thinking too much again

[salixbabylon]

I saw "Libertine" last night...



...and I'm *so* annoyed by movies that present sex as bad and dirty and wrong and immoral and ultimately leading to despair, disease, and death. Fuckers.

I mean, there was lots of talking about sex, but almost no nudity, and very little humping. I found only one scene early in the movie to be erotic, but not the rest. With one exception, women didn't seem to enjoy sex at all. Sex was a thing men bought, a thing to have, not an act to enjoy or relish or take time with or explore for the pleasure of it. It was the quest for a fuck rather than the joy of sexual ecstasy.

And it bloody well pissed me off.

I mean, I wasn't expecting NC-17 smut, but I *would* have liked a touch more Johnny-flesh. A few more fun-fucking scenes. And a FUCK OF A LOT LESS moralizing about how bad and evil sex is.

*grump*

First, become a writer. Next, take over Hollywood and make sex-positive, non-porn (or happy!porn) movies.

:P

Comments

[janinelearner.livejournal.com]

You do realise this was a biographical film dont you? That's what Wilmot really was like and he didnt care about the women, not really, and he died of syphillis, that was the whole point, he got his comeupance for his decandent lifestyle.

[salixbabylon.livejournal.com]

I did know that it was a bi-pic, yes. And no, he wasn't a nice man, and possibly he did "deserve what he got", since no one made him whore around that much or drink himself to death. But I have pretty major issues with the concept that people who screw around should be punished, as if sex was sinful. But that's my own personal crusade, I guess.

At the very least, I'd have liked to see him enjoying the sex a little more, you know? I mean, why live that kind of lifestyle if you really don't like it? And the romantic bits could have been a bit sexier, too, IMO.

I'm just a grouch, I guess. ;)

[bloominbabylon.livejournal.com]

First, become a writer. Next, take over Hollywood and make sex-positive, non-porn (or happy!porn) movies.

Can I help? I could...oh...I don't know...maybe be a fluffer for the boys?

[salixbabylon.livejournal.com]

I'm sure we can find a job for you somewhere. ;)

[bloominbabylon.livejournal.com]

I'm a quick study...you won't be sorry:-)

[miladyhawke.livejournal.com]

I'm going to see it tomorrow with caseymochraidh and have a feeling I'll end up feeling the same way. Before I knew what it was about, I thought it was a period adventure :p I still held out hopes for Rochester being some likable rogue. Oh well. Like the one person said, biography, but... why one would care to do a bio of him I have no idea.

[salixbabylon.livejournal.com]

I wanted a likeable rogue, too... Well, I hope you enjoy the film more than I did! :)

[lozateazer.livejournal.com]

Damn, that sucks. And I heard that they make you hate the Earl, but... sex in a bad light? Boo.

[salixbabylon.livejournal.com]

I *could* just be a lot pickier than the general audience, since I have a vested interest in presenting sex as a good thing, as a career. ;)

[rifleman-s.livejournal.com]

This film doesn't seem to be appearing anywhere in the UK at present *sigh*. Guess I'll have to wait for the DVD *is annoyed*

I believe this is a re-working of an biographical account of his life, and unfortunately those attitudes were around at the time. So although it's upsetting to our modern minds, it's probably an accurate historical portrayal.

However, can I join you in Hollywood . . . *winks*

[salixbabylon.livejournal.com]

Sounds good to me!