MovieChat Forums > Trance (2013) Discussion > There should be sexual equality of nudit...

There should be sexual equality of nudity in films!

posted 11 years ago by andrewbanks
200 replies | jump to latest

In 'Trance' there is a shot of Rosario Dawson, the female lead, in which we get to see her bare breasts and her genitals.

However, the most we see in terms of male nudity in this film is a shot of James McAvoy's bare back and bare bottom.

On the grounds of both gender balance and audience satisfaction, I think we should introduce a rule in movies whereby if a female actor bares all, then a male actor should do likewise, and vice versa, of course.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Matthew 7:12)

[–] eatingpatterns 9 years ago

Actually something I always noticed about Danny Boyle movies. With the exception of Millions, there's always male genitals in his movies. Even here in trance you see shadow penis and balls and a dude get's shot in the dick.

But seriously look back at all his films. ALWAYS A PENIS AT LEAST ONCE IN HIS MOVIES.

[–] terryperring104 9 years ago

looking AT THE REPLIES YOU'VE GOT FOR THIS POST-I DONT THINK THEY'RE READING IT THE WAY IT WAS INTENDED??
oops caps on**__
ie lightheartedly. haha

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dlbearcave-2 8 years ago

I thoroughly enjoyed Ms Dawson's scene and didn't even notice James nudity at all.

~~A candy-colored clown they call the Sandman~~

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Tommen_Forever 8 years ago

I agree nudity should be more equal in films, but female nudity was important for this particular film's plot. Dawson's nudity in the movie is far more meaningful than McAvoy's would have been, and it might have undercut the significance of Rosario's reveal. The full-frontal scene where she comes out in the buff is supposed to be on the forefront of our minds, as it is on McAvoy's.

Also, the movie heavily deals with the theme of manipulation through sexual appeal, particularly female manipulation of men. Rosario Dawson uses her body to twist these two men around her little finger and Danny Boyle does the same to his viewers.

Otherwise, I'd agree with you. I don't know why everyone's so afraid of penises.

-------------
Life doesn't imitate art, it imitates bad television

[–] TheGame81 8 years ago

It's not penises that people are afraid of, it's VAGINAS. This film is a rarity to show that body part so exposed like that, and it caused so much controversy - women and gay men went livid. Even all the major Hollywood distributors wanted nothing to do with distributing this film as a wide release due to the vagina nudity, even while they happily distribute films with penises in them all the time.

Penises are shown a hell of a lot more than vaginas and the OP is an idiot (just as you are) for calling for "equal" nudity only when vaginas are shown yet never do when penises are shown. So much for equality.

[–] Tommen_Forever 8 years ago

False equivalency. There's more to the female genitalia than the vagina (which by the way is an internal organ that you're unlikely to see unless you're watching a medical program.) Vulvas, like penises, are external sex organs so it makes more sense to establish that as a comparative standard. And vulvas are shown more frequently than penises, which is why people are noticing the discrepancy.

-------------
Live Deliciously! http://bit.ly/2gD7xFP

[–] TheGame81 8 years ago

Vulvas shown more than penises? What?! Please list these films, and remember, we are talking vulva here (labia exposure) not fake pubic hair merkins which is all you see in films these days.

[–] NMMarino 8 years ago

dude, shut up and watch the movie. You want equal parts? go watch a porno.

[–] CookieMonsterV 8 years ago

No - why should we!

If penises are in mainstream films then we should also see vulvas

ITS TIME FOR THE MERKINS TO COME OFF, ITS TIME TO FREETHEVULVA!!
Please read my Bio.

[–] badspaenzer (8) 4 years ago

would be totally ok if the number of topless men equals the number of topless women