James Ivory & the controversy that won't go away!
Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 5:46PM by Murtada
If you thought that after the Oscars you’d never hear about Call Me By Your Name, think again. The movie is now out on DVD but that is not why it’s in the headlines once again. Oscar winning screenwriter James Ivory would just not let his displeasure with the non-nudity in the film die. We are all for a true legend like Ivory to say whatever the fuck he wants, whenever he wants. So we are all in for his recent interview that's making the rounds.
In the CMBYN cultural wars of last Oscar season there are two camps. The first thinks that it lessens the power of its story by shying away from explicit nudity in its sex scenes. The second thinks that was the right aesthetic choice for the story and that the film is not “coy” because it shows Armie Hammer wiping cum from his chest. This is a short and reductive way of briefly explaining the different POVs; each camp of course has more nuance...
This writer is firmly in the first camp and frankly that cutaway in Elio and Oliver's first sexual encounter, through the window to the trees outside, is an embarrassing choice for a story about sexual obsession and first love. Specially when the film did not cutaway from the different sex coupling.
Ivory has always maintained that his screenplay contained nudity. He even went further and divulged the actors’ contracts had non-nudity clauses, and that his choice to play Oliver was Shia Labeouf. If you’ve seen Lars Von Trier’s Nymphomaniac, you get the shade he's throwing. Now with Oscar in hand, he’s going even further and calling Luca Guadagnino a liar.
When Luca says he never thought of putting nudity in, that is totally untrue. He sat in this very room where I am sitting now, talking about how he would do it, so when he says that it was a conscious aesthetic decision not to – well, that’s just bullshit.
He goes on explaining why the absence of full frontal nudity still bothers him.
When people are wandering around before or after making love, and they’re decorously covered with sheets, it’s always seemed phoney to me. I never liked doing that. And I don’t do it, as you know. [In Maurice], the two guys have had sex and they get up and you certainly see everything there is to be seen. To me, that’s a more natural way of doing things than to hide them, or to do what Luca did, which is to pan the camera out of the window toward some trees. Well …
And here is the clicker, he doesn’t end it there. Rather, according to The Guardian, “gives a derisive snort”.
Call Me By Your Name remains a story beautifully told and acted, by Timothée Chalamet. And it seems that it will continue to be in the conversation, whether or not those sequels Guadagnino keeps talking about happen. And if Ivory has anything to do about it, we will keep hearing exactly what he thinks at all times. Derisive snort and all. Have you already bought your DVD/streaming copy?
Reader Comments (45)
I don't think that full frontal nudity would have made the movie better- but it might have sold more tickets
I think the full frontal nudity would have taken audiences out of the movie because one of the actors was playing a 17 year old. Like I get it James, but that would have been uncomfortable to sit through (which could have worked but lets shy away from anything that messy)
Shia is a very good actor and a terrible choice for Elio, right? I'm so glad we don't get to see Chalamet's genitalia, but I would have enjoyed a bit of Armie's bush.
Generally speaking I would like to see more male nudity in movies and in this site in particular, starting with the contributor writers.
The movie is so beautiful as it is. The nudity or the lack thereof doesn’t matter. What would it really contribute to the movie?
Clearly stated in the article that Ivory wanted Shia as Oliver, not Elio.
Oliver or Elio, Shia would have been a terrible choice.
AlI I can do is imagine how much better this subpar film would've been if James had directed it.
Sorry! Shia as Oliver is even a worse choice.
I'm curious of Shia as Oliver. Going by his work in American Honey, he could've brought a nice mix of seduction, danger and mystery to the role. Couldn't be any worse than Armie.
I think they should have gone for equal opportunity, one way or the other. As is typical in these kinds of movies, the girl is asked to show much more than the boys. For me, it would have been enough to see them making out in bed, not cutting to the window. I don't need to see their junk.
He reads street wise and a bit vulgar to me. Like casting Jennifer Lawrence as a physicist.
He would have fucked Elio the very first night.
a) Labouef in American Honey is a revelation
b) It's less the nudity and more the coy pan away. It really undercuts some of the power of the story in that moment.
c) Love the movie still.
James Ivory is that daddy on Grindr that demands nudes before saying hello.
Bushwick -- LOL
We never discuss the poor Amira Cassar surrounded by gays everywhere. Please tell me she's got an italian lover hidden somewhere. A peasant maybe.
I thought Armie Hammer was wonderful in the film...
Murtada, great article.
PeggySue, LOL on contributing writer nudity. I'm ready to go!
CMBYN is basically a masterpiece. One can quibble but the filmmaking that's there is astonishing.
I haven't seen the film but I really want to. I want to see some penis. Not Shia LaBeouf's penis, his dick is ugly.
I thought the movie was quite beautiful as is.... I don't really care for a lot of nudity in a movie whether it is male or female.
Go to a porno if that is what you like,
Bored now.
The problem is the double standard of it all. Actresses are expected (and demanded) to be completely naked, no matter how trivial the moment/scene is.
And then think of john hawkes in the sessions. His lack of nudity ruined/underminded a really important moment in the film. Helen Hunt is completely naked almost the whole movie. Huh?
The book is so overtly sexual (Oliver eats the peach) that for me the movie came off as a bit sanitized.
On the sex: Oliver goes down on Elio twice. That doesn't count as sex anymore?
On the nudity: every article on this topic suggests all actors should just get nude because people expect them to. The fact that they might be uncomfortable with it, apparently doesn't matter? Should I expect everyone to drop their pants when I tell them to?
CMBYN does not have a double standard regarding nudity for actors and actresses. Both do not show full frontal, just bare chests. Why people insist that there a double standard?? Just because the female nipple is more of a tabu??
The bitter old queen who is free to be spiteful and shady now that she has her Oscar is not a good look for Ivory.
You don't need nudity for a love scene to have impact. Arguably the greatest of all time simply has waves hitting on fully dressed people. Some movies require poetry. Some movies require grit. The pan to the window is corny, sure, but I thought CMBYN was quite frank about the sexuality of its characters, despite not having frontal male nudity.
To be perfectly honest, neither actor is so unbelievably attractive as to pique my interest on their specific nudity. One looks too much like a 13yo boy; the other, weirdly asexual. I always thought Hammer was miscast exactly because he has zero sex-appeal (he's also not a particularly good actor). I don't really care for a sex scene between a prepubescent looking boy and a dude who seems really bad at it.
Nnnnvg -- It didn't for Clinton!
I love the movie but given how sensual and intimate it is, it definitely feels like a sanitized decision and wasted opportunity how tame in the sex department it is. I don't need a 15 min-Blue is the Warmest Color sex scene, but we don't get anything at all in a movie about first love.
I also think part of the reason I side with Ivory is how much Luca has spoken about how he wanted to make the movie "universal" so I can see that playing a role in his decision to make the movie more palatable for straight audiences and James getting frustrated with it.
Can someone explain the Shia LaBoeuf shade to me? I’ve seen Nymphomaniac but don’t get the joke...
i'm with evan, i also saw Nympho, and do not get the shade. what shade?
Evan and ivan - that Shia is obvs willing to show it all while Hammer had a nudity clause.
Peggy Sue - I agree more male nudity is needed. LOL.
I'm with Luca on this one. The end result speaks for itself--the movie is a classic. Nudity is not going to improve anything. Jason wrote a great article on this. I agree the pan out the window is corny, and he probably should have just shot the two kissing in bed--but that shot's worked a hundred years, and it'll work a hundred more. I am no prude, but I have never been a fan of on-screen nudity--male or female. I don't think it can come off as anything other than prurient and gratuitous. Seeing someone's dick makes it about the sex and not the emotion.
And after all, that controversial shot out the window did show wood. Sorry, just had to.
The nudity or no-nudity issue is neither here nor there for me. I loved the film and was moved by it. Yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing Armie Hammer naked, but whatever.
Uh, excuse me, but it is not the same thing for a woman to show her breasts or a man to take off his shirt. The young woman's body in this film was much more sexualized than the two men, which is ironic since she was not a central character.
I go back and forth about the pan to the tree moment. I don't think it ruined the movie for me, but it was kind of headscratcher. All this build up to midnight and then they pan away. I think the pan would have worked if there was more foreplay, but just as soon as the clothes start coming off it gets shy.
The nudity missing from the film was a fucking copout. It's all in the novel. You had a bunch of straight dudes dictating aesthetic choices here, and this is what you get as a result. Mr. Ivory has no fucks left to give, and I'm all here for it!!!
To be fair we do see brief nudity from both Elio and Oliver as they change into swim trunks early on and, while it is in shadow, Oliver is naked in front of the window during that dreamy, color-saturation moment before his departure. But that's just butts, and this must be a dick-specific concern on Ivory's part. I don't think he's wrong generally speaking about cinema, but I feel like the briefness of it in this film isn't so much about playing coy as it is keeping the thematics of desire and sensuality tangible throughout. I would liken it to "The Duke of Burgundy" in a way. A film full of lust and kink but without the need for nudity. I like that it creates an aura of eroticism without needing to resort to "the money shot." It weaves a singularly sensuous spell that would be cheapened by a more typical "sex scene."
European films have a long tradition of full frontal male nudity even in movies you least expected it; like in the classic 1980's slasher "Pieces"
Adam--cosign. Very well-said.
I'd like to add that no matter how explicit the novel, writing about sex is not the same as showing it on screen. Prose needs to be quite specific in ways cinematic imagery does not. The nuance of film is often more than how it ignites the imagination rather than registering the obvious, especially when it comes to the erotic.
Adam & Brookes... I'm actually with you guys on this, and Jason earlier. I love myself some nudity on film but didn't feel the lack of it was a problem in this particular movie. And it didn't feel coy to me (the blowjob stuff and the peach were pretty damn specific.
Carmen -- James Ivory was saying this before he was even nominated for the Oscar so it's not because he's won. Though it is surprising that he is still talking about it. I guess people keep asking him about it.
Ian -- Luca Guadagnino is gay so it wasn't a straight dude making this decision unless you mean Chalamet and Hammer and their no-nudity clauses but it doesnt sound like Luca even asked them. The no-nudity clause is, from my understanding, pretty standard for famous actors so when they are naked onscreen some director or screenwriter or their own feelings about the material has convinced them to do it anyway.
This is the most important argument since trying to decide if it is right to watch the new Roseanne. The movie is perfect, if you think it suffers from lack of dick, that might say more about your priorities. James Ivory should be bowing down to Luca every day for putting that script into shape (have you read the early drafts?).
Much ado about nothing. That’s all I can say
Nothing "perfect" about that tree pan scene. Get outta here with that noise.
Miss Ivory keepin' it 100 for u bitches! Chileee! 100% agree! :-D
I am sorry, James is a hero, but Luca is a much better director. I trust him.
I like Ivory, and it's great he finally has an Oscar. When he won, he thanked Guadagnino in his speech for being "our sensible and sensitive director". So it's somewhat disappointing that he is still carrying this view about the nudity.
I agree with Adam's points above. I think the film's level of nudity is just right. Sure, with Ivory at the helm, a version with more nudity might have worked just as well - but Guadagnino's direction works on its own terms. As for the midnight scene, that scene is pretty lengthy - there is considerable build-up before they begin kissing each other - and so, for me, the pan out the window to the trees was an effective end-point to the scene: now that they are in each other's arms, we know what we need to know, and if we were to have seen anything beyond that point, it would have spoilt it. I also feel that, oddly, it would have violated the characters' privacy.
I don't recall any complaints about the lack of nudity in It Happened One Night, The Philadelphia Story, Brief Encounter, Notorious, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, The Sound of Music, Annie Hall, Out of Africa, Moonstruck - all great romances. Let Call Me By Your Name stand with them. Stranger by the Lake, another recent film with gay protagonists, used explicit nudity extremely well. The world is big enough for both of those excellent films - and we're big enough for both of them too, right?
After seeing that peach scene-no frontal nudity please!
cal -- luca a much better director? WTH? Ivory has made so many classics. Luca is still pretty new in his directorial career though he's got one masterpiece under his belt (I Am Love) so i have high hopes for future films.