Posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
All You Will Get Is Fake Peen
It's not that I'm dying to see flaccid penises on the big screen, you understand. I like 'em fine enough, but 1) if it's a porn, I'm going to expect to see it get hard, 2) if it's a mainstream film, I'm going to expect it to be either very brief and thus unimportant or unnecessary and distracting from the plot, or 3) if I'm hunting for celebrity masturbatory fodder, more non-genital nudity would go further than the peen, which I can construct just fine in my mind. So following that logic, I really shouldn't be so upset at the fact that I won't be seeing Sean Penn or James Franco's penises in the upcoming movie "Milk".And yet I am, and I'll tell you why.
(On a side note, I am sooo excited about "Milk", the biopic about the first openly gay politican Harvey Milk. I have to admit it- I'm not that much a fan of Sean Penn. Others love him, tell me he's great, but I just don't care for his personality. But just watching the preview, I'm super-stoked, not only because it looks tremendously well-made, but because I really think it has the potential to rally people. Think about it- angry GLBTQ folks fresh off of being denied marriage + a moving portrayal of political activism + newly politically mobilized youth = a new revolution. Maybe? I don't know. But I'm still excited.)
Anyways, back on topic. When the two characters shimmy down to nothing, their penises are going to be fake prosthetics, as James Franco told Jimmy Kimmel. The question I have, though, and which doesn't seemed to be addressed in any of the other blogs posting the news, is: "Why?"
The last two big prosthetic penises I remember seeing on-screen belonged to Transamerica's Felicity Huffman and Boogie Night's Mark Walhberg- one for the actress who didn't have one herself, and one for the man needing to portray some hefty porno endowment. Both of these were exceptional cases, ones that I just don't think are present in the case of "Milk". I don't remember hearing any rumor that Milk or his lover were hung like horses, thereby requiring filmmakers to provide historical accuracy by means of plastic genitals.
Mind you, I'm not faulting Penn or Franco. Not only must it be incredibly difficult to expose yourself to millions of strangers, making yourself vulnerable through the removal of protective clothes, but it also opens up the wide and ridiculous arena of penis commentary that is sure to follow. Anybody not swinging an enormous club is immediately subject to intense discussion and criticism- all we have to do is look at what happened to poor Jude Law. One outside changing of clothes and boom! everybody is talking about how small the guy is, despite the fact that he appears more than average to moi. (And I've read countless articles in "defense" of Jude Law's penis- from claims of shrinkage in the pool, a hairy bush hiding and diminishing the goods, all the way to the hydraulics of his crouching stance). Dropping trow is a huge risk to one's career, and if I were an agent, I wouldn't be recommending my male talent to be flopping freely in front of cameras, either. And who wouldn't rather put on a fake and let it take all the heat? Penn and Franco, it turns out, are victims of our size-obsessed culture.
I'm just very tired of penis size being yakked about so much. Even after Enzyte has been sued for its false claims and lack of peer-reviewed evidence (even though c'mon, anybody who bought it was an idiot!), I still have to see Bob's damn smiling face while a cheery announcer tells me all about natural male enhancement. Guys are incredibly worried about their size and national male anxiety increases tenfold. But there's little men can do about penis size without dropping serious cash or risking lumpiness (eek!). It truly is the most ridiculous thing to worry about- it just ain't changing. Best learn to love your penis (why are women encouraged to love their bodies, but men rarely are?), learn to modify your lovemaking skills and tool box if your lady/man says size is causing you to lack, and stop stressing.
But unfortunately, watching "Milk" will make sweat break out on your forehead all over again. You might feel better, having heard Franco regale audiences with his humorous tale, as you remind yourself that they're fake, and even Sean Penn, who bedded the eminently beddable Madonna, worried about his own size. Or not. Nobody seems to be calling out the fake penises for what it says about our culture and our sexual anxieties, and I don't care if it's been talked about to death. Somebody should say it and put it on the table, at the very least.
Until then, though, expect a new trend- Judd Apatow be damned- of the dicks being larger than life, because all you're getting is fake peen.
Ah, well. Go and see "Milk" when it comes out- for the story, instead.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Porn Addiction? According To Who?
This post is largely a jump-off from this article about how the porn addiction portrayed in Kurt Cameron's new movie "Fireproof" is raising a lot of 'awareness' of such addiction.
First off, I still remember the good old days when I was in love with "Growing Pains". Mike Seaver had a best friend named 'Boner', something that amused my teenage self to no end. Or how about the episode where little Ben repeatedly called a phone sex hotline? For a girl who stumbled bewilderingly onto porn in her youth and had a lot of conflictions and guilt, that was a pretty precious episode to me, too. But now, of course, Kurt Cameron is uber-Christian . . . enough so that he refused to even kiss his onscreen costar in his new 'with God and some work, I saved my marriage' film "Fireproof". They had to bring in his real-life wife and some shadowy filming to get the scene. I try not to laugh at this fact. I try to tell myself that it's pretty amazing that he sticks to his principles that way and that he wants to remove himself from all temptation that kissing a strange woman might promote. Like I said, I try. I never said I succeeeded.
Even though it looks to be like a so-so acted, and very heavy-handed film with a big ol' "Christian" stamp all over it, it actually doesn't look half-bad, if you're really dead-set on watching a movie about relationships. My reaction is "Ugh", but then again, I've never cared for most love stories unless they seriously engage another genre and do it well. Maybe once I'm married or involved long-term, I'll suddenly garner an interest for these types of tales.
But I'm getting off-topic. What about the porn?
Ah, yes, porn. Bane of the Christians. And with a lot of good defenses of porn/erotica popping up (like 'How about the beautiful celebration of love and sex in "Song of Solomon"?' or 'What about educational movies?', etc.), about the only thing they can really latch onto is the whole "porn addiction" thing. Which, as I've stated before, is a real problem that affects a whole bunch of people and a lot of marriages. But then again, Christian perspectives are working from a viewpoint that condemns porn. Talking about the men and women who casually consume porn without becoming addicted or being adversely affected isn't part of the agenda.
It's interesting, actually . . . a little researching tells me that porn isn't the only thing breaking down the marriage in this movie, which makes me happy, at least. None of the sensationalism of, say, Lifetime's "Cyber Seduction: His Secret Life". But at the same time, Kurt Cameron's character isn't portrayed as being obsessed with porn. He watches it. He cleans out his browser's cache after watching it (although, when your wife screams and gives you a hard time about it, who wouldn't?). But I'm sorry. Addiction this isn't. And it's pretty scary that people are watching this film are coming out shaking their heads about the 'horrible addiction'.
The scariest thing, though, is the fact that, coinciding with the movie, Internetsafety.com is giving out a 30% discount on their porn-blocking software. Now, I'm totally a fan of discounts. I'm totally a fan of people realizing they have a problem and attacking it head-on. And at the same time, I'm upset that nobody is questioning the fact that porn-blocking software companies ARE companies, and they do have a vested interest in promoting the idea of porn addiction. Nobody seems to be taking a critical eye towards this fact. If hysteria and scare tactics are brought to light as tactics of the media to stay self-sustaining, then why can't we ask whether or not such filter companies might have something at stake in convincing people that porn addiction is hugely prevalent, that even occasional looking is addiction, and that it is such a strong force that nothing short of complete and total removal will help you?
Millions of Christians- men and women- watch porn or otherwise consume erotica, and feel it is consistent with their faith. Churches (dependent on tithings) and other religious anti-porn contingents (hired therapists, filtering companies, 'overcoming porn addiction with Christ' books, etc., etc.) can't exactly take that line. Where would they be, then? I'm not trying to say that Christians are motivated by money. I know a lot who aren't, at all, and who really want the best for their friends, family, and parishioners. But I think a we need to ask some serious questions here, and even more when we aren't Christian, but still are told we might suffer from porn addiction.
Who is benefiting from pathologizing you today? Who is requesting money to cure you of your diagnosed addiction, instead of telling you to practice some self-control instead of putting on blinders (which certainly don't work very well when commercials have half-naked chicks soaping up cars sexily)? Whose might like to guilt you straight to the "Porn Addiction" bookshelf at your local bookstore? Ask yourself these questions, and get back to me.
It's cool with me if you don't like porn. It's cool with me if you like porn but feel it's not so good for you and so you abstain. It's pretty dang cool with me if you like porn. But it ain't cool to let others make these decisions for you, especially when the person they're looking out for may not really be you.
Am I totally off-base here? I dunno . . . I'm tired and, for some reason, it's my third blog of the day (can we say 'no social life'?). Comments would be welcome!
First off, I still remember the good old days when I was in love with "Growing Pains". Mike Seaver had a best friend named 'Boner', something that amused my teenage self to no end. Or how about the episode where little Ben repeatedly called a phone sex hotline? For a girl who stumbled bewilderingly onto porn in her youth and had a lot of conflictions and guilt, that was a pretty precious episode to me, too. But now, of course, Kurt Cameron is uber-Christian . . . enough so that he refused to even kiss his onscreen costar in his new 'with God and some work, I saved my marriage' film "Fireproof". They had to bring in his real-life wife and some shadowy filming to get the scene. I try not to laugh at this fact. I try to tell myself that it's pretty amazing that he sticks to his principles that way and that he wants to remove himself from all temptation that kissing a strange woman might promote. Like I said, I try. I never said I succeeeded.
Even though it looks to be like a so-so acted, and very heavy-handed film with a big ol' "Christian" stamp all over it, it actually doesn't look half-bad, if you're really dead-set on watching a movie about relationships. My reaction is "Ugh", but then again, I've never cared for most love stories unless they seriously engage another genre and do it well. Maybe once I'm married or involved long-term, I'll suddenly garner an interest for these types of tales.
But I'm getting off-topic. What about the porn?
Ah, yes, porn. Bane of the Christians. And with a lot of good defenses of porn/erotica popping up (like 'How about the beautiful celebration of love and sex in "Song of Solomon"?' or 'What about educational movies?', etc.), about the only thing they can really latch onto is the whole "porn addiction" thing. Which, as I've stated before, is a real problem that affects a whole bunch of people and a lot of marriages. But then again, Christian perspectives are working from a viewpoint that condemns porn. Talking about the men and women who casually consume porn without becoming addicted or being adversely affected isn't part of the agenda.
It's interesting, actually . . . a little researching tells me that porn isn't the only thing breaking down the marriage in this movie, which makes me happy, at least. None of the sensationalism of, say, Lifetime's "Cyber Seduction: His Secret Life". But at the same time, Kurt Cameron's character isn't portrayed as being obsessed with porn. He watches it. He cleans out his browser's cache after watching it (although, when your wife screams and gives you a hard time about it, who wouldn't?). But I'm sorry. Addiction this isn't. And it's pretty scary that people are watching this film are coming out shaking their heads about the 'horrible addiction'.
The scariest thing, though, is the fact that, coinciding with the movie, Internetsafety.com is giving out a 30% discount on their porn-blocking software. Now, I'm totally a fan of discounts. I'm totally a fan of people realizing they have a problem and attacking it head-on. And at the same time, I'm upset that nobody is questioning the fact that porn-blocking software companies ARE companies, and they do have a vested interest in promoting the idea of porn addiction. Nobody seems to be taking a critical eye towards this fact. If hysteria and scare tactics are brought to light as tactics of the media to stay self-sustaining, then why can't we ask whether or not such filter companies might have something at stake in convincing people that porn addiction is hugely prevalent, that even occasional looking is addiction, and that it is such a strong force that nothing short of complete and total removal will help you?
Millions of Christians- men and women- watch porn or otherwise consume erotica, and feel it is consistent with their faith. Churches (dependent on tithings) and other religious anti-porn contingents (hired therapists, filtering companies, 'overcoming porn addiction with Christ' books, etc., etc.) can't exactly take that line. Where would they be, then? I'm not trying to say that Christians are motivated by money. I know a lot who aren't, at all, and who really want the best for their friends, family, and parishioners. But I think a we need to ask some serious questions here, and even more when we aren't Christian, but still are told we might suffer from porn addiction.
Who is benefiting from pathologizing you today? Who is requesting money to cure you of your diagnosed addiction, instead of telling you to practice some self-control instead of putting on blinders (which certainly don't work very well when commercials have half-naked chicks soaping up cars sexily)? Whose might like to guilt you straight to the "Porn Addiction" bookshelf at your local bookstore? Ask yourself these questions, and get back to me.
It's cool with me if you don't like porn. It's cool with me if you like porn but feel it's not so good for you and so you abstain. It's pretty dang cool with me if you like porn. But it ain't cool to let others make these decisions for you, especially when the person they're looking out for may not really be you.
Am I totally off-base here? I dunno . . . I'm tired and, for some reason, it's my third blog of the day (can we say 'no social life'?). Comments would be welcome!
Friday, May 2, 2008
There's Something About Her Toothy . . . Smile
Is it weird that I kind of find that age-old idea of "vagina dentata" hot? I mean, there's pussy power, and then there's pussy power where that thing can bite. Somehow it seems fun to throw the concept in boys' faces- make them shudder. And I know that I really shouldn't . . . I mean, a toothed vagina could chow down a lesbian lover's hand or your own fingers or destroy a good-quality sex toy just as much as it can a cock, and yet it still seems so wild, so primal, so good.
Well, guess what? Now there's a movie for it. And it actually looks to be pretty darn brilliant (though the previews paint it almost like a bad horror movie). I'm rather thrilled, too, that it stars John Hensley- a.k.a. Matt from "Nip/Tuck". Coolio.I can't give my impressions on it until I actually see the whole thing (and I sniff on the winds of the Internet claims of misandry and man-hating), but until now, I'm just excited that I have a new and challenging movie to look forward to . . . before someone tried to drag me to go see "Made Of Honor".
Enjoy the preview!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
