When it comes to movies, has anyone noticed that the word "gratuitous" is most often used in relation to sex scenes? Even more so than violence.
You watch a comedy, and there's a one-liner that's really funny. But it didn't really have anything to do with the story. I say, "That was a gratuitous one-liner." You reply, "But it was funny, and even if it didn't really have anything to do with the story, at least it didn't stop the scene dead cold."
You watch an action flick, and there's this really cool montage of all the major cities in the world being attacked. I say: "Yeah, they showed like 7 or 8 cities being blown up. They should have cut the shot involving Paris. It was gratuitous." You reply, "But it's an action film. It's supposed to have lots of cool explosions. Anyway, it didn't slow down the story, so what's the harm?"
You watch "Lust, Caution," and there's a scene where Yee licks Wong Chai Chi's armpit, and guess what? Suddenly gratuity is a bad thing! What the hell? It doesn't stop the story dead cold in its tracks. If it had spent 30 seconds lingering on him digging his tongue into her armpit, that would have been too much. But a one-second shot? No the hell way. It's a sex scene; it's supposed to have sexual shots in it.
And I agree with the others: that shot was in no way gratuitous. It added a whole lot to that scene.
Proud member of SHREWS (Society for the Honor Required of Eyes Wide Shut)
reply
share