Trailer Tuesday: Shame (2011)


68 Responses to “Trailer Tuesday: Shame (2011)”

  1. Mack Reed says:

    Erm … “his chartreuse sister”?

    • Yeah… That, or she’s a molded vegetable salad. Damn you, AutoCorrect, I suppose…

      • mguffin says:

        Actually the Autocorrect wasn’t the culprit. ‘Chartreuse’ was right. The actual error was that he just credited the wrong actor: the sister’s actually played by Kermit the Frog in a rare cross dressing attempt to nab the Tootsie vote for next years Best Actress Oscar. Don’t judge him. It’s not easy being green…

    • Phoenix Lomax says:

      Sorta wondered if his greenish sister was a (bizarre) nod to Star Trek… perhaps a cameo by William Shatner would be in order.

    • irksome says:

      Assuming they’ve changed their gender-specific admission standards, perhaps she is one of the two Carthusian monks that know the secret recipe to what I recall as being a thoroughly intoxicating elixir.

    • Xof says:

      With that color correction? I’d go with chartreuse, too.

  2. jackbird says:

    His sister is green?

  3. planettom says:

    < until his chartreuse sister (Carey Mulligan)

    Carey Mulligan has many admirable attributes (I can't blink while gazing upon her), but being halfway between yellow and green isn't one of them.

    But, it's less fun if "chanteuse" was the intended word!

  4. danimagoo says:

    Chanteuse doesn’t make a lot of sense either. It’s a noun. Plus, if she’s a singer, why not just say that?

    • Deidzoeb says:

      Some people just gotta use stilted or antiquated language, like the way newspapers have to use “tembler” every time there’s an earthquake, or some sports writers have to use “cagers” and “tankers” and “pugilists” to avoid repeating the more common words like basketball players, swimmers (?) and boxers. Sometimes it’s better to repeat the common word than use a startling archaic synonym.

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        Some people just gotta use stilted or antiquated language…

        Or some people recognize that different words have different shades of meaning which are, apparently, imperceptible to the Basic English crowd.

      • Donald Petersen says:

        I noticed while still a lad that newspapers invariably use the word “temblor” second in the body text.  “MASSIVE QUAKE STRIKES ATLANTIS” would be the headline.  Then the story goes, “A devastating earthquake struck the mythical sea-colony of Atlantis Thursday afternoon.  The temblor registered 9.8 on the Richter scale, and is thought to be attributable to the flatulence of the slumbering deity Poseidon, who has demonstrated a hunger for refried beans this week.”

        Not once in my life have I seen the word “temblor” used in any other context but the second sentence in a news release, and believe you me, for thirty plus years, I’ve been looking.

  5. Melinda9 says:

    ‘Echoes of Midnight Cowboy’? Have they even seen that movie? (Which one is Ratso Rizzo?)

  6. Isaac Priestley says:

    ‘Chanteuse sister’ makes perfect sense. If she were a writer, ‘author sister’ would make sense. ‘Sculptor sister’, etc. You see her in the trailer singing.

  7. autark says:

    maybe she is anise/herbal flavored?

  8. Teufelaffe says:

    I really wish people would stop using the term “sex addiction”.  There’s no such thing.  This character may have compulsive sexual behaviors, but he certainly doesn’t have a sex “addiction”.  Sexual compulsive behaviors are not addictions, they don’t act like addictions, and they aren’t treated like addictions.

    Bah, what am I saying?  Since when has the movie industry ever cared about accuracy?  :P

  9. Carey Mulligan is an awesome actress. Did not know she could sing!

  10. dculberson says:

    What a chartreuse sister might look like.

  11. VerySincerely says:


  12. Terry Border says:

    So, if you’re rich enough to buy sex, or smooth enough to get it for free pretty frequently, you’re a sex addict. The rest are just poor schlubs who jerk off a lot? Or are at least not as interesting to make a movie or tv show about.

  13. pjk says:

    Hold on while I shed a tear for a 30-something Manhattan executive with more money than he can count. Oh, he’s rich, but trust me, you don’t want to be rich! Because they’re all crying on the inside!!

    • peterblue11 says:

      well he does have to fuck all these beautiful women…it must be a real struggle to get up every morning…

    • Because everyone knows that the more money you have the happier you are… right?

      • pjk says:

        Of course not, but there’s a limited amount of human suffering that I’m able to absorb and empathize with and prefer to save that empathy for, oh, I don’t know, the human trafficked prostitutes this rich guy is fucking. For example. It’s like Up in the Air. Remember? Where we were supposed to feel sorry for the guy getting paid millions to go around firing everyone? Fuck. That.

      • Xof says:

        No, but your options for avoiding misery are considerably wider.

    • Sekino says:

      I see your point… But how many people would want to see the movie if it were about some fugly, struggling loser who can only afford equally unappealing  ‘casual encounters’ on Craigslist?

  14. Chris Hemming says:

    It’s about contentment vs. a false need. Addictions set off chemical changes in the brain that cause you to want. Whatever it is, you want it, and when you get it it’s not enough so the next time you want more of it. So whether it’s sex or money or food or heroin or whatever, a lot of people have lost the ability to be content. It’s something that has to be re-learned. 

    So. pjk, it isn’t about the money. There are plenty of rich people out there who have learned contentment and share what they have. Peterblue11, it isn’t about the sex. There are plenty of people out there that have amazing sex with a loving partner and are content. There are also those without either who are content, and those without that are not content and may develop the same problems given the opportunity. 

    If we are to feel sorry for anyone it’s those who have forgotten or have never learned to be content, and the people they hurt trying to fill whatever hole they feel they have to fill.

    • awjt says:

      They’re not content because they never looked.  And if they say they looked, they never looked underneath THAT.

    • pjk says:

      I understand all that and it’s all true. My point was that if I’m going to spend my time empathizing with suffering, this particular kind of suffering of this particular person seems pretty far down on the global scale – actually even on the American scale – of suffering. I’m not saying all movies should be about deadly serious suffering, but if you’re going to make a movie that PURPORTS to be about deadly serious suffering, it better damn well be deadly and serious, because God knows there’s plenty out there. Instead, lots of (most?) American movies and books tend to pass off upper-middle class worries and stresses and Stuff My Therapist Told Me as worthy of high art about the human condition. It’s American decadence at its finest. Obviously Mr. McQueen is free to make whatever kind of movie he wants, but if you want to make a movie about sex addiction, why not make it about a father of three from Staten Island? I mean, Requiem for a Dream isn’t a perfect movie, but at least it’s not about some i-banker addicted to blow.

      • noah says:

        There’s all kinds of suffering in the world.  It can be hard to feel empathy for all of it, but I think it’s ultimately worthwhile.

        And McQueen is British; born and raised in London.

  15. Xof says:

    Serious Movies show sex as being dreary and unerotic. (Cf: Shortbus.) If a movie shows sex as being, you know, fun and pleasurable, then it’s nasty porn. The most important thing, apparently, is to make sure that any Serious Movie about sex is as unerotic and unarousing as possible.

    Can you imagine this in any other genre? Comedy: “Well, you see, the thing that is important about my movie is that it is actually not funny at all.” Action adventure: “The thing that makes my movie artistic is that no one will actually be thrilled by it at any point.”

    If someone actually thinks that making a movie with lots of skin that is “about sex addiction” is a brave new artistic statement, they have just awoken from cryogenic suspension since 1952.

    • Sekino says:

      This preview is clearly failing at selling a ‘Serious Movie’ then… Because all I could think was that if most one-night-stands looked like that, I’d have sought them out a lot more in my single years ;)

    • muckdriver says:

      Re: Shortbus

      What?! Really? Sure, there is some unconfortable/funny/weird sex in Shortbus. There were also some scenes that were incredibly hot. & It was all real sex/& penetration, too. 
      Sounds pretty true to life to me. 
      I really thought that was the point of the movie – you can show real sex & not have it be Porn. 

      • Xof says:

        Mitchell has made a big point that he does not want or expect anyone to be turned on by Shortbus. So, I guess if you were turned on, you’re watching it wrong. :)

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        For about five minutes, Shortbus seems to be about sex, and then it’s very much about despair and alienation. Something about the guy jizzing into his own mouth and then silently weeping.

        • Donald Petersen says:

          I dunno.  The guy singing The Star-Spangled Banner into another guy’s ass was a moment of high hilarity for me.  There was plenty of despair and alienation in that movie, sure, but I also thought I saw heaps of hope and sweetness there, too.  I’ll have to watch it again.  I loved that movie, and I don’t remember it being a downer in the end.

    • Totally agree. 

      Case in point, the french movie “Stories of sex”, directed by a former porn actress and which was given an X rating in France, effectively killing any chance of it ever turning a profit. Because, you see, as it featured fun and hot sex scenes it was considered porn. Whereas a Breillat movie, displaying the same amount of sex, does so in a tormented and moralizing way, hence the “artistic” label and the NC-17 rating.

  16. Melinda9 says:

    I watched the trailer with the sound off – this film looks comical.

  17. TheMidnightHobo says:

    Well, if nothing else, the music was damn good.

  18. toxonix says:

    Is this NSFW? I’m tempted to watch it, because there’s really no way I can say anything about it otherwise. Except the guy needs to give McQueen his name back.

    • Donald Petersen says:

      Maybe we can make the other guy stick to “Steven McQueen,” as he was credited in The Blob.

      Then again, I don’t think anyone could have made that McQueen do anything.

      BTW, the trailer posted above is SFW. There’s a red-band trailer linked to the article, but it appears to be hosted on Facebook, so I can’t tell you just how redbandy it is.

  19. Kevin Atkins says:

    Sounds like an upscale version of this thing in my Netflix queue:
    I Am a Sex Addict

    In this provocative autobiographical tale, filmmaker Caveh Zahedi uses an unconventional mix of home movies, candid confessionals, reenactments and animation to chronicle his long struggle with sex addiction.

  20. danimagoo says:

    Chartreuse has been changed to chanteuse in the linked article. I now want someone to make a movie about a chartreuse girl … who also happens to be a chanteuse.

  21. anharmyenone says:

    A sexy movie full of erotophobia. How depressing. I’d rather watch “Now & Later” (available from Netflix on streaming or DVD).

Leave a Reply