The Criterion Collection

[SammyJankis]

There's nothing wrong with a filmmaker touching any subject. It's just the way they handle the tone and context that can make me question the use. Gaspar Noe is a good example, as he makes me feel like he's sitting in the corner smirking at the reaction he's almost guaranteed to get - the sound frequency and digitally added penis almost confirms this notion. I never feel like his intentions are in the right place.

One film that handles this better than most, I think, is Don't Look Now. The use of sex in that film makes its thematic concerns more substantial. Not to mention its edited in a rather delicate manner and seems realistic.

[Namuhana]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

It just bugs me people make a HUGE deal about sex in films, yet violence, drugs, gore, murder etc etc is never commented on as much as sex which is so natural and normal, more so than the other thing shown in film.

As sad as it is to say, I believe us Americans are "conditioned" to accept violence and reject sex (in anything public or for the mass market). It's the same thing as cursing, too. I quite distinctly remember the whole The Hunger Games/Bully thing a few years ago (fun fact: Bully's director, Lee Hirsch, held a colloquium at my university back in 2012 to discuss his film and the impact of bullying). The Hunger Games shows children killing each other and received a PG-13 rating whereas Bully has several instances of expletives and automatically gets rated R. Just equate sex with expletives and it's the same situation. It's completely idiotic in my opinion.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

it is almost too much in Blue.. by the time the film ended, I reconsidered and figured that it was justified.

Stranger by the Lake is a phenomenal film that many probably won't see either because of the explicit sex or because of the fact that it is explicit homosexual sex. glad to say that it didn't bother me a bit.. it was explicit, but not gratuitous, I don't think... and I'm certainly glad that I saw the movie.

I haven't seen Blue is the Warmest Color (yet) but actually, this reminds me to rent Stranger by the Lake from my local library.

Originally Posted by Polaroid

It just bugs me people make a HUGE deal about sex in films, yet violence, drugs, gore, murder etc etc is never commented on as much as sex which is so natural and normal, more so than the other thing shown in film.

If you know a little about American history, it's plainly obvious that the USA was founded as a puritanical nation and has unfortunately remained that way to this very day. Attitudes have changed somewhat but that core level of "sex is bad" remains.

[yoyokid8]

Picked up Tokyo Drifter, My Winnipeg, Hausu, and Walkabout. So happy!

[Infernal King]

So is Fellini Satyricon generally thought of as "going too far", like Scott asserted, or is it not in the same vein as films I have no desire to see, such as Salo, Antichrist, Nymphomaniac, etc.?

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

So is Fellini Satyricon generally thought of as "going too far", like Scott asserted, or is it not in the same vein as films I have no desire to see, such as Salo, Antichrist, Nymphomaniac, etc.?

It's much better than the others you have listed, but I would not consider it a safe blind buy by any means.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by iScottie

It's much better than the others you have listed, but I would not consider it a safe blind buy by any means.

Do you mean it's "much better" in terms of how it handles its excesses? That's more of what I was asking.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

Do you mean it's "much better" in terms of how it handles its excesses? That's more of what I was asking.

I compared Satyricon to Pasolini's trilogy because the styles felt very similar in this situation. There aren't too many excessive things in the film. Rather, the entire film is strictly bizarre.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I compared Satyricon to Pasolini's trilogy because the styles felt very similar in this situation. There aren't too many excessive things in the film. Rather, the entire film is strictly bizarre.

Ah, I understand what you mean now.

Okay, to the Criterion website for real this time!

[kuro_sawa]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

So is Fellini Satyricon generally thought of as "going too far", like Scott asserted, or is it not in the same vein as films I have no desire to see, such as Salo, Antichrist, Nymphomaniac, etc.?

If you are familiar with all the directors you've mentioned, you probably are in the general ballpark before even asking the question. Satyricon is much more comical, surreal, open and less harsh or brash in its depiction of sex and violence, as well as its general tone. It has aspirations that lie more in the realm of the odd/weird/introspective (in relation to history and our perceptions of it during modern times) than the other films mentioned, which to me are rooted much more in reality and less fantastical even if some mentioned are dealing with religion. It would be my favourite of all the ones listed honestly. "Pure cinema" as they say

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Makes no sense to me, sex is sex, it natural, we all do it - so why are people so scared of it lol?

Originally Posted by jw007

Not everyone does it. Ask some of those Carthusian monks in the French alps if they do it. They don't.

Sure, but that's not natural.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I think the use of vulgarities in Chasing Amy is absolutely absurd. I curse as much as the next guy, but I thought it was excessive and not natural sounding. So, it doesn't matter what it is, excess is excess.

So, when you watch Alien are you putting off by the excessive eating?

If you're not sure what I'm talking about, give it another look some time. In virtually every scene Yaphet Kotto is in, he's eating or chewing something.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jayembee

So, when you watch Alien are you putting off by the excessive eating?

If you're not sure what I'm talking about, give it another look some time. In virtually every scene Yaphet Kotto is in, he's eating or chewing something.

have never seen Alien...

but if it goes beyond making some kind of point... idk... I might be put off by it.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

have never seen Alien...

but if it goes beyond making some kind of point... idk... I might be put off by it.

He was being facetious with the eating thing, I think.

And WATCH ALIEN IMMEDIATELY!

[Gusto-Guus]

Originally Posted by iScottie

It's simply Lars von Trier stooping to an entirely new low. Where can he go from there?

LOL, Like in Birdman,

[Show spoiler]Kill an actual person on camera.

As for the sex topic, there is a line where it's pornographic. Using violence as an example, in some films they omit blood, sometimes they don't show a headshot with a gun, etc. I thought both Nymphomaniac and Blue is the warmest color crossed that line into porno. Go watch any porn and watch those particular scenes and there isn't much difference in the two.

[myka22]

Originally Posted by jw007

Seeing that I had 322 loyalty points, I had to go for it during this flash sale.

I ended up purchasing

An Autumn Afternoon (blu-ray)
Belle de Jour (blu-ray)
The Fire Within (dvd)

Nice work, The Fire Within is a great movie. I hope they upgrade it someday soon.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by Infernal King

I haven't seen Blue is the Warmest Color (yet) but actually, this reminds me to rent Stranger by the Lake from my local library.

If you know a little about American history, it's plainly obvious that the USA was founded as a puritanical nation and has unfortunately remained that way to this very day. Attitudes have changed somewhat but that core level of "sex is bad" remains.

Yeah I will admit I am very uneducated din terms of American history >.< Sorry - most th issues I think are just different cultures and stuff

Originally Posted by Gusto-Guus

LOL, Like in Birdman,

[Show spoiler]Kill an actual person on camera.

As for the sex topic, there is a line where it's pornographic. Using violence as an example, in some films they omit blood, sometimes they don't show a headshot with a gun, etc. I thought both Nymphomaniac and Blue is the warmest color crossed that line into porno. Go watch any porn and watch those particular scenes and there isn't much difference in the two.

But they are not Pornos, Porno's are made to get you off pretty much, Nymphomaniac and Blue weren't made to get you off and give you a fun few hours :P.

That's how I see it anyway, I think you'd have hard time getting off to those films anyway :P

Nymph did make me look at Billy Elliot in new light though :P

-

I do apologise, im crap at explaining my thoughts over text so it can easily be misread/understood

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

have never seen Alien...

but if it goes beyond making some kind of point... idk... I might be put off by it.

Please see it ! it's an incredible horror/scifi film, personally I have really disliked every other film related to Alien, they don't capture the mystery and horror of Alien... in my opinion of course!

Also great casting and acting throughout, not sure how Ridley Scott messed up Prometheus tbh XD.... he should have written it himself lol.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by Gusto-Guus

LOL, Like in Birdman,

[Show spoiler]Kill an actual person on camera.

As for the sex topic, there is a line where it's pornographic. Using violence as an example, in some films they omit blood, sometimes they don't show a headshot with a gun, etc. I thought both Nymphomaniac and Blue is the warmest color crossed that line into porno. Go watch any porn and watch those particular scenes and there isn't much difference in the two.

This is like saying a torture scene in Hostel is akin to an actual snuff film. Taking scenes out of context and judging them on their own does nothing when you don't take note of what's around them.

I have problems with the filmmaking of Blue is the Warmest Color's sex scenes, but they are essential. They aren't pornography because they're apart of a greater narrative that revolves around them. Same goes for Nymphomaniac. The two are vastly different, and I don't think they serve much of a purpose for comparison outside of content. Kechiche's segment is clearly meant to be erotic, while Von Trier's is handled in a more detached, almost clinical manner.

[Infernal King]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Yeah I will admit I am very uneducated din terms of American history >.< Sorry - most th issues I think are just different cultures and stuff

Yes but it was the Puritans who left your country in the first place!

[ElliesDad]

Originally Posted by SammyJankis

There's nothing wrong with a filmmaker touching any subject. It's just the way they handle the tone and context that can make me question the use. Gaspar Noe is a good example, as he makes me feel like he's sitting in the corner smirking at the reaction he's almost guaranteed to get - the sound frequency and digitally added penis almost confirms this notion. I never feel like his intentions are in the right place.

One film that handles this better than most, I think, is Don't Look Now. The use of sex in that film makes its thematic concerns more substantial. Not to mention its edited in a rather delicate manner and seems realistic.

Exactly! People's sensibilities and judgements concerning sex and pretty much everything else have changed substantially over the past few decades, especially since the '60's. Most people are comfortable with reasonably sensible and sensitive and yes, tasteful, depictions of sex in film where there is some relevance to it's inclusion. But it's the salacious, smarmy, leering, exploitative, meant-to-shock treatments of the subject that draw adverse reactions. And sorry but Salo and it's ilk fit into the latter category no matter what aesthetic or intellectual gymnastics are employed to try to justify them.

And of course the compulsory, albeit needless, sex scene, added willy-nilly (no pun intended) for no apparent purpose is usually just boring and distracting. Same goes for strong language. Used properly in the proper context it's powerful and meaningful. Used inappropriately for effect it's just crass and reflects poorly on everyone associated with the production.