Voynaristic – Female Nudity
Okay, you pervs (and others)… here is a topic to titalate… from Kim Voynar, MCN’s newest star…
Although I recognize that there will be any number of men who will go to see The Wrestler because exploitative websites like Mr. Skin tell them down to the minute just when they’ll get to seeTomei’s bare breasts on the screen (and that’s a subject for another column), I would argue that in the case of The Wrestler, Tomei’s nudity is absolutely relevant to the story. The whole point of Cassidy’s character revolves around both the way in which she exposes and exploits herself for the sake of a buck, and the way in which the men to whom she’s exposing herself view her as “too old” to fulfill their sexual fantasies (also disturbing in and of itself for what it says about both the male sexual obsession with young girls and the way in which men, as they age, become “dignified” while women become “over the hill”).
For us to really feel the impact of Pam’s awareness of her own exploitation in her stripper persona, and in particular the way in which she evokes that despairwrenchingly onstage in the film’s final act, we need to have earlier felt the way in which she accepted (or rather, told herself she accepted) that exploitation as a means to an end. The audience needs to cringe as Tomei writhes on stage for the kind of men who slip dollar bills into stripper’s thongs, needs to feel tension as she’s taunted by a pack of young men for being too old for them to pay her for a private lap dance, needs to feel the pain of that moment when, after years of taking her clothes off for a living, she suddenly feels utterly vulnerable, naked, and exposed.
The rest…
You could probably say something about revealing Rourke’s face — it took about seven shots before you saw it head on — or the dilapidated Fun House. I think Aronofsky put one exploitative set-up of Tomei sticking her ass in the camera to set the bar to show how everything else was below it.
OK here’s a surprise, the LEXMAN has some shit to say about this.
First of all, NUDITY OWNS, at least when it’s a hot chick. FUCK YEAH, SHOW THEM, YEP YEP. NICE. And sorry feminists and all, but cool as Tomei is, if MEGAN FOX was indeed rocking this part, it would redefine OWNAGE.
And Voynar is cool but let me make two important points: Tomei was still the boneage in Before the Devil, and I was rocking a Cialis sword when Hoffman was taxing that shit from behind. BONE UP.
But however women seek to see nudity or stripping in terms of some form of power, yes, I agree that’s a cool thought, but ultimately aren’t you kind of deflated in that aim by the fact that most guys aren’t exactly subscribing to your manifesto of power reversal, and just wanna see a shaking ass and snazz? Not saying either side is always right or wrong, but even as a MASSIVE PERV, the “empowerment” thing always seems like a better concept in theory than execution, when you still have drunken yayhoos yelling “Show your tits!”
And it’s fucked up how some dudes are down with any and all nudity, like regardless of context. Perhaps not coincidentally another Aronofsky, but I remember certain fanboy sites where those fat shut-ins were actually leching after Connolly’s ass-to-ass scene and the snizz simply because she happened to be naked. And I was appalled, like, HOLY SHIT you fucking cretins, it’s in the context of the coldest and most miserably depressing shit ever. That is NOT OWNAGE. Why don’t you fuckbags go punch the clown to Leaving Las Vegas while you’re at it?
Yeah, it OWNS when chicks show their shit but I’m just saying there are moments were it OWNS and moments where the artistry needs to be taken into account and it’s just common sense not to get a rod.
IT IS OBVIOUS THAT I AM A GREAT BIG ROMANTIC.
I OWN. LADIES, HIT ME UP.
“A Cialis sword”?!
LexG… I hope you are who I think you are… because if so, you have truly found your voice, m’man.
I think Kim hit the nail on the head with this. Obviously there are always gonna be the types who will seek a movie like The Wrestler or Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead because of the nudity, but I doubt they’ll be there in the theaters. Maybe some will be, but it seems doubtful.
Nudity for the sake of nudity usually seems crass, yet as Kim points out, Megan Fox clothed in Transformers was exploitative. Maybe more so than a porn film, since it’s being packaged in a kid’s movie.
Anyhow, I don’t have a problem with nudity in service of the story. What I have a problem with is people who search out films with nudity, ignoring any intention of the filmmaker (like the aforementioned Requiem for a Dream – good call Lex).
BUt she wasn’t really topless in the movie because she was wearing the pasties that created the illusion of pierced nipples… she doesn’t *really* have pierced nipples… that was just the work of the excellent make-up department.
Lex that is a great post. You make some good points and also made me laugh my ass off. When you are serious you are an interesting commentator.
Frankly, I’ve always enjoyed the gamesmanship of Sam Raimi. In that, I mean he will sometimes put ‘crowd pleasing’ nudity in his pictures, but he will frame it in an ugly context.
Aside from the obvious example of the first Evil Dead (tree rape), we have The Gift and Spider-Man. With The Gift, we get the much touted breast shots of Katie Holmes, but only as she’s literally being fished out of the river, dead and rotting, on a giant hook. With Spider-Man, everyone babbled on about how we could see Kirsten Dunst’s wet nipples during the rain kiss scene. But, if you’ll notice, we only see said nipples because she had her jacket ripped off in a violent attempted rape.
Whether Raimi was intentionally making some kind of comment about non consensual voyeurism and sexual violence I can’t say, but he gets points for framing his nudity in a morally tricky fashion.
A good commentary on nudity as exploitation/art. However, I can’t believe no one has brought up Dancing At The Blue Iguana.
ED… does this mean that you asked her about her nipples in an interview?
And you do know, Scott, that Sheila Kelley has built a rather significant business out of the pole work experience in that film… which is all-female… and now expanded around the country.
It makes sense those are prosthetic nipple rings, however, it’s still nakedness. For once pasties aren’t modesty patches, how refreshing.
Raimi said in his Incredibly Strange Film Show interview that he regrets the tree rape scene in EVIL DEAD…
As I think has been made clear, there are very, very few things in movies that make me feel uncomfortable or dirty, and the tree rape in the first Evil Dead is one of them.
kim, a nicely written and comprehensive piece (so comprehensive, in fact, i need to digest and ruminate for a bit…) i can say right off the bat, however, that being close to tomei’s age, i can relate. hopefully i’ll be able to view ‘the wrestler’ for myself and see what got your gears turning.
When that tree was raping the girl, I remember thinking if that was a guy she’d just kick him in the balls, which obviously wouldn’t work. But she could kick it in the nuts.
So far, the discussion has been about films that are obviously meant to be art, or have pretensions to artistry, or films that are working on a more consciously low-art or genre experiment level (zombie slapstick, anyone?). For me, the use of nudity in films that hover in between arthouse and exploitation is the hardest (ahem, most difficult) to parse.
Like Brian DePalma’s films, for example, where the gratuitousness of the nudity is part of the point (the opening sequence of Blow Out, or the credit sequence of Body Double). On the other hand, he’s also got scenes in movies where the blood is more gratuitous than the nudity, in which the nudity is absolutely essential for establishing character, motivation, etc. (Carrie and Dressed to Kill come to mind).
Or what about what I’m sure is one of LexG’s favorites, The Hot Spot? Dennis Hopper doesn’t ever seem to make up his mind whether he’s making an arthouse or exploitation flick. In an exploitation movie, nobody would have to wonder why Jennifer Connelly and Virginia Madsen are naked in it. If it’s arthouse, then everyone gets to ask why the director made the deliberate decision to be explicit about everything (as Kim Voynar is asking about Aronofsky’s choice — so clearly The Wrestler isn’t exploitation).
All of these films are probably right up there on the list if you look up their lead actresses on Mr. Skin. That’s only half of Kim’s question, though — the other half has to do with whether we are supposed to be titillated by Marisa Tomei’s nudity, or if there is more going on that we should be reacting to. Are there really only two choices we have as viewers — to feel either enthusiastic about the titillation, or indicted by it? What about actresses who aren’t playing strippers or prostitutes in arthouse movies? Like, say, Tilda Swinton in Young Adam?
Sorry for the long post, but Kim raises a lot of issues.
BTW, there are more topless male actors in Spider-Man than topless females, Kirsten Dunst’s nipplage aside. Just thought I’d point that out.
just an observation: why is it when ‘film nudity: art or exploitation’ is discussed, only female nudity ever seems to garner attention? (this is an observation not about kim’s piece, which is very specific, but the responses) are men that in denial about male nudity on screen? or is it by virtue of its very sparseness that the boy’s bits are neglected in the conversation? (i don’t think topless men is considered nudity, not david bordwell)
Leah, it’s guilt and it’s scarcity. David DeCoteau (of The Brotherhood and Leeches! fame) doesn’t make enough films.
Just to note…
Of course, we’re supposed to be titillated by the nudity in The Wrestler. She’s playing a stripper. In a strip club. And it’s portrayed accurately, as opposed to most movies.
So, yes. Just as MT helped Devil earn 4 times as much on video as theatrical, I’d expect The Wrestler DVDs to leave the shelves bare too. Pun intended.
Movie’s pretty good too.
Leah, I’m perfectly willing to talk about Don Johnson’s bare ass in The Hot Spot, Kevin Bacon’s full frontal in Wild Things, Ewan McGregor’s particularly spectacular flippity floppity in Velvet Goldmine, and Willem Dafoe’s nudity or near nudity in quite a number of things you wouldn’t expect. But as you might have noticed, the other boys don’t like to talk about these things on this blog.
There’s a double standard for female nudity, obvs, as the men usually remain shy about the package even when their ladies are expected to be bold about the Delta of Venus. I think the same dynamics apply to male nudity, though — is it art or exploitation? It’s kind of fun in Wild Things, for example, because it’s completely gratuitous and a nice twist from what is basically an exploitation flick with A-listers.
I’ll also stand by my observation about the abundance of bare male chests in Sam Raimi movies — it was the focus of the key art for Army of Darkness, and the whole “What’s Peter doing in his bedroom” thing in Spider-Man was about him getting off on his brand new pecs (he shoots his web and everything — did we really need Jack Black clear that up for us?). How is this not a sexualization of the male torso in a way that’s normally reserved for bare breasts? And most of the women I know think that naked Willem Dafoe is sexy, even when he’s nailed to a cross.
Kim doesn’t think so, though, mutiny. She thinks the nudity is about her vulnerability, not our titillation. My point is, that’s because it’s arthouse, not exploitation — even if the Mr. Skin consumers think everything’s fodder for a wank.
finally, a bloke who’s willing to discuss ewan’s flippity floppity in ‘velvet goldmine’! (ewan’s not shy to get his kit off, that’s for sure, good on him)
‘There’s a double standard for female nudity, obvs, as the men usually remain shy about the package even when their ladies are expected to be bold about the Delta of Venus.’
boy, you got that right, not david. and i agree the same dynamics apply to male nudity re: art or exploitation, though the male body would seem to be deemed far more comic than the female, to add another facet.
(jeff, i understand scarcity, but why guilt? please explain if you’re so inclined)
mutinyco wrote:
“Of course, we’re supposed to be titillated by the nudity in The Wrestler. She’s playing a stripper. In a strip club. And it’s portrayed accurately, as opposed to most movies.”
I addressed this in the comments over on my blog, copying it over here:
NDB,
You raise a lot of valid points that merit further discussion. In particular, I’m interested in the point you raise about whether we as an audience are supposed to be titalated by Tomei’s nudity in Wrestler. I would say, clearly, that’s not the intent of the film or the nudity; for me, it serves primarily to better impact, as I said, that moment at the end when she clearly feels naked and exposed on stage for the first time. And partly, that change was driven by her desire to not keep living this duel life of good mother/stripper, but it’s also implied that she’s been supporting her kid that way for a long time, and up to this point she’s had the ability to compartmentalize those sides of herself and convince herself that it’s okay.
It was fairly evident from the storyline that, in part, it’s the evolving nature of her relationship with Randy that is the impetus for the shift in her view of herself and how she’s exploiting her body to make a living. Suddenly Randy, who’s always been just a customer to her (although she was certainly more than that to him for a while) starts to feel like something else, and her struggle is in reconciling her feelings for him with her feelings about herself. Because it’s one thing to let your inner slut loose in the privacy of your bedroom with a partner you trust, but it’s another thing entirely to play the part of a slut for the benefit of a paying customer; she pushes Randy away because she can no longer be just the latter for him.
In a weird sort of way, I saw a bit of a parallel here to Julia Robert’s role in Pretty Woman (pretty much a crappy, unrealistic movie, I know, but bear with me here). In that film, Vivian (Roberts) and her friend Kit (Laura San Giacomo) have this mantra that allows them to compartmentalize whoring their bodies for cash: We say who, we say when — the point being, they’re not as bad as women who whore for a pimp’s benefit, they are the ones who choose their own customers, they choose what they’ll do with them, they get all the money. And Vivian’s one Big Rule is no kissing, because kissing implies a level of intimacy that’s her line in the sand with paying customers, until she meets Prince Charming in the form of Edward Lewis.
Tomei’s character basically follows the same template, in that her career as a stripper has afforded her relative financial independence and the ability to support her son, but Randy is no rich billionaire come to sweep the hooker with the heart of gold up out of the gutters; he’s just a guy, as broken-down emotionally and otherwise as she is, who sees her in a way that none of her other customers do. And his honesty and the raw emotional need he has to connect with someone, anyone, breaks through the resolve she thought she had, that allowed her to do what she did.
I didn’t feel there was any point in the film where Aronofsky’s intent was to dehumanize either the character or the actress, nor was their any intent to titalate the pervs in the audience. The men who would find that performance titalating in any way, they are exactly the kind of men who frequent strip bars to begin with. They’re getting off not just on a nude body, but on the idea of a woman debasing and exploiting herself for their benefit. It gives them a sense a power, that these women are taking off their clothes, shaking their tits, crawling half-naked across the floor for the sake of a dollar in a g-string, lap dancing implied sex.
Strippers and hookers are vessels for the uncomplicated sexual gratification of a warm female body without the responsibility of viewing the owner of that body as a person with thoughts, feelings and needs. And if a man finds Tomei’s nudity in this film titalating, well, that says much more about him than it does about Tomei as an actress.
Leah, I meant that men are probably going to be more willing to try to justify female nudity for the sake of ‘art’, out of a sense of guilt, than to bother with male nudity at all, when discussing the issue.
got it
Doug, I like Dancing at the Blue Iguana. Is that wrong of me?
She’s two people and there’s a regular courtship going on with one of them. Her detachment emphasizes it but also allows for projection. You catch yourself when she does.
You can analyze Pam’s character and her situation. That’s fine.
But on a much more fundamental level, if the scenes weren’t titillating then they’d be an abject failure. In fact, I’d think MT would be disappointed if people didn’t think she was sexy.
Of course, titillation isn’t the purpose of the scenes. But it has to be there. Just like a scene in a horror film can be about something else, but it’s still supposed to be scary…
No, no, no. MT is so beyond the surface read, she absolutely wants you to get the psychological trick she worked really hard for. It works because everyone thought it through and perfected it.
I’m not saying the other level isn’t there. Of course it is. I’m just saying the scenes are titillating (why do we keep using that stupid word?) as well, and that can’t be denied. And I think the inability to recognize that says just as much as if somebody was only looking at it for thrills. It’s got both.
Hell, I wanted Pam for my girlfriend when I walked out.
Yeah, you’d marry her and make her quit dancing. Give Mickey an Oscar for making you do it. Love that story how it went from Nick Cage to Rourke.
Just saw EQUUS last night on Broadway, with Daniel Radcliffe and Anna Camp both full-frontal starkers. Lex, jump on the plane, come out here and OWN. (Of course, you’ll hafta put up with two hours-plus of all that psychiatric crap first.)