THN Friday Face Off: Luke On Unsimulated Sex

This is the third debate of our monthly feature, entitled ‘THN Friday Face Off’. One Friday every month will see two THN titans of film knowledge duke it out over a pressing issue relating to our most beloved art form. Each film fanatic will argue from a different viewpoint on a particular subject, in a bid to persuade our exceptionally attractive readers, as well as his or her colleague, they should be deemed the winner.

Of course, there are no definitive right or wrong answers. However, we would love for you to get involved by sharing your opinion, and voting for whoever you think has argued their case in a more effective way. You can do this by commenting below, tweeting us via @thncom, or commenting on our Facebook page. Before doing so, we ask that you read the opposition’s stance on the matter here.

This month we ask whether unsimulated sex in narrative films is a necessity, or just something to shock?

In a world where violence, sex, drug use, and swearwords are no longer enough to raise the the hackles of anyone but the most chaste and prudent of viewers, there is still one issue that is a guaranteed ticket onto the expressway of controversy, unsimulated sex. Although it is yet to break into the mainstream, there are plenty of art house and independent films that have used the technique, for a varying degree of reasons, such as THE BROWN BUNNY, BAISE-MOI, THE IDIOTS, 9 SONGS, and DESTRICTED. But why would any director or artist want to incorporate unismulated sex, and why would an actor or actress say yes to such an act? We may not have all the answers, but let’s take a look at the sordid and gritty world of sex, the real kind.

Isn’t it just porn?

First of all let’s look at porn (not literally, close that search engine) and your traditional narrative film. A narrative film is obviously meant to tell a story as well as giving us characters for whom we can care for. Porn on the other hand (get your mind out of the gutter), is generally used to arouse and titillate. No prizes for that observation, but as we all know from countless comedy sketches (and not the porn itself because we don’t watch that), porn isn’t below adding a plot itself. Whether it’s the seductive boss who’s going to make you work for that promotion, or the pizza delivery guy who accepts more than just dollar bills, porn often has a story. But don’t viewers of porn just come along for the sex and smut? What could a plot possibly add to two ridiculously proportioned individuals going at each other in positions that are great for camera angles but not so high on comfort? It’s quite simply the element of fantasy.

Viewers aren’t just voyeuristically observing the participants with an air of curiosity. They’re imagining themselves in those situations. Understanding this is key to accepting the difference between simulated and unsimulated sex. If there was no difference between the two then porn wouldn’t have a market. I’m sure many viewers would feel short changed were they to find out that the sexual acts in adult filmmaking were faked, but wouldn’t bat an eyelid when discovering the student with the 36EE’s, isn’t actually an 18 year old virgin, but a professional porn star in her mid-30s, with a string of previous sexual partners. However you look at it, the sex being real has a profound effect on the material and the viewer’s response to it.

Simulated vs. Unsimulated!

So since we all know that simulated and unsimulated sex scenes change how the viewer feels and the effect it has on the viewer, why use unsimulated sex in movies? With today’s CGI and prosthetics, even if you wanted sex to seem realistic and detailed, you could very well generate a believable sequence, such as the fellatio scene in the beginning of the rather explicit IN THE CUT. A prosthetic penis was used, and many viewers would be unable to tell the difference, but does that make it any less shocking than footage of an actual blowjob?

One thing we have to come to terms with is that, in the way characters in a porno do not act like people in real life, Hollywood or cinematic sex is also just as fictional when compared to the real thing. Sex scenes in motion pictures have the luxury of being choreographed in a way to best exhibit the stars and give you a sensual and passionate view of love making. The lighting is perfect, the sweat controlled, the taking off of bras is done dextrously, and bizarre and inappropriate comments have been substituted by poetically conceived clichés. It’s very telling that some of the most realistic sex scenes in Hollywood come from comedies, that don’t have to worry about creating such tender moments.

Unsimulated sex has offered us something that perhaps we are not too comfortable with, and that’s an open and gritty look at people at their most vulnerable, which also suggests that perhaps the majority of sex isn’t actually all that sexy (especially for those not involved). Mainstream cinematic sex is there for the whole family to enjoy.

The effect on the viewer!

Unsimulated sex doesn’t just work by being up there on screen, as pointed out earlier, filmmakers could very easily recreate sex scenes that look real. The power comes from the audience knowing they are real beforehand. The audience’s prior knowledge plays a key part in their reaction to what they are seeing. When THE EXORCIST first hit the cinema, director William Friedkin told audiences that magnets were used to levitate Linda Blair from the bed. He did this because he believed that by telling the audiences there were no strings, the audience would be unable to see the strings. Unsimulated Sex has a similar effect, as the moment we are told a film contains it, our views immediately change.

We’d love to think that we can be completely unbiased when watching a film, but knowing that Chloe Sevigny is really performing oral sex on Vincent Gallo towards the end of THE BROWN BUNNY is exactly the same as knowing that Robert De Niro put on all that weight for RAGING BULL. Some will applaud the efforts to which the actors have gone to shape and explore their craft, whereas others will say “Why the hell did you bother doing that?” It’s a tool that some will welcome and others will not. Some people will still balk at the site of a man’s penis on screen, or two men kissing, but that doesn’t mean they should be banned from our screens.

So far, at least in my experience, unsimulated sex has been used to delve into the characters (if you’ll excuse the phrase), and never for some cheap thrills. BAISE MOI often combined the unsimulated sex with violence, even depicting a rape scene. Knowing that penetration was occurring made the scene shocking and disturbing, as a rape scene should be. THE BROWN BUNNY used technique to examine the fragility of Gallo’s character in his moment of despair, because despite the act itself being real, ironically, in the film the act was a fantasy. Sevigny defended the scene in a blunt but truthful statement back in 2003:

I’m really angry at the way everyone’s trivialising it. It’s a really intense romantic scene, really beautiful. It’s not gratuitous, it’s deep. I do it in everyday life. Everybody’s done it, or had it done to them.

In some ways, it doesn’t even matter if the sex is real or not, the mere suggestion of it can have a profound effect on the viewer. DON’T LOOK NOW featured a realistic sex scene, which to this day some claim to be real, despite the denials of the cast. So if a scene can be faked and yet still convince the audience to be shocked, why does it matter if the sex is real? In fact, if audiences are unable to spot the difference between real and fake sex, then surely it’s down to the directors and actors as to whether performing the act itself will enhance their performance. It isn’t really a question of real sex vs. fake sex, but a question of method acting vs. acting.

There is concern over unsimulated sex in film, including the possible exploitation of actors, STDs – Melvin Van Peebles claims he contracted one during the filming of SWEET SWEETBACK’S BAADASSSSS SONG – and using it as a simple shock technique just to generate some publicity. One of its biggest users, Lars Von Trier, has been experimenting with it for years, and feels it is so important, that when the actors do not wish to take part in the acts, he hires body doubles. His latest, NYMPHOMANIAC, will even be using computers to blend actor’s faces onto stand-ins. Surely if a director feels this passionately about faking unsimulated sex, it must hold more importance than “LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!” The trick is not to make the subject so taboo as to force it underground. At the end of the day, who doesn’t enjoy a bit of unsimulated sex?

Please do tell us what you think, but first, be sure to read the counter-argument, which can be found here.