Screenwriting : Sex and Nudity in films is bad for you? by Geoff Hall

I've written several sex scenes, but I keep them brief and only to further the story. Also, there's a fine line between depicting sex tastefully and crossing into Penthouse Forum territory. I don't believe I've ever crossed that line. I'm not a fan of graphic sex scenes that go too long.

Phillip E. Hardy, "The Real Deal" me neither. My aim in the novel was to show the level of intimacy between two characters.

Just skimmed through the link in your post. The very least that I can possibly say in regards to all of this is: If a storyteller of any kind wants to include sex scenes, that is their absolute choice to do so (not the audience, whose reactions ought to vary), yet I would also consider making sure that they're not taken for granted, that they're not there just because they're there in the most unnecessary sense of the word, if you know what I'm saying, unless there really is a need to include unnecessary sex scenes in there, and what I'm saying here right now no longer makes any sense, doesn't it?

The USA has an issue with Sex and not guns because guns are mentioned in the second amendment and lube isn't.

People have sex for a number of reasons, and as long as that reason moves the story forward, the sex is needed.

Craig D Griffiths time to rewrite the constitution?

Michael Nguyen haha, Michael.

“…unless there really is a need to include unnecessary sex scenes…” yup, you lost me there too! Maybe it’s talking about sex that messes up our minds?!!

B A Mason BA yes, the Monsters Ball, but way back in the last century there was the infamous sex scene between Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland (Don’t Look Now) and reports of them having ‘real sex’. Do you recall that one?

If sex did not "further the plot" in life, none of us would be here.

Seems to me like a complete misapprehension, implying that the sex between persons in a story is there only for prurient interest, which is such a limited view it only speaks of the mindset of the contributor who put forth that clunker.

Any sexual connection in a story implies some kind of relationship, and I think it's the relationships between characters that provide a rationale for the plot;

a plot without character relationships, romance, tension or human connection would likely be sterile.

Sex and nudity sells. People want to see it. Some of the most watched shows are full of nudity and sex. When those shows reduce it in future episodes or series, viewership drops off. Westworld is a prime example. Now, that doesn’t mean something can’t be good without sex or nudity, but it helps get a certain number of viewers. Remember, for us it’s a career or passion to create, but the flip side is the end user, the viewer, it’s just entertainment. They want a break from life. To be entertained. And a lot, not all, want to see nudity and sex. Most want to see what they don’t have and enjoy it before going back to their own reality.

Daniel Stuelpnagel Hi Daniel, perhaps a better way of saying it would be not to show gratuitous or exploitative sex (with the actors in mind)?

Yes, ‘furthering the plot’ sounds a little sterile or formulaic. And sex can also be in the context of a bad relationship.

I say cut sex scenes, action, violence, etc. if it doesn't reveal character or further the plot, Geoff Hall.

Ed Kelly Hi Ed, “but the flip side is the end user, the viewer, it’s just entertainment.”

I’d like to think that there are also those who become invested in the worlds we create and see them not just as entertainment, but almost as a new way of seeing their lives. Aspirational would be one word for it.

Maurice (tagging’s out again) I’d add something else to that, beyond character and plot and say that it should also be creating atmosphere, narrative and visual style, plus world building.

Sex and nudity can also say something about consensual or exploitative relationships. Look at how sex was treated in American Beauty, for example.

Yes, you’ve probably gathered that I want to take this beyond mere function. In “Breathe” we explore this pearl of wisdom. “A man’s body is made for prose, a woman’s for poetry.”

B A Mason BA I looked further into the Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland film (Don’t Look Now) and found the language we use to describe it, a little, well, rigid. Check out the image attached to this comment.

On IMDb where sex and nudity is classified as ‘severe’. I find the language we use to talk about and describe them is very stilted. It lacks any artistry or sense of the poetic; bereft of imagination, like we should be threatened by it, or afraid of it.

I think it depends on what you're trying to convey. Sex and nudity itself, if misplaced, could be deemed pointless. But if, for example, you're writing a flourishing relationship between two individuals and the eventual lead-up is them consummating their love, then I definitely think it furthers it. That being said if done tastefully it removes that initial stigma.

You're right, Geoff Hall ("I’d add something else to that, beyond character and plot and say that it should also be creating atmosphere, narrative and visual style, plus world building").

Thank you, Maurice Vaughan

Samantha that’s a great way of putting it:

“That being said if done tastefully it removes that initial stigma.”

Sex scenes in the plot wouldn't be bad, but it depends on the timing and it's contribution to the plots, though some over do it even when not necessarily driving the plot forward or boosting the character.

Hakim Kisakye Hi Hakim, thanks for posting your comment. Do you have any examples you could share, that highlight what you’re talking about, please?

You're welcome, Geoff Hall.

I'm a fan of this quote from Shirley MacLaine from an interview back in 1975 -- "I remembered that in the old days — the old days meaning the ‘40s and the ‘50s when the Hays Office was the censorship board and you had Barbara Stanwyck, Joan Crawford, and Katharine Hepburn playing women judges, women politicians, women mayors, women scientists, blah blah — you were not allowed to play a love scene in the bedroom with a double bed ... So what happened was, because they couldn’t play any real good sexy love scenes, they had to resort to giving women these parts that were sensational in real life. The Hays Office was abolished in the name of more liberal sexual attitudes, and the ratings systems came in. Well, now, because men were running the studios, men were writing the scripts, and men were the directors — they put us back in the bedroom. And we haven’t been judges or politicians or mayors since. We’ve been screwing in the bedroom!”

Sex scenes can be great but their use has greatly impacted depictions of women and BIPOC communities. So if it's not advancing the plot (or revealing something about the character we haven't seen before/often on screen), I would take it out. Just something to consider

I would argue the sex scene in Terminator most certainly forwarded the plot as Kyle Reese was John Connor's father. To answer your question as to why Americans are fine with violence and not sex. We are a nation founded by puritans. We have the right to bare arms, but not the right to bare children. Something to think about.

Sex in a story is like a gunfight. It needs to serve a purpose. To Emily’s point about movies in the 60-70. I think films reflect society. So sex as part of films reflects that as well.

I remember in the first run of Rosanne, her sister Jackie is in a bar. A guy slides onto the seat beside her and says “hey you”. She looks at him and says “I really wanted sex the other night, I had it, so we’re done”. She smiles and he walks off dejected. That would be in a 60’s film.

So woman’s sexuality being a prize to win has died (mostly) in films. Showing women as having choices and desires is more a norm. I am not talking about sexual violence or abuse. Woman are now shown to use sex to control a man and it is not seen as some evil, immoral act.

BA Mason, if the audience doesn’t get the point you failed as a writer. I believe you should be able to walk an audience right up to the door so they are comfortable to walk through.

BA, you make some good points. But it is undone by two words you used “too much”. Your argument lives and dies by a lack of skill by the writer and “too much” of anything is bad.

If the audience misses the point, even when it is left open for them to discover, it is a failing of the writer/filmmaker. We could say that they did “too little” to inform the audience enabling to make a decision.

I'd ask, is the sex or nudity required to tell the story? I think, usually not. I do have nudity in my novella but it's required to ensure no biological contamination makes it into the living area. Also just because the characters are nude or partially clothed doesn't mean it has to be shown on the screen. I'm fine with nudity and sex if it is integral to the story. Futurama's Fry wouldn't exist if he didn't go back in time to have sex with his grandmother, after his grandfather is killed. But that's a special case as is each story.

Emily (sorry, tagging is not working again) “Sex scenes can be great but their use has greatly impacted depictions of women and BIPOC communities.” How so?

Craig D Griffiths “I believe you should be able to walk an audience right up to the door so they are comfortable to walk through.” So, do you mean that if we are good writers, then everyone will get it? But, isn’t that creating an art of the obvious, when many great artists provide anything but?

Geoff interpretation is always going to differ, look at the christian bible, there are people making careers out of interpreting.

But we can walk people right up to a door and everyone has a different reason for walking through. We a fail when people have no idea there is a door.

For example.

The end of Joker. Was it nature of nurture. Was he always going to be the Joker, or did the system let him down? Is society responsible for what it gets.

Was he an unreliable narrator and none of it happened, it was all in his head?

Was he evil or mentally ill. Not everyone with a mental illness murder people.

The "human psyche"! Is the human race claiming, "scientifically" and "otherwise", to know it all anyway! Depending on one's perspective, of "controversy" and "divinity", "etc".,, curiosity in endeavors exists, of how to explore more into...ehm, "relevant subject matters"!

@Dan Guardino well said, Dan. What we can and cannot do is only subject to the story we are wanting to tell. You could say, let the story be your editor (or censor!) or your guide.

@Eon C Rambally it’s my firm belief that as writers we should not shy away from controversy, Eon. Change makers can’t sit comfortably in the back seat while other people drive it.

I'm mindful, Geoff Hall! You mentioned of “Change makers” and being driven! In our “modern world”, importantly and briefly for humor, I’ll recall the previous subject and advice, "adaptively" for “semiautonomous vehicles”, being of concerns, mindfully, what drives us generally! Adaptive to the immediate subject however. Ancient times, “atmosphere”, “characters” and “procreation”. Kings, Queens and Conquerors, glamour beauty and fame. Reverting! The concept of “Legacy”, was prominent. The perception and “Concept” of bearing “god children” or a “god child” was part of legacy and perception in procreation. However obviously, “characteristics” and “characters”, are already established. Therefore, a pertinent story of kings, queens’ conquerors and “procreation”, with relevant scenes for preference and maturity, is what “an audience”, may or should prefer, along with subject/concept, beauty and structure of gods. However, the “Concept”, of course remains! That being, the legacy of “god children” or a “god child”! Different perspectives do exist, as we know, but can’t ignore, omit or “delete” the before mentioned, in all good conscience! Mind depth. and deep thought, becomes the obvious subjects of concern. Controversy! Reverting to “scenes” of our “modern world”, the concept of kings, queens, conquerors, “god children” or “god child”, is in-part, replaced by the concepts, (basically for the young and young at, "heart"), “Super humans”, “Mutants”, “Meta humans”, with procreation and a "mindful audience"! Of course again, the “obvious concept”, of beauty and structure is applied, for relevant “impact”. Subjects again, for "Mind depth” and “Deep thoughts”. Mindful of morals and sensitivities!...We inevitably ask our audience, “Are you entertained”?...Concept!!!