really hadn't understood what was happening to Preston as the Prozium left his system. Just because he was feeling an emotional response to Mary, it didn't mean he was going to go all cave-man on her. His essential nature would preclude that. In fact, he might be more the flowers and chocolates type...a romantic at heart...since he reacted so deeply to the sunrise and the music. |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 18, 2005 13:59:45 GMT -5
... it didn't mean he was going to go all cave-man on her... Bahahahah!! Libby, you just made me realize something...I married the "cave-man" type. Bahahahah!! ;D In fact, after seeing Phantom of the Opera I also realized he was the "Phantom" type. It's the only film/character EVER that I've seem him actually shed a tear for. I honestly didn't think he had it in him.  |
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 18, 2005 14:01:49 GMT -5
It's part of Preston that I might explore in Ashes actually Libby, the romantic...after he gets his revenge of course *WEG*
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 18, 2005 14:02:50 GMT -5
Bahahahah!! Libby, you just made me realize something...I married the "cave-man" type. Bahahahah!! ;D In fact, after seeing Phantom of the Opera I also realized he was the "Phantom" type. It's the only film/character EVER that I've seem him actually shed a tear for. I honestly didn't think he had it in him. Best line ever: Perhaps madame, it is you who are the toad. Butler is just amazing IMHO. |
|
]
I thought the scenes between Preston and Mary were done quite well, as Preston got more and more feeling back the sexual tension increased between him and Mary. It started with the look in the mirror at Mary's place and culminated in the finger touching scene. Also not just the seperate beds but the fact that Prestons wife, during the raid, ran to him and kissed him and the Sweepers screamed "Get her off of him" pretty much gave it away that there was no contact whatsoever between husband and wife. 
. Not all movies should have sex scenes,it really depends on the theme and storyline of the film.
