SexScene Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Like plenty of you out there, I sat down to watch Brüno over the weekend and was treated to one of the more graphic sex scenes I've had the pleasure of witnessing in a long time. But unlike most sex scenes, this one wasn't about turning on the crowd, it was about getting laughs. Now in Brüno's case, the comedic effect was a deliberate one, but it did get me thinking about sex scenes in films that have had the opposite of their intended effect. So that's why today I've put together a list of sex scenes in movies that aren't the least bit sexy.

Showgirls
Let's start off with the big dog, shall we? When it comes to ridiculous on-screen sex, it doesn't get much dumber than Showgirls. If you don't believe me, do a quick search for a list of the worst sex scenes and this Eszterhas/Verhoeven turkey is usually the hands down winner -- and rightfully so. When it comes to low points, there really is too much to choose from, but the highlights include Elizabeth Berkley flailing about like an electrocuted dolphin while her partner, Kyle MacLachlan, is busy making 'barf faces' (which I suppose were meant to be ecstasy). So watch the clip in it's entirety here and see if you can make it to the end without bursting into laughter.

After the jump: more laughably bad sex scenes...

I'm not sure if this is true, but I've heard some movie geeks out there grew up crushing on Winona Ryder. I know I wasn't the only one. Actually, I know there were thousands of us, if not millions. Now, as a sensitive teen, one of the things I liked about the actress was that she was firm on her decision to keep her clothes on. Of course, as a hormonal teen, this was also one of the things that frustrated me about her. Well, now that it's been about twelve years since I met Ryder while selling her Shine tickets and came to the realization that she was a real person and not someone to obsess over, she is baring some skin. It's still not a lot of skin, and it's only noticeable if a certain gossip blog freeze frames it for us, but Winona Ryder is a bit naked in Sex and Death 101. Now, you might want to chime in and point out that, as MrSkin.com does, Ryder showed a dab of flesh in Autumn and New York (there were rumors of a full nude scene that was cut out), and this isn't that much better. But this is a little different; I would at least consider it more of a nude scene. And if you want to watch it, you better do it quick. The video and the NSFW photo are sure to be taken down soon.

For those who don't know, Sex and Death 101 is the film that reunites Winona Ryder with Heathers screenwriter Daniel Waters, who also directs this time around. It stars Ryder, of course, as a serial killer named Death Nell, who targets sex criminals. Ryder's co-star in the film is Simon Baker (The Devil Wears Prada), who can be seen in the video, as a guy who one day receives a mysterious email detailing all the women he has and will have sex with in his life. Our own Scott Weinberg saw the film at Fantastic Fest and called it Waters' "best work in a very long time," and Ryder's, "best stuff in years." That may not say much to you, knowing their lack of success in recent years, but Scott continued to give the film praise. He wrote, "the movie juggles romantic comedy, dark humor, sex farce and slight slapstick with seldom a misstep, resulting in a surprisingly unpredictable flick that works on a small variety of levels." Sounds interesting. Oh, and don't forget that sex scene; that might interest you, too.

Sundance is abuzz this morning over a sex scene, featuring Katie Holmes, that mysteriously disappeared from Jason Reitman's Thank You For Smoking in between its Toronto premiere and Sundance screening. Most people on the ground here don't believe, as various tabloids are reporting, that Tom Cruise had anything to do with the scene's excision, but it is odd that the director himself isn't taking any responsibility for it. Claiming he was "in shock" when he saw the sex scene-less version projected on Saturday night, Reitman told the LA Times that a projectionist had accidentally snipped off the scene whilst changing reels. As implausible as that sounds – even the shortest scene would live on several feet of film stock, making any kind of accidental snip both unweildy and conspicuous – there doesn't seem to be another credible explanation at this point. I did not see the film in Toronto, but my sources tell me that the original scene wasn't graphic in any way – certainly not as graphic as anything Nicole Kidman did whilst co-starring opposite then-husband Cruise in Eyes Wide Shut – and considering that Holmes herself appeared topless several years ago in the Gift, any squeamishness on the part of Holmes' fiancee would just be really, really crazy. When I saw Smoking here at Sundance, I actually sort of admired the lack of hardcore action in the innuendo-laden film – I thought Reitman was trying to be Preston Sturges. Guess not. But what do you think is going on here? If nothing else, isn't it a little funny that this not-inherently controversial film finds a way to cause some kind of silly hoopla everywhere it goes? Here's one more scrap of "evidence": when the film screened again on Sunday, the scene in question had not been replaced.