Shia LaBeouf to have real sex on screen

[levitt]

I don't even know how I feel about this. Will this start a trend?

[Lalique]

if you like von trier's films and willem dafoe, check out antichrist.. charlotte gainsbourg is also in it and i thought it was a fantastic film..

I hate this movie so hard.

[MohandasKGanja]

i love von trier.
there have been other movies where the actors had sex for real - the late guillaume depardieu did it in 'pola x', there's michael winterbottom's '9 songs'.
but probably the first time such meainstream actors do it. this should be interesting.
can't wait to see willem dafoe in this. so hot.

I thought "Don't Look Now" (1973) with Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie was the first major film where the stars actually did it. Ironically, it had the same kind of overall theme that "Antichrist" did.

Speaking of Dafoe, if what Dana Delaney said was true, they should be some impressive scenes.

I've seen Antichrist. Very very hard movie to watch, its just exhausting.

Not because of Von Trier, but knowing the subject matter, would make it hard for me to watch in the first place. Similar to that other movie, "Rabbit Hole".

[MsDark]

So who's gonna be fucking who?

[tulip]

And let's not forget Chloë Sevigny blowing Vincent Gallo in The Brown Bunny.

No, please. I think the world would prefer to forget that. Eeek.

[sluce]

Where is the line that classifies a film from being a mainstream film to a porn film? I really am curious.

[MohandasKGanja]

Where is the line that classifies a film from being a mainstream film to a porn film? I really am curious.

I think the standard definition was that the line would be when the film has no remaining artistic merit and would merely exist to get you off.

It seems that, based on his track record, even a graphically explicit von Trier film would still have artistic merit and that it would be so dreary that nobody would get off.

[Sasha]

von Triers' Antichrist and The Idiots both feature real sex.

And don't forget John Cameron Mitchell's Shortbus.

[SoCalMarie]

And let's not forget Chloë Sevigny blowing Vincent Gallo in The Brown Bunny.

No, please. I think the world would prefer to forget that. Eeek.

Oh god. I forgot about that one.... so uncomfortable to watch - not because of the story line, it was just gross, and I was embarrassed for her... but didn't feel any kind of pity - since she's an adult and made the decision to do that.

But it was just disgusting. The whole thing.

Where is the line that classifies a film from being a mainstream film to a porn film? I really am curious.

The only differences between a mainstream film with actual sex and a porn
are better script, lighting, and the close-up camera shots of the "action".

So, yeah, not much of line defining the two
I 'd like to see what the rating association (or whatever they're called) guidelines for movies like that.

I know that if a man shows his private bits, it can't be fully erect.
I know this from watching an interview with Jason Segel, where he was taking about his nude scene Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and how the movie needed to stay at an "R" rating (and not an NC-17, which would cancel out most of their "core" audience from seeing the movie).

[Mrs P]

I forget where I heard it so take it at that level but I was given to understand that all the sex scenes in The Doors were real

I so would have banged Val Kilmer back in the day when he played Jim Morrison.

[SuriCruise]

I've enjoyed some of von Trier's films but he's kind of insufferable and I hated Antichrist and am really sick of Charlotte Gainsbourg, I just don't like her in films at all.

I don't see the point of the actors really having sex, aside from for the publicity and notoriety which seems like a desperate way to make people care more about your movie. They're actors, they can act having sex. Most film sex isn't that realistic and unless it's a porn there isn't any reason why it needs to be. I guess I just think this is pointless, creepy, and doesn't add any artistic merit whatsoever. He has produced porn so I'm not really that surprised he's doing this.

[CornFlakegrl]

I've enjoyed some of von Trier's films but he's kind of insufferable and I hated Antichrist and am really sick of Charlotte Gainsbourg, I just don't like her in films at all.

I don't see the point of the actors really having sex, aside from for the publicity and notoriety which seems like a desperate way to make people care more about your movie. They're actors, they can act having sex. Most film sex isn't that realistic and unless it's a porn there isn't any reason why it needs to be. I guess I just think this is pointless, creepy, and doesn't add any artistic merit whatsoever. He has produced porn so I'm not really that surprised he's doing this.

This. What's the point of real sex except for building hype and titilation (is that a word?). It's just fancy porn.

I have no desire to see Shia having real or fake sex. Eww.

[Kathie_Moffett]

I think the standard definition was that the line would be when the film has no remaining artistic merit and would merely exist to get you off.
It seems that, based on his track record, even a graphically explicit von Trier film would still have artistic merit and that it would be so dreary that nobody would get off.

So who's gonna be fucking who?

Yeah. So, Shia's "terrified" because he's gonna do Nicole?

[Sarzy]

I don't even know how I feel about this. Will this start a trend?

Eh I hope not. If you wanna have sex on film just go and be a porno star. But these 'real sex' films are basically just porn. They may dress it up as being 'arty' and whatever BS, but they're not imo.

[yanna]

I'm as artsy fartsy as they get in my movie taste but I've only seen Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark from Lars von Trier. I liked them well enough but can't really be bothered to watch anything else.

I've heard Dogville is good. Should I give it a chance? Any others?