Farrell's 'Huge' Manhood Cut from Film
06-29-04, 07:04 AM
#51
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DRG
According to comments here, Michael Corvin seems to fall into this last category, as most straight males would. Don't hate me for asking, but is this really homophobia? I've heard gay men who say they would be disgusted at the idea of having sex with a woman... are they heterophobes? So he's personally not a fan of gazing at male anatomy for long periods of time. What's the line between preference and prejudice?
According to comments here, Michael Corvin seems to fall into this last category, as most straight males would. Don't hate me for asking, but is this really homophobia? I've heard gay men who say they would be disgusted at the idea of having sex with a woman... are they heterophobes? So he's personally not a fan of gazing at male anatomy for long periods of time. What's the line between preference and prejudice?
But that doesn't mean we wince or look away when we see it in EVERY big-budget Hollywood movie.
06-29-04, 07:41 AM
#52
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally posted by DRG
Maybe the term "homophobia" needs to be expanded a bit more. It seems to me that there are at least three distinct types of behavior that can be considered homophobia:
1. Hatred of homosexuality
The obvious gay bashers, who openly dislike gay people no matter what.
2. Scared of homosexuality
People who are uncomfortable with the ideas of gay intimacy, even if they don't mind homosexuals as people and maybe even have gay friends.
3. Scared of personally being involved in homosexuality
People who have no problem with gays, and don't have any problem with gay people getting it on, but are disgusted by the idea of *themselves* being in a gay act.
According to comments here, Michael Corvin seems to fall into this last category, as most straight males would. Don't hate me for asking, but is this really homophobia? I've heard gay men who say they would be disgusted at the idea of having sex with a woman... are they heterophobes? So he's personally not a fan of gazing at male anatomy for long periods of time. What's the line between preference and prejudice?
Maybe the term "homophobia" needs to be expanded a bit more. It seems to me that there are at least three distinct types of behavior that can be considered homophobia:
1. Hatred of homosexuality
The obvious gay bashers, who openly dislike gay people no matter what.
2. Scared of homosexuality
People who are uncomfortable with the ideas of gay intimacy, even if they don't mind homosexuals as people and maybe even have gay friends.
3. Scared of personally being involved in homosexuality
People who have no problem with gays, and don't have any problem with gay people getting it on, but are disgusted by the idea of *themselves* being in a gay act.
According to comments here, Michael Corvin seems to fall into this last category, as most straight males would. Don't hate me for asking, but is this really homophobia? I've heard gay men who say they would be disgusted at the idea of having sex with a woman... are they heterophobes? So he's personally not a fan of gazing at male anatomy for long periods of time. What's the line between preference and prejudice?
I don't have a problem with 1 and 2. I work with, and hung out with some gay guys plenty over the past 14 years. Working in restaurants you meet all kinds of people. Hell some even hit on me. Very flatering. But really, can #3 be classified as homophobia? Just because I don't want to smoke some pole or get some back door action makes me a homophobe? I personally don't think so. It just means the chemicals in my brain don't work like that.
Lastly, I never see any gratuitus vagina footage, so why should we be subjected to the lesser attractive(IMO, of course) male member? They showed some of Maria Bello in the Cooler and it got an NC-17. They cut it to get an R. So why show a penis? Equal opportunity ladies.
06-29-04, 08:27 AM
#53
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Michael Corvin
Well, I watch porn and there is plenty of male nudity in that. No problems there. Wild Things? No problem. Friends & Lovers - hilarious scene, 28 days later? No problems here either. The script/story called for it. I'm just saying most films don't need it. Especially a long(pun intended) lingering shot of it. It is totally unneccesary.
Well, I watch porn and there is plenty of male nudity in that. No problems there. Wild Things? No problem. Friends & Lovers - hilarious scene, 28 days later? No problems here either. The script/story called for it. I'm just saying most films don't need it. Especially a long(pun intended) lingering shot of it. It is totally unneccesary.
Re: long, lingering shots of nudity: Do you feel the same about lingering shots of female nudity?
06-29-04, 08:32 AM
#54
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
Some gay men are disgusted at the thought of having sex with a woman.
But that doesn't mean we wince or look away when we see it in EVERY big-budget Hollywood movie.
Some gay men are disgusted at the thought of having sex with a woman.
But that doesn't mean we wince or look away when we see it in EVERY big-budget Hollywood movie.
) I found the sex scene in "Bound" between two women to be very erotic.
06-29-04, 08:35 AM
#55
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
To me, showing a female's pubic area and showing a male's flaccid penis is the same. An actual vagina and erect penis would be the same.
06-29-04, 09:10 AM
#56
Moderator
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
Speak for yourself. I think it's hot.
Speak for yourself. I think it's hot.
Talk about clueless, I had no idea there would be that much rampant male nudity.
06-29-04, 09:45 AM
#57
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Giles
so... did you happen to see the Broadway play 'Take Me Out'?
Talk about clueless, I had no idea there would be that much rampant male nudity.
so... did you happen to see the Broadway play 'Take Me Out'?
Talk about clueless, I had no idea there would be that much rampant male nudity.
Aside from sitting next to my father, it was hot as hell.
They did it for whatever reason and it didn't bother me. I thought it was quite amusing, as did most of the audience.
Theater people don't tend to be fazed by things like that. Dare I say that they're of a higher mental level than the average movie-goer.
06-29-04, 10:05 AM
#58
Moderator
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
As a matter of fact, I DID see the show...i was in the second row
Aside from sitting next to my father, it was hot as hell.
As a matter of fact, I DID see the show...i was in the second row
Aside from sitting next to my father, it was hot as hell.
Theater people don't tend to be fazed by things like that. Dare I say that they're of a higher mental level than the average movie-goer.
Although I think there is a reverse thinking in that graphic violence can be just as off putting for theatregoers as filmgoers are less jaded. Case in point; I saw a play in London 'The Lieutenant of Inishman' that was just of barrage of graphic gun play, blood and grue splattering everywhere (Tarantino would be proud) that made alot of theatregoers uncomfortable and repulsed.
Even's 'Bugs' nudity seemed natural to the story, the whole tone though was edgy and literally made your skin crawl (and itch). I was very surprised to see that the New Yorker ran a full page photo of the male and female protagonist's stark naked.
('Take Me Out' is part of next years Washington DC's Studio Theatre 2004-2005 Season - I can't wait to see it again).
Last edited by Giles; 06-29-04 at 10:11 AM.
06-29-04, 10:17 AM
#59
Moderator
Originally posted by LiquidSky
To me, showing a female's pubic area and showing a male's flaccid penis is the same. An actual vagina and erect penis would be the same.
To me, showing a female's pubic area and showing a male's flaccid penis is the same. An actual vagina and erect penis would be the same.
06-29-04, 10:19 AM
#60
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Giles
was your dad shocked?
was your dad shocked?
My parents really aren't shocked by much.
When I came out, my mom immediately said "well what's the big deal? I asked you twice in high school."
She was the one that was supposed to go to the show that night but couldn't. She was sad that she missed out on seeing "dinkle."
06-29-04, 10:30 AM
#61
Moderator
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
She was the one that was supposed to go to the show that night but couldn't. She was sad that she missed out on seeing "dinkle."
She was the one that was supposed to go to the show that night but couldn't. She was sad that she missed out on seeing "dinkle."
06-29-04, 10:37 AM
#62
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
Dare I say that they're of a higher mental level than the average movie-goer.
Dare I say that they're of a higher mental level than the average movie-goer.
06-29-04, 10:50 AM
#63
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by sundog
Please don't. Nudity (particularly male nudity) and other "progressive" devices used in theater reflect the culture of which it is born, not the intelligence of its patrons. The same goes for film as well. An average movie-goer may be put off by male nudity simply because it's outside his or her frame of reference, and not because of his or her "lower" mental level.
Please don't. Nudity (particularly male nudity) and other "progressive" devices used in theater reflect the culture of which it is born, not the intelligence of its patrons. The same goes for film as well. An average movie-goer may be put off by male nudity simply because it's outside his or her frame of reference, and not because of his or her "lower" mental level.
I'd honestly say the same thing for "art-house" films. The people that go to see those are, on average, a more mature and educated group than the group going to see, say, Spiderman 2.
Out of their frame of reference? We're not talking about brain-surgery here. We're talking about a penis. You've never seen a penis? lol
06-29-04, 11:01 AM
#64
Moderator
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
I'd honestly say the same thing for "art-house" films. The people that go to see those are, on average, a more mature and educated group than the group going to see, say, Spiderman 2.
I'd honestly say the same thing for "art-house" films. The people that go to see those are, on average, a more mature and educated group than the group going to see, say, Spiderman 2.
well, now wait a sec, and I really want to see Spiderman 2...
but even theatre that is transfered to film, seems dumbed down to movie goers taste and acceptance. Neil LaBute's 'The Shape of Things' is an excellent example of the writer terribly overstating ideas and plot nuiances that were subtle in the 'Play' version, while the film version is much more blatant and condescending to it's film audience in it's attempt to convey what was happening.
Last edited by Giles; 06-29-04 at 11:46 AM.
06-29-04, 11:16 AM
#65
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Giles
well, now wait a sec, and I really want to see Spiderman 2...
but even theatre that is transfered to film, seems dumbed down to movie goers taste and acceptance. Neil LaBute's 'The Shape of Things' is an excellent example of the writer terribly overstating ideas and plot nuiances that were subtle in the 'Play' version, while the film version is much more blatant and condescending to it's film viewers in it's attempt to convey what was happening.
well, now wait a sec, and I really want to see Spiderman 2...
but even theatre that is transfered to film, seems dumbed down to movie goers taste and acceptance. Neil LaBute's 'The Shape of Things' is an excellent example of the writer terribly overstating ideas and plot nuiances that were subtle in the 'Play' version, while the film version is much more blatant and condescending to it's film viewers in it's attempt to convey what was happening.
All I'm saying is that it's a horrible generalization but definitely a true one. On the whole, the people I've met who are theater-goers are a much more intelligent and accepting breed of people. Always have been and always will be. Theater dares to go where movies can't on an emotional level.
06-29-04, 11:17 AM
#66
Moderator
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
Well...regardless, I'd still say that regular theater-goers are more educated than ones that are not. I reference the recent revival starring Mr. Puff Ditty Doodie. Stand outside the theater and check out the people going into and out of it and you'll see the difference between an "average theater-goer" and an "average movie-goer." That is invasion of the "movie-goers.'
Well...regardless, I'd still say that regular theater-goers are more educated than ones that are not. I reference the recent revival starring Mr. Puff Ditty Doodie. Stand outside the theater and check out the people going into and out of it and you'll see the difference between an "average theater-goer" and an "average movie-goer." That is invasion of the "movie-goers.'
Jeesh, you should have seen all the love-swooning female teenagers in the audience.
06-29-04, 11:18 AM
#67
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by digitalfreaknyc
Well...regardless, I'd still say that regular theater-goers are more educated than ones that are not.
. . . say the same thing for "art-house" films. The people that go to see those are, on average, a more mature and educated group than the group going to see, say, Spiderman 2.
Well...regardless, I'd still say that regular theater-goers are more educated than ones that are not.
. . . say the same thing for "art-house" films. The people that go to see those are, on average, a more mature and educated group than the group going to see, say, Spiderman 2.
Out of their frame of reference? We're not talking about brain-surgery here. We're talking about a penis. You've never seen a penis?
06-29-04, 11:33 AM
#69
Moderator
Originally posted by sundog
Or they think they are . . . Really, I know too many smart, mature people (people who don't follow art or culture) to not take issue with your generalization.
Or they think they are . . . Really, I know too many smart, mature people (people who don't follow art or culture) to not take issue with your generalization.
We are talking about a taboo image that the American media feels the need to insulate the population against. Many do not expect to see a penis on a casual night out. The fact that female breasts are much more acceptable in a movie only illustrates the disparity.
Last edited by Giles; 06-29-04 at 11:37 AM.
06-29-04, 11:56 AM
#70
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally posted by Giles
so what do you talk with mature people who aren't into art or culture, count me out - I make it a point not to talk about sports or politics (two subjects I know very little about: sports, or care to fight about: politics). Culture is pretty board, it's sad to think that no one would talk about a book, or a museum exhibit or musical performance they had just seen or been to.
so what do you talk with mature people who aren't into art or culture, count me out - I make it a point not to talk about sports or politics (two subjects I know very little about: sports, or care to fight about: politics). Culture is pretty board, it's sad to think that no one would talk about a book, or a museum exhibit or musical performance they had just seen or been to.
. . . The usual male response is of out disgust or fear of being compared to movie actor attributes.
06-29-04, 12:11 PM
#74
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yay!
To be honest...we're talking about penises on screen here and how totally absurd it is that people make a big deal about it. To me, that's just damn funny. I don't find the penis, itself, amusing. I find the fact that people make such a big deal about it wildly amusing. Just such a statement on our culture and how we deal with sex and sexuality.
To be honest...we're talking about penises on screen here and how totally absurd it is that people make a big deal about it. To me, that's just damn funny. I don't find the penis, itself, amusing. I find the fact that people make such a big deal about it wildly amusing. Just such a statement on our culture and how we deal with sex and sexuality.
06-29-04, 12:24 PM
#75
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
I only posted to respond to your generalization about average movie-goers. You agreed it was a generalization; so while it may be true in your sphere of the world it is certainly not true in my own. Point made.
And for anyone looking to desensitize his or herself to male nudity in films check out Greenaway's Prospero's Books. There's all sorts of stuff flapping about.
And for anyone looking to desensitize his or herself to male nudity in films check out Greenaway's Prospero's Books. There's all sorts of stuff flapping about.