Funny, but "without all" means none is left. So your logic fails.

The gay way...

maroon barchetta said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I can understand this reaction if you've only ever seen her prior movies. But she's incredible in Euphoria, for which she's won two Emmys, and deservedly so. And here, in this movie, she absolutely sells the no nonsense, success-obsessed tennis phenom. She's really, really good.

---

Yeah I'm sure she's great and all.

But my generation gave us Wild Things. Your generation gives us a tennis movie, with no real sex scenes, and two dudes.

/old man waves fist at clouds

---

My generation?

I saw Wild Things, in the theater, when I was 17.

---

His point stands.

Your generation consumed Wild Things. The generation before produced it.

---

And what point, exactly, is that?

Euphoria is way more graphic than Wild Things, and *also* stars Zendaya.

Not to mention, if it's a lack of female nudity we're taking about...

- Rachel Brosnahan
- Emelia Clarke
- Alexandra Daddario
- Natalie Dormer
- Scarlett Johansson
- Jennifer Lawrence
- Rooney Mara
- Florence Pugh
- Margot Robbie
- Lea Seydoux
- Sydney Sweeney
- Emma Stone
- Olivia Wilde

... are all currently big stars and have all appeared nude in movies/shows within recent years.

Also, Challengers was made by a 52-year-old man.

So what, again, are we talking about?

This will likely end up as the movie of the year, yet there are only two people in here actually discussing it. I realize this is ironic for me to say! Still, disappointing to witness this. Anyone interested in film should cherish the few times talented writers and directors collaborate these days. Will only continue to decrease as literature continues to be kicked down the rungs of our "culture".

Someone had to do the hard research.

Sex Panther said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I can understand this reaction if you've only ever seen her prior movies. But she's incredible in Euphoria, for which she's won two Emmys, and deservedly so. And here, in this movie, she absolutely sells the no nonsense, success-obsessed tennis phenom. She's really, really good.

---

Yeah I'm sure she's great and all.

But my generation gave us Wild Things. Your generation gives us a tennis movie, with no real sex scenes, and two dudes.

/old man waves fist at clouds

---

My generation?

I saw Wild Things, in the theater, when I was 17.

---

---

I know that's Bane, but unlike Steve Rogers I don't get the reference.

And I don't care. I am Gen X. Bring back hot moms that go topless for Christ's sake. Or American Pie. Or anything better with a sense of humor. Everyone loves two hot chicks going at it while Matt Dillon nods in smug approval. No one wants a sexless, hot chick not getting naked, potential off screen sword fight.

/old man shakes fist at clouds

Wait till you see pornhub.

Urban Ag said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

I can understand this reaction if you've only ever seen her prior movies. But she's incredible in Euphoria, for which she's won two Emmys, and deservedly so. And here, in this movie, she absolutely sells the no nonsense, success-obsessed tennis phenom. She's really, really good.

---

Yeah I'm sure she's great and all.

But my generation gave us Wild Things. Your generation gives us a tennis movie, with no real sex scenes, and two dudes.

/old man waves fist at clouds

---

My generation?

I saw Wild Things, in the theater, when I was 17.

---

---

I know that's Bane, but unlike Steve Rogers I don't get the reference.

And I don't care. I am Gen X. Bring back hot moms that go topless for Christ's sake. Or American Pie. Or anything better with a sense of humor. Everyone loves two hot chicks going at it while Matt Dillon nods in smug approval. No one wants a sexless, hot chick not getting naked, potential off screen sword fight.

/old man shakes fist at clouds

---

I think you're the guy who said you couldn't get your sons to watch stuff with you? If so, the reason why is their phones. Assuming they're straight, the amount of egirls/streamers, girls on tiktok and reels, girls they actually know, all of these via screens make Hollywood at any point look like nothing. And I'm leaving out explicit porn because that's of course different. Better to focus on the soft core analogues.

But yes, lots of people do want this. The girls and gays contingent has lots of spending power. Look at how huge Euphoria has been. And something like The Shards that's in the pipeline, which will likely have actual penetrative gay sex and not just making out and such.

Homoeroticism is making itself much more explicit than ever. It was just a matter of time. Beyond homoeroticism though, Guadagnino is further proof that (imo) the Italians and Jews or those with their ancestry have the best grip on aesthetics in the visual/cinematic arts. I think you can count the French too, though their strength is still in the literary arts, as far as I'm concerned.

I realize that few on here likely care much about any of this and that I "converse with myself", but why do otherwise at this point in the internet's evolution? It's best to treat it as absurdly as possible and see what transpires.

Three things...

1) I continue to think you might very well be the most elaborate troll since Redstone.

2) While I actually get what you're saying (despite expressing it in the weirdest, most repetitive terms), this movie shouldn't be pegged as something just for "girls and gays," or defined only by its homoeroticism/sexuality. Because, above all of that...

3) It's also just damn good storytelling, and a legit fun sports movie. The structure is brilliant, the performances are great, the competition elements are electric, the score is awesome, and any straight dude who's not some '90s caveman frat bro can appreciate it for all of those things. Also, like Spilner mentioned earlier... there's no actual sex in the movie, and none of the main characters are actually gay.

This is… kind of incredible?

paul vs feyd with the challengers score pic.twitter.com/EiqpGSHsa0

— mac (@batsdune) April 29, 2024

Captain Winky said:

---

I saw the preview and have never been less interested in a movie than I was with this one.

---

User name does not check out.

TCTTS said:

---

Three things...

1) I continue to think you might very well be the most elaborate troll since Redstone.

2) While I actually get what you're saying (despite expressing it in the weirdest, most repetitive terms), this movie shouldn't be pegged as something just for "girls and gays," or defined only by its homoeroticism/sexuality. Because, above all of that...

3) It's also just damn good storytelling, and a legit fun sports movie. The structure is brilliant, the performances are great, the competition elements are electric, the score is awesome, and any straight dude who's not some '90s caveman frat bro can appreciate it for all of those things. Also, like Spilner mentioned earlier... there's no actual sex in the movie, and none of the main characters are actually gay.

---

I will come out and admit I have not actually seen this movie. I watch very few, to be perfectly honest. Sometimes I come on here and play around and see what transpires. It's fun to be in character! I feel a bit miserable discussing things in earnest online, I don't know why. And I also despise arguing online, not to mention in person. I don't know why I've done it so often in the past year or so on here and practically nowhere else. Maybe it's best to give up on reasoning and intent and just play! And if anyone wants to know why I write this way, I suppose you should read a Thomas Bernhard novel and maybe this podcast called Caribbean Rhythms.

But I will see it. I do appreciate Guadagnino! He is a very welcome figure in cinema to be sure. Seems like people enjoy working with him.

Final thing, I would guess I believe much of what I say. I just begin to type and I suppose things from the subconscious pop into my head and I forget that others are actually trying to mimic conversation on here.

Cliff.Booth said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

She's almost more of girls' idea of an attractive woman than a guy's idea of an attractive woman

---

You don't have to say "almost". That's exactly what she is. That's what makes this movie a weird watch for straight dudes. I saw five more attractive women than her on my last Target run.

---

Again, it's such a weird take to imply that straight dudes can only enjoy a movie, or the lead woman's performance in it, if she's traditionally hot. Does it help? Sure! But you guys get seem to get legit irritated otherwise, in the funniest way. Again, do I find her super attractive? Not particularly. But I'm not, like, mad at people who think she is, I don't think Tom Holland is weird for fawning over her, and I can totally understand the two male tennis player leads in the movie finding the character's looks/athleticism/attitude attractive. She has a presence in the movie that's very commanding, and she's not overly manly like some female tennis players. Is she the hottest woman who ever lived? Of course not. But she's not hideous either, she has a fashion-model-like figure/appearance, which a lot of people do like, and most importantly, she just so happens to be able to act her ass off. Otherwise, I just don't get what the issue is.

Sex Panther said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

This thread is awesome

---

This thread is weird

---

TexAgs posters complaining about actress' looks on the internet + anything remotely "gay" + Capybara will do that to a thread.

TCTTS said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

This thread is awesome

---

This thread is weird

---

TexAgs posters complaining about actress' looks on the internet + anything remotely "gay" + Capybara will do that to a thread.

---

Maybe I'm getting people on here ready for the "post-cringe" culture I believe we're about to enter into.

TCTTS said:

---

Cliff.Booth said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

She's almost more of girls' idea of an attractive woman than a guy's idea of an attractive woman

---

You don't have to say "almost". That's exactly what she is. That's what makes this movie a weird watch for straight dudes. I saw five more attractive women than her on my last Target run.

---

Again, it's such a weird take to imply that straight dudes can only enjoy a movie, or the lead woman's performance in it, if she's traditionally hot. Does it help? Sure! But you guys get seem to get legit irritated otherwise, in the funniest way. Again, do I find her super attractive? Not particularly. But I'm not, like, mad at people who think she is, I don't think Tom Holland is weird for fawning over her, and I can totally understand the two male tennis player leads in the movie finding the character's looks/athleticism/attitude attractive. She has a presence in the movie that's very commanding, and she's not overly manly like some female tennis players. Is she the hottest woman who ever lived? Of course not. But she's not hideous either, she has a fashion-model-like figure/appearance, which a lot of people do like, and most importantly, she just so happens to be able to act her ass off. Otherwise, I just don't get what the issue is.

---

Being completely earnest, I think it's a losing proposition to try to get butts in seats via sex appeal. The online environment and then the music environment and such (Tate McRae and so on) simply commands straight mens' attention too well.