I finally got to see Call Me By Your Name late in the Oscar season. I loved it, even though it was much too long. A savage editor should have been hired to trim it down by about 20-25 minutes and then it would have been absolutely perfect. In some ways, it reminded me of Brokeback Mountain, in that we – as a society – should get to see representations of man-on-man love set in glorious, beautiful, cinematic glory. CMBYN is a relatively simple story about a young man’s sexual coming of age, but it was done so with such beautiful scenery, everything became so next-level. Timothee Chalamet was flat-out robbed of an Oscar – his performance was raw, fearless and lived-in. CMBYN ended up winning an Oscar for screenwriter James Ivory, and someone recently asked Ivory about all of the man-on-man love and why we didn’t get to see anything explicit, like their d-cks.
Call Me By Your Name screenwriter James Ivory called out director Luca Guadagnino over the Oscar-winning film’s lack of nudity, digging up an old point of contention among certain critics and viewers.
“When Luca says he never thought of putting nudity in, that is totally untrue,” Ivory told The Guardian in an interview. “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 bullsh–.”
Call Me By Your Name sparked many a think piece over the avoidance of nudity, especially when the original novel revels in this imagery. Guadagnino gave various explanations as to why there’s such an absence of male nudity in the film. Speaking in his defense to The Independent, he remarked, “I am the least prudish director you can meet. I’ve been very precise in using the female and male body on screen to convey all kind of emotions. I thought that the display of nudity in this specific movie was absolutely irrelevant and I understand that for James it would have been relevant but that is his vision, what is clear is that we had no limitations on what we wanted to do.”
“When people are wandering around before or after making love, and they’re decorously covered with sheets, it’s always seemed phony to me,” Ivory, who won an Oscar for the film’s screenplay, continued. “I never liked doing that. And I don’t do it, as you know.” He referred 1987’s Maurice, a film he directed based on the novel by E.M. Forster. “The two guys have had sex and they get up and you certainly see everything there is to be seen,” he said. “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.”
Call Me By Your Name tells the story of 17-year-old Elio (Timothée Chalamet) falling in love with Oliver (Armie Hammer), an older intern who’s come to spend the summer working with Elio’s father at the family’s Italian villa.
Ivory had told Variety in October that, “according to Luca, both actors had it in their contract that there would be no frontal nudity.” Hammer, in turn, told IndieWire he felt relieved that you don’t see anything beyond his exposed rear.
Had they actually shown some full-frontal stuff – Armie or Timothee – I do wonder if the film would have ended up becoming like Shame, that Michael Fassbender film. Fassbender did full-frontal nudity in Shame and so much of the conversation about that film became about the nudity (and the size of his d-ck). I’m sure the same thing would have happened here – the conversation wouldn’t be “this is a great love story” or “this is a beautiful film, worthy of Oscars,” it would have been “this is the film where we see Armie Hammer’s dong.” Still, I would have liked to have seen more of the actual sex!
Photos courtesy of CMBYN, WENN.
I saw that film recently, it was lovely. It did NOT need more nudity.
He should be honest and say he was uncomfortable showing Chalamet’s barely legal junk.
I get what he’s saying, but like you said, it would have become like Shame, where people seem to care and focus more about the nudity than the actual film.
I agree.
The thing that ruined the movie for me was the age difference that comes across. Timothee looked like a 16 or 17 year old whilst Armie a man in his late 30’s, early 40’s.
I feel the same way. Timothée looks like a young teen going through puberty, while Armie looks old. While I know the age in the movie is different, physically speaking, the age difference was too much.
I’ve only seen good reviews, so I’ll surely watch it at some point.
Your comments are totally on point.
1. the movie was a bit too long, but then again did a lot to build up the tension between the two of them
2. Timothee’s performance was extraordinary. Just alone the rolling credits next to his face in closeup was incredibly moving.
3. I agree that the discussion could have been diverted by the nudity. I had not read the book, but I already had heard something about a peach…..Since gay love stories have already a hard time with some parts of the audience, I rather they focus on the feelings instead of the physicality.
Can I just say that after CMBYN and Girls Trip In 2017, I can do without any sex with fruit scenes in 2018?
I liked the movie but the casting made me feel icky. Timothee looks like a 15 year old and Armie looks like a 30 year old. I dont think this movie will age well. I think in a few years people will be less awed by the love story since those will be more common place and be more grossed out by the aesthetics.
I don’t think so. People still love Woody Allen’s self inserts, … sorry movies about teenage girls falling in love with old white dudes.
Tim looks younger than his age and Armie older, but they are actually 22 and 31 years old, nothing outrageous compared to what we see depicted in heresexual romances in movies.
+1 Krill. Just watched the film the other day and it was a little icky because of how The age difference came off visually. Imagine if it was Armie Hammer and Henry Cavill or Timothee and someone who looks more his age, like Tom Holland.
I disagree. First of all, this takes places in the 80’s. Second, elio is 17 (turning 18) and Oliver is 23 or 24. Italy has an age of consent set at 16. This movie in my opinion will age well. I loved it. And I may also be a little biased since I met my now husband when I was 18 and he was 25.
It’s not about how old they are in the book, it’s about how old the actors look. Armie looks 35, Timothée like 15. Together with the height difference and hair styles/colours, this unfortunately heavily plays into an aesthetic that’s very common in porn. There are enough issues with this in the gay community already and I agree that this movie won’t age well as people get more aware of those issues and maybe start changing them. Also agree that it’s off-putting and keeps me from enjoying the movie.
i really want to see the movie, but visually, it makes me feel gross. arnie looks in his mid-30s, he does not pass/come close to looking 23 or 24. i understand the age difference is canonically fine, but they needed to cast someone who looks in their early 20s, not arnie, who looks like he’s having a midlife crisis.
“but they needed to cast someone who looks in their early 20s, not arnie, who looks like he’s having a midlife crisis.”
pffft that made me laugh xD
Haven’t seen it yet for the same reason. Also that it’s mostly really old men behind the scenes is just…yeah no.
I AM SOOOOOO HAPPY you loved the film! Chalamet crying at the end with visions of gideon playing ugh so beautiful.
That scene alone should have earned Timothy an Oscar.
That scene was unbelievable.
I think I need to watch the movie again though. For some reason, even though I really liked it, I didn’t buy that they had this incredible, once in a lifetime love.
Brokeback Mountain made me feel like that, but not this movie. Timothee’s character did make me remember what it was like to be young and enamored with someone. He was fantastic.
I thought Chalamet did a wonderful acting job but that there was ZERO chemistry between him and Hammer. Armie Hammer’s acting was so wooden. He was awful.
The criticism isn’t simply more male dong or more sex. James is pointing out Luca’s directorial choices.
Why is the only visble nudity in the film that of a woman, something Brokeback Mtn does too, when this is suppose to be a queer movie about two men falling in love? Why does the film allow the sex secene between Elio and his girlfriend but right before him and Oliver do it, the camera pans away to the window? There are a lot of decisions made to make the film more palatable to a straight audience. That’s the issue James see with the movie.
I would agree with that and I assume Luca is straight so for him female nudity is standard (hetero-normative vibes, anyone?) but I also understand full frontal etc was prohibited by both Tim & Armie’s contracts? How do you get around that when you see find the right actors for the role but they are unwilling. I enjoyed the film but for me it wasn’t the stand out 5 star movie everyone made it out to be. Not that it matters but I’m a straight female and for me what really resonated was the pain and loss of first love. Timothy was phenomenal in portraying that…and the father’s speech had me crying for about 2 hours afterwards.
Luca is gay, he has a bf
@anon – ah, I didn’t know that. I wonder why – as James Ivory (who is also gay) says: odd that the camera pans away and as someone said above the nudity involved the french girl. Maybe financing/wider distribution would have been an issue? I am stabbing in the dark but it’s an interesting point nonetheless…
I am perfectly happy with minimal nudity in general so whatever.
You know, Wood Dragon, so am I. When done in a sexual scene, oddly, it is more distracting. Have to think about this.
I’m so glad you liked it Kaiser. I saw this film twice in theatres and bought the book and bought the DVD. People think I’m obsessed (and they are correct!) But honestly I haven’t seen a film this good in years.
And obviously we all wish there was nudity, but can I say that there actually was nudity. Marcia was topless… Are we all really that shocked that a girl’s breasts were shown but not the nudes penises…? This is classic male Hollywood exes making decisions as they always do.
If you put nudity in a film, then that’s all people will harp on about. I don’t necessarily mind it but when actors (especially women) do nude scenes, all they get asked about in interviews is that scene, what it was like to film it, how they felt about it, did they get in shape for it etc. American cinematic culture is just so obsessed with nudity (or lack thereof I guess) and then the conversation just becomes about the nudity and not what the movie is actually about (in this case a love story between two men).
I just got the chance to watch this movie, and I agree, Timothee Chalamet’s performance was so captivating and breathtaking. He was definitely the stand out, along with the gorgeous scenery.
My girlfriend and I certainly didn’t need to see any dicks lol, but we were definitely surprised by how short the sex scenes were, especially when you contrast it with the love scene between Elio and Marzia (which featured female nudity, as others have pointed out).
I didn’t feel like the movie needed more nudity – it worked perfectly fine and it was amazing the way it was; but I do think there is this obsession and this almost panic-like reaction – at least with American audiences – with seeing THE DICK.
In French movies everybody parades naked all the time and it’s all perfectly fine and natural. I’ve seen Louis Garrel’s dick in like three movies at least and I doubt anybody asks him about it. Male nudity should just be more natural in movies.
But anyway maybe in this particular movie it had something to do with the perceptible age difference between the actors, and the fact that Timothée looked so young… the movie certainly felt less sexual than the book.
I loved the movie. It took me out of myself and lived and relived inside my head even to this day. I wanted to see more of the sex scenes and nudity but good ole US of A wouldn’t be able to deal with that between men. Obviously, people don’t have issues with female nudity. I suppose the actors didn’t want to do frontal nudity? Here’s a thing I’m often uncomfortable about love and sex scenes but then something comes along that is erotic and sexual tension is present in the scene whereas anything else feels like bleurgh. A smoldering Clive Owen (Gosford Park) planting a kiss on Kelly Macdonald, hot. The two leads in Once, who never once kissed, hot. A brief dance scene between the two young leads in 35 Shots of Rum, so romantic and yet so hot. And CMBYN, hot. Armie Hammer is not someone I’ve crushed on, I’ve only seen some of Social Network. My only awareness of him was some actor name AH who looked like a Ken doll. But whatever combination of fine acting between the Chalamet and Hammer brought tenderness, romance and eroticism to the story.
Since this isn’t an American film, I’m puzzled by the wealth of comments using it as an example to slam alleged American prudishness. Myself, I’ve never understood this European (mostly French) obsession with d*cks flopping around even when it serves no discernible purpose to the plot, but if it’s something you insist upon, I mean…just don’t watch American films? Seems like a fairly simple solution.
“Timothee Chalamet was flat-out robbed of an Oscar” – Agreed. Timothee’s raw authenticity brought to mind James Dean or early Brando.
Conveying intimacy does not require nudity and if you think it does, the movie is all the poorer for it.
I am a hetero female and this was my favorite movie from last year. I saw it three times in the theater and have read the book. Timothée Chalamet was robbed of an Oscar. He was breathtaking and heartbreaking (especially in that final scene). The age difference does not bother me. I think that 17 and 24 in a hetero relationship would not have bothered people.
I don’t think that it needed full frontal was necessary or would have made it any better.
I think this movie will age well.
I think it would have been distracting and their emotional connection was what was so powerful. I thought it was the most beautifully made film I’ve ever seen, in terms of how the shots were directed. And I think it’s the perfect length!