SXSW FILM FESTIVAL
SXSW Review: Forgetting Sarah Marshall
by Alex Billington
March 11, 2008
As much as I'd love to go into an in-depth discussion on the intricacies of the comedy within Forgetting Sarah Marshall, it's entirely unnecessary. It's a very funny film that follows the Judd Apatow formula to the core (including with a running time of nearly two hours) and delivers. While not the absolute funniest of Apatow's recent features, Sarah Marshall is still one of the better comedies to arrive this half of the year and that shows both the struggles of break ups and the brighter side on the other end. If you're unsure of whether Jason Segel could pull it off, I'll be the first to tell you that he can, and does.
Forgetting Sarah Marshall follows Peter Bretter (Jason Segel), a newly heartbroken ex-lover of TV celebrity Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell). When his friend suggests he visit Hawaii to ease his pain, Peter quickly discovers that Sarah has vacationed to the exact same hotel with her new boyfriend Aldous Snow (Russell Brand). Not only is it almost too much for Peter to handle, but he begins falling for the hotel's front desk hostess Racheal (Mila Kunis). From there you can only begin to imagine the excessive amount of relationship mayhem that ensues within its 111 minutes.
Jason Segel is as natural in the lead as Seth Rogen in Knocked Up, if not even more! This truly is entirely Segel's show, as I could tell that he wrote the script and developed all of the humor and jokes around his exact style. Like Superbad before it, allowing the same actors to appear in the movie they wrote is the best thing that could ever happen to a comedy. It allows Segel, who I won't claim is the most experienced actor around, to feel 100% naturally comedic in a world he built.
Sure there is full-frontal nudity (of the male kind), sure there are some extremely over-the-top comedic moments and ridiculous scenes with Russell Brand, sure there are vampire puppets, sure Jonah Hill makes a damn appearance, but oh well, the movie was still great. I will gladly add it to my collection alongside of Knocked Up, 40 Year Old Virgin, and Superbad, and pull it out whenever I need to be cheered up. Although I didn't laugh out loud as much as I did in Superbad, in the end I had a good time and that's what counts the most.
Sounds good. Want to see it bad!!!!
Ryan on Mar 11, 2008
Love Jason Segel in How I Met Your Mother (or HIMYM as its known) definitely on my must see list.
EDA on Mar 12, 2008
I was at the Showing at SXSW and it kick ass
Sky on Mar 13, 2008
I have actual love for Russell Brand.
Sally on Mar 14, 2008
Why is full male nudity allowed in R movies, while female nudity doesn't go beyond breasts, I hate Judd Appatow and if you are a straight male you won't go to see his movies, he ridiculizes the male kind and the only nudity shown in his movies is male. DO NOT SEE " Forgetting Sarah Marshall" till the son of a ....t sohws some female full frontal as well.
Gabriel on Mar 25, 2008
I agree with you Gabriel. Enough of all this male frontal nudity.
Tim on Apr 1, 2008
Well guys, now you know what it's like to (for once) have male nudity instead of the female kind that is always shown. And yes, breasts count. It's a nice change.
JEN on Apr 4, 2008
Breasts do not count you prude.
Ron99 on Sep 19, 2011
Jen, what do you mean "for once?" That is all there seems to be any more is male frontal nudity on stage, in movies, and seemingly every show on HBO. Where is the female frontal nudity ????? Maybe if movies and cable were showing the labia as often as the male gentials maybe you would feel different about breasts counting. I am not opposed to equal amounts of both but please let it be equal. And Jen, if you don't mind me asking, since women have for the longest time wanted equally, and rightly so, are females still concerned about their being an equal amount of female nudity as well. Or, since there is much more male frontal nudity than female frontal nudity, have females abandoned their conviction of equality ? I would hope not. However, I don't seem to hear much about females wanting a change. Thanks for your time Jen.
Tim on Apr 4, 2008
I would love for Tim to do a list of " all the male nudity around" there might be a little more visible male nudity later, but that does n it change the years and years of endless female nudity. I am with you Jen pablo
Pablo on Apr 7, 2008
I would like Tim to make that list too, because until recently I don't recall much male nudity. I'd say this is one way of making things equal; one part of women are exposed and now one part of men are too. Why should it matter which part? I think the only reason some may think breasts do not count is because movies showing them have been around for a long time. For many, they are just seen as normal movie scenes. I'm sure that at the beginning this was a huge deal too, just like the male frontals are now. Some women feel insecure, uncomfortable, etc... with those scenes, and maybe now men will understand why. Thanks Pablo -Jen
JEN on Apr 7, 2008
So Jen, let me ask: Would you still feel comfortable saying that if women were exposing their labia and men just their behinds that it wouldn't make any difference which part is exposed ? I know I don't think that it would be equal, and some how I don't think you would feel that way either. I guess my question is where are all the females frontals ????? If you truly want to be equal then it is only fair Jen. Or, is it like I suggested in my earlier comment, that now that women have the advantage with only male frontal nudity are you still interested in equality with wanting more female frontal nudity or have women turned a deft ear and don't care about equality now that they are in the better position ? I would feel very disappointed to know that is the case. I have always respected women and if my girl friend did not feel comfortable about seeing movies that contained female nudity we wouldn't go. Yes, women have shown more nudity over the years but as they say two wrongs don't make a right. I will be looking forward to hearing from you again Jen.
Tim on Apr 8, 2008
Sorry, Pablo and Jen, almost forgot about your list. First, let me say that I agree that over the years there has ben more female nudity than male nudity. However, for the longest time movies were showing women's breats and guy's bare behinds. However, I am talkng about frontal nudity in these days. As for a list, all you need to do is type in male frontal nudity in movies and plays and you will see the great abundance of shows. As for cable, I will name a few. First there is "Oz" in which almost every show there were male gentials seen and even one show where a man was urinating. (Not for me and no need for equality by women in that regards. In fact, the entire thing isn't needed as far as I am concerned.) Then there is "Rome." They had several shows with male gentials and one which showed a woman's pubic hair. Sorry, but public hair and gentials are not equal in my opinion. Let's not forget about "Queer as Folk" and "Tell me You Love Me." And I guess my latest disappointment was in the documentary about John Adams. How pathetic !!!!! There are more but that's all presently recall. Also, what about only male nudity in cartoons ???? OK, lol, let's not even go there for now. Now Pablo and Jen let me give a challenge. What movies or shows exhibit women's gentials in mainstream movies or on an HBO series ?
Tim on Apr 8, 2008
I completely agree with Tim.
Mark on Apr 9, 2008
Female nudity has been over played in movies since the 1960s, go see walk hard, american pie, or the bank job, the shining has full frontal female nudity as well. Almost all female nudity in movies is gratuitous nudity, it is just meant to attract men (and sometimes women) to make money, and all this nudity does, is continue to supress women's social status below men's, we will continued to be regarded as simply sexual objects and therefore treated differently then men until this over-objectification of women ends or there is an equall balance of it between men and women. Women only make 77 cents, on average for every dollar a man makes, so unless you are willing to make up the difference I would quit your complaining about having to see another human being with the same genitalia as you. P.S. Your comment is also offensive to homosexuals, it assumes that you have to be a homosexual to see movies like this and it also assumes that that is all they are interested in.
Hayley on Apr 10, 2008
You have to be kidding Haley. First, you are talking about social issues with the money situation and I agree in places where that happens. I think both men and women should be equal in all aspects. Fortunately, I have not been in a situation where there is a pay difference. It isn't right and needs to be changed. That is why I feel that there is only male frontal nudity and no female frontal nudity. If you want equally why aren't you supporting that position ??? And funny, you only mentioned that female nudity was gratuitous. You mean you don't feel the same about male nudity ??? To be honest, they have made many pictures in the past with no nudity and they could do the same today. You could still get your point across without coming out and showing nudity. However, that is not the case. So, even though I support your concern for women in the work force, I wonder why you feel you can not support this issue about a dominance of male frontal nudity in movies, plays, and so many HBO new series. This was a question I raised in an earlier comment. Now that females have the upper hand in nudity do they care about the men ? I guess not. Very dissappointing. Without that how can you actually want equally if you are not willing to demand that for others as well ?? And, talking about catching up for an injustice in the past has no signifigance. In America there was a time whre we had slavery and women didn't have the right to vote. Once that was accomplished we didn't enslave those that had slaves or take away the right to vote for men to "catch up" for an injustice. It would certainly be nice to have you support in this nudity equally. Please give it some thought. Maybe with both men and women working together in all areas we may someday get these things corrected.
Tim on Apr 10, 2008
P.S. Haley: As far as complaining, look who is calling the kettle black. You are complaining about the work force. And, would you enjoy seeing women's genitals on screen without an equal amount of male genitals ????? As far as the homosexuals, I have made no comment about them at all.
Tim on Apr 10, 2008
One last thing Haley. I do believe that a woman's opinion and contributions are just as valuable as a man's. So, if you have a web site or other address that supports an injustice in the work place please let me know. I will show my support by contacting the agency or group and adding my name to a petition or writing a letter to a company, etc. Thanks
Tim on Apr 10, 2008
This is one of the dumbest arguments Ive ever seen. If you wanna see labia for the sake of labia then go watch porn. No one finds a shot of a vagina shocking or funny. Men just find it sexually exiting. This is stupid. Put it in perspective. Its a comedy. Vaginas arent very funny because men dont laugh when they see one. they leer. I'm a man.
Staccat0 on Apr 10, 2008
My point is a simple one. Enough of all this male frontal nudity !!!!!!!!!! Where is the female frontal nudity ?????? I don't find it funny.
Tim on Apr 11, 2008
I don't know what the big deal with the nudity. So what!
Jake on Apr 11, 2008
Alex, I know there is plenty of female nudity in porno. My point is there is not any female genitals exposed in mainstream movies. plays, or on new HBO series. My question is why ??????? Why are we flooded with all this male frontal nudity without and equal amount of female nudity ?
Tim on Apr 11, 2008
Well stated Mark !!!!!!
Tim on Apr 11, 2008
Because nowadays it is ok to bash and exploit white men. We have no voice. Well I guess this whole nudity issue regarding the different treatment of men's and women's genitals is completely representative of how men and women are treated differently by today's society regarding lots of issues. And women completely ignore the differences when it suits them, but are quick to highlight equality issues which DO affect them. Note that I happened to agree with some of the posters when they pointed out that programmes with vaginas had been shown. That was a fact and I don't argue with facts. Over the past 5 or so years we have endured a male / female genitalia ratio of about 150:1 in movies and on tv. And THAT smacks of blatant in your face sexism that makes a statement to everyone that we should be more respectful of women's private parts but that it acceptable to strip men of their dignity and leave them with nothing. I guess we are living through an era where 'anything goes' as far as the male is concerned, but the feminists ignore these things in a blissfully ignorant way, completely unaware that they are setting the standards for how the female will be depicted and viewed in our next generation. I think that TV is definitely at least partly to blame for drumming negative ideas into the minds of the young and portraying the sexes in different ways. I think we should straighten up the sexist issues and bring the sexes into line. Men and women are equal. They feel the same pain, both physically and emotionally. They both work hard bringing up their children and serving the community. They need each other, and yet there has been a bitter hatred brewing amongst feminists who have not yet finished with their man-bashing agenda. Instead of being happy with what they have, they rant on about the fact that they want the same salary as a man (who doesn't have a chance in hell of staying at home to look after the kids in the vast majority of cases) and yet still want to have babies while getting to stay at home (possibly working part time) for months and years on end looking after them while they grow up. Yet the feminists who came up with this false statistics fail to point out that the 77 cents women earn on the dollar take into account much more missed time for sick days, maternity leave and other factors. The fail to mention the study showed women work LESS and thus men earn more money per year than a woman. The media constantly drum it into everyone's heads that women are having a bad time and that there are loads of sexist issues which need addressing on behalf of women while male bashing is seen as funny and cool yet say one thing about a woman and it makes headlines. How else can you explain awarding 11 million dollars to the woman who accused Isiah Thomas of a sexual harassment. Would a man receive 11 million for unwanted sexual advances. Not a chance, in fact he would be laughed at if he sued a woman for that. Honestly, for every one valid point a feminist raises, I can think of 50 counter-arguments. It's just that people are so overwhelmed by TV and media indoctrination they fail to see the true picture of what is unfolding. I would like to see some program makers start focusing on what I believe is a gaping hole in the market. We've seen virtually every aspect of feminist support broadcast on TV, radio and general media. I have rarely heard the voice of male groups who can see things from a different perspective. The program would have an abundance of material from which it could choose, from nudity through health support, suicide and education and on to shocking facts completely overlooked by the public at present. They could also focus on the general depiction of men in the media eg. adverts and soaps and highlight some clear facts regarding domestic violence and how one-sided the messages are conveyed to the public. We have seen program based on animal cruelty, racism, female equality, concerns for children, the aged, the disabled.... etc. etc. But as yet there has been virtually no recognition amongst program makers regarding the concerns surrounding your average white male. It's about time we had a few and women stopped the hatred and vendettas toward males.
Mark on Apr 11, 2008
As for your list Jen and Pablo, here it is: 28 Days Later, Tell Me You Love ME, Weeds, OZ, Queer as Folk, Rome, Shadowboxer, Into the Wild, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay, The Dreamers, Bully, Alexander, American History X, Kinsey, Sideways, Borat, Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, Hostel part 2, All of the Jackass movies, The Last King of Scotland, Eastern Promises, Deadwood, Lucky Louie, Brokeback Mountain, Get Rich or Die Tryin, Any Given Sunday, American Psycho, Boogie Nights, Wild Things and there are plenty more. Lets see if you can come up with half as many that show a vagina. These are all mainstream shows or movies and some show a penis very graphically. Jen and Pablo, please tell me you are smarter and not so ignorant to say that a breast is the same is a vagina. Why do so many women flash their breasts, show cleavage to turn men on, nurse in public occasionally, and many woman want the right to go topless in public. A womens chest is an attractive part of a womans body much like women find a man's chest attractive. Please compare apples to apples. Enough with your vengeance. Haley, men are exploited just as much as women. Its just not talked about. Look at soap operas, womens magazines and other media that exploits men. Why is it ok to talk graphically about the male anatomy in movies and even on broadcast tv. Most foul language in movies consists of terms for male genitals and rarely female. What if that was reversed? What if the scene in the Simpsons was reversed and that was Lisa's vagina being showed. Would never pass and would cause an outrage. StaccatO- I don't find it funny. I find it uncomfortable and exploitive. Maybe your use to women finding your penis funny to look at.
Mark on Apr 11, 2008
Alex, I am with you. Maybe the time has come for men to stand up and refuse to be put to this double standard. It seems very interesting to me that all of these women who have cried over the years for equality are at this point no where to be found in a man's case for equality. If you know of any group or organization that men can start to contact and express their opinion I would like to know. Thanks.
Tim on Apr 13, 2008
It's the same reason Imus was fired for making a joke about the Rutger's basketball team, which ironically is his job to be controversial and make jokes. Say something about a female, especially a black female and you will lose your job. Everyone attacked the Duke lacrosse players and they were expelled from school, the lacrosse team was suspended, the male coach was fired, and it was all because 2 black female strippers lied and made up the entire story about being raped. Innocent until proven guilty, unless your a white male accused by a female. On another point, why is it ok that the company, run by women, make shirts that say BOYS ARE STUPID, I HATE BOYS, BOYS ARE DUMB: THROW ROCKS AT THEM. I can't figure out for the life of me why there is no outrage over these shirts and why they are acceptable. That would never be the case if the situation was reversed. Female sports reporters are allowed in male locker rooms with completely naked men, yet male reporters are not allowed in female locker rooms until the women are fully dressed. Women feel they are entitled to everything and there is no privacy for men. Every male only social club is constantly attacked and women try to gain membership because they feel they are being discriminated against, yet it is totally acceptable for all womens clubs. They get custody of the children, any property, and grossly unfair amounts of monetary support. Men are constantly objectified in daytime and nighttime soap operas and shows like Sex and the City. But that is all ok. I am sick of the double standards and it is partly because men have no spine and are afraid of a backlash if they say something. These men make me sick and they should be embarrassed to be men, because it is only going to affect our young boys in the future.
Alex on Apr 13, 2008
I agree with the fact that female frontal nudity is far and few in mainstream movies, especially in this day and age. Very rarely do you hear as often the slang words of female anatomy compared to male anatomy even on regular T.V. shows. Here something to think about....years ago the female frontal nudity only consisted of the breasts. Later it became a few quick peeks at the full frontal female body. Mind you with hair on the female genitals which act as a PATCH as far as I am concered. Now that we have entered into the 21st century we STILL see this same patch (hair) on the female genitals in mainstream movies. Again a patch...what are you looking at. Men do not have this advantage so you see the real deal flesh. My point is and I speak from experience that many if not over 85% + of women shave their vulva and leave a small patch (mohawk) at the top of the pubic bone. They do this not only for the fad of the times but for a cleaner smoother and non-smelling reason. YET in any mainstream movie I have yet to see a full frontal let alone close up (compared to what they show on male frontal nudity today on mainstream) of a shaved meaty vagina. God let alone what would happen if a well endowed women had a large clitoris protruding between her vulva for all viewers to see if even a mere millisecond! The women of this country would go ballistic! But its ok for all the male frontal cloe-up huh!!?? I am sorry I am not a breat man they do nothing for me and even in movies to me it's minor nothing compared to when the lower genitals are exposed. You can very rarely today even see a female buttocks for a millisecond in mainstream movies anymore. The men of this country should complain and cry and boycott this overly amount of male nudity in the movies to the Board that passes and ok's what can be seen in a movie before it is released. I am sure many women in the past have complained and maybe this is why the lack of female frontal nudity close up does not happen as often. Unless the producers of these movies today are swinging the other way gay maybe. My point. Love to see a 3 or 4 second scene in a movie where a well endowed woman unzips her pants and pulls out her 3 inch clitoris to show the viewers and puts it back in like the male scene in Boogie Night. I'll bet holy hell would take place with the female community on that! But its ok the other way with a male doing it isn't? Where the appalling voices from females on this. You want your cake and eat to, or can I say you want your "pie" and eat it too. Then there's the masterbation scenes. Jeeze let me tell you something every women I have met does it and in the movies it always the guys they depict. Like women are goody goodies. Bunch a bull. If they do show it for a female it's in a romantic scene bathtub with 6 foot bubbles in the tub. Bunch of bull. I know as a male I'm tired of being degraded in the mainstream movies. Don
Don on Apr 14, 2008
Sorry for my spelling errors in my last comment I wrote. When I get upset my typing seems to have a mind of it's own. Don
Don on Apr 14, 2008
I agree with you Don. I would also like to make my voice heard on this issue with those that control things. It has been very interesting that not one female, in this forum, has come forth in support of the male cause.
Tim on Apr 14, 2008
Has anyone here seen Code 46? Samantha Morton shows full frontal nudity, no pubic hair anywhere in sight.
Sharon on Apr 15, 2008
Thanks Sharon, but no, I am not aware of the movie.
Tim on Apr 15, 2008
Wow, and I thought I was the only man concerned about this. I was watching a TV show the other day (not cable), and I was with my 13 year old niece and her friends. I won't mention the program, but this came on before 9pm. Anyway, during this ONE program, the words balls and woody were mentioned, and two men urinating with a female present in the bathroom was a centerpiece of a scene. I was very embarrassed for myself and my nieces. Today, men have no value. It's not just white men, black men have been exploited for their nudity (Any Given Sunday). The male nudity in these films have no impact on the story; it's just there for the benefit of heterosexual women and gay men. Men have absolutely no privacy when it comes to their bodies, and to complain about it gives you a sense that you are being effeminate, in that real men shouldn't have feelings about such things. I am a real man, and I'm damn mad about this. Remember the clear testicle shot in Scary Movie? Why don't we see clear shots shots of vaginas? Because women have complained enough to make that a stigma, while men don't complain. How many times to you hear slang terms for male genetalia? Now, sans breasts, how many times do you hear it for female genetalia? The only way we can stop this is for men to start a social movement and do what women have done; make it truly taboo to show the male penis/testes. Fat chance of that happening.
Troy on Apr 18, 2008
One last thing, any other guys up for a boycott of this movie (not that any guy would want to see this movie anyway)? Put the word out as to why.
Troy on Apr 18, 2008
Thanks Troy. I think what men need is a group or organization that we can go to to express our concerns. If you know of one please let us know. Thanks
Tim on Apr 18, 2008
It's only going to get much, much worse because now these films have set a precedence and we will unfortunately be seeing much more male full frontal nudity. We need to write the studios and the MPAA and let them know how we feel and why this is blatant inequality despite the illogical arguments of women. Speaking about slang terms for male genitals being allowed on broadcast, did you know that the executives at ABC wouldn't even allow Grey's Anatomy to use the word vagina because they feared a backlash from women's groups. Men are having everything taken from them and we have no voice. We are losing jobs because of affirmative action, we are losing our dignity, and women have absolutely no respect for men unless men make more money than them and then they have a financial use for us. Our young boys are the ones who are going to really suffer as it is just going to get worse. I was on a site called the Huffington post and there was a vulgar article from a women who wrote about this movie and that it is about time men showed everything because women have always showed their breasts, only she used extremely vulgar terms for male genitals throughout her article. People who agreed with her were able to comment with the same vulgarity. However, my comment was denied by the site because I disagreed with her and used 1 slang term ( The P word) for the female genitals. They said I used foul language, but it was perfectly ok for everyone else, including the author of the article, as long as you used vulgar language for the male genitals. That is so typical of the way women act these days. Men with no spine will learn the hard way.
Mark on Apr 18, 2008
go get em guys! your dollars speak best. i use screenit.com to give me all the info re who why and how much nudity so i can avoid the malemongers agendas and keep my cash out of their pockets!
tim2 on Apr 20, 2008
I think there are alot more of us out there that feel like you do. I was with my wife's 18 year old daughter when I went to watch Hostel II. I did not study up on the movie ahead of time as I should have. They not only show a nude male model with full frontal and proceed to show only a portion of the female model's breast, the actress graphically cuts off a man's penis (completely shown on screen in every detail) because he used the C word. They glorified it as he screamed in agony with blood spurting everywhere as she tossed his penis into the dogs mouth. Believe it or not, the reviews were fair to good for this movie, actually better then movies like Norbit. I was appalled, as should be every woman and man out there. I would never condone or support a movie that mutilates a woman like this and glorifies it on screen. My daughter's 10 year old friend boasted of watching this movie. There would be public outrage if this type of mutilation was done to women's genitals (clit) in such grusome detail on the mainscreen and then given a 3/5 stars by critics such as Elizabeth Weitzman of New York Daily News (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hostel_2/?critic=creamcrop). They followed this movie up with the movie Teeth with lots of male frontal nudity prior to the lady's vagina (which they refused to show even though this was the center of the movie)removing their genitals. Lisa Swartzbaum of Entertainment Weekly also gave it a B+ (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20172133,00.html). Talk about a double standard. What actually constitutes NC17 anymore. It is R rated if the penis is shown and mutilated in every detail but NC 17 if a real vagina is shown. I was reading a review about Harold and Kumar opening this weekend. Apparently there is frontal male nudity in this movie also, not just female. Neil Patrick Harris who plays in the movie made the following quote: "… You’re not allowed to show true vagina. But you can show a fake vagina on top of a true vagina- http://www.sacurrent.com/film/story.asp?id=68582 . Apparently this is how they avoided the NC17 rating. I highly doubt they put a fake penis on Segel in Forgetting Sarah Marshall nor did they edit the actual slap of his penis against his hips. There have been two mainstrem movies that apparently showed a close up of a true vagina (Basic Instict (possibly) and Babel). Maybe you can find more but I also challenge all of the female critics out there to make a list of films that actually show labia and not hair (and no Knocked up doesn't count as it was a prosthetic vagina also). Women just as well as men can rent porn if they want to see a penis, or, get the playboy channel as it has alot of penis on it also. However, our children are able to get into these movie theaters and watch these movies, especially if they work there or have someone buy them the tickets and it is hard as a parent to control this. This male hatred and double standard is only going to breed anger in boys that are growing up now and will not benefit our society. I still remember how angry I was when I first saw Porkys 2 in the early 80s and it was chuck full of full frontal male nudity and no female frontal (except breast if you actually call that nudity which most women do). Even the original Porky's was balanced with male frontal and some female frontal (pubic hair) nudity. And yes, I did not finish watching John Adams because of the frontal nude shot of the guy that they proceeded to tar and feather in all of his naked agony. It was rated TV14 of all things. I let my 9 year old daughter watch it with me because once again because I thought it would be educational. I did not expect this type of graphic nudity and utter disrespect of men from a TV-14 rating, but afterall it was HBO. She was horrified and so I have dumped HBO and will stick with Showtime just as I refuse to watch Nip and Tuck and FX at that. My Money is just as powerful as anyone elses and if enough people would unite and boycott these movies, it would stop. I am sure every woman reading this is appalled that men would react like this. But if this country is to make it, we have got to unite. I read a blog by a female that said she would not go to a movie with her boyfriend that showed female nudity because it made her uncomfortable. Yet she was completely ok with going to see Sarah Marshall with him. Talk about double standard. If you feel uncomfortable about female nudity, what makes you think we don't also feel uncomfortable with the penis flapping all over the screen knowing that is meant to punish men, not just shock women. As a heterosexual male, I love the female form and am not a big fan of seeing nude men but don't mind it if there are nude women also. Women are pleasing to look at and not just from a sexual standpoint. Women are beautiful. I also like watching movies with my wife when they are balanced as it is arousing, not angering. Unfortunately it looks as though Sarah Marshall will make money ($17 Million pulled in this weekend with a cost of $30 million to make). However, boycott the upcoming Muppet movie as it is made by the same director (Judd Apatow) who has no business making this kind of family movie after Sarah Marshall. Also, boycott Segel and Eli Roth (produced Hostel2) . Ironically, I actually check out every movie prior to seeing it at Kids In Mind Movie Ratings as it has some of the best reviews of movies concerning nudity (http://www.kids-in-mind.com/), violence and profanity. If it has male full frontal nudity, I boycott it. I don't mind those that have equal distribution of male and female nudity and so I will probobly go see Harold and Kumar just to support this even knowing that the vagina shot is fake Finally, I do not care if anyone responds to my opinion as it is that, AN OPINION and I am allowed to have it.
mark2 on Apr 21, 2008
There are a few more movies coming out this summer with graphic male full frontal nudity, including the Sex and the City movie. Thats all women are talking about with the Sex and the City movie is that they are hoping there is a lot of full frontal nudity and they are so glad it is rated R with the graphic nudity. This is getting to be such a joke. I am boycotting movies all together until they can get their act together. Write the MPAA and the studios and tell them how you feel. Thats the only way things get done. I just watched Two and a half Men and Rules of Engagement and the graphic language they use for the male genitals is appalling. My sons mother allows him to watch those shows and he has stared to talk just like them. He is 7 years old. I also just read that a mother brought their young grade school children to the Forgetting Sarah Marshall movie. How can a movie theater allow this and what is wrong with parents. There are also a lot of mothers who said they will allow their underage daughters to see the Sex and the City movie even if they need to buy them the tickets. Our society is going downhill very fast.
alex on Apr 21, 2008
Alex Bliington: Since you write columns on movies isn't it about time that someone writes a column on the double standard to men which is now present in movies, plays, cartoons, and HBO ? I believe you will find many men who will agree with such and some women who truly believe in equality. Yes, men are looking for equality in nudity. They want to see as much female frontal nudity as male frontal nudity. Maybe someone responsible for programming will start to listen and begin to care. However, we need a starting place. Thanks
Tim on Apr 22, 2008
I agree Mark2. It is getting far worse though.
alex on Apr 27, 2008
Myth #1: In violent heterosexual relationships, the aggressor is almost always the man, and the victim is almost always the woman. Serious research on domestic violence overwhelmingly asserts that domestic assault is committed by both men and women and that, by using weapons and the element of surprise, women are abusing their male partners as often as vice versa. Only about 1/4 of violent heterosexual relationships fit the feminist "man/aggressor, woman/victim" model--about the same percentage as fit the "woman/aggressor, man/victim" model. Roughly half of all violent heterosexual relationships are mutually abusive, and domestic violence rates between men and women are comparable from small violence to serious violence, including murder. The mutual nature of domestic violence has been attested to in voluminous research. For example, veteran domestic violence researchers Richard Gelles, Murray Straus, and Susan Steinmetz, who were once hailed by the women's movement for their pioneering work on violence against women, were initially surprised to find equal levels of male and female violence. Since then their studies have confirmed it repeatedly. Cal State Long Beach professor Martin Fiebert compiled and summarized 117 different studies with over 72,000 respondents which found that women initiated domestic violence as often as or more often than men. Studies conducted by the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire in 1975, 1985, and 1992 found that abuse rates were equal between husbands and wives and that abuse of wives by husbands is decreasing, while abuse of husbands by wives is increasing. Studies by researchers R.I. McNeeley and Coramae Richey Mann show that women are much more likely than men to use weapons and the element of surprise. These weapons often include guns, knives, boiling water, bricks, fireplace pokers and baseball bats. Myth # 2: When women are violent, it is usually in self-defense. As a general rule, neither men's nor women's violence is usually committed in self-defense. According to Straus, for example, roughly 10 percent of women and 15 percent of men perpetuate partner abuse in self-defense. Dr. David Fontes, author of Violent Touch: Breaking Through the Stereotype, and the director of Stop Abuse for Everyone (SAFE), has also found that only a small percentage of female abusers are acting in self-defense. Myth #3: Domestic violence is committed almost entirely by men, and lesbian relationships are gentler and provide women a refuge from male patriarchal dominance and violence. Actually, the evidence is virtually undisputed that domestic violence is at least as common in lesbian relationships as it is in heterosexual ones. For example, a 1997 survey of 1,099 lesbians found that 52% of the respondents had been abused by a female lover or partner and that 30% admitted having abused a female lover or partner. Of those who had been victims of abuse, more than half (51.5%) reported that they also had been abusive toward their partners. According to St. Joseph's University sociology professor Claire Renzetti, lesbian batterers "display a terrifying ingenuity in their selection of abuse tactics, frequently tailoring the abuse to the specific vulnerabilities of their partners" (Violent Betrayal: Partner Abuse in Lesbian Relationships). To their credit, even the UCLA Clothesline Project, whose website and public materials contain scores of discredited lies about men and domestic violence, cites Renzetti's research findings that "Violence in gay/lesbian relationships occur at about the same frequency as violence in heterosexual relationships." Over the past 30 years feminists have often played an admirable role in pushing for societal acceptance for gays and lesbians. However, feminists have shamefully turned their backs on battered lesbians, and have stifled the attempts of activists to address lesbian domestic violence. Myth #4: Mothers are children's "first line of defense" against child abuse. In reality it is mothers, not fathers, who commit the overwhelming majority of child abuse, neglect, and parental murder. According to the US Department of Justice, 70% of confirmed cases of child abuse and 65% of parental murders of children are committed by mothers, not fathers. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, adjusting for the greater number of single mothers, a custodial mother is five times as likely to murder her own children as a custodial father is. A study of confirmed child abuse cases published in the Journal of Child Abuse and Neglect found that mothers abuse their children two and a half times as often as fathers. The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (1996) found that children are 88% more likely to be seriously injured from abuse or neglect by their mothers than by their fathers. Twenty-five years ago feminists played a heroic role in advocating for abused women and publicizing the despicable crime of wife-beating. Today, unfortunately, their refusal to acknowledge violence by women stands in the way of eliminating domestic violence for everyone--not only women, but men and children as well. This is what men have to deal with from feminists today and why women hat men so much. The feminists have ruined male-female relationships.
alex on Apr 27, 2008
Male genitals mean power to a man. Men seek power naturally because we are seeking to be financial providers to our wives and children and protect them. It is the role of the male to do this, which is why we are masculine. We have roles that we were born to do. Men aren't taught these things, they come naturally to us. By exposing the penis we are being emasculated for the feminist agenda. Men do not know their roles anymore. At the same time women are naturally caregivers; mothers and wives. They seek to nurture and care for their husbands and children. Feminists are teaching females of today that they need to be more like men. They are also teaching women to be sexually empowered. Females today are extremely sexual promiscuous, piggish I would say, and they swear more often than men do now and have many, many sexual partners. Women are trying to become what they think men are. Is it any wonder why marriages are failing and there are less and less marriages and the family is being torn apart. Men and women don't know their roles anymore. It is a shame that feminism has ruined the family all for their agenda. How about women of today start acting with some class and men get a spine and be men again. Women need to stop the male bashing, it has gone too far. You have the right to vote, get an education, and have a career now. Nobody is going to take that away. Now all of a sudden feminists have taught women they don't need men and men are no good. Thats what most women believe today. I hear it far too much. This decline of family values just continues on a downward spiral. Women have no respect for men at all. It is partly due to movies like Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Sure on the surface it may even be a funny movie. However, by showing a male so graphically, it is really emasculating men, objectifying men, and men don't have the power we once had. We are lost basically, because we don't know our role anymore and so are women. This leaves society lost and it's why the gender wars will get much worse. Men need to do something about it. Write the MPAA and the studios who produce these movies.
Alex on Apr 27, 2008
I thought this article was interesting, if not off point a little: The feminist movement was an ideal platform on which to launch such attacks against men. These attacks began in earnest in the 1970`s and the women's movement, many men unwittingly provided the means, money and platform those with darker motives needed. A profound hatred of men was sown into women under cover of an idea of male patriarchy ruining their lives. Men suddenly and unexpectedly found themselves reeling from attacks on all sides. Attacks like those reproduced below became common place and engendered in the men who read them a sense of profoundly deep shock and shame. "I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which a man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it." -- Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan "All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French, Author, "The Women's Room" "I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, MS. Magazine Editor "Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin "And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual [male ED], it may be mainly a quantitative difference." -- Susan Griffin "Rape: The All-American Crime" "The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist" [For anti feminist lead anti revolutionary. ED] -- Ti-Grace Atkinson "Amazon Odyssey" (p. 86) By endless statements such as these many men were taught to hate themselves and many women were taught to hate men. Homosexuality became something to be promoted and heterosexuality became something to be afraid of. Single motherhood was elevated to the status of desirability. Fathers were systematically removed from contact with their children. Divorce was made so easy it could be entered into for the most minor of family disagreements. Religious values were undermined. Pornography was pumped into millions of homes through the mediums of television and film. False statistics on rape, sexual abuse, domestic violence and countless other anti male issues were force fed to a blind media hungry for sensationalistic stories. [See the great Super bowl Sunday Scam. ED. Here is the link: http://www.batteredmen.com/suprmyth.htm The result of this brainwashing has been to destroy the family. Also, it has so demoralized the male that few men feel able to fight back and many more feel it would be "anti woman" to fight back. Men have been the target of this "defamation" for forty years and very effective it has been too! It is time for men to shake off the false guilt laid upon them and to remember that without our efforts, our genius, our organizational skills, our sweat and our blood there would be no civilization at all. As men we have much to be proud of. As men, very few of us have woken in the morning with the intention of oppressing anyone, let alone women. As men, we have laid down our lives in countless wars to protect what the communist inspired radical feminist movement claim we have oppressed. As men we have raised our sons to take care of women and not brutalize them. As men we have sacrificed our lives by remaining on sinking vessels at sea so that women and children could flee to safety in the lifeboats. As men, we are a noble, proud, and fierce defender of the family and all we love and hold dear. Yet, as men, we are seeing our families destroyed by left wing politicians and radical feminist propaganda that is twisting our values, self beliefs and those of our female wives and partners into a parody of the truth. Our children are suffering as a result. It is time to remember those positive attributes of our manhood, shake off the guilt of 40 years of brainwashing, stand up, fight back and be men! Now you know why the men's movement across the world are so angry. Don't just accept everything the government controlled press say to you. Think for yourself!
Jeff P. on Apr 27, 2008
Tim, you have too much time on your hands! I saw similar comments on another page haha
Christy on Apr 30, 2008
Christy, when there is an injustice you need to make time so people become aware.
Tim on May 1, 2008
I get so annoyed by the "never showing male nudity on tv or movies" whine. First off most the closely related counterpart to a male penis is the female vagina not the female breasts, so for a male to go standing around full frontal is not the same as a female standing around full frontal, to be closer to the truth a woman would have to be legs open. So tell me how many tv series or movies have you seen where a woman is truely exposing her vagina with legs open, because that is the true parallel to a man standing around with his penis out, not a woman with legs clamped shut and breasts exposed. Get it right please.
johnsmith on May 4, 2008
Women have absolutely NO logic!
alex on May 22, 2008
There is blatant bias in Hollywood and film. The amazing thing is most feminist will argue that women are the objectified gender when the opposite is true. Inequality is easily seen. Although I could go into a tirade about how much full-frontal male exposure is present on virtually every HBO and discuss the way male rear exposure is acceptable on comedy central, MTV, FX channel, and many more; the point is better illustrated by a simple litmus test for comparison – replace the male lead with a female lead and logically conclude whether such a visual would then be accepted. Examine the recent films of Hostel 2, Walk Hard, and Eastern Promises. Hostel 2 shows, in graphic detail, the male member being severed and fed to a dog. What if the gender were reversed here and it were graphic female mutilation? There would be a definite outcry. Then there is the prolonged scene of male frontal exposure in Walk Hard for “comedic” effect. What if it were graphic exposure of a female sitting down on full display? Would that be allowed? Finally, consider Eastern Promises with a graphic steam sauna fight, exposing the male lead to an extent that nothing is left to the imagination, but deemed acceptable for its “dramatic effect”. Can anyone imagine if that scene were changed with a woman spin-kicking and sprawled about? The movie would be considered exploitive trash. Replacing the man in each of these roles with a woman allows the casual viewer to see just how blatant and gratuitous these scenes are. The contrast is laughable. These types of depictions should not be allowed at all. In fact, they are not allowed by the MPAA when the graphic depiction concerns a women. A little art film from Britain came out awhile back about an artist that could freeze time and used this ability to disrobe the women who were shopping at his grocery store in order to draw them. It was quite popular at Cannes and Toronto Film festival and was a hit with the critics. The buzz led to its transformation into a full length feature film called Cashback. In order to be released with an R rating, the female figures were digitally altered to cover some of the more revealing areas. Having watched the original film short, the amount of female flesh on display was far less than that currently shown by men in current film and cable television. Why was the prominent display of the men in the above listed films allowed while the women’s privacy was kept sacrosanct? This discussion is relevant because it shows, again, how women are protected and respected while men are flaunted. Keep it analogous; women enjoy a nice looking male chest as much as men enjoy a nice looking female chest. Please do not compare a female upper body to a man’s lower. Neither genders genitalia should be shown, but if it is, it should be equal. Bare flesh always leads to vibrant discussion, but more disturbing than the disproportionate amount of male flesh displayed on cable and movies is the general depiction of men on television. On the average sitcom, take a look at the male figures and compare them to their female counterparts. How often is the man a bumbling, unintelligent buffoon who requires the saving grace of his well rounded wife in order to make it through the episode? Now imagine we had a show where the man knew what was best and the woman was a moron. Imagine the feminist outcry! Yet, it is perfectly acceptable for male bashing to occur without so much as a batted eyelash - it is business as usual. Be careful of what this may teach the future generations of men in our society.
CK on Jun 4, 2008
I agree with Tim, Alex, and the other men who have commented here. I'm also disgusted by the sexist double-standard when it comes to showing female nudity and appalled at the audacity of feminists who try equate breasts with penises. Showing a breast is NOT equivelant to showing a penis. If one is going to make comparisons of nudity for "equality" purposes, then we must compare apples to apples. Breasts, like buttocks, are non-genital nudity. There is a big difference between showing non-genital nudity and genital nudity. Non-genital nudity is clearly understood by society to be less extreme and less explicit than genital nudity. In fact, breasts are not even deemed to be nudity in many European countries and parts of Canada; women are allowed to go topless on the beach or in public parks. Non-genital nudity is far less revealing and offensive than genital nudity. In the past, that's about all you could see of either gender in mainstream film. You could see a man's bare ass or a woman's bare breasts; it was equal. For every instance where some dumb feminist cries about a woman's breasts being shown, I can point out an instance of a man's bare buttocks being revealed. Unfortunately, the feminists have big mouths and constantly complain and many of them are journalists. They deemed female nudity to be "exploitaive" and politically incorrect. Of course, they never complained about the male nudity. Instead, these hypocrites applauded frontal male nudity and claim that this is some sort of victory for "equality". Nothing could be further from the truth. The only equivelant of male frontal nudity, where the entire genitalia is revealed (pubic hair, penis, and testicles) would be female nudity where the woman has her legs apart so her entire genitalia can be seen. (pubic hair , clitoris, and vulva) But of course we never get to see that in any mainstream film or cable telivision series. Why not? Why the double-standard? How come the entire male anatomy can be shown on mainstream television or movies, but female genitalia is always kept hidden and relegated only to porn? That's where the REAL inequality is. So things are already completely unfair and slanted against men and yet still these dumb feminists complain and make incorrect and irrational comparisons. It would be the same as showing a close-up of a woman's vagina in a PG-13 rated movie and us men saying, " It's about time. They have been showing men's bare bottoms in PG-13 rated movies for years. They need to make things even by showing a woman's vagina. They should show more women's vaginas in PG-13 movies to make up for the men's bare bottoms that we have had to watch!" Would you women find this fair? Would you see this as "equality"? Would you find it accurate to equate a man's ass to a woman's vagina? Do you ladies feel that showing boobs is the same as showing a woman's vagina or anus? Then how can you equate breasts to a man's penis? Such is the "logic" of women. I'm all for fairness. I'm okay with filmakers showing a man's bare ass just as often as a woman's non-genital nudity. By the same token then, filmakers should be just as willing to show a woman's vagina (not just pubic hair) or anus as they are willing to show men's testicles and penises. After all, fair is fair, right ladies? I am going to write a letter to the MPAA and question them as to their apparent double-standard when it comes to allowing full genitalia to be shown. I wonder why the genitalia of one gender can be fully revealed in mainstream film and be given an R rating, but not of the other. We men have been pushed around long enough by the feminist scum. It is time to stand up and start defending our rights and demanding REAL EQUALITY, not the unilateral feminist version of "equality".
Castlebridge on Sep 11, 2008
Simple minded American puritans! You would rather teach your children about violence than teach them about love. I have 2 young children - boy and girl who see each other naked daily. I couldn't prevent it if I wanted to. I don't because I don't want my children to have negative issues about their bodies or think they are something to be ashamed of. There should be nothing shameful about a naked body. They do learn that it is appropriate to wear clothing but they don't scream and run and hide if someone sees them naked in the bathroom and neither do we. Compare this to a friend's boy who has no siblings and modest parents but when they aren't around, he likes to pull out his penis and wave it around saying look at me!! We try to teach him that it is not appropriate behavior but we try to make him not ashamed about it at the same time - just treat it like any other minor thing he might do that was not allowed. We don't run a nudist camp. They make out nudity to be something more than natural in rebellion of the puritan shamism. But I would much rather my children see a nudist camp than any fight. Yes fighting and violence are just as natural and necessary but it is a natural tendency that we should overcome with education and love. Some countries have the news in the nude. Strange concept but it would get my attention! I think the ratings should not consider nudity but violence as the primary rating factor. I have seen a lot of violence in R movies that I think should be in NC17 or worse. All you need is love.
Mike on Oct 10, 2008
I can think of plenty of movies where female pubic hair was on display in 70s n 80s R movies and partially on display in PG movies of the same period. While during this same era, male nudity of the penile variety was scarce (which was fine by me). However, this is a technical discussion (not of personal preference), and I do see why today's R rated films don't show female vagina's anymore; which is all due to the 'wax me till I look like a kid' fad. For a rated R film to show a women 'spead eagle', or even her shaved vulva is impossible. Consider something, even soft X films on playboy don't show a women 'spread eagle'. Yes, the days of lines like "We Got Bush" (Revenge of the Nerds 1984) are over, and sad to say (for me as a child of the 70s-80s era) as I relish a woman in all her full bloom (womanly) beauty. Today we see bleached, booby ballooned (surgically), and cleanly hairless barbies; wow, they all look sooooo similar......where's the....diversity....or is uniformity now the norm? Sorry for the rant. BTW, why are any of these guys freakin so over a dick in a movie? Hasnt any of you men been in a P.E. class where us guys (unfortunately) don't get the private shower privileges that girls had in Junior and High School. Just like in gym showers, just don't look and it makes it more endurable.
Billy Riddell on Oct 22, 2008
The female nudity has been limited to breasts and pubic hair. Equality means that if you are going to show male genitals then you must show female genitals. Breasts are not genitals. Showing breasts does not completely expose the female. Males have nipples. According to Gray's Anatomy, the equivalent organ to the corpus collosum or the penis in the male is the clitoris in the female. Showing the clitoris completely exposes the female just as exposing the penis completely exposes the male. The clitoris engourges with blood when aroused. The penis engourges with blood when aroused. I think we have a match. If HBO wishes to show genitals then they should do that but they should show male and female genitals. They do not do this. Movies are able to receive an R rating with male genitals but not with female genitals because they have female chauvinists working for the Classification and Ratings Administration. HBO has Sheila Nevins (Private Dicks) and some other woman who also are too ignorant to realize that breasts are not genitals. Check http://www.logicalequality.com on March 1. This site will have everything you are looking for including a worldwide boycott of the anti-male bullshit starting with cancelling your HBO and telling them why with a letter. We will also tell you who the letter needs to go to and what address to send it.
Greg Miller on Dec 27, 2008
I agree with all the other men on here! It pisses me off that women are so stupid as to compare a topless woman (which only shows NON-GENITAL nudity) to a frontally nude man (which shows total GENITAL nudity). How come women are so incredibly stupid and illogical? There is a huge double-standard not only with the type of nudity being shown, but how it is rated. The REAL double standard when it comes to how the MPAA rates film nudity. Feminists incorrectly compare female frontal nudity to male frontal nudity and called for more male frontal nudity. The comparison is incorrect. It's like comparing apples to oranges. When a woman is frontally nude, her genitals cannot be seen. Only her pubic hair, at most, is seen. Her actual genitalia (the clitoris, labia, etc.) CANNOT be seen. But when a man is frontally nude, you see his pubic hair AND his entire genitalia. (penis, testicles, etc.) Thus, frontal male nudity is visually more graphic than frontal female nudity, since it reveals the entire sexual anatomy, and should therefore get a harsher rating. It is like showing a topless man or showing a topless woman. Do these both get the SAME rating? No, they do not. A topless woman is considered more graphic than a topless man, so it gets a harsher rating, even though they are BOTH topless. In the same way, a frontally nude man (which shows FULL genitalia) should get a harsher rating than a frontally nude woman (where the full full genitalia cannot be seen). The dumb feminists, who have called for more frontal male nudity in the name of "equality", don't seem to be able to comprehend this. Maybe we men should be calling for more topless women in G-rated movies in the name of "equality"? Maybe we should call for topless women to be shown on regualr daytime tv just like topless males can be shown? That is feminist "logic" for you. The REAL double-standard with the MPAA is the fact that they allow penises to be shown in R-rated movies but not vaginas. I've seen several movies showing full male genitalia (pubic hair, penis, and testicles) but not a SINGLE mainstream R-rated movie showing full female genitalia, (pubic hair, clitoris, and labia) Think about it. There are dozens of movies that have shown the entire male genitalia, but NONE that have revealed the entire female genitalia. A penis can be passed with an R-rating but a vagina automatically gets an NC-17. That's the real double-standard. Why can the genitalia of one gender be shown but not the other? In Eastern Promises, Viggo does a nude fight scene. His penis and scrotum are visible in several positions while he fights. Now what if this exact scene was repeated but with a female actress? And as the actress rolls around, her legs are apart and the audience gets to see her vagina or anus in different positions. Do you think this would be given the same R-rating? No way! It would immediately be given an NC-17, which is virtual censorship. Or in the movie Walk Hard, there is a graphic close-up of a man's penis. What if that situation was reversed and instead there was a graphic close-up of a woman's vagina? Would that have been given an R-rating? No, it would have been given an NC-17. So the MPAA allows the graphic depiction of the entire male sex organ, but not the entire female sex organ. That is a sexist double-standard! Somebody needs to sue the MPAA for this. This documentary failed to point out this nudity double-standard. If penises can be shown, then vaginas should be shown too. Men, write to the MPAA and demand change! Also, go to fight-the-mpaa-.com. This is a grassroots organization that is pushing to change the MPAA and Hollywood and eliminate the genital-nudity double-standard.
Castlebridge on Mar 22, 2009
I havn't been keeping track of a lot of newer movies and tv shows precisely because I got so tired of the overt misandry and male-hating going down. It seems things havn't changed much... To be fair, you don't have to look to hard these days to find female frontal nudity. If it's not shown so much in mainstream films, you can easily find it on the internet and elsewhere (of course, you can easily find male genitalia that way too). Some good points, if not a bit exaggerrated, were made here. But if you want a fresh perspective, then I'll give you one. The increase in more male nudity can actually be seen as EMPOWERING for MEN. For years women have used sexual and beauty power over men, enticing them and tentalizing them and putting them under a kind of, as it were, spell. I consider that quite a powerful thing actually. Gender femmies have twisted to around so as to make it seem to be ALL a bad thing for women. As with most things, gender feminists are wrong. Now, men have that power. Men can sexually tantalize and entice women using their own sexual power. It's a trade of types of power: as women have gained more financial and public power, men have gained more sexual and beauty. Just look all that money horny old broads give male strippers in tips, and how many sexy men on romance covers lure women to buy them. I say Yeah! Take their money! That's POWER boys! Whether you know that now or not...you will. Men still don't weave as much sexual power as women, but then again women still don't weave as much financial power as men. My advice to men: use your sexual power over women like women have always done over men--it's your turn to shine! Currently though, I'm let down that a lot of these movies portray male nudity as a kind of joke, while female nudity is regarded as if something that is sacred, that has to covered over due to its "hole"ness. That is total and complete bullshit. The vagina isn't even that attractive if you really look at it. I mean, it's a HOLE for god's sake, with a couple flaps of rough edged--it looks kind of like wrindkled dog-eared paper-skin. What's so special about it that it can't be seen in these mainstream movies and cable tv show?? This isn't Fundamentalist Islam, there should be nothing to hide here. I also think men are merely socialized--as in it is nothing innate--to be so droolishly leering when it comes to female nudity (although many more women are like this towards men now too, as I said above). Stop pretending that you're so smitten by it....you're just bullshiting yourself and everyone else. I know some more lusty people really are, but I don't think this represents the majority of men--most men behave like that cause tha's what they've been DEMANDED to do and so that's what they think they should do. One more thing, it's kind of prudish and a bit to far to say that no full frontal nudity should be seen. What kind of Victorian idea is that? But if want you mean is a kind of all or nothing thing, that is, either show both male/female nudity equally or none at all, then I may actually agree.
Sheller on Aug 1, 2009
First of all, breasts are the same as genitals. This male nudity trend in mainstream R-rated movies and little or no female genitalia (or an equivalent wouldn't really be from the front, but, while she's laying down...you know what I mean here) is only going to lead less R-rated movie attendance. The fix to this problem is simply to not go to these movies and be forced fed this crap from Hollywood.
Tate on Aug 17, 2009
I love handsome naked guys in film.In Europe it is much more normal.Guys,something for your lady in the movie and she will be latter more horny for you.So,you will have super hot time with her and actualy win,win.This is not a race.
anna on Oct 15, 2009
i honestly dont remember the last time i seen a movie or show that had a mans genitals exposed but the last movie i went and saw at the movie theatre was rated pg13 and showed many womens breasts. i know men dont think its ok for them to be exposed like that but consider for a second how women feel everytime their are womens breasts exposed on cable tv, the news, and in many movies. think about it this way... it is just as uncomfortable for me to sit through a movie that exposes womens breasts as it is for you to see a mans genitals exposed. womens breasts grow just like a mans penis. i feel degraded and objectified too. many parents take there kids to see pg13 movies because normally the only bad things in it are the language but its getting ridiculous. anything with nudity should be rated r or even better nc17. exposing kids and young adults to both sexes being exposed AT ALL is why so many young teen agers are pregnant and so many kids have multiple partners before they even get to high school. its sad really. im not a prude but all of the sex should only be an adult thing. nudity is nudity. you cant compare men and women because we are not the same. genitals for genitals breasts for breasts. think about your young daughters that are with you when they show a womens breasts and explain to her why thats ok because men show theres all the time so women should be exposed too. i had a younger brother and i remember all of the movies that showed naked women and it was mortifying for me but never did we see something with a naked man. my point is that if it is illegal for women to walk around without shirts on then it shouldnt be shown. the same goes for mens and womens genitals. just quit showing it. thats what porn was made for
ashley on Jan 8, 2010
Tate, Anna, and Ashley: NO, breasts are NOT the same as genitalia. The Genetalia are the actual sex organs used for reproduction. This is the penis and testicles in a man or the labia of a woman. Breasts are NON-GENITAL NUDITY, just like buttocks, and are not equivelant to genital nudity. Most people are okay with the showing of non-genital nudity (breasts and buttocks). I have seen a greater number of men's bare asses in PG13 rated movies as women's breasts. So even when it comes to non-genital nudity, men are exposed more and it typically is given a lower rating. Its not uncommon to see men's naked bums in PG13 rated movies, but a woman's bare ass or breasts is far more rare in PG13 films and is usually given a harsher R rating. This is unfair. Furthermore, we NEVER see full female genitalia (the clitoris and labia) in an R-rated movie, but there are countless examples of men's full genitalia (the penis and testicles) being shown in R-rated films. The most we ever see of a woman is just her bush, NOT her actual genitalia. Why can't women be shown in natural positions with their legs apart and THEIR genitalia fully visible too? The MPAA rates male genitalia R, but female genitalia NC-17. This is a completely unfair, sexist, and misandric double-standard. The MPAA has a sexist rating policy and somebody needs to file a class-action lawsuit against them. I know that if I was a filmaker I would put full female genitalia in my movie, and if the MPAA tried to give me an NC-17 rating I would take them to court. I would like to see them explain to a judge why they routinely allow male genitalia to be passed with an R-rating but not full female genitalia. Why can the penis be shown but not the vagina? Its a double-standard and it IS going to be put to an end one way or another. If nobody else does it first, then once I have enough money I will make a film that clearly shows full female genitalia and I will sue the MPAA if they try to rate it NC-17!!!
Castlebridge on Jan 17, 2010
In this movie, the showing of male genitalia is supposed to be--somehow (don't ask me) "humorous". It's generally played for a crowd without a good sense of humor. But then again it's not just the showing of the penis that's funny, it's that it's this particular actor in this particular situation showing it. It's also for a kind of shock value, etc. It's a notable reversal anyway. I'm only 26 and i remember a time when it was the showing of penises that got the more restricted rating, not vulvas. I wonder why such a switch would occur in such a short period of time? The pendellum could easily swing back tho..... But did anyone ever consider that the vulva isn't pretty anyway? I mean why would you want to see it, it's pretty ugly. The penis too... genatalia, male or female, aint the most attractive thing in the world.
Steve on Jan 21, 2010
Just wanted to read a review on this movie so I'm not gonna come past here again to read replies, if there are any (considering these were written in January). I read some of the comments here, the ones that weren't block walls of text. My conclusion: If women want to hate men, let them do it. It's their lives and their choice. Seriously, who cares what other people do with their lives? Why bother worrying about something that's not going to directly affect you or your family's life? And if directors want to put penises in their movies and not vaginas, thats their choice too. They do what they want to do, and if it makes them money, they'll do it. And not all feminists want to be men. Mostly they want to be whatever they want to be, and not what everyone else thinks they should be. Maybe some women don't want to be nurturers and care-givers, maybe they want to join a fight club, swear, smoke and drink beer. It's their choice and who cares? It's their life and they can do what they want with it. And it's your life too. If you want to sit on the internet and whine about how the movies you watched didn't have vaginas, and think that this fact, with whatever else you can come up with outweighs the shit women have had to live with before women's rights kicked in, do it. If you want something done about it, make your own movie with vaginas everywhere. Make a movie with vagina wallpaper and where all the characters are walking vaginas for all it matters. Seriously. Just for the record, women had no rights to work, were not allowed into a courtroom, speak their minds, have any original thought of their own, go out without an escort, be seen with any man other than family, show bare skin, have a hobby other than cooking, cleaning or popping out babies. And men... oh no! They aren't allowed into a woman's changing room while they're naked! And they have to show their penis on a movie they AGREED to do and are getting paid to do for a few seconds? The horror! Oh no! Equalityyyyyy! Grow up.
Sodomize Intolerance on Jun 26, 2010
It is time men stand up for there rights women have every advantage in life they complain about not making as much but thats about it when it comes to taking a police officer exam they have to lower the standards for women when the job is performed the same way for a male or female why should the standards be lowered.In the military women can have longer hair,why?God made men and women different for a reason.When it comes to underage nudity it is always male when is the last time you saw and underage girl nude on camera it happens all the time with boys.
bob gentry on Dec 22, 2010
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.