The fact of the matter is this; it's a movie defending softcore porn in the mainstream.
Look up the definition of softcore porn, and everything inside of the justifications they use is all about the pornography, not about art.
They had it right in the beginning in the of the film where the art of erotica is stills of natural beauty. The moment you motion for sexual intercourse, with or without penetration, auditorily or seen, is some form of porn. To have nudity isn't the issue, if done properly.
To have sexual humping, motions, moaning, etceteras makes it softcore porn by definition.
Nothing they say in this film does anything for the artform of nudity, such as in statues or artwork. It's a promotion for the normalization of softcore porn in the mainstream media, which is abhorrent.
Especially since you see the condition of the actresses and actors mental conditions afterwards doing this type of filmography. Especially since most of them are then typecast as pornographic actresses and actors for the rest of their careers.
Justification of softcore porn in the mainstream media. Period.
Abhorrent and disgusting. Watched it to see what lean they had, and that's the lean. Justify softcore porn in mainstream media.
