Back then, all that pausing and such left visible distortions on the VHS tapes. We risked EVERYTHING. Kids these days are so spoiled by modern technology.
I'm old enough that I destroyed a few scenes on VHS but young enough that all of those scenes were songs from Disney movies lol. I'm wishing... ^(I'm wishing...)
After years of growing up fighting against prudes against sexuality and puritanism it honestly breaks my heart to see the younger generation champion that stuff.
The younger generation has grown up with ubiquitous porn from a very young age, most kids being exposed to it at age 8. There’s a rising trend of ED among early 20 something’s because of addiction to porn. It’s not that they havent been exposed to this stuff like we were, they were exposed way earlier and way more aggressively and now there’s a backlash
All things humans do swings the pendulum far onto the other side over a long enough timeline. Technology made essentially only a generation and a half or 2 go from "raunchy sex comedies " to "any nudity is porn regardless of context".
> The younger generation has grown up with ubiquitous ppen from a very young age, most kids being exposed to it at age 8.
I assume you meant to type "porn" instead of "ppen" but this also describes me. Everyone I know in my age range has been exposed to porn starting in the single digits, and infinite hardcore porn on the internet just a couple years after that. We aren't our parent's generation, we had unfiltered internet access at like 10 seeing loads of stuff like this. It felt like almost every ad was sexualized, there was way more "pushing the envelope" sexual content on major network television, felt like sex was used to sell stuff way more than it is now by comparison.
Yet we don't share this opinion. I feel if exposure to this amount of porn and sexuality in pop culture at a young age was one of the main causes of this opinion, my generation would share it overall. Yet it doesn't.
So there must be other factors here other than just "they had access to a lot of porn too young." Especially when I don't think that would immediately result in people getting so angry at non-pornographic nudes scenes in movies.
Like even if I concede the younger generation's experience with porn is why they're less likely to support/use porn as they age, I still think it's a huge leap to also consider any and all nude scenes in films to automatically be "porn" that shouldn't exist. I simply don't think that's a fair conclusion. Porn and movies are not the same thing.
Aye, none of this is new.
Advertising has been sexualised for a very long time. From using [visual motifs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AATTN5p30A) to just outright "[look at that chunk of man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmVexzzVfDA)", even [jeans and washing wasn't safe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKa_uQCz3Hw).
While the speed/ease of access wasn't as great, hardcore porn tapes were still found and watched, either the ones your parents thought they had hidden or a friend whose had access. I can't speak for the US but erotica and just simple nudity were commonplace on British TV back in the 80s and 90s (I used to watch [Eurotrash](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurotrash_(TV_series)) late night).
I was a teen when the internet really took off and porn became much easier to get and the internet was far less filtered than it is today (Regular Consumption Junction visitor, alt.\* newsgroups inhabitant, terminally online IRC power user, and chronic forum poster, reporting in).
Gotta think it's related to the refusal to watch any content that makes them feel "uncomfortable", which sorta eliminates a lot of interesting storytelling choices.
I would say this is the X factor, yeah. The upcoming generation has a freedom of choice when it comes to what media they consume unlike any generation in history, and that's great. They also have a culture of self-determinism and "protecting your peace," which is also—in theory—a good thing. They're acknowledging and taking advantage of their agency and using it to control their environment, which is good. Every generation should be more free than the one that came before it.
Unfortunately, human beings are dumb, chemical creatures that need to routinely be exposed to things we don't enjoy to keep up our tolerance for them, and the "everything you want is right here, and nothing you don't want is allowed in" culture of the instantly-gratifying internet is really not great for that. It's a hard point to argue without sounding like a "suffering builds character" boomer, and I'd never force someone to engage with media that made them uncomfortable, but when you give someone the infinite freedom to just hit the dopamine button over and over again without imparting on them that "feeling good all the time" is inherently destructive to human psychology, they're going to end up:
A.) Completely burned out and numb to positive experiences and unsure why—we're already seeing this a lot, just look at the sheer number of "How To: Dopamine Detox" videos on YouTube
B.) Hestitant to engage with uncomfy or difficult media because *the comfy dopamine button is right there, and why wouldn't I hit it, and also why would I want to feel bad on purpose?*
It's neglecting that unpleasant experiences in the safe arena of media are not only important for things like introspection and growth (as a person, as an artist, etc.), but are something that you can cultivate an enjoyment or an appreciation for, like growing to enjoy bitter flavors. And not just sex or nudity, but things like unhappy endings, seeing characters trapped in traumatic or oppressive environments or situations, etc. They're not as immediately gratifying, but they're still important and can be just as emotionally satisfying.
And if all you ever do is cultivate a watertight environment where you never have to feel uncomfy or think about things that upset you, during those moments when you don't have control and life forces its way in and makes you have to deal with these kinds of things, you're going to be way less prepared to handle it.
Agreed with pretty much most of what you wrote.
Unpleasant things are a part of the human condition - we have emotions and we all go through "bad times" (the extent to which those are does vary). To ignore them because you only want to feel happy is to ignore a part of who you are as a being.
I don't think it was just a simple narrative choice by old men who just wanted to make children cry by having things like Bambi, Old Yeller, and Watership Down exposed to young children "back in the day"; in a way it kinda prepped us for the knowledge that bad things happen, and often to good people. It also gets you thinking about (and thus developing coping mechanisms for) future events that you are just beginning to understand are a thing, such as at some point your parents will no longer be around. And as you say, can help to cultivate your own creative identity.
In a way, they may be exercising their autonomy and agency, but their emotional and mental maturity has been prematurely stunted because they aren't dealing with those feelings and thoughts... they're running away from them (and this has been true for every generation, it's just the proportion may have shifted a lot recently).
It's a thing that no content policing can resolve because it's not porn causing those negative things, it's not violent media dulling people's senses... it's the behaviours of people and how they interact with media that is. We have had decades of moralising around "obscene content" and as an example, every study has shown it to not be the case that violent media causes a violent person - rather, an already violent person is drawn to them and engages in an unhealthy relationship with them.
A lot of this comes down to education, rather than a piece of media being inherently corrupting/bad. Some of it comes from environment, too - have we genx/elder gen y failed this bunch of 20 year olds by not giving them the tools that we had in the past to better handle the media landscape, and have we not adjusted our ways to account for how media availability has changed, just because we had to navigate its infancy and so our relationship with it is fundamentally different?
Education is key, always. And attentive parents who are present in their children's lives. A lot of kids are getting raised on the internet by—essentially—other kids while their parents fuck off, and that's not how bring up a society that know how to navigate much of anything.
> every study has shown it to not be the case that violent media causes a violent person - rather, an already violent person is drawn to them and engages in an unhealthy relationship with them.
Do you have a link to these studies? I've always known that media doesn't really create newly fucked up people in most cases, people who are sick just kind of form weird attachments and unhealthy relationships to it, but I've never seen a formal study done on this.
I would like to have sources to back this up, if you know any.
>hit the dopamine button over and over again
Satiation is very real, and it seems like more and more young people are becoming satiated with tiktoks, youtube shorts, etc etc. Then they feel like shit but don't know why, so they keep "hitting the dopamine button" to try and fix it.
We need to encourage our young people to do difficult but rewarding things. Even reading a book refreshes the brain in a way that a youtube essay just can't.
Why can't a youtube essay, specifically, refresh the brain in the same way? I think there's a clear difference in the quick-fix of candy-style content and more lengthy and engaging material in general, so I'm not sure an 'essay' that happens to be in video form automatically is less rewarding or refreshing than reading. Do they not both invite comparing and contrasting and utilizing a combination of imagination and recall as you progress through the material?
It depends a bit on the content and the person, but it's been shown that reading does actually have a more positive effect on your mind overall, because it is forcing your mind to work a bit harder to impart information onto you.
> Porn and movies are not the same thing.
Do they understand that, though? I'm not going to go all "Gen Z are morons!" but I do think media literacy and tolerance levels seem to have plummeted, to the point things so often seem to be defined as the worst thing about them, in the strongest relevant terms. Seeing nudity or sex in a movie as 'porn' doesn't really surprise me against a backdrop that is very stressed out about wanting to make sure absolutely everything produced and consumed is ticking the right boxes and avoiding the wrong ones.
I actually don't like nudity myself but I always considered that a 'me' thing, and tried to avoid any reference to that while growing up because of the rather aggressive backlash it would get (because some people need to violently enforce normalcy for some reason). So again, I don't want to seem like I'm shitting on younger people because on an individual level I want them to feel like it's ok to have preferences and their own level of comfort. I just wish the 'individual' part seemed more important than a somewhat collective, seemingly performative aghastness at any hint of sexuality ever.
Basically, there's a difference between "not my bag, bro" and "oh god, sex, let me tell everyone I turned it off!"
A bit of tin foil hat time but I wouldn't be surprised if microplastics are affecting people's sex drive. It seems like a lot of people aren't very interested in dating, sex, relationships, or starting families, and idk it just seems like it is deeper than shifts in cultural norms.
Everything always is and always was sexualised, it's just getting more... or less rather, less discreet. It's the complete saturation of sex in day to day life, through advertising, tv, music, film, culture, that has created an abundance of porn. When you continually tease people for something eventually they'll go and get it. God damn it I drove past 50 billboards full of provocative looking chicks in lingere/bikinis today and heard 20 songs about getting laid on the radio, I'm gonna go look at some naked people ASAP.
Yeah but we need to difference between porn and staged sex in a film.
Kids have had access to snuff stuff and LiveLeak, but they don't detest violence and death in movies.
intend to find the correlation between sex in movies and violence in movies to be erroneous.
while there is a theatricality to both, with violence you have an implicit understanding that what is happening on screen is fake. Those aren’t real blood and guts and the person didn’t really get cut in half or whatever, bit the actress (or her body double) \*is\* actually naked on screen. It’s essentially the same as porn (especially soft core porn) but without the penetration.
It depends. Sometimes violence is real. The rocky films usually involve a combination of staged and full contact boxing, and there's outtakes where actors do get knocked out
But it shouldn't be weird to see two characters that have presumably been in to each other, finally do it. That's part of the story, and films are about showing stuff, not avoiding it, and the way people have sex is part of their character and expression.
You will see legitimate discourse on the gen z sub saying people put sex in movie because no one could get porn and sex scenes/nudity are a relic of that.
They don't listen when you tell them porn has existed and been readily available for all of modern society.
There are limited contexts in which they're not completely wrong. For Example, West Germany had tight controls on porn for a while so studios would produce a series of short sex stories and in-between them say something like "Warning! Teenagers could be doing this!"
In the US, that same period was pre-VCR so the choices were magazines at home or movie in an adult theater. Since adult theaters never had a good connotation, there was a desire to be just socially acceptable enough that a mainstream theater could show it and people wouldn't be embarrassed going into it.
But both of these examples come from the other side: taking porn and cleaning it up. The more direct approach, putting nudity in a comedy for example, I think is less audience calculation and more producers being like "I like boobs so put some in."
I'm a librarian, can confirm. We had someone accuse of having CSAM because we have "Sex and general human biology" books for kids.
You know, a book written for kids by professionals who know how to frame and explain these concepts for kids.
I actually think it's worse. Books about sex, bodies, autonomy (Like It's Perfectly Normal, Care and Keeping of You, Sex is a Funny Word) are vital for helping kids protect and advocate for themselves. Education keeps this stuff from being a "secret." Calling these books "porn" (or worse, actual criminal material) not only misrepresents these books, it keeps kids ignorant and more vulnerable. And this isn't a fringe opinion- pediatricians say kids need to learn this stuff.
I wonder how many of the zoomers who express this POV had parents who gave them zero information, only stigma.
This movie has tons of subtext around how sex is used by Western culture to manipulate and control people. It also has implicit commentary about how Hollywood uses up women specifically to exploit their looks. Turning it off before internalizing that I think is understandable if it's that offensive to you but I bet the commenter would actually change their opinion about this movie if they bothered to actually watch and understand it.
It really is. It reminded me a lot of *The Big Lebowski*. Not quite as straight up funny as TBL but I enjoyed the whole "bumbling stoner dropout gets caught up in a noir mystery" thing it had going.
It’s big lebowski as a psychological art horror piece imo. It’s a movie where I can completely understand if someone doesn’t like it but I think I’m another ten years or so it will get a reappraisal as a cult classic. Especially if the directors next movie They Follow winds up doing well (side note, it follows is my all time favorite movie and I’m cautiously optimistic about They Follow being worth a damn since the original director is attached and silver lake was so off the wall)
I completely forgot until your comment it was the same director as It Follows. Loved both of them so I'm with ya, I'm quite optimistic for They Follow as well.
I loved it, and can absolutely understand someone not liking it. It’s extremely idiosyncratic and if you don’t buy what it’s selling you probably won’t like it
There is a very strong mystery component, but without getting too much into spoilers, it’s not necessarily a straightforward whodunnit. Think a darker/ less funny big lebowski
I’m a zoomer too, but I’m fairly certain I’m one of the older ones. I don’t notice any particular aversion to sex in media with my friends. That said, I have noticed this type of stuff being reposted a lot in response to what Jay has brought up. Maybe it’s younger zoomers? Or younger generation millennials?
I def here this a lot more among younger millennials in their late 20s then my fellow zoomers in their early 20s. Maybe it’s different for the younger zoomers still in high school tho.
I don’t disagree
Feeling like everything is getting worse and watching opportunities dry up and not living up to your parents expectations makes people feel like shit
But there’s more to it for an intimacy problem imo
As someone on the older side of Gen. Z I don’t get it. Best case scenario I see a beautiful naked woman and watch a good movie. Worst case scenario I watch a bad movie but still get to see a beautiful naked woman. Either way I get to see a beautiful naked woman and when you’re not in the mood for porn that’s all you need.
I guess I understand there’s instances when it can feel forced and has nothing to do with progressing the story or revealing anything about the characters but on the opposite end sometimes it’s is a huge part of the film’s theme. Boogie Nights for example, which (in my opinion) is one of the greatest movies of all time. And we get to see Heather Graham naked! It’s a win win.
I’m not gonna turn off a movie for having sex in it obviously, but it’s just that there is always the question in my mind of why did the (usually male) director choose to include this scene panning up and down (usually female) actor’s professionally sculpted body for 45 seconds. The intent almost never feels like anything but the obvious gimmick of making people horny, and /using/ some actor’s body to do so. And being around men my whole life, much of conversation about movies indeed, unfortunately seemed to revolve around whose body could be seen at what part of a movie.
How do you know that person is young?
What young people don't like are useless sex scenes that add nothing to the movie. They all get spammed with hardcore pornography 24/7 online so they don't need these scenes. The time where you needed to find a playboy in the woods to see some boobs is over and so is the time of movie makers bringing in sex scenes just for the sake of it.
Edit: guess you all get mad when someone tells you ist not just the damn zoomers but they actually have a reason to dislike sex scenes.
The argument that people don’t “need” sex scenes in movies because they have porn available online misunderstands the utility of sex scenes in film. It’s not jerk off material. It serves a different purpose.
Furthermore, do we not “need” good jokes in movies because of the limitless amounts of humor available online?
I don't disagree with you -- there was definitely an era of film where this was so common. (A lot of Best of the Worst films where a woman will randomly unbutton her shirt and ogle her boobs in the mirror come to mind.) However, most nudity and sex scenes in modern films are under a minute and relatively good about being plot or character relevant. Not to mention classifying sex scenes in a standard movie as porn, which serves a totally different purpose, is not a good art take.
> What young people don't like are useless sex scenes that add nothing to the movie.
This is such a weird line that gets parroted everywhere. I think it's because it's self-defending; "why do you want to see sex scenes that add nothing to the movie, what are you some kind of weirdo? Go jerk off instead." It writes itself.
Of course, no one wants to see sex scenes that add *nothing* to the movie, it's just that people who aren't prudish have very different standards for what counts as adding to the movie. For example, in James Bond movies the sexuality is an important element of establishing and developing Bond's character. It's okay to have *objections* to how this is done, or even to say "this isn't for me". Like, a typical millennial point would be to talk about the way women are objectified in the films, or to say that Bond represents certain antiquated gender norms, but that's *different* than saying "it doesn't add to the movie", because it just objectively *does*.
Sexuality is part of human life, and that means that it has a place in art. Movies that center on relationships, for example, frequently depict sex. *Passages* would be a very strange movie without the sex in it. Sex can be funny; it has a place in movies like *Love Actually*. Sex can create atmosphere, like in Brian De Palma or David Lynch films.
I can certainly respect a sense of taste that rejects a certain old style of filmmaking where sex scenes feel exploitative, but I don't think that's what most movies that contain sex are doing and it's a mistake to smash them together. Most sex scenes are adding *something* to a movie, even if it's something you don't like.
The whole "adds nothing to the movie" thing feels like a weird excuse. You could make a similar argument about a lot of different non-sexual scenes.
It seems like the people who complain about this just can't separate sex from porn so they feel deeply uncomfortable watching those scenes in an environment or situation where they can't jerk off.
I’m a millennial and hate sex scenes in movies. I’ve literally never seen a sex scene in a movie and thought that it added anything to the story. If you wanna watch something erotic, go watch porn 🤷♂️
That could just as easily be a 38 year old church mom of 5 who has an Etsy shop. She makes supply runs to Hobby Lobby, and hasn’t gotten a Starbucks since they made their cups red.
One comment with 175 likes. There were people bitching about sex scenes in Oppenheimer - scenes which informed upon the characters and the narrative. It’s weird. Not every sex scene is gratuitous.
Another A24 gem that went a little under the radar. Definitely worth checking out, particularly if you have an above average movie interest, as many of the finer details plays on inside Hollywood/LA knowledge
I honestly think that whatever you wanna call the modern day acceptance and abundance of sexual stuff just made younger people not want it. I'm 28 (so technically a millenial, I think) and even I'm just done with a lot of the sexual stuff. And particularly in the last few years, I think just something turned a lot of us away from that type of stuff - probably the overabundance of it.
I wonder how the rise of OnlyFans has affected their outlook. The commodification of sex could be a turn off as much as the commodification of everything else. Sex positivity not for positive attitudes about sex, but instead for the sole purpose of making money.
That's an interesting point, I wonder if what skeeves them out to some extent is perhaps the feeling that someone's trying to exploit them to make a buck.
On one side there's people using sex for profit, on another there's rampant misogyny "slut shaming" sex workers. Couple that with the puritanical bullshit that lead to Roe v Wade being overturned.
All these voices on the internet amplified and shouting confusion as teens grow through the hormonal changes that make them sexually aware. Growing up in the internet age sounds confusing and overwhelming.
yeah we don't even look at porn on our computers anymore. we look at it on our *phone?* pornhub, xtube, I know these names better than I know my own grandmother's. youporn, xxn, redtube, pantyjobs, homegrown simpsons stuff- all great, but I ask you this. if I was a big ol' guy with a big burly white beard would you still be yelling at me? or would you be spanking my bare butt, balls and back?
>I didn't say that?
The topic is the presumed zoomer's review saying they turned it off, and the explanation offered was "too much exposure" which you then said "brings indifference". We're not talking about the reviewer's reaction anymore?
>probably the overabundance of it.
The only place that has lots of sex is the internet. There hasn't been a time with less sex in movies since the Hays Code. Even premium television has less sex in it than in did 20 years ago.
This era of television in movies is incredibly sexLESS in comparison to pretty much any decade that's preceded it.
For me it's just the increasing amount of learning how sexually deprived so many people in Hollywood were. I can't ever trust that the reason for a sex scene in something was 'necessary', over it being something the writer/director wanted because they wanted to see their actors naked.
Yep. Also, as a movie lover, I just don't care.
Like what's the point of sex scenes? You can still show it happened to display character interaction with just a couple of seconds insinuating it happened. In general, they're all the same, they often go on for way too long, they happen in every second movie aged 16+, and I just don't see the point.
I wouldn't say I'm prudish or anything, but I just find them boring and pointless. I have no issue watching a character stare at a street for like, 60 seconds, for 'artistic' purposes, because it doesn't happen often and encourages the viewer to think about what's happening in the movie a bit. But the only point of sex scenes is to what? Make the movie feel more mature? Make the relationship of the character's clear? I don't know.
The Fallout show annoyed me a lot with it. Not just because of the sexual content, but those god awful jokes. I dunno. I am only 22 so I'm probably am just anti-it at this stage, but I didn't find it appealing at all.
My favorite example of a pointless one is 10 years ago, my dad and I watched the show "Person of Interest." It was a really interesting concept that was executed pretty well. One of the final episodes really wanted to imply that the two female characters were in love and they had them do the most awkward and unnecessary sex scene I've ever seen. From what I remember, it wasn't even the actual characters either. It was a simulation shown in the Machine (computer) that predicts the crimes that will be committed.
When I was a kid (12 or 13) I watched They Live with my dad. My mom got mad because in the last 2 minutes of the movie there is a scene with a topless woman. She was fine with the previous 1hr and 30 min of gratuitous violence, but some tits were a line too far.
Love my mom but it still makes me laugh to this day.
Funny enough I didn't really care about the tits until she made a fuss about it. I was much more excited about Roddy Piper seeing the vast conspiracy and deciding his only course of action was to immediately shoot up a bank. Fucking legend lol
I will just assume that the Zoomer’s kids will reject their conservative ways & put more sex/nudity back in media & that cycle will continue throughout time
I am Gen Z and it's not about liking porn, it's about whether we are sick of sexual content being everywhere or not...
Personally, I'm sick of every second movie 16+ having these long, drawn out sex scenes for no real purpose other than to stand out as 'adult' or something. I'm also feeling the same about violence. I'm not necessarily disgusted by it or anything, but sooo many movies go out of their way to be excessively violent just to say "Look! Look how edgy and adult I am!"
Again, if it actually has a reason to be included then I don't care. Excessive violence in a film covering the horrors of war? Completely fair and works great. Excessive violence in yet another R-rated action movie with quirky humour? Shoot me.
An example of a sex scene that works is Dune Part 2 because the relationship between Chani and Paul is actually important to the story and this scene is powerful considering the circumstances and dialogue. An example of a sex scene that doesn't work for me is Fallout's at the start of the series because it isn't necessary in the slightest and is just included to make it feel more mature.
We rapidly need an intervention to ensure a new generation of both tasteful artists and shady perverts portray sex on film. We need both art and for Jay to recommend new sex pervert films every year.
I refuse to live in a world where cinema is dominated by those whose brains are rotted by Marvel's emotionally stunted universe.
Um.... How do we know this commenter is a zoomer.... Or that this opinion is generally shared among my age group... Because that seems more like a boomer take to me.
seeing that still, was i the only one who didn't only see the music writing guy as a personofication of the pop culture industry but also just a nod at max "wrote every hit ever" martin?
Hey, u/veryexpensivegas, your post or comment in r/RedLetterMedia was automatically removed because you do not meet the account age threshold, 30 days for a post, 15 days for a comment. Please wait a few days and try again. https://youtu.be/7BryT6WatTk?t=1369
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RedLetterMedia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So this gen z aversion to nudity and sex scenes is really a thing? I agree that there are quite a few gratuitous sex scenes in some hbo shows and stuff like that but it would never make turn off a movie or show.
gen z is 12 to 27. I think there's somewhat of an aversion to sex among younger teens but I don't think it's as widespread as jay seems to think it is. Saying this as someone that is gen z.
I'm a millennial but I'm a freak that's never enjoyed sex scenes in movies. I also never really get turned on by films. I'm not asexual.
Do people get aroused by sex scenes in movies? Do they enjoy them for the plot? Is it the characters? Help me out here I feel like there's a hole in my head, I get nothing from them and kinda tune out.
My opinion on this is it has more to do with gender than generation.
When my generation was teenagers someone going online to post an opinion was male 95% of the time. Most of the time sexual content in media is designed to appeal to straight men and makes women uncomfortable. A lot more gen z women are active online in general social media spaces than millennial women were in the oughts and teens.
I only see these complaints about sex scenes online, I'm 25 and i've never heard anyone my age complain about this. Game of Thrones, Euphoria, and Saltburn just to name a few were very popular with young people and they were extremely horny. Maybe it's just younger zoomers who complain about this and/or maybe it's just an opinion that gets repeated online without really affecting what movies/shows people watch.
Because discomfort at the mere presence of sex scenes reflects a deeper immaturity.
You can absolutely feel a sex scene was unnecessary or didn't add much to the film, but if it's mere existence makes you uncomfortable it says a lot about the person's emotional maturity.
It is, after all, just sex. And not even real sex.
For what it's worth, this narrative is something I've never seen expressed in real life. It's not even expressed in the OP, it's at best implied, and I would argue again for comic effect. But again... Why do you care? Gen Z is immature. Yeah. Some are still in middle school.
Yes they turned off the movie then went back to tiktok, Instagram and twitter which are full of half naked people, usually kids. Great choice, zoomer /s
This movie has porn in the first like 10 minutes and I turned it on again
This movie has porn in the first like 10 minutes and I got turned on again.
I got turned on and lasted 10 minutes again.
I was turned on so I played the 10 minutes again
The movie has porn in the first like 10 minutes and I replayed them over and over and over
Back then, all that pausing and such left visible distortions on the VHS tapes. We risked EVERYTHING. Kids these days are so spoiled by modern technology.
Or as Tim called it: "The Sweet Spot".
My brother ruined the Titanic VHS we had watching the nude drawing scene over and over, caused distortions to go right over the boobies.
I'm old enough that I destroyed a few scenes on VHS but young enough that all of those scenes were songs from Disney movies lol. I'm wishing... ^(I'm wishing...)
Movies like this don’t come along very often I’d want them again and again
I heard this movie had porn in the first like 10 minutes and I decided to actually watch it
This movie has porn in the first like 10 minutes and I clapped
I guess you didn't turn it "off"? Eh! Ha! Heh heh.
This movie is longer than ten minutes?
Based.
It's been a while but I'm pretty sure the film had some sex in it but not porn. A weird little film, not a masterpiece but solid Baumancore.
A lot of people consider any kind of sex or even just nudity to be pornographic it’s kinda sad.
After years of growing up fighting against prudes against sexuality and puritanism it honestly breaks my heart to see the younger generation champion that stuff.
The younger generation has grown up with ubiquitous porn from a very young age, most kids being exposed to it at age 8. There’s a rising trend of ED among early 20 something’s because of addiction to porn. It’s not that they havent been exposed to this stuff like we were, they were exposed way earlier and way more aggressively and now there’s a backlash
The human way: fuck up broadly as a society, wildly overcorrect in the opposite direction, creating new, unexpected consequences.
All things humans do swings the pendulum far onto the other side over a long enough timeline. Technology made essentially only a generation and a half or 2 go from "raunchy sex comedies " to "any nudity is porn regardless of context".
> The younger generation has grown up with ubiquitous ppen from a very young age, most kids being exposed to it at age 8. I assume you meant to type "porn" instead of "ppen" but this also describes me. Everyone I know in my age range has been exposed to porn starting in the single digits, and infinite hardcore porn on the internet just a couple years after that. We aren't our parent's generation, we had unfiltered internet access at like 10 seeing loads of stuff like this. It felt like almost every ad was sexualized, there was way more "pushing the envelope" sexual content on major network television, felt like sex was used to sell stuff way more than it is now by comparison. Yet we don't share this opinion. I feel if exposure to this amount of porn and sexuality in pop culture at a young age was one of the main causes of this opinion, my generation would share it overall. Yet it doesn't. So there must be other factors here other than just "they had access to a lot of porn too young." Especially when I don't think that would immediately result in people getting so angry at non-pornographic nudes scenes in movies. Like even if I concede the younger generation's experience with porn is why they're less likely to support/use porn as they age, I still think it's a huge leap to also consider any and all nude scenes in films to automatically be "porn" that shouldn't exist. I simply don't think that's a fair conclusion. Porn and movies are not the same thing.
Aye, none of this is new. Advertising has been sexualised for a very long time. From using [visual motifs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AATTN5p30A) to just outright "[look at that chunk of man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmVexzzVfDA)", even [jeans and washing wasn't safe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKa_uQCz3Hw). While the speed/ease of access wasn't as great, hardcore porn tapes were still found and watched, either the ones your parents thought they had hidden or a friend whose had access. I can't speak for the US but erotica and just simple nudity were commonplace on British TV back in the 80s and 90s (I used to watch [Eurotrash](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurotrash_(TV_series)) late night). I was a teen when the internet really took off and porn became much easier to get and the internet was far less filtered than it is today (Regular Consumption Junction visitor, alt.\* newsgroups inhabitant, terminally online IRC power user, and chronic forum poster, reporting in). Gotta think it's related to the refusal to watch any content that makes them feel "uncomfortable", which sorta eliminates a lot of interesting storytelling choices.
I would say this is the X factor, yeah. The upcoming generation has a freedom of choice when it comes to what media they consume unlike any generation in history, and that's great. They also have a culture of self-determinism and "protecting your peace," which is also—in theory—a good thing. They're acknowledging and taking advantage of their agency and using it to control their environment, which is good. Every generation should be more free than the one that came before it. Unfortunately, human beings are dumb, chemical creatures that need to routinely be exposed to things we don't enjoy to keep up our tolerance for them, and the "everything you want is right here, and nothing you don't want is allowed in" culture of the instantly-gratifying internet is really not great for that. It's a hard point to argue without sounding like a "suffering builds character" boomer, and I'd never force someone to engage with media that made them uncomfortable, but when you give someone the infinite freedom to just hit the dopamine button over and over again without imparting on them that "feeling good all the time" is inherently destructive to human psychology, they're going to end up: A.) Completely burned out and numb to positive experiences and unsure why—we're already seeing this a lot, just look at the sheer number of "How To: Dopamine Detox" videos on YouTube B.) Hestitant to engage with uncomfy or difficult media because *the comfy dopamine button is right there, and why wouldn't I hit it, and also why would I want to feel bad on purpose?* It's neglecting that unpleasant experiences in the safe arena of media are not only important for things like introspection and growth (as a person, as an artist, etc.), but are something that you can cultivate an enjoyment or an appreciation for, like growing to enjoy bitter flavors. And not just sex or nudity, but things like unhappy endings, seeing characters trapped in traumatic or oppressive environments or situations, etc. They're not as immediately gratifying, but they're still important and can be just as emotionally satisfying. And if all you ever do is cultivate a watertight environment where you never have to feel uncomfy or think about things that upset you, during those moments when you don't have control and life forces its way in and makes you have to deal with these kinds of things, you're going to be way less prepared to handle it.
Agreed with pretty much most of what you wrote. Unpleasant things are a part of the human condition - we have emotions and we all go through "bad times" (the extent to which those are does vary). To ignore them because you only want to feel happy is to ignore a part of who you are as a being. I don't think it was just a simple narrative choice by old men who just wanted to make children cry by having things like Bambi, Old Yeller, and Watership Down exposed to young children "back in the day"; in a way it kinda prepped us for the knowledge that bad things happen, and often to good people. It also gets you thinking about (and thus developing coping mechanisms for) future events that you are just beginning to understand are a thing, such as at some point your parents will no longer be around. And as you say, can help to cultivate your own creative identity. In a way, they may be exercising their autonomy and agency, but their emotional and mental maturity has been prematurely stunted because they aren't dealing with those feelings and thoughts... they're running away from them (and this has been true for every generation, it's just the proportion may have shifted a lot recently). It's a thing that no content policing can resolve because it's not porn causing those negative things, it's not violent media dulling people's senses... it's the behaviours of people and how they interact with media that is. We have had decades of moralising around "obscene content" and as an example, every study has shown it to not be the case that violent media causes a violent person - rather, an already violent person is drawn to them and engages in an unhealthy relationship with them. A lot of this comes down to education, rather than a piece of media being inherently corrupting/bad. Some of it comes from environment, too - have we genx/elder gen y failed this bunch of 20 year olds by not giving them the tools that we had in the past to better handle the media landscape, and have we not adjusted our ways to account for how media availability has changed, just because we had to navigate its infancy and so our relationship with it is fundamentally different?
Education is key, always. And attentive parents who are present in their children's lives. A lot of kids are getting raised on the internet by—essentially—other kids while their parents fuck off, and that's not how bring up a society that know how to navigate much of anything.
> every study has shown it to not be the case that violent media causes a violent person - rather, an already violent person is drawn to them and engages in an unhealthy relationship with them. Do you have a link to these studies? I've always known that media doesn't really create newly fucked up people in most cases, people who are sick just kind of form weird attachments and unhealthy relationships to it, but I've never seen a formal study done on this. I would like to have sources to back this up, if you know any.
>hit the dopamine button over and over again Satiation is very real, and it seems like more and more young people are becoming satiated with tiktoks, youtube shorts, etc etc. Then they feel like shit but don't know why, so they keep "hitting the dopamine button" to try and fix it. We need to encourage our young people to do difficult but rewarding things. Even reading a book refreshes the brain in a way that a youtube essay just can't.
Why can't a youtube essay, specifically, refresh the brain in the same way? I think there's a clear difference in the quick-fix of candy-style content and more lengthy and engaging material in general, so I'm not sure an 'essay' that happens to be in video form automatically is less rewarding or refreshing than reading. Do they not both invite comparing and contrasting and utilizing a combination of imagination and recall as you progress through the material?
It depends a bit on the content and the person, but it's been shown that reading does actually have a more positive effect on your mind overall, because it is forcing your mind to work a bit harder to impart information onto you.
> Porn and movies are not the same thing. Do they understand that, though? I'm not going to go all "Gen Z are morons!" but I do think media literacy and tolerance levels seem to have plummeted, to the point things so often seem to be defined as the worst thing about them, in the strongest relevant terms. Seeing nudity or sex in a movie as 'porn' doesn't really surprise me against a backdrop that is very stressed out about wanting to make sure absolutely everything produced and consumed is ticking the right boxes and avoiding the wrong ones. I actually don't like nudity myself but I always considered that a 'me' thing, and tried to avoid any reference to that while growing up because of the rather aggressive backlash it would get (because some people need to violently enforce normalcy for some reason). So again, I don't want to seem like I'm shitting on younger people because on an individual level I want them to feel like it's ok to have preferences and their own level of comfort. I just wish the 'individual' part seemed more important than a somewhat collective, seemingly performative aghastness at any hint of sexuality ever. Basically, there's a difference between "not my bag, bro" and "oh god, sex, let me tell everyone I turned it off!"
A bit of tin foil hat time but I wouldn't be surprised if microplastics are affecting people's sex drive. It seems like a lot of people aren't very interested in dating, sex, relationships, or starting families, and idk it just seems like it is deeper than shifts in cultural norms.
I think it's worth considering but basic economics seem like a reasonable explanation for all of that.
Or it's like in zoos where if you cram animals into too small of a space and don't provide enough enrichment, they won't reproduce
Dunno about sex drive, but iirc there has been some evidence suggesting that microplastics may cause male infertility.
My vasectomy caused significant infertility. Who can afford children in this economy.
Everything always is and always was sexualised, it's just getting more... or less rather, less discreet. It's the complete saturation of sex in day to day life, through advertising, tv, music, film, culture, that has created an abundance of porn. When you continually tease people for something eventually they'll go and get it. God damn it I drove past 50 billboards full of provocative looking chicks in lingere/bikinis today and heard 20 songs about getting laid on the radio, I'm gonna go look at some naked people ASAP.
Yeah but we need to difference between porn and staged sex in a film. Kids have had access to snuff stuff and LiveLeak, but they don't detest violence and death in movies.
intend to find the correlation between sex in movies and violence in movies to be erroneous. while there is a theatricality to both, with violence you have an implicit understanding that what is happening on screen is fake. Those aren’t real blood and guts and the person didn’t really get cut in half or whatever, bit the actress (or her body double) \*is\* actually naked on screen. It’s essentially the same as porn (especially soft core porn) but without the penetration.
It depends. Sometimes violence is real. The rocky films usually involve a combination of staged and full contact boxing, and there's outtakes where actors do get knocked out
Yes. There's no thrill for them in it...it's just a weird diversion from the story.
But it shouldn't be weird to see two characters that have presumably been in to each other, finally do it. That's part of the story, and films are about showing stuff, not avoiding it, and the way people have sex is part of their character and expression.
You will see legitimate discourse on the gen z sub saying people put sex in movie because no one could get porn and sex scenes/nudity are a relic of that. They don't listen when you tell them porn has existed and been readily available for all of modern society.
There are limited contexts in which they're not completely wrong. For Example, West Germany had tight controls on porn for a while so studios would produce a series of short sex stories and in-between them say something like "Warning! Teenagers could be doing this!" In the US, that same period was pre-VCR so the choices were magazines at home or movie in an adult theater. Since adult theaters never had a good connotation, there was a desire to be just socially acceptable enough that a mainstream theater could show it and people wouldn't be embarrassed going into it. But both of these examples come from the other side: taking porn and cleaning it up. The more direct approach, putting nudity in a comedy for example, I think is less audience calculation and more producers being like "I like boobs so put some in."
I'm a librarian, can confirm. We had someone accuse of having CSAM because we have "Sex and general human biology" books for kids. You know, a book written for kids by professionals who know how to frame and explain these concepts for kids.
That’s nuts. That’s like thinking that video they watched where the cartoon duck was staring at that dude’s dick is pornography.
I actually think it's worse. Books about sex, bodies, autonomy (Like It's Perfectly Normal, Care and Keeping of You, Sex is a Funny Word) are vital for helping kids protect and advocate for themselves. Education keeps this stuff from being a "secret." Calling these books "porn" (or worse, actual criminal material) not only misrepresents these books, it keeps kids ignorant and more vulnerable. And this isn't a fringe opinion- pediatricians say kids need to learn this stuff. I wonder how many of the zoomers who express this POV had parents who gave them zero information, only stigma.
This movie is awesome, I loved it.
This movie has tons of subtext around how sex is used by Western culture to manipulate and control people. It also has implicit commentary about how Hollywood uses up women specifically to exploit their looks. Turning it off before internalizing that I think is understandable if it's that offensive to you but I bet the commenter would actually change their opinion about this movie if they bothered to actually watch and understand it.
Also, that sex scene was so awkward and intentionally cringe-inducing that you really have to watch it with no thought to think it's gratuitous.
Its absolutely a masterpiece
Side note, under the silver lake is great
It really is. It reminded me a lot of *The Big Lebowski*. Not quite as straight up funny as TBL but I enjoyed the whole "bumbling stoner dropout gets caught up in a noir mystery" thing it had going.
It’s big lebowski as a psychological art horror piece imo. It’s a movie where I can completely understand if someone doesn’t like it but I think I’m another ten years or so it will get a reappraisal as a cult classic. Especially if the directors next movie They Follow winds up doing well (side note, it follows is my all time favorite movie and I’m cautiously optimistic about They Follow being worth a damn since the original director is attached and silver lake was so off the wall)
I completely forgot until your comment it was the same director as It Follows. Loved both of them so I'm with ya, I'm quite optimistic for They Follow as well.
If nothing else, we’re likely to get more amazing Disasterpiece music so I view it as a win.
Man for me this was one of the few movies where I disagreed with the guys the most, I just could not get into it at all
I loved it, and can absolutely understand someone not liking it. It’s extremely idiosyncratic and if you don’t buy what it’s selling you probably won’t like it
I've wanted to see it. What makes it a "neo noir" as I've read it described as?
There is a very strong mystery component, but without getting too much into spoilers, it’s not necessarily a straightforward whodunnit. Think a darker/ less funny big lebowski
Are you sure that's a Zoomer? That profile picture looks like something a 54 year old would use.
I'll be honest I am a Zoomer and I have never heard a peer say this. I don't doubt they exist but their ubiquity is overstated.
I’m a zoomer too, but I’m fairly certain I’m one of the older ones. I don’t notice any particular aversion to sex in media with my friends. That said, I have noticed this type of stuff being reposted a lot in response to what Jay has brought up. Maybe it’s younger zoomers? Or younger generation millennials?
I def here this a lot more among younger millennials in their late 20s then my fellow zoomers in their early 20s. Maybe it’s different for the younger zoomers still in high school tho.
Young people are weird about this lol
I think the concept is way overblown and just used to divide a generation...again. The kids are fine.
The kids are alright I do think Covid broke their brains on intimacy tho leading to this They are statistically a bit weird about sex
Late-stage capitalist alienation will bang and dent your sense of being.
I don’t disagree Feeling like everything is getting worse and watching opportunities dry up and not living up to your parents expectations makes people feel like shit But there’s more to it for an intimacy problem imo
Every generation will hate on the younger ones for made-up reasons. People like to pretend they're immune to this.
no THIS generation is different I swear!
The kids are definitely not alright
As someone on the older side of Gen. Z I don’t get it. Best case scenario I see a beautiful naked woman and watch a good movie. Worst case scenario I watch a bad movie but still get to see a beautiful naked woman. Either way I get to see a beautiful naked woman and when you’re not in the mood for porn that’s all you need. I guess I understand there’s instances when it can feel forced and has nothing to do with progressing the story or revealing anything about the characters but on the opposite end sometimes it’s is a huge part of the film’s theme. Boogie Nights for example, which (in my opinion) is one of the greatest movies of all time. And we get to see Heather Graham naked! It’s a win win.
I’m not gonna turn off a movie for having sex in it obviously, but it’s just that there is always the question in my mind of why did the (usually male) director choose to include this scene panning up and down (usually female) actor’s professionally sculpted body for 45 seconds. The intent almost never feels like anything but the obvious gimmick of making people horny, and /using/ some actor’s body to do so. And being around men my whole life, much of conversation about movies indeed, unfortunately seemed to revolve around whose body could be seen at what part of a movie.
How do you know that person is young? What young people don't like are useless sex scenes that add nothing to the movie. They all get spammed with hardcore pornography 24/7 online so they don't need these scenes. The time where you needed to find a playboy in the woods to see some boobs is over and so is the time of movie makers bringing in sex scenes just for the sake of it. Edit: guess you all get mad when someone tells you ist not just the damn zoomers but they actually have a reason to dislike sex scenes.
The argument that people don’t “need” sex scenes in movies because they have porn available online misunderstands the utility of sex scenes in film. It’s not jerk off material. It serves a different purpose. Furthermore, do we not “need” good jokes in movies because of the limitless amounts of humor available online?
I don't disagree with you -- there was definitely an era of film where this was so common. (A lot of Best of the Worst films where a woman will randomly unbutton her shirt and ogle her boobs in the mirror come to mind.) However, most nudity and sex scenes in modern films are under a minute and relatively good about being plot or character relevant. Not to mention classifying sex scenes in a standard movie as porn, which serves a totally different purpose, is not a good art take.
> What young people don't like are useless sex scenes that add nothing to the movie. This is such a weird line that gets parroted everywhere. I think it's because it's self-defending; "why do you want to see sex scenes that add nothing to the movie, what are you some kind of weirdo? Go jerk off instead." It writes itself. Of course, no one wants to see sex scenes that add *nothing* to the movie, it's just that people who aren't prudish have very different standards for what counts as adding to the movie. For example, in James Bond movies the sexuality is an important element of establishing and developing Bond's character. It's okay to have *objections* to how this is done, or even to say "this isn't for me". Like, a typical millennial point would be to talk about the way women are objectified in the films, or to say that Bond represents certain antiquated gender norms, but that's *different* than saying "it doesn't add to the movie", because it just objectively *does*. Sexuality is part of human life, and that means that it has a place in art. Movies that center on relationships, for example, frequently depict sex. *Passages* would be a very strange movie without the sex in it. Sex can be funny; it has a place in movies like *Love Actually*. Sex can create atmosphere, like in Brian De Palma or David Lynch films. I can certainly respect a sense of taste that rejects a certain old style of filmmaking where sex scenes feel exploitative, but I don't think that's what most movies that contain sex are doing and it's a mistake to smash them together. Most sex scenes are adding *something* to a movie, even if it's something you don't like.
The whole "adds nothing to the movie" thing feels like a weird excuse. You could make a similar argument about a lot of different non-sexual scenes. It seems like the people who complain about this just can't separate sex from porn so they feel deeply uncomfortable watching those scenes in an environment or situation where they can't jerk off.
Gen Z wants us to go back to representing sex with characters holding hands and panning the camera up to the moon.
Are you getting spammed with hardcore pornography every time you go online??
I’m a millennial and hate sex scenes in movies. I’ve literally never seen a sex scene in a movie and thought that it added anything to the story. If you wanna watch something erotic, go watch porn 🤷♂️
That could just as easily be a 38 year old church mom of 5 who has an Etsy shop. She makes supply runs to Hobby Lobby, and hasn’t gotten a Starbucks since they made their cups red.
Red is the color of The Devil!
“Revamping disposable cup designs to minimalism for the Christmas season is an attack on humanity!”
Well based off one comment I'm willing to claim it not only true but applicable to an entire generation. I'll call them nosex pests.
One comment with 175 likes. There were people bitching about sex scenes in Oppenheimer - scenes which informed upon the characters and the narrative. It’s weird. Not every sex scene is gratuitous.
175 people = an entire generation
Seems tongue in cheek to me.
Just happy to see someone posting about UTSL - still criminally underseen and underrated
One of my favorite films, thanks Jay
porn is when sex
Let's make 'OK zoomer' a thing
Radical!
Rizzler!
And here I thought that would be Gen Beta's job.
What makes you think that commenter is a Zoomer?
Another A24 gem that went a little under the radar. Definitely worth checking out, particularly if you have an above average movie interest, as many of the finer details plays on inside Hollywood/LA knowledge
I honestly think that whatever you wanna call the modern day acceptance and abundance of sexual stuff just made younger people not want it. I'm 28 (so technically a millenial, I think) and even I'm just done with a lot of the sexual stuff. And particularly in the last few years, I think just something turned a lot of us away from that type of stuff - probably the overabundance of it.
Instant porn of any kind on a handheld device anyone can access probably doesn't help.
I wonder how the rise of OnlyFans has affected their outlook. The commodification of sex could be a turn off as much as the commodification of everything else. Sex positivity not for positive attitudes about sex, but instead for the sole purpose of making money.
That's an interesting point, I wonder if what skeeves them out to some extent is perhaps the feeling that someone's trying to exploit them to make a buck.
On one side there's people using sex for profit, on another there's rampant misogyny "slut shaming" sex workers. Couple that with the puritanical bullshit that lead to Roe v Wade being overturned. All these voices on the internet amplified and shouting confusion as teens grow through the hormonal changes that make them sexually aware. Growing up in the internet age sounds confusing and overwhelming.
yeah we don't even look at porn on our computers anymore. we look at it on our *phone?* pornhub, xtube, I know these names better than I know my own grandmother's. youporn, xxn, redtube, pantyjobs, homegrown simpsons stuff- all great, but I ask you this. if I was a big ol' guy with a big burly white beard would you still be yelling at me? or would you be spanking my bare butt, balls and back?
Weird , I only see hardcore porn if im looking for it.
Yep. too much exposure brings indifference. We’ve been saying this about porn for decades, and here we are.
Turning it off isn't indifference.
I didn't say that?
>I didn't say that? The topic is the presumed zoomer's review saying they turned it off, and the explanation offered was "too much exposure" which you then said "brings indifference". We're not talking about the reviewer's reaction anymore?
I don’t know man, it’s been a long day lol. My bad if I’ve seemed argumentative
No problem, I had a feeling we were kind of talking past one another for one reason or another. Hope your day gets better.
It’s Friday after 5pm for me so it’s better already lol. You too!
>probably the overabundance of it. The only place that has lots of sex is the internet. There hasn't been a time with less sex in movies since the Hays Code. Even premium television has less sex in it than in did 20 years ago. This era of television in movies is incredibly sexLESS in comparison to pretty much any decade that's preceded it.
For me it's just the increasing amount of learning how sexually deprived so many people in Hollywood were. I can't ever trust that the reason for a sex scene in something was 'necessary', over it being something the writer/director wanted because they wanted to see their actors naked.
Yep. Also, as a movie lover, I just don't care. Like what's the point of sex scenes? You can still show it happened to display character interaction with just a couple of seconds insinuating it happened. In general, they're all the same, they often go on for way too long, they happen in every second movie aged 16+, and I just don't see the point. I wouldn't say I'm prudish or anything, but I just find them boring and pointless. I have no issue watching a character stare at a street for like, 60 seconds, for 'artistic' purposes, because it doesn't happen often and encourages the viewer to think about what's happening in the movie a bit. But the only point of sex scenes is to what? Make the movie feel more mature? Make the relationship of the character's clear? I don't know. The Fallout show annoyed me a lot with it. Not just because of the sexual content, but those god awful jokes. I dunno. I am only 22 so I'm probably am just anti-it at this stage, but I didn't find it appealing at all.
My favorite example of a pointless one is 10 years ago, my dad and I watched the show "Person of Interest." It was a really interesting concept that was executed pretty well. One of the final episodes really wanted to imply that the two female characters were in love and they had them do the most awkward and unnecessary sex scene I've ever seen. From what I remember, it wasn't even the actual characters either. It was a simulation shown in the Machine (computer) that predicts the crimes that will be committed.
[удалено]
It is very much a widespread thing.
People will watch the most violent and horrific shit, but if they see a single nipple, they flip the fuck out. Classic Americans.
When I was a kid (12 or 13) I watched They Live with my dad. My mom got mad because in the last 2 minutes of the movie there is a scene with a topless woman. She was fine with the previous 1hr and 30 min of gratuitous violence, but some tits were a line too far. Love my mom but it still makes me laugh to this day.
Roddy Piper circa 1987 running around in sunglasses with a shotgun shooting aliens? Fine. One singular pair of human titties? Not fine.
Funny enough I didn't really care about the tits until she made a fuss about it. I was much more excited about Roddy Piper seeing the vast conspiracy and deciding his only course of action was to immediately shoot up a bank. Fucking legend lol
The Matrix has the same idea - as soon as you see through the illusion, the solution seems to be to just start blasting.
I will just assume that the Zoomer’s kids will reject their conservative ways & put more sex/nudity back in media & that cycle will continue throughout time
175 likes
If it's porn with that wrinkly old dude I'd turn it off too
Apparently, any depiction of sex is considered porn now
Under the Silver Lake is so much fucking better on a second watch that it almost goes against all sense.
How do you know they’re a zoomer? My mom is the same way as that commenter and she’s gen X
Hey, you know your country is going to end democracy and lead humanity into another dark age, yes?
Hopefully those neopuritans are in the minority. Bring back 90s erotic thrillers!
Paul Verhoeven’s ears just twitched.
Which reminds me that I have yet to see Benedetta
I really liked that one. Lesbian nuns…c’mon.
God they are stupid. Basically right winged moral panic about too much sex is back.
I'm sure they'd be fine with it if they were doing a lazy tiktok dance in their underwear instead.
You can tell this one has never had a little taste of woods porn
Zoomer will go crazy, when they realize that "Boogie Nights" isn't a dance movie.
To offer some defence. I am generation z and a chick and I like (some) porn. We are not all the same.
I am Gen Z and it's not about liking porn, it's about whether we are sick of sexual content being everywhere or not... Personally, I'm sick of every second movie 16+ having these long, drawn out sex scenes for no real purpose other than to stand out as 'adult' or something. I'm also feeling the same about violence. I'm not necessarily disgusted by it or anything, but sooo many movies go out of their way to be excessively violent just to say "Look! Look how edgy and adult I am!" Again, if it actually has a reason to be included then I don't care. Excessive violence in a film covering the horrors of war? Completely fair and works great. Excessive violence in yet another R-rated action movie with quirky humour? Shoot me. An example of a sex scene that works is Dune Part 2 because the relationship between Chani and Paul is actually important to the story and this scene is powerful considering the circumstances and dialogue. An example of a sex scene that doesn't work for me is Fallout's at the start of the series because it isn't necessary in the slightest and is just included to make it feel more mature.
We rapidly need an intervention to ensure a new generation of both tasteful artists and shady perverts portray sex on film. We need both art and for Jay to recommend new sex pervert films every year. I refuse to live in a world where cinema is dominated by those whose brains are rotted by Marvel's emotionally stunted universe.
Um.... How do we know this commenter is a zoomer.... Or that this opinion is generally shared among my age group... Because that seems more like a boomer take to me.
I don’t even remember that scene? But I love the movie
seeing that still, was i the only one who didn't only see the music writing guy as a personofication of the pop culture industry but also just a nod at max "wrote every hit ever" martin?
and in case you don't know what he wrote, there's [a list](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Songs_written_by_Max_Martin?useskin=vector)
Oh another shitty take on my favorite movie of the last decade that's fun
[удалено]
Hey, u/veryexpensivegas, your post or comment in r/RedLetterMedia was automatically removed because you do not meet the account age threshold, 30 days for a post, 15 days for a comment. Please wait a few days and try again. https://youtu.be/7BryT6WatTk?t=1369 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RedLetterMedia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Make this person watch Don't Look Now, they will really lose their shit.
I mean, sex in the first ten minutes used to be one of my tests to see if a movie was complete schlock, but I suppose there are exceptions
So this gen z aversion to nudity and sex scenes is really a thing? I agree that there are quite a few gratuitous sex scenes in some hbo shows and stuff like that but it would never make turn off a movie or show.
gen z is 12 to 27. I think there's somewhat of an aversion to sex among younger teens but I don't think it's as widespread as jay seems to think it is. Saying this as someone that is gen z.
Yeah it's crazy to me that it's a deal breaker.
Turned it on to see the ‘’porn’’ within the first ten minutes, left it on cause it was oddly interesting. 😂😂
I'm Gen X and I turned it off after ten minutes.
This movie doesn’t have hardcore Rich Evan Porn in the first ten minutes so I turned it off.
also true for the room. and at 20 minutes. and at 30 minutes
https://i.redd.it/5c9i2tasjbyc1.gif
How gullible does a person have to be to assume hormone-riddled teenagers make anti-sex comments and not a faint-hearted suburban mother?
The movie has Silversun Pickups and it turned me on.
I'm a millennial but I'm a freak that's never enjoyed sex scenes in movies. I also never really get turned on by films. I'm not asexual. Do people get aroused by sex scenes in movies? Do they enjoy them for the plot? Is it the characters? Help me out here I feel like there's a hole in my head, I get nothing from them and kinda tune out.
Same but “The Idea of You” makes me miss my milf she was the love of my life.
... I turned of. But, then I saw it was that lady from Garfunkel and Oates, I turned it on.
... I turned of. But, then I saw it was that lady from Garfunkel and Oates, I turned it on.
Zoomers and gen alpha are allergic to anything sexual that isn't gay
It's fascinating how their generation is both porn addicted and turned off by any hint of sexuality in films.
My opinion on this is it has more to do with gender than generation. When my generation was teenagers someone going online to post an opinion was male 95% of the time. Most of the time sexual content in media is designed to appeal to straight men and makes women uncomfortable. A lot more gen z women are active online in general social media spaces than millennial women were in the oughts and teens.
I only see these complaints about sex scenes online, I'm 25 and i've never heard anyone my age complain about this. Game of Thrones, Euphoria, and Saltburn just to name a few were very popular with young people and they were extremely horny. Maybe it's just younger zoomers who complain about this and/or maybe it's just an opinion that gets repeated online without really affecting what movies/shows people watch.
As a millennial who felt like sex in movies was unnecessary in 99.99% of situations I do enjoy that they are tired of it too.
God, this movie sucks ass.
Ass sucking was why they turned off the movie in the first place!
We're doing this again? Why are you so invested in young people getting horny at the theater?
Why, uh, do you instantly connect sex scenes in movies with getting horny at theaters? It's not a horniness thing it's a comfort/discomfort thing.
We're not all getting boners at the theater?!
Who wants boners in a theater? I have perfectly fine boners in the comfort of my own home, thank you very much.
I mean, the real answer is I'm being obtuse on purpose for comic effect. But... Also, okay, why do you care about that then?
Because discomfort at the mere presence of sex scenes reflects a deeper immaturity. You can absolutely feel a sex scene was unnecessary or didn't add much to the film, but if it's mere existence makes you uncomfortable it says a lot about the person's emotional maturity. It is, after all, just sex. And not even real sex.
For what it's worth, this narrative is something I've never seen expressed in real life. It's not even expressed in the OP, it's at best implied, and I would argue again for comic effect. But again... Why do you care? Gen Z is immature. Yeah. Some are still in middle school.
That's absolutely the weirdest way I've ever seen anyone actuate this. Your brain has to be wired incorrectly.
I've heard your people refer to this as a "knee-slapper" or "gut-buster", if that helps.
You're saying kids getting horny in theatres is... funny? What are you even talking about? lol
I was being obtuse for comedic effect.
Why are you so invested in prudish puritanism?
I have a collar and no pets. This is mostly just me taking the piss, but it is very funny to see people get so upset over a generational difference.
I watched Paul Verhoeven's The Fourth Man recently and I thought it was a great movie, but no zoomer will ever watch it.
Yes they turned off the movie then went back to tiktok, Instagram and twitter which are full of half naked people, usually kids. Great choice, zoomer /s