Talk:Sex in film

message: Isn't the 2nd paragraph (Some have called... extremely subjective ? 82.41.76.204 19:59, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The partial list of films showing nude or underwear scenes does not belong here. Eroticism and nudity aren't the same thing.
In response to User:AntonioMartin's edit summary "put list back; a list is good because it can help parents choose which films to let their children watch or not": The list is (and always will be) woefully incomplete. This article is not the place for it anyway; if someone wants to know about the content of a film before their kids see it, and they are looking around Wikipedia for it, their first thought will not be to look for the article "Eroticism in film." If parents want to know if films are appropriate for their children or not, there are much better online sources, like Screen It, among others.
If anyone insists that this list should stay in Wikipedia, it should be split off into its own article. Tregoweth 15:46, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
Tregoweth: Do you know what an encyclopedia is? It is an information way. That's why the list should be included in the article, which, by the way, is precisely about that. It IS a good way to maintain parents informed more or less of what is recommendable or not for children to watch. I have a six year old girl in my house and I appreciate any place where such a list is posted. 
I want to kindly ask you that next time you have something to tell me, please post it at my talk page.
Thank you and God bless you.
Sincerely yours,
"Antonio Max Martin"
The title of this article is "eroticism in film", not "films with erotic content" (and certainly not "films containing nudity").  That means its focus should be the eroticism, not the specific films.  The only reasonable purpose of a list of films in an article of this sort is to provide examples to illustrate the content of the article.  The fact that the person who started it labeled it a "partial list" suggests that he may have been thinking of it that way.  Unfortunately the list is very haphazard, with little consistency in terms of which films are included or not, and in most cases little or no explanation of why.  I think no list is better than a bad list, especially if people are going to try to use it as some kind of guide for parents, for which it's woefully inadequate and probably misleading.
If I were writing an article about, say, TV shows about police officers, I might list a bunch of noteworthy examples... but I wouldn't try to create a list of all shows that law enforcement officers appear in, so that it could be used by people who wanted to avoid seeing cops on TV. That would miss the point of the article. I also think it'd be doomed to failure (for that purpose). But if someone wants to create a list of that sort, they should go ahead and create list of TV Shows with Police Officers or list of Movies with Nude or Underwear Scenes, which would at least be objective, and wouldn't confuse "eroticism in film" with "nudity or underwear in film".  Meanwhile, this article should focus on describing how eroticism is handled in cinema, citing examples only to the extent that they support the points made in the article.  Tverbeek 23:39, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Tom - Talk 02:50, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial list of films showing nude or underwear scenes 

message: Wouldn't this article be more relelvant and encyclopaedic if it included discussion of techniques used and challenges in acting, setting and filming sex scenes?  Unfortunately I'm neither an actor or a film-maker so I can't provide any real input to this article, but I found it quite light and un-interesting.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.230.207.167 (talk) 08:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cinematoraphy and acting 

message: I don't get why there has to be a special mention about Indian movies. They don't have any sex , even remotely. Period. This article is not about attitudes of sex in films. I am removing it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.75.201.5 (talk) 09:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of India

message: I am pretty certain that Sidney didn't have sex with Billy  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.214.99 (talk) 16:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scream Reference (Sidney Prescott) 

message: It would appear the TV section relates to the state of television prior to about the year 2002. Anyone who has watched ABC, HBO, Netflix, etc. in recent years - and also soap operas - will know that the expression of sexuality has become more frequent and explicit in recent years, even in televised programming supposedly aimed at younger viewers and on mainstream television. Definitely needs an overhaul and updating. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: TV section way outdated