Charles Melton (riverdale)

Loved the film. It was great. I don’t see him being “heavy” or having a “dadbod”. He’s not cut like Reggie in Riverdale, but his character isn’t like that. He’s still hot. As far as the penis, it’s probably 8 inches, not 6, because it’s meant to be hard. He had just been inside of her so he’s still erect. And if you watch the film, you’ll see it’s not soft lol. It’s hard and very large.
And very fake
 
Loved the film. It was great. I don’t see him being “heavy” or having a “dadbod”. He’s not cut like Reggie in Riverdale, but his character isn’t like that. He’s still hot. As far as the penis, it’s probably 8 inches, not 6, because it’s meant to be hard. He had just been inside of her so he’s still erect. And if you watch the film, you’ll see it’s not soft lol. It’s hard and very large.
The film is based on the real-life story of Mary Kay Letourneau who spent seven years in prison after having a relationship with her 13-year-old student, Vili Fualaau. The obvious oversized prosthetic ties well into the storyline in that it the film concludes the woman was a sociopath whose ultimate motivation was that she loved a big dick.

I agree with a previous post in that I could see Melton as being the standout nomination for this film in the best supporting category.
 
Loved the film. It was great. I don’t see him being “heavy” or having a “dadbod”. He’s not cut like Reggie in Riverdale, but his character isn’t like that. He’s still hot. As far as the penis, it’s probably 8 inches, not 6, because it’s meant to be hard. He had just been inside of her so he’s still erect. And if you watch the film, you’ll see it’s not soft lol. It’s hard and very large.
Dude. It’s a prosthetic dick.
 
Was the sex scene hot at all? Doesn't look very promising based on these stills, kinda disappointed. I'm tempted to go to one of my local screenings in NYC if you tell me it's worth it. Otherwise, I'll pass and wait for Netflix on December 1st.
A prosthetic dick was used, so it isn't even a sex scene, it's a plastic scene.
 
Nowadays, real erections are typically not allowed on a major movie set. The sets have intimacy coordinators to ensure that doesn’t happen, and it’s not exactly easy to get and stay hard when there are forty people watching you and you’re under a bunch of hot lights. It’s an impressive prosthetic, though, but obviously meant for shock sake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigboaster
So is there any actual sex... He's just on top of her for one second, gets up to flash a prosthetic penis and sits in bed?
He has a full sex scene with Natalie Portman, but it's not shot in an erotic way at all. In some ways it re-traumatizes his character. It's an uncomfortable scene. Get off to it if you want, but its purpose isn't to titillate.
 
this is the "chubby" people are referring to?? can't be
He gained 40 lbs for the movie. He’s not chubby by any real standards… But for a guy known to be a muscle hunk with a six pack, it’s different. He looks more like a normal guy.

Also the people on here mad that the sex scene isn’t hot… Go back to porn and stay away from art with moral quandaries I guess?
 
He has a full sex scene with Natalie Portman, but it's not shot in an erotic way at all. In some ways it re-traumatizes his character. It's an uncomfortable scene. Get off to it if you want, but its purpose isn't to titillate.
All the more reason why it was important not to cheapen the movie with a comical prosthetic. A real dick would have been best, no dick at all better, a fake stupid dick that just overshadows and detracts from an otherwise great movie is the worst.
 
All the more reason why it was important not to cheapen the movie with a comical prosthetic. A real dick would have been best, no dick at all better, a fake stupid dick that just overshadows and detracts from an otherwise great movie is the worst.
It’s a movie, not a porno.

There is no reason for it to be real for the purposes of the film, and I for one would much prefer to offer actors and actresses the safety and comfort of a prosthetic than traumatize them by asking them to do that.

The indie film scene is a different beast, it attracts different sorts of talent who’re comfortable with different things. There’s no place for that kind of stuff on a mainstream Hollywood film set with actors and actresses who’re far less comfortable and willing to do that kind of nudity.
 
It’s a movie, not a porno.

There is no reason for it to be real for the purposes of the film, and I for one would much prefer to offer actors and actresses the safety and comfort of a prosthetic than traumatize them by asking them to do that.

The indie film scene is a different beast, it attracts different sorts of talent who’re comfortable with different things. There’s no place for that kind of stuff on a mainstream Hollywood film set with actors and actresses who’re far less comfortable and willing to do that kind of nudity.
Agreed.

Also, if you're letting a prosthetic genuinely ruin the rest of what Todd Haynes is doing cinematically, then that's a you problem.