Talk:Unsimulated sex

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"It is rare to see hardcore scenes in mainstream cinema"[edit]

El Topo[edit]

Alejandro Jodorowsky has made claims that he actually raped the actress playing Mara in this film. One source: [2]. It's hard to tell if this should be taken literally or not, however. Not sure if it's worthy of inclusion on this list. (You can't really see anything, so the director/star's claims are the only evidence supporting it. Not sure if the actress has made any statements on the subject.) Lurlock (talk) 19:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Jodorowsky explicitly confirmed this. [[3]] 20:33, 18 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs)
I have some concerns about the wording of this in the article. When he claims he "raped" her does that mean she did not know he was going to do it, and worse still, she did not consent??? Because that seems a very unlikely thing to admit to doing, as rape is a crime. I'm inclined to alter the phrase to "he claims the rape scene had unsimiulated intercourse" or words to that effect. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 19:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
From Jodorowsky's own book:

"When I wanted to do the rape scene, I explained to [Mara Lorenzio] that I was going to hit her and rape her. There was no emotional relationship between us, because I had put a clause in all the women's contracts stating that they would not make love with the director. We had never talked to each other. I knew nothing about her. We went to the desert with two other people: the photographer and a technician. No one else. I said, 'I'm not going to rehearse. There will be only one take because it will be impossible to repeat. Roll the cameras only when I signal you to.' Then I told her, 'Pain does not hurt. Hit me.' And she hit me. I said, 'Harder.' And she started to hit me very hard, hard enough to break a rib...I ached for a week. After she had hit me long enough and hard enough to tire her, I said, 'Now it's my turn. Roll the cameras.' And I really...I really...I really raped her. And she screamed."

Irene Jacob[edit]

I'm in doubt about two movies where scenes involving Irene Jacob seem to be real:

La vie d'Adele[edit]

La vie d'Adele displays explicit and unsimulated lesbian sex acts[[5]]. Should it be included in the list?

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2014[edit]

Please add the movie "Kynodontas" (english title 'Dogtooth', year 2009) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1379182/) as it contains masturbation and closeups of female body parts. Bbsnowman (talk) 22:42, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done IMDB is not a reliable source - and such a source needs to explain why it is particularly notable, or it will not be included in the list. Arjayay (talk) 11:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song[edit]

Melvin Van Peebles' Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song saw Van Peebles performing in a whole host of unsimulated sex scenes over the course of the film. Van Peebles supposedly even contracted a sexual transmitted disease during the making of the film – and then filed for worker's compensation (he was successful). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.19.253.11 (talk) 17:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Caligula[edit]

Caligula was the first ever motion picture to feature both established actors and pornographic scenes. The uncut version of the film does include unsimulated sex scenes including penetration, fellatio and ejaculation – most of which were shot by Bob Guccione. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.19.253.11 (talk) 17:14, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Not sure what you're requesting to be added here as Caligula was one of the very first films added to this list. The statement about it being the first-ever with major actors to feature this sort of activity needs a source. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 22:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Q/Desire and[edit]

It should be noted that the North American version of Q, titled Desire, has the hardcore footage edited out in favor of alternate angles. As of 2014 an uncensored DVD has yet to be issued in North America. The listing for Marfa Girl doesn't indicate any unsimulated elements; just because it's a Larry Clark film doesn't mean this content exists in it. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 22:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2015[edit]

please add:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stranger_by_the_Lake

source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stranger_by_the_Lake#Production

Delphonics (talk) 17:38, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done: [6]. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 18:01, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Silip[edit]

I saw Silip (even in slow-mo) and found no evidence or even a hint of Unsimulated sex. It is very graphic and explicit, but all scenes may be simulated or unsimulated. The provided and quoted source about a rape scene shoot in "'method' manner" and that the men were encouraged to fondle "more than necessary" does not even indicate unsimutaled sex.

Remove silip from the list or provide better evidence.

85.179.128.121 (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC) Joe

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mlpearc (open channel) 15:20, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done as we shouldn't be claiming a film contains unsimulated sex without evidence. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 03:12, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Wetlands[edit]

The given citation for Wetlands does not indicate anywhere that there is unsimulated sex in the film. I marked it as having failed verification, but it should probably be removed if there isn't any better citation given. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Again, the source provided for this film fails verification, as it never uses the word "unsimulated" in the entire article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree with you on this matter. Flyer22 (talk) 17:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
The last time I linked to Wiktionary in order to define terms, the arguments dragged on even longer because there was debate as to whether Wiktionary was reliable. So, I'll skip that and go directly to a better source, namely Merriam-Webster:
Explicit 
"open in the depiction of nudity or sexuality"
Graphic 
"vividly or plainly shown or described"
I agree that these terms could be used to describe unsimulated sex, but the reality is that they are not synonymous with the term. A sex scene can be explicit or graphic without being unsimulated. It's like the difference between "She had sex with an elderly man" and "She had sex with an older man". In the first sentence, there's no statement as to the female's age, and it's entirely possible that two elderly people have had sex. In the second sentence, an explicit acknowledgement is made of the difference in the ages. In this case, "explicit" or "graphic" sex could mean that the simulated sex scene was shown in greater detail than is normal for a mainstream film. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:40, 31 January 2015 (UTc)


According to what was said about terminology, the sources for the film Clip(2012) are also problematic. The sources use only the term "explicit" to describe sexual content, but the word "unsimulated" was never mentioned. In fact, there are no claims at all to indicate to any unsimulated sex act. And since the main theme of the film is sexploitation of one minor girl, according to WP:BLPREMOVE the sources must be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs)


Sourcing standards for this article – WP:BLP[edit]

Sorry to make such a heavy-handed drive-by edit, but I've just commented out five listed films that were tagged with {{failed verification}} – A Single Girl, Enter the Void, Daniel & Ana, I Want Your Love, and Wetlands. My reasoning is that claims that movie sex scenes are unsimulated are claims about living persons, which are subject to WP:Biographies of living persons. So, per WP:BLPREMOVE, contested claims need to be removed rather than tagged. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 09:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I can not really follow you. Why is a claim that a movie has unsimulated sex autumatically a claim about living people? For instance claiming Enter the Void contains scenes of unsimulated sex (which you can simply verify by watching the movie carefully) does not say who of the many actors in the movie had sex nor do we know if they are still alive. The claim is too vague to be subjected to WP:Biographies of living persons without naming them.
Titule (talk) 23:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
But it's not only the actors – a director or producer might not appreciate a false claim they were involved in a movie containing unsimulated sex.
Please be careful with the idea that you can verify that sex is unsimulated just by watching a movie. I'm not convinced non-experts could really tell what is unsimulated and what is cleverly done using prosthetics, digital manipulation, and so on. "Graphic" does not necessarily equal "unsimulated".
If we don't know whether an individual is alive or dead, BLP still applies per WP:BDP.
Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 09:42, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay about the other involved people and dead or alive point..
I see that (hypothetically) an unsimulated sex act can be simulated by film tricks, but then: who can we trust? Any producer and actor can claim that unsimulated sex occurred in the movie just to get publicity (for that reason I would delete [Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song] as I don't see any hint of unsimulated sex in the movie).
Also, putting a prosthesis into a vagina is still unsimulated sex to me. And at some point, the special effect to make simulated look like unsimulated is too expensive just to achieve, well: what? A bit like biting into a plastic apple instead of eating it for real. If you want to show some big expensive stars having sex that seems unsimulated, you need expensive computer effects (e.g. Nymphomaniac..BTW: why does that movie count? It's faked, isn't it?), but having unknown background actors doing it is simply not worth the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titule (talkcontribs)

Removing films with supposed unsimulated sex from list for lack of verified sources[edit]

Das Stundenhotel von St. Pauli

The citation to support this film's inclusion (a contemporary review in Der Spiegel) makes no reference to the "authentic" sex scenes and I have found nothing else about this otherwise unnotable genre film. I am removing it till someone finds a RS saying there are unsimulated sex scenes in this film. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Fantasm

The citation to support this film's inclusion actually compares it to hardcore films, specifically saying it's a softcore film, as does the film's own Wikipedia page. Removed. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 00:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song

While the claim (possibly true) that Van Peebles got worker's compensation for contracting a STD "on the job" is provocative and amusing, it does not prove that any unsimulated sex appears in the film. He may have had the STD anyway and took advantage of it and got lucky with the pay-out. The X rating went to lots of films in the 1970s and the fact it ended up with an R rating after all says a lot. Nothing about it on the film's page, which I think people would have noticed. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 00:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

A Single Girl

The reference is to a rather short clip on XHamster (not an RS). ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Marfa Girl

The source doesn't mention anything about unsimulated sex at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.137.17 (talk) 11:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Une vraie jeune fille

IMDb is not reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 15:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Le journal de Lady M

Review in Variety says the scenes are 'hot' and vaguely implies that the sex could be real, whereas a short Time Out review simply calls it softcore. [1] BTW thanks for the help with this Baba, it looks to me like the weeding we're doing has been needed for some time. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Water in Milk Exists

There are no reliable sources given for the claims made about unsimulated sex acts.

Actually there are plenty. Google is our friend. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 02:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
That being said, it's debatable whether this is a 'mainstream film' in that it's really a work of video art. If nothing else comes of this, at least I added it and the main link to the list of the artist's recent exhibitions on his home page. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2015[edit]

Manju1971 (talk) 07:00, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Grayfell (talk) 06:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Des Jours Plus Belles Que La Nuit (aka Skin. Like. Sun.)[edit]

Please remove the entry for this film, as this article deals with _mainstream_ films that happen to contain unsimulated sex acts. Des Jours Plus Belles Que La Nuit (aka Skin. Like. Sun.) is the second movie by Murielle Scherre, the first one was called "Je fais du porno et j'aime ça" (I make porn and I like it)[1], a collection of shorts that was offered for sale with a Belgian magazine and is still for sale.

IMDB lists Des Jours Plus Belles Que La Nuit (aka Skin. Like. Sun.) as a documentary, which would exclude it from this article as such; it is furthermore simply a sex movie (porn or not, that is up for argument), with little or no plot other than the sex acts. The source you quote (ForTheGirls.com) is simply a porn site with a fancy 'erotica' name.

LuperT23 (talk) 14:12, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ [1]
Yup. Looks like it's been removed, so I'm setting this to answered. Grayfell (talk) 06:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


A Scream in the Streets[edit]

I listed this film here, but I'll most probably remove it as after I watched the film I'am not shore it contains unsimulated scenes. And the scenes are definitely very close to hardcore. But, I have several questions anyway: 1. Can this film be found at megavideo.com and if it can, are there the characters for all the cast, especially actresses? 2. I really need a help to find out the name of actress who played a girl in massage parlor. I know it is difficult (the actress is not well-known) but maybe somebody could find out her name in some way. THANKS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 11:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2015[edit]

Unsimulated sex is the presentation in a film of sex scenes where the actors engage in an actual sex act, and are not just miming or simulating the actions. At one time in the United Sates...

"United Sates" should be changed to "United States"

Unsimulated sex is the presentation in a film of sex scenes where the actors engage in an actual sex act, and are not just miming or simulating the actions. At one time in the United States... 72.66.43.136 (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 03:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2015[edit]

60.219.11.101 (talk) 15:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done as you have not requested a change. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 21:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


Removed W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism[edit]

W.R is an Experimental film. It is a type of the cinema and describes a range of filmmaking styles that are generally quite different from, and often opposed to, the practices of mainstream and documentary filmmaking. W.R explores the relationship between sexuality and communist politics with the main goal to criticize the communist regime in former Yugoslavia. It also explores the life and work of Wilhelm Reich. Despite the fact that the film intercuts documentary footage with, a narrative (near the end) about a Yugoslav woman who seduces a Soviet ice skater, it gives a single story about human sexuality and revolution through montage effect. However, the experimental "techniques" used in the film may be seen in W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism/Episodes. So, all in all, film does contain some elements of drama and even fantasy, but much more an experimental elements. About the sex scenes: Film contains many very explicit, but simulated scenes, including unsimulated manual stimulation of penis in documentary footage. This scene should show that masturbation is a natural human behavior. Also, the similar scene exist in 1900, but that film is not on the list since there were no general agreement about putting the film on the list because of such scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 18:26, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


Nymphomaniac[edit]

And Nymphomaniac? And Diet of Sex (Spanish film)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.77.4.204 (talk) 23:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The Center of the World doesn't belong on this page.[edit]

The only citation for Wayne Wang's The Center of the World's supposed unsimulated sex scene is a capsule review from the Sacramento News & Review, which uses the vague – and misleading – phrasing, "This unrated, digital-video string of Pretty Woman and Leaving Las Vegas moments schmooses with the graphic sex of Triple-X videos".

I have seen the film, and there are no scenes of unsimulated sex between the two actors whose characters have intercourse in the story, Peter Sarsgaard and Molly Parker. As Sarsgaard and Parker were already well-established actors in 2001, on-screen unsimulated sex between them would have been newsworthy.

In fact, neither actor displays any full-frontal nudity in the film. The only reason it received an NC-17 is because of a brief shot, early on, of a stripper (not Parker) partially sticking a lollipop into her vagina.

I request that this film be removed from the page.

Well, you are not quite right.The "Reception" paragraph in The Center of the World says that film contains full-frontal nudity and the source http://www.filmsite.org/sexinfilms60.html mentions even more (anal penetration, oral sex, rape with penetration...). However, my reasoning is that film should stay on the list at least for the lollipop scene. This is a brief scene, but is a sexual in its nature since it may be considered as a kind of female masturbation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 09:25, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2015[edit]

82.114.169.100 (talk) 02:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Grayfell (talk) 02:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2015[edit]

185.11.8.43 (talk) 02:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Grayfell (talk) 02:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Isn't it a little bit odd that there are four "Semi-protected edit request" on this talk page with actually no requests for any editions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 07:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2015[edit]

The description beside "Love" (last film on the list currently) needs to be revised to be less timely and more encyclopedic and to remove POV statement, and should also reference its notoriety as a 3-D release. Suggest rewording to "This film by Gaspar Noé features scenes of unsimulated sexual activity and is notable as being a 3-D release." (PS: I'm not connected to the anons who left those blank requests earlier.) 68.146.52.234 (talk) 23:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Already done -BZTMPS · (talk? contribs?) 15:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Larry Clark: Ken Park[edit]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209077/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:63:2B35:C01:C37:A12F:2118:16F4 (talk) 06:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

IMDB is not a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.137.127 (talk) 08:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • I think there are other sources indicating at least some of the sexual activity is real but I agree the IMDb shouldn't count; another source is needed because some productions can be very convincing. There is another Clark film from 2013 called Jonathan that I've seen and it is unambiguously unsimulated - there's a fellatio scene that is done right out in the clear - but I don't know if this list takes into account short films, which is what this one is. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 13:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, I think that the general "problem" with Larry Clark's films is his "obsession" with underage sex; in another words his films are more like the experiments that should explore underage sexual behavior, and so they belong much more to experimental type of film than to mainstream, big budget type, with the main goal just to tell the story. Also, Ken Park is banned in Australia for, among the other reasons, being a "child pornography" (censorship in Australia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 16:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

That's irrelevant. Acclaimed films such as Pretty Baby and The Tin Drum have likewise been banned and/or accused of being child pornography, yet they are not considered "experimental". Metropolis was an experimental film. So was 2001 A Space Odyssey. This list does not and should not violate WP:NPOV and make a judgement call as to what constitutes an "experimental film". By your criteria virtually all of the entries on this list would have to be deleted. All I was asking is if this list is only for feature-length films (which by their very nature have wider distribution - most of Larry Clark's feature films you can order on Amazon if you want) or if we can include short films that generally do not get very wide distribution and are often only circulated online (which I think is the case with Jonathan). 68.146.52.234 (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Second opinion on pornography definition[edit]

Although the stated definition of what pornography is as opposed to mainstream non-porn does have a good citation, I think in this case there should be second opinions given. You'll find non-trivial sources rebutting the opinion that if a film with hardcore sequences isn't just about sex than it isn't porn. For example, there are movies listed here that are in fact about sex - that is their prime plot motivator - therefore under the definition cited they could be considered porn. It's such a touchy subject - especially when actors are challenged about agreeing to do such films - that I'd personally feel more comfortable with a more diverse range of cited opinion on the definition. It might also serve to help narrow down the criteria of what films should and shouldn't be included here. By some definitions, Deep Throat wasn't a porn film because it had a plot, while Nine Songs - an example of a film where the actors vehemently oppose calling it porn - can be defined as porn because except for the musical sequences sex is pretty much all the film is about. And there have been cases of porn films being reedited and shown in R-rated and even non-sexual versions at film festivals, mainstream theatres, etc. Examples include Cafe Flesh from the 1980s, Dixie Ray Hollywood Star from the 1970s, Night Trips from the late 80s, the Pirates series from a few years ago that you could even rent at Blockbuster, and a number of the recent porn parodies of things like Star Wars are often shown in non-sexual edits that actually stand as viable films. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)