Lovelace why rated r

The plot of the real-life porn movie Deep Throat is discussed. A married couple is shown in bed together, with suggested sex both intercourse and oral , but little nudity is shown. The main character has many partners, though all of them unwilling. A man shows his bare bottom for a camera. Language isn't constant, but "f--k" is heard in many forms, as well as "t-ts," "ass," "c--k," "py," "bitch," "clitoris," "balls," and "cum," plus "Jesus Christ" and "God" as exclamations.

Drugs and drinking are prevalent in the world of s porn. The main character smokes pot. Her mom and dad drink whisky at home.

There's champagne at parties. Linda is seen taking pills. Linda's husband snorts huge amounts of cocaine in later scenes. What parents need to know Parents need to know that Lovelace is a biopic about Linda Lovelace, star of the infamous s porn movie Deep Throat. There's some female toplessness and plenty of sexual innuendo and sexual suggestion, but not much sex is actually shown for a film about porn.

Spousal and sexual abuse are also intense parts of the plot, but the movie manages to keep most of it off screen or suggested, rather than shown. Language isn't frequent but is very strong and includes many sexual terms. And there's plenty of drinking and drug use. The movie is very sympathetic toward its heroine and celebrates her efforts to stand up against a dark and brutal world, but it's still not meant for kids. Continue reading Show less. Stay up to date on new reviews.

Get full reviews, ratings, and advice delivered weekly to your inbox. User Reviews Parents say Kids say. Adult Written by Sefal June 18, A flawless biopic!! First of all, for a movie that takes place in the porn industry, this movie was surprisingly tame. There was barely any nudity and all the sexual content were o Continue reading. Report this review. Teen, 16 years old Written by steveyomam May 1, This movie sucks it is poop trash.

Kid, 9 years old July 29, We see a young woman partially pull down her shorts and a portion of her bare buttocks are visible. We see a shirtless man his bare chest is visible in bed with a young woman and she is shown wearing brief-style underwear and a shirt it is obvious that she is not wearing a bra.

We see a woman in a bathtub with bubbles over her chest no nudity is visible. A young woman asks another young woman if she wants to go skinny-dipping and the young woman declines.

We hear a young woman recite lines about not being interested in sex. A young woman performs a scene for a movie where she discusses not being interested in sex, but that she enjoys having sex even though she does not know how to enjoy herself.

A man asks a woman to read back a portion of a story, about the man having sex with a woman and the man makes a crude remark about the woman telling him what his genitalia tastes like.

We hear a man making a crude remark about pornographic movies. A comedian makes a joke that he had gone to see a pornographic movie because he thought it was about giraffes. A man tells a young woman his daughter that he had tried to watch a movie where the young woman performs pornographic acts, but that he had to leave the theater.

A television host makes a joke about a pornographic movie. A television reporter announces that a pornographic movie is the most popular pornographic movie of all time.

She was an intriguing person, starting as a suburban girl, going on to play the lead role in one of the most successful X-rated films and, finally, to working as an anti-pornography crusader and becoming a feminist icon. The filmmakers focus on the sordid stuff and inexplicably skip over that last part — which is arguably the most compelling.

What prompted her to speak out against the industry that made her famous? Epstein and Friedman opt for the most broadly entertaining and salacious details about the porn film, giving short shrift to Lovelace's complicated contradictions. She became a born-again Christian. She had a troubled childhood and later a serious drug addiction. After all, having sex with a dog, especially on camera, is not an action in which most would engage willingly. I could go on about relevant moments of the real Lovelace's life that this movie chose to ignore.

However, the primary faults of "Lovelace" lie not in what they left out, but in a questionable storytelling structure where the filmmakers obviously tried to be too clever in their narrative. Basically, the first half of the film chronicles a year-old, naive Linda Boreman Amanda Seyfried who lives with her strict, Catholic parents Robert Patrick and a shockingly deglamorized, unrecognizable Sharon Stone in Florida.

A charismatic, year-old Chuck Traynor Peter Sarsgaard spots Linda at a rollerskating rink and begins dating her. While Traynor claims to own a bar and restaurant, young Linda doesn't realize he dabbles in prostitution until after they are married, and she bails him out of jail.

Eventually, Traynor coerces her into performing sexual acts on complete strangers for money before taking her to audition for pornographic movies. From here, the film chronicles the making of the notorious "Deep Throat", the rise of Linda Lovelace, and does more than hint at the unexpected cultural impact the film creates.

Halfway through, the film makes the mistake of jumping ahead six years later I guess circa , and showing a visibly disheveled Linda taking a lie detector test administered by a publisher Eric Roberts in order to assess the validity of her marital abuse claims in her new autobiography, "Ordeal". The film then jumps back 8 or 9 years to show many of the same scenes over again, except adding footage at the end of each scene actually showing Traynor physically and sexually abusing Linda.

Why go back and show these scenes? The lie detector scene would have made a good narrative framework, especially since you see Amanda Seyfried look so shockingly worn down. This is not the same doe- eyed, blonde hottie from "Mamma Mia" , or at least it doesn't look like her. The point is, though, that going back and retreading all the scenes feels like a waste of time. Considering the film's running time of 93 minutes, there is no excuse for retread, especially considering Sarah Jessica Parker's well-publicized cameo as Gloria Steinem was cut out of the film altogether.

However, casting was the film's main strength, which I initially thought would be its weakness. I had my doubts about Seyfried portraying Lovelace, considering that Seyfried is exceptionally gorgeous, and the real Linda Lovelace was Is there any way to say this nicely? Listing actresses in this review who bear a stronger resemblance to the doomed porn starlet would probably be insulting to them.

While Seyfried donned a shaggy brunette hairstyle and freckles to deglamorize herself, she still looked a lot prettier than Lovelace on her best day. Scenes such as low-level mobster Butchie Periano Bobby Cannavale arguing that she is not attractive enough for the porno he is financing appear consequently more dubious. Still, Seyfried did well with what she was given. Her best scenes include the lie-detection test, a surprisingly touching moment with an unexpectedly cordial publicity photographer Wes Bentley , and her begging her emotionally cold mother for asylum from her abusive husband.

Another scene where she is raped by five men at Traynor's behest shows little, but is still hard to watch.