News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
My issue is that it's almost always gratuitous now. I so rarely see a sex scene in a TV show or movie and think that it could have easily been skipped, but they felt the need to show an actress' breasts and have her simulate an orgasm.
I don't get titillated by it. I have porn if I need that.
I didn't get past the first episode of Game of Thrones because I found all the sex and nudity too gratuitous for my tastes.
I don't think I'm a prude. I have no problem with sex scenes and nudity in films where they make sense. Basic Instinct wouldn't make sense without them. Last Tango in Paris wouldn't make sense without them. They're both movies worth watching.
You didn't think it made sense in game of thrones?
It's olden days in a hostile world. All there is to do is have sex and die. What felt inaccurate to life about that?
In the one episode I saw? No. It seemed almost entirely gratuitous. I don't need to watch a prostitute sucking off Peter Dinklage to know he's having sex with a bunch of prostitutes what with him already being in bed with them.
I often find sex scenes to be gratuitous and unnecessary, but I would never let sex prevent me from watching an amazing TV show or movie. I think that's just foolish.
When there are countless other good things to watch that don't involve those? Why spend my time on the ones that do just because they're also considered to be good? I won't enjoy them as much, so obviously they won't be as good for me as they are for others.
I could be missing all kinds of amazing things to watch for all kinds of reasons. So could you. There's only 24 hours in a day. You have to pick and choose.
Just a trivial and silly way to limit your exposure to different types of film/TV.
A sex scene might make me take a point off of my score for a movie, but I've seen far too many flat out incredible movies/shows with unnecessary sex scenes to know just how much I'd be missing if I removed such a large chunk of content from the pool right off the bat like that.
No thanks. I will watch something without regard for its sexual content, because I'm an adult. And then, if it turned out to have a gratuitous sex scene, that will factor into my opinion of the thing.
The thing about gratuitous and unnecessary sex scenes is, by definition, they are unnecessary. So if you really care that much, why not just fast forward through them? You would miss nothing (otherwise it wouldn't have been unnecessary).
I recently watched "Jeanne Dielman..." after seeing it top the BFI Top 100 list. That movie has quite a bit of sex, but it was well worth the watch, and it would be a shame to have prevented myself from even having that opportunity because it contains sex.
It wasn't a sex scene in the case of the first episode of GoT.
I don't have a problem with a sex scene. Especially if it serves the plot.
I literally said so at the beginning of this comment chain:
Yeah I understand that and agree that most sex scenes are unnecessary. And I am talking about movies and TV shows that are considered some of the greatest media ever created, that might happen to have unnecessary sex in it. I'm not going to arbitrarily limit myself and miss out on watching that stuff because there might be 90 seconds (of a 2+ hour film) of unnecessary sex. Again, because I'm an adult.
Using your example, you are missing out on one of the best stories ever told on television (until the last season at least), because the first episode of the show had sex in it that you found to be unnecessary (and btw, while most of the sex in that show is unnecessary, there is at least one or two *very important" sex scenes in season 1 that one might not recognize as being important... Yet).
As someone who read the books, I was able to tell which sex scenes were important, and which weren't, but not all of it is unnecessary.
I understand your position, I just think it's silly (and kind of sad).
And, as I said, you might be missing out on one of the best stories ever told on television for some other reason, what with "one of the best stories ever told" being a very subjective measure. I often disagree with things that people consider to be the "greatest ever" when it comes to movies and TV. As someone who is only mildly interested in high fantasy, I doubt it would have ever elevated it to that level for me.
I was told that Breaking Bad was the greatest ever. I watched more than the first episode. I didn't like it. I don't like shows where everyone is irredeemably awful.
I may miss out on things, but it will only be because I wasn't aware of it. I wouldn't do something to arbitrarily limit my exposure to those things because someone has sex in it. Because I'm an adult.
I watched an episode. I didn't like it. I stopped and watched something else. I'm not sure what the big deal here is aside from you not accepting that I just wasn't interested in something you like.
Why should I keep watching a show I don't like when there are show for me to watch that I do like just because it's a popular show? I have never cared about what is popular and never will.
Do what you want, I'm just pointing out why I think it's silly.
I also think giving up on a show that is considered one of the greatest of all time, after a single episode, is foolish. Regardless if the reason was sex or not.
I guess I just have more interest in finding and watching classic films and shows. I also have enough free time to watch pretty much everything that I want (plus more).
I'm going to upset you more by listing a bunch of other "greatest shows of all time" that I didn't like and I wasted far much more time with them. Just taking a look at some 'best shows of all time' lists...
Breaking Bad
The Sopranos
Westworld
House of Cards
The Wire
Oz
Squid Game
BoJack Horseman
Curb Your Enthusiasm
Twin Peaks
The Americans
Succession
Mad Men
I don't care if you or anyone else liked them. I didn't. I clearly have different entertainment needs than the people who like the "greatest shows of all time." I could go through each one and explain to you why I don't like them or you could accept that what I consider entertaining does not often include the "greatest shows of all time."
I'm guessing some of the shows I consider to be the greatest of all time you haven't even heard of, or if you had, you didn't agree. Just looking at my hard drive and restricting it to American shows that are less well-known or less-recent:
Mystery Science Theater 3000
Fernwood2Night/America2Night
Food Party
Fishing with John
The Adventures of Pete and Pete
Northern Exposure
Odyssey 5
Wonderfalls
The first live-action version of The Tick
Police Squad
It's Garry Shandling's Show
I would watch any of those over the list of shows above. And, as I said, that's only American shows. I can list so many more British ones. And then we get into animation...
Who's upset?
And just FYI as soon as I saw that you were trying to do some "look at how different I am than everyone else" list, I stopped reading.
Edit: Until I saw mst3k and had to see what the context for that was... LOLOL yeah I've never heard of any of those super obscure shows like The Adventures of Pete and Pete hahahaha. My guy, you know nothing about me.
Btw we're all super impressed though
I'm not different from everyone else. Lots of people really love those shows that I listed. Mystery Science Theater 3000 won a Peabody Award and had one of the all-time record Kickstarters for a reboot because it was so beloved. Northern Exposure won multiple Emmys. Let me guess, I'm also "different from everyone else" because I consider the apex of TV to be Star Trek.
I'm trying to explain to you that not everyone shares your tastes, but you seem to be unable to fathom that. You also seem to be under the hilarious impression that you've heard of every great TV show out there because only someone who wanted to show how different they were might love a show you didn't.
So fine, anyone who doesn't consider the exact same TV shows you do to be the greatest one ever is a fool, a monster and lower than pond scum. Glad we've established that and can all move on with our lives.
I think, at least in the GoT example, sexual situations can be used to communicate a lot about the attitudes and culture around sex and nudity in the universe of the show or movie. It's much more interesting than somebody saying, "Hey, person who already knows this: it's considered normal for men to use brothels, isn't it?"
It's much less interesting and necessary for something set in the "current" world, since the audience doesn't need as much education in the social mores. However, it can make the work have better instructive longevity if it's an accurate depiction of the time, since people fifty years in the future can watch and understand what was different.
But I do agree that overall there has been a lot of gratuitous nudity and sex, just the same with violence, etc.
You should suffer through it. The series is pretty primo. Books are good too, but season one is less time investment than book one and they run pretty parallel. Book two and season two... Different story.
To be honest that particular sex scene is pretty central to their story and Bran's story. It could have been less gratuitous but the actual point of him catching them in the act drives the rest of their story lines.
There were multiple sex scenes in the first episode, not just one. If I remember correctly, the scene with Peter Dinklage getting sucked off was right near the beginning.
I went back to look at the parents guide for the first episode and holy shit. There was so much that I forgot about. 90% of it was completely gratuitous.
Oo! Link please!
IMDB Parents Guide
Thanks!