I personally think the sex in True Blood is almost entirely pandering and often have little other purpose other than "we need a vampire banging scene now, maaan". In GoT however you can often read a lot of stuff into the sexual material beyond the obvious. There are exceptions in both shows of course but I'd say GoT actually handles it much better
Zzulu on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Yeah put me in the didn't notice some of the nudity until people pointed it out camp too.
Hey Ross how do you feel about nudity in paintings and things? I'm kind of curious.
In this same thread, a page or two ago, he mentioned liking True Blood. Which is even more sex-riddled than this show.
I think it comes down to his expectations of this show rather than what it actually is more than anything else.
"Expectations" don't have a lot with gratuitous nudity and sexuality.
I just think HBO is handling those things with a clumsy touch and erring well more on the side of male-demographic pandering.
As someone else posted above, a lot of the nudity here seems like HBO feels obligated to give their viewership naked boobs.
How much full on male nudity do you get on other shows on HBO?
Again, True Blood. Mostly boobs and simulated sex that shows the woman off far more than the man.
Game of Thrones. EXACT SAME THING.
Just that one is about sexy vampires and werewolves, and one is a grim, dark low fantasy setting where sex is a tool, and is often not "sexy"
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
Theodore Flooseveltproud parent of eight beautiful girls and shalmelodorne (which is currently being ruled by a woman (awesome role model for my daughters)) #dornedadRegistered Userregular
Ross is saying that it is not necessary for sexy females to be constantly disrobing. That is not the same as him saying he in uncomfortable with sexy females constantly disrobing, just that they could display their sexy female wiles without actually being buck naked to get the point across. You can show women using the tools available to them in a medieval society without continual spontaneous nudity. It's a bit on the nose.
Now! I don't personally think it's gratuitous, and I haven't had a problem with anything on the show, but I'd agree that it's possible some scenes could work just as well without titties all up in.
Surely you can see how it comes across like someone going "Oh god, National Geographic is just pandering, those tribes could totally be shot from a different angle or put some clothes on!" I hope you are realizing what I am getting at here, I didn't even notice there were so many breasts in the Dothraki wedding for instance until I had it on DVD and was listening to the commentaries.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
Now! I don't personally think it's gratuitous, and I haven't had a problem with anything on the show, but I'd agree that it's possible some scenes could work just as well without titties all up in.
I agree with this, and I wish the conversation wasn't steered too often into boring, stupid binaries - "Too much sex! You're all hypocrites or lechers!" "Just enough sex! You're all prudes!"... but if this is mentioned in connection with scenes that feature no titties whatsoever, it's difficult to know what to do with such criticism.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I personally think the sex in True Blood is 100% pandering and often have little other purpose other than "we need a vampire banging scene now, maaan". In GoT you can often read a lot of stuff into the sexual material beyond the obvious
I think the proof of this lies in the Jessica and Tara characters.
If the sex were in any way necessary or not added strictly for the extra viewership (though Sookie is a pretty huge slut in the books, granted) you wouldn't see characters having extensive, earth-shattering, indescribably athletic sex while keeping their bra on or their breasts carefully concealed by a well-placed object. Osha showing everything wouldn't have had the same impact if shot from the back, but Natalia Tena is not exactly an unknown and could've gotten the director to shoot her that way if she'd pushed a little bit. It reminds me of Halle Berry in Swordfish vs Halle Berry in Monster's Ball.
She got an extra $5 million or so for a brief flash of boobs in Swordfish, but received no extra pay for doing a full-on sex scene with Billy Bob Thorton in Monster's Ball. When asked why, she said "Because it wasn't necessary in Swordfish."
Theodore Flooseveltproud parent of eight beautiful girls and shalmelodorne (which is currently being ruled by a woman (awesome role model for my daughters)) #dornedadRegistered Userregular
Surely you can see how it comes across like someone going "Oh god, National Geographic is just pandering, those tribes could totally be shot from a different angle or put some clothes on!" I hope you are realizing what I am getting at here, I didn't even notice there were so many breasts in the Dothraki wedding for instance until I had it on DVD and was listening to the commentaries.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
But GOT is fiction. It is written as "show boobs" or "don't show boobs" (I'm assuming most scripts are very direct when boobies are called for)
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Ross is saying that it is not necessary for sexy females to be constantly disrobing. That is not the same as him saying he in uncomfortable with sexy females constantly disrobing, just that they could display their sexy female wiles without actually being buck naked to get the point across. You can show women using the tools available to them in a medieval society without continual spontaneous nudity. It's a bit on the nose.
Now! I don't personally think it's gratuitous, and I haven't had a problem with anything on the show, but I'd agree that it's possible some scenes could work just as well without titties all up in.
There's also the fact that when nudity does occur, the camera is often placed away from the exchange of pertinent information and is instead focused on general coverage of the nudity.
Take the scene between Renly Baratheon and Margaery Tyrell from before; the blocking in that scene is maximized to see as much of Margaery's tits as possible; she's even turned at an awkward angle to ensure the audience gets a good long look. She disrobes several feet away from Renly and is at an angle perpendicular to his line of sight. She then walks toward the camera with her chest thrust out, only turning herself back toward Renly when she gets right to him.
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
Too bad this line of thought wasn't there pages ago when everybody and their brother jumped on me for suggesting the show do things just a tad differently.
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Here's the thing: yeah, they're totally pandering (the gender disparity is the main indicator here). But most of the nudity serves the story. The stuff in Littlefinger's brother is the least likely to do so. As an example from the last episode:
Why is Osha naked? Two reasons: we're showing that Osha is smart enough to have picked up on Theon's character being a lecher and using that to her advantage. We're also indicating that wildling women are more sexually aggressive and will abuse men's stupidity about sex to get what they want than the typical woman south of the Wall, which informs the later scene between Jon and Ygritte.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
The blocking was perfectly appropriate for a television show with an audience. If this was a stage play, the blocking might in fact even be made more obvious -- because it's not the characters that need to 'see' what's going on as much as the audience.
3DS: 0232-9436-6893
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
Surely you can see how it comes across like someone going "Oh god, National Geographic is just pandering, those tribes could totally be shot from a different angle or put some clothes on!" I hope you are realizing what I am getting at here, I didn't even notice there were so many breasts in the Dothraki wedding for instance until I had it on DVD and was listening to the commentaries.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
But GOT is fiction. It is written as "show boobs" or "don't show boobs" (I'm assuming most scripts are very direct when boobies are called for)
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
I don't think you can find fault with the way the show uses nudity though - from its sets, to costumes, to languages, to far flung places they shoot, and so on, the whole show is aiming to put on full display cultures and tribes. How they are implementing nudity is very much an extension of that, they really are shooting for making these varying people believable as groups with different traditions and culturally accepted motivations, often times to the point where its disturbing not because it puts on front street how fucked up each society is. Tyrion's story for instance about jacking off in his sister's food would probably have a Dothraki busting a gut where it has the Eyrie recoiling in derision and Bronn is notable for grinning at the confession. And someone being attractive nude does not make their scenes titillating if you care to take notice of the context of the scene - in fact, come to think of it there has been only a pair scenes of titillation that I can think of in the entire series and it was done fully clothed (well, she was anyways, hello Drogo!) with implied sex, where as two ladies full on nude get it on and I am right along with Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish in recognizing it as an tawdry act that he is barely taking notice of due to its piss poor performance. In numerous other nude scenes as well there has been context that suggested cultural acceptance that is different than what is acceptable in many places IRL, a transfer of wealth and power, abuse, and even rape - hardly gratuitous, let alone titillating. In many ways this show is handling nudity far more maturely than many shows I have seen before and most of the other ones I would regard as handling it more maturely have been on HBO such as with Boardwalk Empire.
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
CanadianWolverine on
0
Options
Theodore Flooseveltproud parent of eight beautiful girls and shalmelodorne (which is currently being ruled by a woman (awesome role model for my daughters)) #dornedadRegistered Userregular
Here's the thing: yeah, they're totally pandering (the gender disparity is the main indicator here). But most of the nudity serves the story. The stuff in Littlefinger's brother is the least likely to do so. As an example from the last episode:
Why is Osha naked? Two reasons: we're showing that Osha is smart enough to have picked up on Theon's character being a lecher and using that to her advantage. We're also indicating that wildling women are more sexually aggressive and will abuse men's stupidity about sex to get what they want than the typical woman south of the Wall, which informs the later scene between Jon and Ygritte.
That Osha scene is definitely great characterization, for both of those reasons, and the following scene with her improvising a hasty seduction in order to kill the sentry made it all the more effective.
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you understood his point
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you understood his point
I don't think you understood mine.
If you want to shock the audience while still making sense within the blocking of the scene, don't put the camera where it is in that scene. Put it behind or just to the side of Renly, and have Margaery face him dead on; that way the subject (Renly) and the audience can share in the same exchange of information.
Instead, the audience gets a face full of tits and Renly can barely been seen directly.
But I'm sure I'll be told how it's all important to the narrative.
Atomika on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
The hurling of invective and casting of aspersions upon one's character and understanding is needless.
Atomika on
0
Options
Theodore Flooseveltproud parent of eight beautiful girls and shalmelodorne (which is currently being ruled by a woman (awesome role model for my daughters)) #dornedadRegistered Userregular
Surely you can see how it comes across like someone going "Oh god, National Geographic is just pandering, those tribes could totally be shot from a different angle or put some clothes on!" I hope you are realizing what I am getting at here, I didn't even notice there were so many breasts in the Dothraki wedding for instance until I had it on DVD and was listening to the commentaries.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
But GOT is fiction. It is written as "show boobs" or "don't show boobs" (I'm assuming most scripts are very direct when boobies are called for)
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
I don't think you can find fault with the way the show uses nudity though - from its sets, to costumes, to languages, to far flung places they shoot, and so on, the whole show is aiming to put on full display cultures and tribes. How they are implementing nudity is very much an extension of that, they really are shooting for making these varying people believable as groups with different traditions and culturally accepted motivations, often times to the point where its disturbing not because it puts on front street how fucked up each society is. Tyrion's story for instance about jacking off in his sister's food would probably have a Dothraki busting a gut where it has the Eyrie recoiling in derision and Bronn is notable for grinning at the confession. And someone being attractive nude does not make their scenes titillating if you care to take notice of the context of the scene - in fact, come to think of it there has been only a pair scenes of titillation that I can think of in the entire series and it was done fully clothed (well, she was anyways, hello Drogo!) with implied sex, where as two ladies full on nude get it on and I am right along with Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish in recognizing it as an tawdry act that he is barely taking notice of due to its piss poor performance. In numerous other nude scenes as well there has been context that suggested cultural acceptance that is different than what is acceptable in many places IRL, a transfer of wealth and power, abuse, and even rape - hardly gratuitous, let alone titillating. In many ways this show is handling nudity far more maturely than many shows I have seen before and most of the other ones I would regard as handling it more maturely have been on HBO such as with Boardwalk Empire.
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
See, the bolded part is the thing. That is not the end result of every separate criticism of GOT's (or any show's) use of nudity.
Finding fault with the way the nudity is conveyed is not the same thing as disapproving of the show's representation of nudity and sex in Westeros.
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you understood his point
I don't think you understood mine.
If you want to shock the audience while still making sense within the blocking of the scene, don't put the camera where it is in that scene. Put it behind or just to the side of Renly, and have Margaery face him dead on; that way the subject (Renly) and the audience can share in the same exchange of information.
Instead, the audience gets a face full of tits and Renly can barely been seen directly.
But I'm sure I'll be told how it's all important to the narrative.
You're describing the scene wrong
Renly's right in there man
Go rewatch the scene in episode 3, your recollections of how it's shot is wrong
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you understood his point
I don't think you understood mine.
If you want to shock the audience while still making sense within the blocking of the scene, don't put the camera where it is in that scene. Put it behind or just to the side of Renly, and have Margaery face him dead on; that way the subject (Renly) and the audience can share in the same exchange of information.
Instead, the audience gets a face full of tits and Renly can barely been seen directly.
But I'm sure I'll be told how it's all important to the narrative.
I just watched this scene again since it seems to be a sticking point for you.
Renly is standing at a desk drinking wine and is turned away from her right at the start. I get the feeling he is turned away from her because he is HORRIBLY UNCOMFORTABLE with the current situation.
She makes a quip about the dress looking better on the floor, as she walks towards him, and positions herself so that he cannot turn away from her. The dress doesn't fall off until she is much closer and in his line of sight.
Watch the scene again; its not as you remember it.
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
Renly never moves in the entire scene. I have HBO-Go. I just watched it. He's static at his desk the whole time.
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
Renly never moves in the entire scene. I have HBO-Go. I just watched it. He's static at his desk the whole time.
None of my description requires him to be moving like a Ninja. It's just that from the start, he was establishing body language that stated DO NOT WANT, like not squaring up with her, hand on the desk, shoulders slumped down, strained expression... trying to get out of it by saying he was drunk... the whole thing was one big way of trying to not be in an intimate situation with her.
And all of your stuff about the camera you have to see was off now if you saw it again. I'm not trying to call you out here - it's just that your argument is built on inaccurate info.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
CreamstoutWhat you think I program for, to push a fuckin' quad-core?Registered Userregular
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
Renly never moves in the entire scene. I have HBO-Go. I just watched it. He's static at his desk the whole time.
That's the point, when she enters the tent he does not turn to her and address her. He keeps talking to her while not making eye contact. If a women is entering a tent of a heterosexual man, and they both know it is sexy time, a man would make eye contact, it is known.
Creamstout on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
Renly never moves in the entire scene. I have HBO-Go. I just watched it. He's static at his desk the whole time.
None of my description requires him to be moving like a Ninja. It's just that from the start, he was establishing body language that stated DO NOT WANT, like not squaring up with her, hand on the desk, shoulders slumped down, strained expression... trying to get out of it by saying he was drunk... the whole thing was one big way of trying to not be in an intimate situation with her.
And all of your stuff about the camera you have to see was off now if you saw it again. I'm not trying to call you out here - it's just that your argument is built on inaccurate info.
She's about 10 feet away from him when she disrobes, and she's still facing the camera and not Renly when she does it, which is still my whole point about the scene.
As far as the gender disparity that has been mentioned a couple times. Is there a gender disparity? What do women find attractive of men in scenes like this? Do they want to see dongs flapping around as men want to see titties bouncing?
Men like nice view of the breasts and ass, with some bush here and there. I'd think women are similar, nice view of the chest, arms and abs, with some shots of ass here and there. Was oiled Gendry with dirt and lighting to show of his abs that he was flexing not pandering to women viewers? Or the many shots we've had of the young men with their shirts off blasting their abs? Or Mother Fuckin Khal Drogo and his giant shoulders, arms and chest being shown off 24/7?
I think Women are getting as much eye candy as men are.
No that is awesome filming because the whole point of that scene was Renly being incredibly uncomfortable with her nudity and they're framing it aggressively to drive the point home
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you understood his point
I don't think you understood mine.
If you want to shock the audience while still making sense within the blocking of the scene, don't put the camera where it is in that scene. Put it behind or just to the side of Renly, and have Margaery face him dead on; that way the subject (Renly) and the audience can share in the same exchange of information.
Instead, the audience gets a face full of tits and Renly can barely been seen directly.
But I'm sure I'll be told how it's all important to the narrative.
Kana on
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
As far as the gender disparity that has been mentioned a couple times. Is there a gender disparity? What do women find attractive of men in scenes like this? Do they want to see dongs flapping around as men want to see titties bouncing?
Men like nice view of the breasts and ass, with some bush here and there. I'd think women are similar, nice view of the chest, arms and abs, with some shots of ass here and there. Was oiled Gendry with dirt and lighting to show of his abs that he was flexing not pandering to women viewers? Or the many shots we've had of the young men with their shirts off blasting their abs? Or Mother Fuckin Khal Drogo and his giant shoulders, arms and chest being shown off 24/7?
I think Women are getting as much eye candy as men are.
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I can't have this conversation with you, Ross.
Mostly because I think you are watching a different version of the scene in which she doesn't approach him while disrobing and closing most of the distance between them, and doesn't obviously walk into his line of sight while doing so.
Behind the spoiler is the very first frame in which her boobs are revealed to Renly, who can CLEARLY see what is going on, and is not ten feet away (or even if he is, the camerawork is not trying to imply distance here)
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Renly IS in the frame, very much so
She's facing renly
and renly is clearly having none of it
She starts disrobing a bit before your link, but regardless. You still don't see Renly's reaction shot as much as you see the tits, and the focus of the scene once she disrobes is 100% on her chest. Everything else is shot with a view to those boobs, and not her face or his face or their relationship in space; just boobs.
As well, in the context of the scene it's arguably superfluous since Margaery knows he's gay anyway.
Great, another round of "moving the goalposts with Ross"
Seriously now you're just making things up
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
The hurling of invective and casting of aspersions upon one's character and understanding is needless.
Speaking of needless, you don't need to be so defensive like I was personally attacking you. You aren't the first person to post that "OMG nude" and I fear you won't be the last. Nah, when I want to cast aspersions on you, I'll just name you like I did because that whole "True Blood is doing it right" thing was confusing as fuck as an argument. The "13 year old boy" thing is referring to the SNL sketch which I didn't think was all that funny but then SNL being funny on occasion is more the exception than the rule in my own experience.
Surely you can see how it comes across like someone going "Oh god, National Geographic is just pandering, those tribes could totally be shot from a different angle or put some clothes on!" I hope you are realizing what I am getting at here, I didn't even notice there were so many breasts in the Dothraki wedding for instance until I had it on DVD and was listening to the commentaries.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
But GOT is fiction. It is written as "show boobs" or "don't show boobs" (I'm assuming most scripts are very direct when boobies are called for)
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
I don't think you can find fault with the way the show uses nudity though - from its sets, to costumes, to languages, to far flung places they shoot, and so on, the whole show is aiming to put on full display cultures and tribes. How they are implementing nudity is very much an extension of that, they really are shooting for making these varying people believable as groups with different traditions and culturally accepted motivations, often times to the point where its disturbing not because it puts on front street how fucked up each society is. Tyrion's story for instance about jacking off in his sister's food would probably have a Dothraki busting a gut where it has the Eyrie recoiling in derision and Bronn is notable for grinning at the confession. And someone being attractive nude does not make their scenes titillating if you care to take notice of the context of the scene - in fact, come to think of it there has been only a pair scenes of titillation that I can think of in the entire series and it was done fully clothed (well, she was anyways, hello Drogo!) with implied sex, where as two ladies full on nude get it on and I am right along with Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish in recognizing it as an tawdry act that he is barely taking notice of due to its piss poor performance. In numerous other nude scenes as well there has been context that suggested cultural acceptance that is different than what is acceptable in many places IRL, a transfer of wealth and power, abuse, and even rape - hardly gratuitous, let alone titillating. In many ways this show is handling nudity far more maturely than many shows I have seen before and most of the other ones I would regard as handling it more maturely have been on HBO such as with Boardwalk Empire.
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
See, the bolded part is the thing. That is not the end result of every separate criticism of GOT's (or any show's) use of nudity.
Finding fault with the way the nudity is conveyed is not the same thing as disapproving of the show's representation of nudity and sex in Westeros.
How so Theo? Changing how it is conveyed would change the representation, would it not?
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
As someone else posted above, a lot of the nudity here seems like HBO feels obligated to give their viewership naked boobs.
You could also say they know they can show naked boobs (and sexy people of both genders fucking, and so on), so they do. Instead of arguing why, I say, why not?
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
As someone else posted above, a lot of the nudity here seems like HBO feels obligated to give their viewership naked boobs.
You could also say they know they can show naked boobs (and sexy people of both genders fucking, and so on), so they do. Instead of arguing why, I say, why not?
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
As far as the gender disparity that has been mentioned a couple times. Is there a gender disparity? What do women find attractive of men in scenes like this? Do they want to see dongs flapping around as men want to see titties bouncing?
Men like nice view of the breasts and ass, with some bush here and there. I'd think women are similar, nice view of the chest, arms and abs, with some shots of ass here and there. Was oiled Gendry with dirt and lighting to show of his abs that he was flexing not pandering to women viewers? Or the many shots we've had of the young men with their shirts off blasting their abs? Or Mother Fuckin Khal Drogo and his giant shoulders, arms and chest being shown off 24/7?
I think Women are getting as much eye candy as men are.
Pretty sure gender disparity doesn't just refer to "Are teh broadz gettin them some hunk meat, too?"
It refers more to things like the show always making the explicit sex either straight or lesbian, both of which arguably appeal to a male audience primarily. Of never once entertaining the idea of having Littlefinger give a monologue while two dudes go at it.
"My ethics first came from...no, no, no, you should be moaning louder and you should be thrusting so hard the other fellow's eyes look like they'll shoot across the room. He should stagger when he leaves! Anywho, when I was a child, my ethics first came to me..."
Posts
How much full on male nudity do you get on other shows on HBO?
Again, True Blood. Mostly boobs and simulated sex that shows the woman off far more than the man.
Game of Thrones. EXACT SAME THING.
Just that one is about sexy vampires and werewolves, and one is a grim, dark low fantasy setting where sex is a tool, and is often not "sexy"
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Now! I don't personally think it's gratuitous, and I haven't had a problem with anything on the show, but I'd agree that it's possible some scenes could work just as well without titties all up in.
I like True Blood as well and that show has definitely expounded upon its source material's nudity and sexuality (especially with Jason and the use of vampire blood induced sexual dreams), where as with Game of Thrones there has been even less so than its source material, so Ross's use of that as showing how this show is weak on the use of nudity as a part of the narrative and setting is confusing as fuck for me in particular.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I think the proof of this lies in the Jessica and Tara characters.
If the sex were in any way necessary or not added strictly for the extra viewership (though Sookie is a pretty huge slut in the books, granted) you wouldn't see characters having extensive, earth-shattering, indescribably athletic sex while keeping their bra on or their breasts carefully concealed by a well-placed object. Osha showing everything wouldn't have had the same impact if shot from the back, but Natalia Tena is not exactly an unknown and could've gotten the director to shoot her that way if she'd pushed a little bit. It reminds me of Halle Berry in Swordfish vs Halle Berry in Monster's Ball.
She got an extra $5 million or so for a brief flash of boobs in Swordfish, but received no extra pay for doing a full-on sex scene with Billy Bob Thorton in Monster's Ball. When asked why, she said "Because it wasn't necessary in Swordfish."
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
But GOT is fiction. It is written as "show boobs" or "don't show boobs" (I'm assuming most scripts are very direct when boobies are called for)
I'm with you, though, on the Dothraki Wedding, etc. I don't think it's gratuitous, I think GOT does it well. More gender-equal nudity would help... but that's every show. I just don't think Ross needs to be attacked like he's arguing from a prudish standpoint. You can accept that the show will use nudity and still find fault in the way it implements it.
There's also the fact that when nudity does occur, the camera is often placed away from the exchange of pertinent information and is instead focused on general coverage of the nudity.
Take the scene between Renly Baratheon and Margaery Tyrell from before; the blocking in that scene is maximized to see as much of Margaery's tits as possible; she's even turned at an awkward angle to ensure the audience gets a good long look. She disrobes several feet away from Renly and is at an angle perpendicular to his line of sight. She then walks toward the camera with her chest thrust out, only turning herself back toward Renly when she gets right to him.
That's pandering.
Too bad this line of thought wasn't there pages ago when everybody and their brother jumped on me for suggesting the show do things just a tad differently.
It's not framed as being aggressive to Renly, though. It's aggressive to the audience at home. If was supposed to be aggressive to Renly she should have been placed closer to him and within his line of sight, not with her tits at a 90-degree angle to him pointed at the camera ten feet away.
I'm not even upset with her tits being out. They should be out. It's important to the scene. It's the presentation that's tacky and cheap.
I love that Theon would have been better acclimated to Greyjoy society had he been raised by actual wolves.
It really goes to show how much you have to work at being an asshole when you're the biggest asshole on an archipelago populated entirely by assholes.
Why is Osha naked? Two reasons: we're showing that Osha is smart enough to have picked up on Theon's character being a lecher and using that to her advantage. We're also indicating that wildling women are more sexually aggressive and will abuse men's stupidity about sex to get what they want than the typical woman south of the Wall, which informs the later scene between Jon and Ygritte.
Who needs to understand the impact or point of the scene and the interaction between the characters, Renly or the audience?
The blocking was perfectly appropriate for a television show with an audience. If this was a stage play, the blocking might in fact even be made more obvious -- because it's not the characters that need to 'see' what's going on as much as the audience.
Cameras aren't static, friend. They're so light that people can place them where ever they wish. This is a bad handwave.
I don't think you can find fault with the way the show uses nudity though - from its sets, to costumes, to languages, to far flung places they shoot, and so on, the whole show is aiming to put on full display cultures and tribes. How they are implementing nudity is very much an extension of that, they really are shooting for making these varying people believable as groups with different traditions and culturally accepted motivations, often times to the point where its disturbing not because it puts on front street how fucked up each society is. Tyrion's story for instance about jacking off in his sister's food would probably have a Dothraki busting a gut where it has the Eyrie recoiling in derision and Bronn is notable for grinning at the confession. And someone being attractive nude does not make their scenes titillating if you care to take notice of the context of the scene - in fact, come to think of it there has been only a pair scenes of titillation that I can think of in the entire series and it was done fully clothed (well, she was anyways, hello Drogo!) with implied sex, where as two ladies full on nude get it on and I am right along with Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish in recognizing it as an tawdry act that he is barely taking notice of due to its piss poor performance. In numerous other nude scenes as well there has been context that suggested cultural acceptance that is different than what is acceptable in many places IRL, a transfer of wealth and power, abuse, and even rape - hardly gratuitous, let alone titillating. In many ways this show is handling nudity far more maturely than many shows I have seen before and most of the other ones I would regard as handling it more maturely have been on HBO such as with Boardwalk Empire.
There is very much a point where if you think this is just extra footage to meant appeal to a hormone crazed 13 year old boy and older that really, you are just revealing your own discomfort because you are entirely missing the context within the setting and quite possibly the narrative as well by being drawn out of the setting by the human body and chip on your shoulder.
That Osha scene is definitely great characterization, for both of those reasons, and the following scene with her improvising a hasty seduction in order to kill the sentry made it all the more effective.
I don't think you understood his point
I don't think you understood mine.
If you want to shock the audience while still making sense within the blocking of the scene, don't put the camera where it is in that scene. Put it behind or just to the side of Renly, and have Margaery face him dead on; that way the subject (Renly) and the audience can share in the same exchange of information.
Instead, the audience gets a face full of tits and Renly can barely been seen directly.
But I'm sure I'll be told how it's all important to the narrative.
The hurling of invective and casting of aspersions upon one's character and understanding is needless.
See, the bolded part is the thing. That is not the end result of every separate criticism of GOT's (or any show's) use of nudity.
Finding fault with the way the nudity is conveyed is not the same thing as disapproving of the show's representation of nudity and sex in Westeros.
You're describing the scene wrong
Renly's right in there man
Go rewatch the scene in episode 3, your recollections of how it's shot is wrong
Renly is standing at a desk drinking wine and is turned away from her right at the start. I get the feeling he is turned away from her because he is HORRIBLY UNCOMFORTABLE with the current situation.
She makes a quip about the dress looking better on the floor, as she walks towards him, and positions herself so that he cannot turn away from her. The dress doesn't fall off until she is much closer and in his line of sight.
Watch the scene again; its not as you remember it.
edit: like, Renly is actively TRYING to be not directly in front of her, and she is not having any of it. It makes tons of sense and fits the narrative.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Renly never moves in the entire scene. I have HBO-Go. I just watched it. He's static at his desk the whole time.
None of my description requires him to be moving like a Ninja. It's just that from the start, he was establishing body language that stated DO NOT WANT, like not squaring up with her, hand on the desk, shoulders slumped down, strained expression... trying to get out of it by saying he was drunk... the whole thing was one big way of trying to not be in an intimate situation with her.
And all of your stuff about the camera you have to see was off now if you saw it again. I'm not trying to call you out here - it's just that your argument is built on inaccurate info.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
That's the point, when she enters the tent he does not turn to her and address her. He keeps talking to her while not making eye contact. If a women is entering a tent of a heterosexual man, and they both know it is sexy time, a man would make eye contact, it is known.
She's about 10 feet away from him when she disrobes, and she's still facing the camera and not Renly when she does it, which is still my whole point about the scene.
Men like nice view of the breasts and ass, with some bush here and there. I'd think women are similar, nice view of the chest, arms and abs, with some shots of ass here and there. Was oiled Gendry with dirt and lighting to show of his abs that he was flexing not pandering to women viewers? Or the many shots we've had of the young men with their shirts off blasting their abs? Or Mother Fuckin Khal Drogo and his giant shoulders, arms and chest being shown off 24/7?
I think Women are getting as much eye candy as men are.
NSFW image, obviously
Marge's boobs
So lets see.
Renly IS in the frame, very much so
She's facing renly
and renly is clearly having none of it
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Mostly because I think you are watching a different version of the scene in which she doesn't approach him while disrobing and closing most of the distance between them, and doesn't obviously walk into his line of sight while doing so.
Behind the spoiler is the very first frame in which her boobs are revealed to Renly, who can CLEARLY see what is going on, and is not ten feet away (or even if he is, the camerawork is not trying to imply distance here)
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
She starts disrobing a bit before your link, but regardless. You still don't see Renly's reaction shot as much as you see the tits, and the focus of the scene once she disrobes is 100% on her chest. Everything else is shot with a view to those boobs, and not her face or his face or their relationship in space; just boobs.
As well, in the context of the scene it's arguably superfluous since Margaery knows he's gay anyway.
Seriously now you're just making things up
Still the same argument as before. Pointless boobs.
Speaking of needless, you don't need to be so defensive like I was personally attacking you. You aren't the first person to post that "OMG nude" and I fear you won't be the last. Nah, when I want to cast aspersions on you, I'll just name you like I did because that whole "True Blood is doing it right" thing was confusing as fuck as an argument. The "13 year old boy" thing is referring to the SNL sketch which I didn't think was all that funny but then SNL being funny on occasion is more the exception than the rule in my own experience.
How so Theo? Changing how it is conveyed would change the representation, would it not?
I'm fairly certain you're not reading my posts at all.
You could also say they know they can show naked boobs (and sexy people of both genders fucking, and so on), so they do. Instead of arguing why, I say, why not?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Pretty sure gender disparity doesn't just refer to "Are teh broadz gettin them some hunk meat, too?"
It refers more to things like the show always making the explicit sex either straight or lesbian, both of which arguably appeal to a male audience primarily. Of never once entertaining the idea of having Littlefinger give a monologue while two dudes go at it.
"My ethics first came from...no, no, no, you should be moaning louder and you should be thrusting so hard the other fellow's eyes look like they'll shoot across the room. He should stagger when he leaves! Anywho, when I was a child, my ethics first came to me..."