[BOOK SPOILERS] Nudity and Sexuality in HBO's GoT

[Kalbear]

I think the amount of nudity was not gratious, it felt just right compared to the source material.

Okay, see, I was more bugged that we didn't have Cat and Ned naked after sex and they're just cuddling. Because that scene was actually important for some character building - showing that Ned and Cat still do love each other, still want kids, and Cat doesn't care about things like modesty when something's important (but Ned does). Yes, Cat wasn't going to have pert breasts or a flat ass, but so what?

And that's why it seems gratuitous. We don't see Cersei and Jaime naked. We don't see Cat and Ned naked. Both of these things were in the books. So instead we get Dany naked even more.

I don't have any problem at all with nudity. I don't have any problem with them depicting sex. But I don't like it when they do so just for the sake of titillation, and that's what it felt Dany's bath lingering was. By comparison, when she's getting undressed for Drogo that seemed completely perfect as far as a use of nudity. So did Tyrion whoring it up.

But panning down? Come on.

[RobMRobM]

Agree with Bronn Stone's comment. Re the addition of several whores, it added a needed touch of levity to the episode. I'm for it.

[Thefalconemperor]

Only the Dany walk into the bath felt a bit too much to me, but even as I watched it, I figured the dangers of having her walk too fast into the bath.

[Prince of Dinas Emrys]

As a European I don't feel that way.;)

It's always amusing to see Americans get furious over a bit of nipple while heads got cut off spurting and guts ripped out...

I think the amount of nudity was not gratious, it felt just right compared to the source material.

In the Tyrion scene, it serves like has been said before as a quick characterisation.

Danaerys consumation would have been totally unbelieveable, had it ended being consensual, this does not work without a direct POV like in the book.

Dany walking into the water foreshadows the last scene.

Pesonally I can't get enough of Emilia and I hope that the ladies will get some NCW butt in the future.

Let me clarify. I am not being Puritanical or quintessentially American -- IE, squeamish -- about the sexuality or nudity on display here. The irony is that for years I've been railing against our cultural permissiveness toward graphic violence, while nipples and nude flesh are somehow seen as an abomination or detrimental to children. That double-standard drives me nuts and is pervasive in this society.

No, I am talking about the naturalism and humanity with which such scenes, IMO, should be framed and presented on-screen in this particular production. I believe that the gratuitous lingering, for example, on Dany's backside is an outgrowth of the very anti-sexual mores that religiously oppose any nudity or sexual expression in media whatsoever.

What I mean is that, if we (the US as a culture) were entirely free from the anti-sex bias that pervades media watchdogs and religious groups, the flip side of that -- gratuitous and overtly lecherous depictions of sexuality -- would disappear as well.

In Martin's books, sex is presented graphically -- but it is not lurid or lecherous, it just is. People have sex in a way that feels human and casual and right. Framing a nude woman in the center of the picture plane while tilting the camera down so that we get a long, almost medical view of her ass is not natural or humanistic; it's unnecessary and designed purely to titillate. In this sense, IMHO, it is out-of-step with the style of the books.

Yes! to people shown having sex in a natural, normal, human way.

Yes! to honest depictions of the nude human form in any and all positions, including sex organs.

No! to artificially extended examinations of body parts for their own sake.

No! to lurid, vaseline-lensed softcore erotica.

Pornography has its place, but not in lifelike portrayals of real human sexuality. Let the camera capture what it captures organically, not in storyboarded crane-shots that put body parts on display for lingering inspection.

[Jack Sparrow]

But panning down? Come on.

It's not clear to me that they were panning down to get a shot of Dany's ass; I thought this at first, but every time I watched it my eyes were drawn to that side of the screen. Watching it again, they may have just been following Viserys as he moved a little down in the frame.

[Xenophon]

sure, I agree. I wouldn't mind some tasteful eroticism when appropriate. It adds to the story in the book, and i'm sure it can add to the story on tv. I don't even mind a bit of eye candy in principle, at least up to the point where it jars with the tone. Hell, I didn't mind the shaving scene for example in and of itself, but its just barely skating by on 'showing Jon and Robb's friendship and Stark domesticity' in terms of necessity, and I think shirtless men is less obviously porny than a fully naked woman anyway.

But I have no sympathy whatsoever for "We really have to put in more tits and ass. Its what the audience wants".

Exactly. Nudity really grabs your attention, so when it's used well it can add a lot to a scene. But when it's used badly it's just distracting. Imagine Ned and Catelyn were naked in the scene with Maester Luwin (as they were in the book). It would have totally distracted from what's important in that scene.

Also, despite Ginia Bellafante's bizarre claim that the sex-scenes primarily appeal to women, my wife found the number of naked women off-putting, especially since men in Westeros apparently don't ever take their pants off, even during sex. Ans when your show is set in a world where women are treated horribly, it doesn't seem wise to invite charges of misogyny by filling the show with naked women.

[Kalbear]

In Martin's books, sex is presented graphically -- but it is not lurid or lecherous, it just is.

That's not precisely true or reasonable. We don't get hot descriptions of gay sex, but we get plenty of lesbian action. We get things like 'fat pink mast' or pretty deep descriptions of Dany and Drogo, or Jon and Ygritte. If you were correct you'd have things like "And then Tyrion went down on Shae and then they had sex".

We don't get that. We do get some pretty graphic, lurid depictions of it, and saying otherwise is like saying that GRRM doesn't like food recipes.

Watching it again, they may have just been following Viserys as he moved a little down in the frame.

Except in the frame he's moving up and up the stairs. It actually makes him further away. It's odd. In any case there's no reason for Dany to be standing there at all, and they make this clear when in the next shot they focus on Viserys without Dany even being in frame. In that first shot she's basically set decoration; we don't see her face, she isn't moving, she's just standing there with her ass out. Which I guess Jeff from Coupling would appreciate if there was nothing on TV, but it's a bit silly.

No, it's nothing like Spartacus - where we'd get a random orgy scene because HEY I HEARD YOU LIKE FUCKING SO I PUT SOME FUCKING IN YOUR FUCKING.

[Jack Sparrow]

Except in the frame he's moving up and up the stairs.

He seems to move down a step or two first; at any rate, whether it's him going farther away, or down a step, he moves down in the picture, which is when the camera pans down.

[reiver]

Having Tyrion naked, on the other hand, might have actually done something, especially if Peter Dinklage were able to make himself seem really deformed.

I think this is the real difference between nudity to titillate and nudity for the sake of developing the script. If it's all young pretty girls disrobing and carefully managing exactly how much skin they're showing then there's absolutely nothing "gritty or realistic" about the nudity and it's blatantly there to titillate (which annoys me when great lines are being cut to add more breasts). When the old, the ugly and the misshapen get naked with the rest in a non self concious and natural way then i'm fine with copious nudity (ie. schindlers list). great point about Tyrion, that would have made the scene meaningful and character building rather than fluff and +nipple count.

The book vs. screen thing has been done a few times and i agree there's a fair bit. With the exception of Dany and her handmaidens i don't ever remember it being too out of place or crass the way the show's was. The reason i think this rankles with me and others that there's a gap in tone between the books and this but also between what is good for the show. These scenes for the most part stand out like bad dialogue or lousy effects because they're cheap and at odds with the quality the show is trying to deliver.

[Tempra]

If Dany is objectified during the bath scene, isn't that kind of the point? Vis views his sister as an object that he can trade to get back his Kingdom. I think whether Dany is objectified is open to interpretation, but if we assume she is, I think there is a legitimate artistic reason for doing so.

I don't think that the creators were gratuitous in their use of nudity. In fact, the evidence seems to point otherwise. Cersei and Jaime were both clothed, as were Ned and Cat, and the Dothraki dry humping during the wedding ceremony were as well. The only scenes where we really saw nudity were during the marriage consumation, in the whorehouse, and during the bath scene. Hardly throwing in random tits and ass. Even when three more whores pile on Tyrion, we see them for a second or so. I thought it was rather tame for both Martin and HBO.

[Kalbear]

Is Dany is objectified during the bath scene, isn't that kind of the point? Vis views his sister as an object that he can trade to get back his Kingdom. I think whether Dany is objectified is open to interpretation, but I think there is a legitimate artistic reason for doing so.

There's a legitimate reason to show that Viserys objectifies her. There's not a real legitimate reason for the audience to do so. And it would likely have been more effective if she is being objectified by him but doesn't allow anyone else to, or at least avoids it.

Also, on nudity: it bugged that no men got nekkid. Not because I really like dongs (I get enough of those in Bakker's books) but because why the hell do no men ever take off their pants? Heck, as far as I can tell no one ever tucks anything in or whips anything out. The Dothraki scene was horrible in that regard; the Dothraki are killing each other over dry humping? Man, they must go to war if they get to second base.

[Prince of Dinas Emrys]

That's not precisely true or reasonable. We don't get hot descriptions of gay sex, but we get plenty of lesbian action. We get things like 'fat pink mast' or pretty deep descriptions of Dany and Drogo, or Jon and Ygritte. If you were correct you'd have things like "And then Tyrion went down on Shae and then they had sex".

We don't get that. We do get some pretty graphic, lurid depictions of it, and saying otherwise is like saying that GRRM doesn't like food recipes.

Well, I disagree. The author describes sex scenes with the same vivid detail that he uses to describe anything else. That doesn't make them "lurid or lecherous", which is our sole point of contention. You're only crafting a straw man when you claim "And then Tyrion went down on Shae and then they had sex" is in any way in keeping with Martin's colorful, evocative style.

[reiver]

If Dany is objectified during the bath scene, isn't that kind of the point? Vis views his sister as an object that he can trade to get back his Kingdom. I think whether Dany is objectified is open to interpretation, but if we assume she is, I think there is a legitimate artistic reason for doing so.

I don't think that the creators were gratuitous in their use of nudity. In fact, the evidence seems to point otherwise. Cersei and Jaime were both clothed, as were Ned and Cat, and the Dothraki dry humping during the wedding ceremony were as well. The only scenes where we really saw nudity were during the marriage consumation, in the whorehouse, and during the bath scene. Hardly throwing in random tits and ass. Even when three more whores pile on Tyrion, we see them for a second or so. I thought it was rather tame for both Martin and HBO.

There's a calculatedness to it that makes it seem so contrived and cynical. The carefully revealed breasts and buttocks of Dany but avoiding the pubic area makes it seem unnatural. If we're claiming "artistic merit" to the scene then why is it shot in a way that's titillating and softly lit rather than reflecting the nastiness and coldness of the scene? Her vulnerability and helplessnes would be better served by a wide shot of her fully naked and not looking in control rather than sexualising her.

It's the same with the Dothraki scene. If they're going to do nudity do it right and fully commit to it with naked and wild men and women not a few breasts and some dry humping. What we got seemed smutty rather than adult.

[Prince of Dinas Emrys]

I think this is the real difference between nudity to titillate and nudity for the sake of developing the script. If it's all young pretty girls disrobing and carefully managing exactly how much skin they're showing then there's absolutely nothing "gritty or realistic" about the nudity and it's blatantly there to titillate (which annoys me when great lines are being cut to add more breasts). When the old, the ugly and the misshapen get naked with the rest in a non self concious and natural way then i'm fine with copious nudity (ie. schindlers list). great point about Tyrion, that would have made the scene meaningful and character building rather than fluff and +nipple count.

The book vs. screen thing has been done a few times and i agree there's a fair bit. With the exception of Dany and her handmaidens i don't ever remember it being too out of place or crass the way the show's was. The reason i think this rankles with me and others that there's a gap in tone between the books and this but also between what is good for the show. These scenes for the most part stand out like bad dialogue or lousy effects because they're cheap and at odds with the quality the show is trying to deliver.

Absolutely spot-on. I couldn't have said it better.

[Prince of Dinas Emrys]

There's a calculatedness to it that makes it seem so contrived and cynical. The carefully revealed breasts and buttocks of Dany but avoiding the pubic area makes it seem unnatural. If we're claiming "artistic merit" to the scene then why is it shot in a way that's titillating and softly lit rather than reflecting the nastiness and coldness of the scene? Her vulnerability and helplessnes would be better served by a wide shot of her fully naked and not looking in control rather than sexualising her.

It's the same with the Dothraki scene. If they're going to do nudity do it right and fully commit to it with naked and wild men and women not a few breasts and some dry humping. What we got seemed smutty rather than adult.

You are totally nailing what I have been trying to say. :bowdown:

[Bronn Stone]

The Daenerys bath scene was small potatoes compared to the Atia of the Julii bath scene in the premiere of Rome. That characer turned out sufficiently complex for my tastes.

[peterbound]

It's great that we are concerned about all the nudity and sex, and no one has brought up the disembowelments, beheadings, dead kids, and weirdly configured body parts. All of which were in the book, JUST LIKE ALL THE SEX AND NUDITY.

Lame.

I for one say bring it on. The more sex and nudity the better.. for fucks sake, it's why i'm glad it's on HBO, not AMC. I get to see all that shit, all the nastiness of the books.

As for the non showing of the pubs. That might have something to do with contract negotiations rather than lack of 'artistic merit'. Some actresses are willing to show a little boob, a little ass, but won't bust out the the FFN on their first go.

I think your concern over the amount of nudity and sex is unmerited, and the amount stays pretty loyal to the source material.

I will admit, however, the wedding scene did seem a little cheese dick. They could have done that a little better.

I can't wait to see how you guys react when they show Dany getting 'serviced' by her handmaids next season.

[Kalbear]

The Daenerys bath scene was small potatoes compared to the Atia of the Julii bath scene in the premiere of Rome. That characer turned out sufficiently complex for my tastes.

I guess that's what bugs me, Bronn; Rome was clearly at times gratuitous just for the sake of having random hot people naked. No rhyme to it, no reason, just fan service. I don't want AGOT to be comparable to Rome in that respect. I don't want it to go all spartacus either.

[Jack Sparrow]

I guess that's what bugs me, Bronn; Rome was clearly at times gratuitous just for the sake of having random hot people naked. No rhyme to it, no reason, just fan service.

Yes, just "fan service," or trying to portray a different culture with different attitudes toward sex and nudity.

[Prince of Dinas Emrys]

It's great that we are concerned about all the nudity and sex, and no one has brought up the disembowelments, beheadings, dead kids, and weirdly configured body parts. All of which were in the book, JUST LIKE ALL THE SEX AND NUDITY.

Lame.

I don't object to graphic violence (which is why I haven't created a thread about it or commented on it), and I don't object to graphic sexuality. You're entirely missing the nuance of my position because you think I'm knee-jerk reacting to the amount of sex and nudity in the show.

I'm not. It's the staged, calculated and softcore-porn feel of the sex and nudity that I object to. Show sex and nudity! I'm all for it. But do it in a way that feels natural and organic and human, as IMO it is presented in the book(s).

If you can't see the distinction I'm making, fine: you're entitled to your viewpoint. Just please don't misconstrue or mischaracterize my own viewpoint in the process.