"Rape" butter scene DETAILED


Ok, it's been a long time since I've seen this film. These are the questions:

1 - Did MB actually smear butter onto MS anal area? The anus itself? If so, and if Maria did NOT know that was going to happen, then YES - that IS violation.

2- Was MB penis actually ramming into / around her anus? Because it looked like he was actually "dry humping" her. But the way it was filmed, the audience is supposed to think MB penis is actually OUT and penetrating her anally - but the reports are that aspect was SIMULATED. NO actual genital-to-anal contact.

3- So MS did not fully know that MB was going to dry hump her? And if not, what did MS think was going to happen?

I am so confused. Bottom line (no pun intended) was MS blindsided by what Brando and BB did? What did SHE think was going to happen in that scene???

reply

It's hilarious... the headline intentionally makes it sound like Marlon Brando and Bernardo Bertolucci conspired to rape Maria Schneider on set and went through with it. The actual story is that they added a scene last minute that she was uncomfortable with. That's the whole story. She filmed the scene.

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

That's not the whole story. What Brando did with the butter wasn't told to her. She had no idea he was going to do that. Meaning it was against her will. The director admits they planned it and purposely didn't tell her.

reply

Stuff like this happens on most movies that people enjoy and that are remembered. Whether you like it or not, most good directors use tricks like this to get reactions they want out of their actors. I personally think it's ridiculous and pretentious to put "the art of film" over another person's well-being, but that's not the standard. The actors and actresses all know what they're singing up for, and if they really don't want the job they can leave. I don't even think this incident would qualify as sexual harassment if it was in court TODAY.

The fact of the matter is, this media is trying to sell some kind of story where Brando and the director colluded in raping the actress, which isn't even remotely true as far as the facts presented to us. What happened is the equivalent of an actor improvising in a scene and pouring water on a female co-star without her consent, or maybe even less. And given the overall exploitative sexual nature of the production, that everyone involved new full-well about, I think it's ridiculous.

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

You are a dumb human being, cease existing.

reply

Keep yelling at my facts and maybe they'll go away.

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

what is up with women getting raped and coming forward 40 years later?

reply

Stuff like this happens on most movies that people enjoy and that are remembered. Whether you like it or not, most good directors use tricks like this to get reactions they want out of their actors. I personally think it's ridiculous and pretentious to put "the art of film" over another person's well-being, but that's not the standard. The actors and actresses all know what they're singing up for, and if they really don't want the job they can leave. I don't even think this incident would qualify as sexual harassment if it was in court TODAY.

The fact of the matter is, this media is trying to sell some kind of story where Brando and the director colluded in raping the actress, which isn't even remotely true as far as the facts presented to us. What happened is the equivalent of an actor improvising in a scene and pouring water on a female co-star without her consent, or maybe even less. And given the overall exploitative sexual nature of the production, that everyone involved new full-well about, I think it's ridiculous.


I agree.

This is a non-story pushed as a 'scandal' only because Jessica Chastain
wrote some nonsense on Twitter.

Chastain is a good actress, but not very bright.

To use a word like "rape" for an improv during a shoot is simply feminist BS.

Chastain probably never saw "Last Tango" ?


reply

Let someone you respect put butter on your *beep* without telling you they're going to do it and get back to us.

reply

Sign up to do a softcore "art" rape porn with "someone you respect" and act surprised when they do something sexual and rapey/"artistic".

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

The director threw himself under the bus. http://variety.com/2016/film/news/last-tango-in-paris-rape-scene-consensual-bernardo-bertolucci-1201933117/
So she was telling the truth

reply

Yeah, I am also not quite certain why Chastain would write on twitter such a false claim that Schneider was really raped based upon a half-heartedly written article that doesn't give all the necessary information. And now the whole thing is out there and it isn't even true, since Schneider clearly said that, apart from that she felt "a little raped" emotionally, there was no real sex going on between her an Brando during the shooting of this film. So no, neither Bertolucci nor Brando where raping Schneider, nor did Brando and Schneider have real sex at any point. She even said that they stayed friends for many years after filming and that they sorta bonded over hating Bertolucci and how they treated his actors.

The one thing she wasn't informed about was that there was going to be a scene in which the butter was getting used and that Paul would rape Jeanne (and I am only talking about the characters here). She apparently didn't agree upon the narrative of the film taking such a turn, but was then convinced by Brando and Bertolucci to do it any way. In the end, she didn't like how this working experience turned out.
However, I am really confused what she felt "a little raped" about? Was it that she didn't like her character to be humiliated like that or that Paul and Jeanne's relationship turned out to become physically violent? Or was it because she didn't like that Bertolucci added a scene she wasn't informed about and hadn't had a say in? Or did Brando really do something physical to her with the butter, i.e. getting to close to her genitals? As long as Brando didn't get physical with her, I feel like she shouldn't have used the words "a little raped". That's not cool to those to whom such an astrocious thing really happened. However, I also see that such a bad working experience can be really bad for a 19 year old actress in the early years of her career.

reply

However, I am really confused what she felt "a little raped" about? Was it that she didn't like her character to be humiliated like that or that Paul and Jeanne's relationship turned out to become physically violent? Or was it because she didn't like that Bertolucci added a scene she wasn't informed about and hadn't had a say in? Or did Brando really do something physical to her with the butter, i.e. getting to close to her genitals? As long as Brando didn't get physical with her, I feel like she shouldn't have used the words "a little raped". That's not cool to those to whom such an astrocious thing really happened.

The scene wasn't in the script, she was reluctantly talked into doing it at the last minute, and even then Bertolucci and Brando deliberately didn't tell her what they planned to do. Bertolucci didn't want her to act in that scene, he wanted to capture her genuine distress and humiliation on screen. I don't know how much of the scene she was told about (whether she just knew it would be a rape scene, an anal sex scene, whether she knew he'd be pulling her underwear down, etc.) but she didn't know the butter would be used.

She said she felt "a little raped" because she was literally sexually assaulted on camera by a dude old enough to be her father while another filmed it (to anyone saying she wasn't sexually assaulted, look up the legal definition -- the way she was touched, without her consent, is sexual assault). Raped can be used in a way that is synonymous with the word "violated" too which was probably the context she intended.

And no, it's not the same as a director surprising an actor by pouring water on them or something as someone said -- dumping water on someone isn't a crime, it isn't a traumatising experience, sexual assault is. It'd be more like a director deciding to surprise a male actor with an actual hard kick in the balls to catch their genuine pain and reaction while the actor just signed up for a choreographed fake fight scene (i.e. it'd be a deliberate physical assault that wasn't consensual and caused real harm to the actor).

reply

But they're already acting in what anyone with a brain can see is a pretentious porno. And I'm just confused about what the assault is... was there an explicit agreement that was broken, or was it just "hey, you want to be in my pretentious sex movie?" "hey do you want to film a pretentious rape scene?"

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

But they're already acting in what anyone with a brain can see is a pretentious porno. And I'm just confused about what the assault is... was there an explicit agreement that was broken, or was it just "hey, you want to be in my pretentious sex movie?" "hey do you want to film a pretentious rape scene?"

Yes, there was an explicit agreement that was broken. She agreed to film what was in the script, but that scene was not in the script. Any changes should've been discussed with her but this wasn't. All of the other sex scenes were very blatantly simulated and any touching was touching she knew would happen and had signed on for.

The butter scene was different. The scene itself was sprung on her at the last moment, she was pressured into it and then while filming, they took it even further and did something she didn't agree to.

She had Brando on top of her, pinning her down, her jeans and underwear pulled down...and then Brando put his hand down between her legs to smear butter on her, which she wasn't expecting and hadn't consented to and even if she said no or stop (which she did and we'll never know whether that was her trying to act the scene or not) they wouldn't because her distress worked for the scene and was what the director intended. He wanted her to actually feel violated, he wanted it to be a real assault, he wanted her tears to be genuine and not acted.

She was hired as an actress, but like he said, he wanted her reaction as a girl being actually assaulted, not as an actress acting a scene...that wasn't part of anything she agreed to. And then she had what happened to her captured on film and people all over the world have been watching it for decades, often mocking it and making a joke of it.

reply

ONLY MEN WOULD BE DUMBFOUNDED AS TO WHY A WOMAN DIDN'T REPORT IT SOONER. DO YOU KNOW WHAT LIFE WAS LIKE BACK THEN FOR WOMEN?

EVEN TODAY YOU HAVE POWERFUL MEN TRY TO ABUSE WOMEN! LOOK AT THAT FOX NEWS SCANDAL AND ALL THE BBC SCANDALS WITH THOSE OLD DIRTY PEADOS


reply

then thank God/Allah that we now have the new star wars movies where SJW´s and feminists can sit quietly in the theatre and flick their dried-out beans to.

reply

Yeah, it definitely happened back then... Linda Lovelace would be a good example. This "Last Tango in Paris" story that we're given is a terrible example.

Today is the day to say I love you to your best friend - chinese proverb

reply

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/last-tango-in-paris-rape-scene-consensual-bernardo-bertolucci-1201933117/
So she was telling the truth. The director threw himself under the bus

reply