Talk:Unsimulated sex

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

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

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[[2]]. Should it be included in the list?

Remove "Irréversible"[edit]

I followed the link to,,429974_2,00.html (cite 65) that should serves evidence to the claim that this movie contains unsimulated oral sex. I did not find anything about that. In fact, there is only one sentence about this movie: "The other movie, an unrated French import called ”Irréversible,” nearly caused a riot last May when its unblinking nine-minute rape sequence had its first showing in Cannes and has since sharply divided critics."

There is one short scene where there is a prono movie running on a tv in the background with oral sex, but that doesn't count as it is a movie in the movie.

If there is no better evidence, "Irréversible" should be removed from the list

--Titule (talk) 19:18, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Better late than never. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 04:41, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2016[edit]

Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 and 2 (2014) should be added to this list. There are real blowjobs and sex. (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - item(s) now added - should now be ok - please post if otherwise of course - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
We should have a reference there. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 04:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I've looked it up, it's fancy body doubles waist down which apparently counts per other body doubles in the list. That kind of thing does need to be distinguished here as to do otherwise implies the stars are having sex when they're not. Hence the need to look up references and report what that they say. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 05:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Unnecessary POV descriptions[edit]

I have noticed a number of the brief descriptions are referring to some films as "classic"; it's not our job to assess whether these films are good, bad, "classic", or whatever--that is left to critics and those aspects of the films are reported on the films' pages if they are deemed notable enough to have one. Please avoid use of POV words such as "classic" or indeed any attempt to assess the film's value, genre, etc. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC) Apologies, seem to have April fooled myself, putting this is in the wrong order first time. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Do body doubles count or not?[edit]

The first line of the article says the actors are actually having sex, no reference to body doubles. Does that mean we should remove films from the list which "only" have doubles filling in? That would remove The Idiots and several others. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 04:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I think we should. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baba i deda (talkcontribs) 18:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't matter if it's a body double or not as someone is still being shown in a mainstream film engaging in unsimulated activity. It's no different than having a scene in which extras are shown engaging. The point of the list are films (and IMO we'll probably be adding TV shows to this list before long) showing the activity. (talk) 12:33, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

The description of Hotel Desire states that the main actors have unsimulated sex, but for the oral and penetration shots, you can clearly see that body doubles are used. One woman has a scar on her stomach and the other does not.

About El Topo ("rape")[edit]

I know that is what Jorodowsky says happened in his book. Maybe it even happened. But can you actually see any of this on screen? If not, maybe there's other material that qualifies (it's a very long film, and I haven't seen it, so I don't know). Anyway, that quote is not a source for the content of the film itself, it's a source for what A.J. says happened when he was filming the scene (which may or may not depict the act unambiguously). We need a source that describes what is actually depicted on the screen by reviewers. There have been many times when directors or others hint at sexual activity having taken place in order to generate controversy (free advertising, etc.). This may have been one of those times, else why shouldn't A.J. have feared criminal prosecution? ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:49, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Q (Desire)[edit]

The entry for this one should include a note that the North American DVD release (titled "Desire") edits out the unsimulated scenes. I've seen both versions and it's unambiguous - the infamous car scene, for example, switches to a distance shot of the vehicle during the key moments (in order to preserve the dialogue). (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Rather than this just being a list[edit]

I know from long experience with Wikipedia that there's always a bit of hesitancy when it comes to straight list articles. Readers/researchers want more "meat". How about add a section in which - using reliable sources, interviews, etc - the rationale for showing unsimulated sexual activity in mainstream films is discussed. In theory few of the films listed are intended to be erotica, in which sexually arousing the audience is the goal, therefore their sexual content could have been depicted in a simulated fashion. And in the overwhelming majority of cases, sex scenes exist only as character building moments or mood-setters and contribute nothing substantial to the plot. I'm sure there has been discussion of an academic, non-trivial nature as to why, for example, the director of 9 Songs chose to make his film hardcore, even realizing that in doing so his potential market just got sliced to a fraction. Did von Triers need to show hardcore in Nymphomaniac? What was their reasoning? Similarly, actors and actresses who have participated have also been asked for their rationale, with some defending the decision because of various reasons, while others have expressed regret in later years for having done the scene(s). This of course would need to be handled carefully because of WP:BLP. (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

according to the title of the article, the introductory text really must be longer and far more comprehensive including a section for rationale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I do agree that a simple list is not really interesting. This article should evolve to something more comprehensive about the reasons why a director includes unsimulated sex scenes despite all the difficulties. Steff-X (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)