Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Sex Doesn't Sell

(1/6) > >>

Paul Keith:
Sex and nudity in movies have failed to generate ticket sales in Hollywood, says a report.

The report titled Sex Doesn't Sell -- Nor Impress! is authored by Dean Keith Simonton and Anemone Cerridwen. The authors, who examined more than 900 films released between 2001 and 2005, indicated that virtually all the top-grossing films that came out during that period had little or no sex or nudity, reports imdb.com.

"Sex did not sell, whether in the domestic or international box office, and even after controlling for MPAA [Motion Picture Association of America] rating," said Simonton, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Davis.

Added Cerridwen: "In other words, even among R [rated] movies, less graphic sex is better."

Cerridwen also said that the study evolved from a personal experience while she was taking an acting class and became concerned about the sexual content of the scripts she was viewing.

"I assumed sex sold and wanted to know by how much. I braced myself for the worst, and got quite the surprise."

She is also hoping that the study will influence Hollywood producers.

"I do believe that there are a fair number of people in the film industry who want to make better films, and this study may give them some ammunition," said Cerridwen.
--- End quote ---

http://sify.com/movies/fullstory.php?id=14925606

4wd:
It could be that:

a) the films that had nudity/sex in them were just total crap, in which case nothing would save them, or
b) films that did extremely well while not having much in the way of nudity/sex did better than they would of because, (even if by a small margin), of the nudity/sex, or
c) the genre of the films they used in their report appealed more to one particular category of movie viewers, (drama, sci-fi, etc), than all movie viewers.

Unless they publish all the names of the films they are refering to so that people can look at what genre, overall rating, country and movie viewer demographics they appealed to, then this report is basically a fantasy.

Stoic Joker:
then this report is basically a fantasy.-4wd (January 02, 2010, 06:11 PM)
--- End quote ---
...And a stunningly retarded one at that.

Sex and/or sex appeal is used to sell everything from breath mints to cell phones. Fashion models flocking around some grinning schmuck (like mongrel dogs to carrion) because his breath is just so minty fresh they're all just dieing to what? (f...) play Parcheesi with him?!? - Please...

The babblingly idiotic assumption that "removing" nudity from a film means there is no sex in it is beyond absurd. It just means that its that much easier to get it past the ratings board. ...and at some point you'll need to waste 5 minutes watching two lumps romp about under a blanket.

Now here's a question for the film industry ... Why is that having the beauty of the human (female) form so horrifyingly taboo that it must be rated R or worse, but depicting a woman getting rapped and beaten to death in an ally is (for some demented reason) quality (prime time) entertainment?!?

Paul Keith:
Those are both valid points and normally I would agree but I've been watching alot of Cronenberg lately and even though his movie receptions are old, this article reminded me of one IMDB poster's account of someone he knew.

I didn't save it but based on memory it went something like: It's interesting how a guy like Cronenberg went from making crap and then went on to create a great movie like A History of Violence.
--- End quote ---

Now, while it's true that the fanbase of Cronenberg tend to have people who are most endeared by him based on the shock factor of nudity and gore, what I find interesting is that you could almost find patterns where people might excuse his movies as quality if it weren't as shocking.

The one comment that jumped at me is this person's comment of his movie Crash:

This film does however prove a very interesting point, something of which every young filmmaker should take careful note: It is possible to turn a quasi-pornographic movie with twisted sexual scenarios and "controversial" material galore into something profoundly boring. Twisted freaks get turned on by car crashes, and... well, that's about it, actually. For an hour and a half. If the viewer isn't turned on by the (apparently deliberately) unerotic sex, what does this have to offer? I've read the theory that this is about the deep connection between sex and death, but surely that topic has been explored in far more interesting and illuminating ways. Really, this is a rather sad one-trick pony of a movie: It all depends on the viewer's being *shocked* by the "controversial" subject-matter, but if the viewer isn't shocked (as I wasn't. Perhaps I'm just really, really jaded...) this is incredibly shallow and, I repeat once more for emphasis, excruciatingly dull.
--- End quote ---

...it almost seems as if the expectation is both a hypocrisy that if it has sex, it needs to be at the minimum tantalizing and borderline make you interested but if it has that factor, it is porn so it's low quality porn as highlighted by a review of another movie A Sleeping Dictionary:

Ridiculous Teeny-Bop Soft-Porn Noble Savage Tripe

Utterly unbelievable that colonial Brits and natives of Sarawak in the first third of the last century had perfect teeth, perfect complexions (in spite of mixed ancestry), and that women groomed themselves with shaved legs and shaved arm pits! What a typically absurd Hollywood distortion of reality! It was like watching the old black & white `historicals' from the 30's or 40's with all the stars having their then current hair-dos and facial hair (e.g., pencil thin mustaches on the men, etc.) none of which had any historical accuracy whatsoever and look totally absurd in retrospect. It was silly.

This is an expensive `passion pit' movie designed to get the teeny boys and girls hot 'n bothered on their night out. A totally vapid and worthless romance. A shame to the genre.
--- End quote ---


I'm not saying this movie deserves an award or that people should praise these movies as high quality unanimously but I find it interesting that "sex" as the main theme is one of those elements that many people can put into a category of "Look, if you're going do a sex scene make it look accurate but make it so it seems attractive to me on screen and not just dull and boring."

Where as if you put any of these other "pretty" elements in other genres, the flaws tend to levitate more into the category of "It's a Hollywood movie, what did you expect?" rather than "Hollywood absurdity". (or if it gets criticized as a Hollywood absurdity, it never expands into an additional demeaning term equivalent to accusing a movie as porn)

Then there's such culture views as these: (comment made on The Bounty IMDB forum)

Any and all frontal or female topless nudity should be at least rated "R". Obviously alot of under aged children and teens will be watching and especially with the popularity of pirate movies. Im amazed that this was only rated "PG". The double standard is a slap in the face for all non-white cultures. They're basically saying these women arent equal to white women so they shouldnt be seen as enticing or sexual. There's enough blood in this movie to earn it at least an upgrade to a PG-13 and topless nudity should be an "R".
--- End quote ---

...thus requiring another poster to clarify it in these words:

First of all I can't imagine many men, regardless of their colour, not finding the women enticing or sexual. In wanting to equate the treatment of white and non-white women you are making a statement about something that was natural to the women of Tahiti, imposing the "white" view of what is acceptable on a non-white culture. It is you who is giving a non-white culture a slap in the face.
When white women are shown topless in films it is usually in a sexual context and justifies a different treatment.

That aside the story line revolves around the love affair between Fletcher Christian and Mauatau.
--- End quote ---

...but then you have an issue such as this:

You misread my statement. Pay attention now. I said by making the movie PG rather than R-rated, they're saying these women, though in their natural habitat, aren't to be seen as sexual whereas white women would be covered up. Sure white women in civilized countries don't run around with their breasts swinging in the breeze but this is a movie playing in the US not in Tahiti so the U.S. viewers who are the intended audience, aren't just looking at some native women in their own environment. These women are also being looked at and lusted after as sex objects by the crew on the Bounty. The natural habitat part is just a loophole. I have no problem with how the women appear in the movie but how the movie is rated.
--- End quote ---

Ultimately though, I'm not saying this article is right or wrong but I think we shouldn't dismiss this as black and white inaccurate quite so fast.

I know I made generalizing statements and there are enough movies with sex and nudity that break this mold to prove this article but I guess to me, I just don't read this as Sex Doesn't Sell because Sex Sells but rather, Sex Sells but it won't sell as much as a movie without Sex.

Examples that come to my mind are Cameron's Titanic nude scene where the lack of sex is what made the plot more memorable despite it still containing nudity and being more soft-porn plot than most soft-porn plot, Total Recall where Arnie goes to lengths for literally his dream girl, The Matrix where it could just as be an analogy for being seduced by an Ice Queen (plus let's not forget the machine lesbian scene), A Clockwork Orange where the rape scene is respected as artistic because of the director's reputation (although Kubrick didn't get away with it in Eyes Wide Shut)

Ultimately though, I'm not singling these movies out nor am I saying no one ever criticized them as such but I find it interesting that there seems to be an interesting standard in highly respected movies where there's an unspoken stereotypical rule that Sex and Nudity can only sell if you turn it into a one-shot "almost unrelated" nude scene thus satisfying both those who are looking for that particular nude scene and also satisfying thoe who normally might be appalled by it in an almost disassociative effect where the porn lovers get their pie and the other movie goers feel like they got their plot and that the director added the scene because it added to the story. (even though many times, these scenes are often the least related to the plot compared with movies with more "in your face" nudity) Similarly sex scenes it seems must never imply full sexuality (in a seemingly similar reason to Robert Downey Jr.'s statement that "one must never go full retard when playing a retard" in Tropic Thunder) or else it's porn or it's bad or it's detracting.

But if a director focuses on the pre- and post- implications of a sex scene, then they can get away with a porn equivalent plot and even a violent sex scene and be perceived as being of a higher quality. Of course, it can be also said that this technique is often used by directors who can make better movies and thus it's not so much that the movie uses this technique as much as it is indeed a higher quality film.

Still... I look at some of the positive statements to Eyes Wide Shut and I find it interesting where many can excuse the scenes and interpret it as being "above porn" because it holds these qualities even though the movie didn't sell as much compared to say Flesh+Blood's portrayal of a sex scene.

(Although both are entirely unrelated movies with different timespans and a more accurate picture can be had by using Basic Instinct as a comparison but I did it this way anyway because it's still a stretched out comparison anyways and I don't really have an extensive knowledge of movies)

zridling:
I think the worst gratuitous nudity I've ever seen in a film was the absolutely awful film, Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008).



I could have lived an entire life without seeing Jason Segel's ugly junk, fat gut, puffy nips, and hatchet ass.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page