MovieChat Forums > Shame Discussion > Why is the movie not categorized into th...

Why is the movie not categorized into the Porno Genre??

posted 12 years ago by erikkartmann
47 replies | jump to latest

Well except for the key charachters of the movie Fassbender and Mulligan not having a mutual sex scene (at one point when Carey finds Michael masturbating, he comes wraped in towel and jumps over on her, and the scene might even suggest that he was trying to finish off his unfinished business), the movie was filled up with all charachters having sex, or getting sexual. The production failed to do justice either to the title or to the golden globe nomination. What could have been a highly acclaimed artistic success ended up to be a high class porn shoot.

reply

[–] lubin-freddy 11 years ago

You've clearly never SEEN a porn movie.

Listen to the river sing sweet songs
to rock my soul

reply

[–] dark_frances 11 years ago

Yeah that could also be an explanation!

there's a highway that is curling up like smoke above her shoulder

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] acthewriter 11 years ago

Don't be dumb. Why would the movie be classified as porn when no one was actually having REAL sex? It was actor's PRETENDING to have sex. Say it with me now...PRE-TEN-DING.

Lord, some of y'all oblivious as hell.

Your fugitive's name is Dr. Richard Kimble. Go get him.

reply

[–] BewareOfTheAvalanche 11 years ago

Porn depicts sexual activity to cause pleasure, this film intends to cause pain and it succeeds.

reply

[–] somethingtofear 11 years ago

^^^ that's what i was gonna say.

reply

[–] gabypanama 10 years ago

because you dont see penetration, a requisite for porno.

reply

[–] megArnold 10 years ago

Ever watched softcore porn?

--
No, Schmuck! You are only entitled to your INFORMED opinion!!
-- Harlan Ellison

reply

[–] gabypanama 10 years ago

yes.

reply

[–] skywalker_2003 10 years ago

This is an artistic porno and some film makers make such movies for festivals and sick people around.you can change your vision every time watching this movie.once as a soft porn,once as an artistic film and ....you have no limit!

reply

[–] megArnold 10 years ago

Porn is the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal.

The purpose of this film is not to get you hard. Definitely not.

--
No, Schmuck! You are only entitled to your INFORMED opinion!!
-- Harlan Ellison

reply

[–] ribby45 10 years ago

megArnold - agree with you on both counts.

It made me seriously uncomfortable - which, I suspect was the point.

Fassbender's character seemed like the kind of guy who could quite cheerfully *beep* you, kill you and then eat you afterwards.

OK. I'm exaggerating.
But only a bit.

Show it to a bunch of 15-year-olds and put them off sex for life.

Or I am just getting o-l-d?
Yep, 54, just around the corner. . 

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LubyleFou 10 years ago

Certainly because it's not that bad as far as explicit sex is concerned, you know...except for the scene with the two women towards the end, which is quite graphic I admit, the rest is rather tame in my opinion( nothing compared to Lars Von Trier's Nymphomaniac or Noe's Enter The Void for instance)...

What's more, like many people on this board said before, this movie is not here to arouse or to excite: it is clearly a raw depiction of an addiction and its terrible conséquences and all...so, its not being classified as a porn film is totally normal to me...

Some people *beep* up all the time...

reply

[–] mohammadnasirzade 10 years ago

Congratulations! I believe you've pushed the boundaries of superficiality!! This board is capable of being easily recorded in Guinness!!!

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ribby45 9 years ago

Professor_Tommen

Excellent foreign film list - thanks for posting.

I'm assuming you're from the US so I hope you saw Come and See as it should be (subtitled not dubbed), please?

Next time you want to stay awake all night, watch Les Miserables (1995 version dir. Claude Lelouch), Romauld et Juliette (1989 dir. Colline Serreau) and La Horde (2009 dir. Raphael Horcher )and Le Chat du Rabbin (2011 dir. Joann Sfar).

Happy viewing!

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ribby45 9 years ago

Roger-Tommen-Radcliffe -

Cool top 100 list - I've seen 17 of them.

Re. the recs - you're welcome!

reply

1
2
3