Wow, no thread on this.

Anyway, this is the story of Dr. Alfred Kinsey and his groundbreaking sex study in the 1920s.

Liam Neeson and Laura Linney are both good in the lead roles, and the film is quite funny.

I do think it would've been more effective had it been made about 30 years ago, but it still brings you back in time as if you were in the first half of the 20th century and hearing all that sex talk for the first time.

This is from Bill Condon "Gods & Monsters" and features a great supporting cast. (Peter Saarsgard, Timothy Hutton, Chris O'Donnell, John Lithgow)

It's funny how they can show full frontal nudity of both sexes more than once in this, and yet Bad Education still receives an NC-17. Oh well.

Do a search. There was a thread on people protesting the film....

I saw this over the weekend. While I thought the performances of Liam Neeson and Laura Linney were exceptional, and the script was very well written, the film itself just didn't work for me. Ultimately, it just wasn't an interesting enough subject. And I'm no prude by far, but too many times the film edged into the category of "perversion." Overrated, IMO.

It's an interesting film with a very interesting subject. It's also flawed...I found the film at times lacked focus, unsure whether the film should be about the man himself or the overriding subject of sex in America. There's just so much interesting stuff about what effect the Kinsey reports had, what they meant to society, and the film of course makes light of that, but hardly delves into it in depth. Of course, that wasn't the director's intent, but I ended up thinking it would have made for a more compelling piece. It's still a solid film with good performances nonetheless.

I'm no prude by any stretch either, but I watched the DVD recently and found this film bordering on unwatchable. The guy was so creepy, I kept thinking of the Dr. Bernardi character in Woody's Everything About Sex movie. Also the scene where I kinda wish I was sitting in a theater and was able to see the expressions on the faces of some other people during that scene. Lastly, the movie didn't really give us any closure as far as what the real impact was of this guy's life and work. The film led the viewer to believe that his research was basically shunned and written off by the academic community. Ebert gave this movie 4 stars to boot.

I think the filmmakers respected the audience's intelligence too much to offer some 2 or 3 sentence wrap-up trying to explain Kinsey's importance or influence.

I thought it was excellent, and the Kinsey scale, in my opinion, is very accurate

Still want to see this. Would it make for a good blind buy?

because the MPAA still takes offense to homosexual blow job scenes.

incidently, in the latest Unzipped magazine - the write up of recent (or in this case non) male nude scenes lists this movie as an utter tease since Liam doesn't drop trou - Peter Sarsgaard does, but not for the lead star. Even Laura Linney who was more than willing to do a nude scene for 'Love Actually' doesn't bare all.

Not having Liam go full monty probably protects the pride of most male viewers since rumor has it the guy is like a real life Dirk Diggler.

yeah that was the point of this magazine's article - a real 'cock tease'

I enjoyed it very much.

i tried to watch it last night, but shut it off half way through.

I finally saw it on cable. I liked it. Laura Linney was great.

kthnxbye

Depends on your taste, of course, but I found it solidly entertaining and I think they did a good job. It's certainly worth seeing.