Unsimulated sex scenes in a movie

No baggie
There's some kind of plastic or fabric covering, I don't think that's a condom or the texture of his balls.

Screenshot 2024-07-12 at 8.30.21 AM.png

Screenshot 2024-07-12 at 8.30.57 AM.png

Screenshot 2024-07-12 at 8.32.17 AM.png


Anyway, you can tell just from the way the whole thing is shot that it's simulated sex. The angles, when they cut away, the fact that every time there's full frontal nudity they are flaccid. That's what simulated sex scenes look like. If it was unsimulated there wouldn't be such a care to imply that more is going on while hiding the actual penetration, stroking, fingering, etc. just out of frame.

I understand the drive to try to find hot unsimulated content in movies and TV, but I think a lot of it is wishful thinking. The reality is that it's super rare and filmmakers are increasingly apt at making explicit sex scenes without involving their actors in real sexual activity, especially now with prosthetics and digital composition/AI. Unless you're shooting porn or trying to provoke or make a point about eroticism, anyone who's ever been on a film set could tell you - with lighting adjustments, and camera resets, and doing many takes, and keeping up with the dialogue - it's a lot easier for everyone involved to have them pretend instead of actually fucking.
 
There's some kind of plastic or fabric covering, I don't think that's a condom or the texture of his balls.

View attachment 137458671
View attachment 137458681
View attachment 137458691

Anyway, you can tell just from the way the whole thing is shot that it's simulated sex. The angles, when they cut away, the fact that every time there's full frontal nudity they are flaccid. That's what simulated sex scenes look like. If it was unsimulated there wouldn't be such a care to imply that more is going on while hiding the actual penetration, stroking, fingering, etc. just out of frame.

I understand the drive to try to find hot unsimulated content in movies and TV, but I think a lot of it is wishful thinking. The reality is that it's super rare and filmmakers are increasingly apt at making explicit sex scenes without involving their actors in real sexual activity, especially now with prosthetics and digital composition/AI. Unless you're shooting porn or trying to provoke or make a point about eroticism, anyone who's ever been on a film set could tell you - with lighting adjustments, and camera resets, and doing many takes, and keeping up with the dialogue - it's a lot easier for everyone involved to have them pretend instead of actually fucking.
AI is our misfortune.
 
There's some kind of plastic or fabric covering, I don't think that's a condom or the texture of his balls.

View attachment 137458671
View attachment 137458681
View attachment 137458691

Anyway, you can tell just from the way the whole thing is shot that it's simulated sex. The angles, when they cut away, the fact that every time there's full frontal nudity they are flaccid. That's what simulated sex scenes look like. If it was unsimulated there wouldn't be such a care to imply that more is going on while hiding the actual penetration, stroking, fingering, etc. just out of frame.

I understand the drive to try to find hot unsimulated content in movies and TV, but I think a lot of it is wishful thinking. The reality is that it's super rare and filmmakers are increasingly apt at making explicit sex scenes without involving their actors in real sexual activity, especially now with prosthetics and digital composition/AI. Unless you're shooting porn or trying to provoke or make a point about eroticism, anyone who's ever been on a film set could tell you - with lighting adjustments, and camera resets, and doing many takes, and keeping up with the dialogue - it's a lot easier for everyone involved to have them pretend instead of actually fucking.
This is ridiculous because people generally want to see a lot of sex on certain categories of films, real sex attracts masses of people. Directors are stupid.
 
There's some kind of plastic or fabric covering, I don't think that's a condom or the texture of his balls.

View attachment 137458671
View attachment 137458681
View attachment 137458691

Anyway, you can tell just from the way the whole thing is shot that it's simulated sex. The angles, when they cut away, the fact that every time there's full frontal nudity they are flaccid. That's what simulated sex scenes look like. If it was unsimulated there wouldn't be such a care to imply that more is going on while hiding the actual penetration, stroking, fingering, etc. just out of frame.

I understand the drive to try to find hot unsimulated content in movies and TV, but I think a lot of it is wishful thinking. The reality is that it's super rare and filmmakers are increasingly apt at making explicit sex scenes without involving their actors in real sexual activity, especially now with prosthetics and digital composition/AI. Unless you're shooting porn or trying to provoke or make a point about eroticism, anyone who's ever been on a film set could tell you - with lighting adjustments, and camera resets, and doing many takes, and keeping up with the dialogue - it's a lot easier for everyone involved to have them pretend instead of actually fucking.
Some of us have been pretending instead of fucking for decades! :)
But seriously, with ratings and guidelines and things, and the internet, most directors probably just think it isn't worth it. If people want real fucking, porn is Very easy to find...why bother?
 
Some of us have been pretending instead of fucking for decades! :)
But seriously, with ratings and guidelines and things, and the internet, most directors probably just think it isn't worth it. If people want real fucking, porn is Very easy to find...why bother?
Porn is not the same as a film, sorry