How is what Ben did to the women in the store any different than rape? Did any of the women consent to having their clothes taken off while he did whatever he wanted to them? Sorry, this isn't art, this is abuse.
shareIt is different because it's just his fantasy/dream or you want to send every man to jail just because he is dreaming about sex with woman he saw?
Peter Markoff
If you don't like my english, write it to me in my own language.
It was his fantasy, I'm sure every man has had that one on multiple occasions.
shareI'm guessing you two are men. There's nothing wrong with fantasy, but, as in my original post, none of these women consented to what he did. If he was that interested, why not hire a model to pose? That's what we do in art school.
shareWhat a ridiculous comment. If you can't tell the difference between fantasy and real "rape" or consent, you have a problem. And it hasn't nothing to do with being a man or a woman. Both men and women have sexual fantasies about other people. It's that simple.
shareI must accept the original OP question is ridiculous, every man on earth had a similar fantasy, on a shopping/mall, stripping naked every woman he encounters.. granted, all my fantasies are far more fun than the fantasies this guy have.
I was bored to hell, the nude part wasn't enough to have me interested in this guy or the story.
Alex Vojacek
'Hire a model'? So then money is the only thing in the world worth considering about?? Money transcends and is more important than beauty and feelings and emotions?? That's basically what you are saying with that post...
shareWell, I'd say - Jenkins' behaviour is much worthier discussing on this board then Ben's. Jenkins harrassed Sharon over and over, and I failed to see the purpose of this for the plot development. Was it for the laughs? Really? Then why would we see Ben watching it happen for the first time in the film in such a detailed manner?
shareHe didn't LITERALLY undress them, just like he couldn't LITERALLY stop time. He only pictured himself undressing them and drawing them. There wasn't anything sexual about it, it wasn't for his gratification, it was just artistic curiosity.
It's just a thing that some people can do, usually people who have studied human portrait extensively, they can look at a clothed person and almost immediately see what they look like under their clothes without needing to actually see them naked. I can do it to an extent because I studied art for a long time, what you see in the movie is a representation of how Ben is EXCEPTIONALLY good at it, to the point where it's figuratively as if he can stop time and undress them.
Also, note how he never expresses any sexual desire or attraction for the women. It's not a sexual thing for him, he's not interested in seeing them naked so he can ogle them, violate them or have a good ol' fap, he's interested because he finds their physical form beautiful. You have to bear in mind that nudity is not always sexual in nature.
It was all in his mind. You can't rape someone with your imagination. And that's setting aside that even if what happened were literal, they were simply undressed. That's assault, not rape. You cheapen the meaning of a real rape when you start calling events where no sexual interactions of any kind took place rape.
What a lovely way to burn...
[deleted]