MovieChat Forums > The Dreamers (2004) Discussion > Michael Pitt's erection was real, right?...

Michael Pitt's erection was real, right?

posted 9 years ago by roraio
6 replies | jump to latest

I know the sex scenes weren't real obviously - they just lay naked on top of each other and fake moans, but in the scene where Eva Green pulls down Michael Pitt's pants and she finds her photograph underneath his penis before they make love, that erection was real, wasn't it? I mean, they use prosthetic penises in other films, the base of which are covered in clothes and stuff, but given that Michael Pitt was nude in this scene and shot very up close, I assume it was 100% real. What do you think?

The strange thing is I wasn't that bothered by the full male nudity in this film and close-up shots, which really put me off in other films depending on the actor, probably because young Michael Pitt looked pretty as a girl and sort of inoffensive. I don't know why but if I were to watch the same scenes with an older, manlier, hairier actor I'd be pretty grossed out. The fact that they chose very attractive and very young actors (19-22) in The Dreamers did not only serve the obvious purpose, but it also made the film more enjoyable.

Would you rather have seen Leonardo DiCaprio, Jake Gyllenhaal or Dominic Cooper (proposed actors for Matthew's role) in the nude instead of Michael Pitt? I know I would, but DiCaprio would not have accepted this artsy indie movie that is by no means Oscar material.

[–] DarthSil 9 years ago

Yes, it was real. All of the actors have stated that they were willing to push any boundaries the director suggested based on the fact that they enjoyed working with him (Bertolucci) so much.

And I think Michael was perfect for the part.

"A little Consideration, a little Thought for Others, makes all the difference." Eeyore

[–] DaveBowman2001 (520) 7 years ago

I would have been a little more than half erect if Eva Green was taking my pants off.

[–] pgFiSheYe 9 years ago

indeed it was.

that was his tender and HOT penis !!!

[–] Saltpeter 8 years ago

Frankly I thought that scene was a total cop-out, because, if I remember correctly, when the camera shows his genitals, it doesn't show the actor's face, so it could have been anyone's genitals, i.e. those of a stunt double. Michael Pitt says he knew signing on there would be nudity, but we don't really know if we ever see him naked.

Speaking of cop-outs, the script also called for at least one explicit sex scene between the two men, but Bertolucci changed his mind about filming it, saying it was "too much." Putting him right up there with William Wyler when he cut the scenes from "The Children's Hour" showing Shirley MacLaine's obsessive love for Audrey Hepburn.

[–] davedave11 8 years ago

sex for money is prostitution, unless there is a camera in the room, then it's acting

[–] mobocracy (902) 4 years ago

I just wonder in a scene like that how they avoid accidental contact. Is he like moving it way out of the way when it looks like he's trying to look like he's guiding it in?

I also kind of wonder how often "not real" sex scenes actually involve penetration, either incidental/accidental that the actors just go with or maybe where both of them figure the scene would be better if they would just actually let it happen. I suspect not very often, but I can also see where it could easily happen because the actors actually want to for realism, because they're so far into the character/scene that it just happens, or maybe they just want to. I suppose there are even some kind of awful situations where a new/naive actress gets taken advantage of but is too worried about her career to complain.

I guess its still probably rare or unusual, especially in the post MeToo era where they employ sex scene overseers to make sure everyone is copacetic with the outcomes.