Mainstream movies with unsimulated sex

Wikipedia notes (FR):
'It contains explicit scenes'

The Sex:
I have seen this movie a couple of times but, even though there is indeed a lot of nudity and some explicit sex scenes, I'm pretty sure it was simulated though.

The Movie:
It just love this movie and it is probably the best Dutch movie ever made so you should definitely check it out. From someone living outside the Netherlands, it is probably difficult to realize the impact of this movie on the Dutch movie industry and it is basically thanks to this movie that you got some gratuitous nudity in pretty much every Dutch feature for the last 40 years.

Wikipedia notes (FR):
'An asiatic dancer put a cigaret in her vagina and exhales the smoke.'

The Sex:
To be honest, it has been a while since I have this flick and I just can't remember the scene described above. The rest is pretty much the usual steamy erotic stuff.

The Movie:
Since it is a massive classic in France, I was quite eager to check it out but, to be honest, I thought it was really disappointing and quite boring. It might have been groundbreaking when it was released but, 40 years later, it feels really tame and outdated.

Wikipedia notes (FR):
'Stefania Casini masturbates Gérard Depardieu and Robert De Niro'

The Sex:
I do recall that you got to see some frontal nudity involving Depardieu and De Niro but I don't remember anything about some masturbation.

The Movie:
It is really long, it is definitely an acquired taste but I really liked this movie a lot though. Basicaly, it is a great epic about Italy. Sure, I don't think it was historically accurate whatsoever but I believe it is was a poetic study about the class struggle. Therefore, it is rather over the top and quite theatrical but I really have a weak spot for the whole thing.

Wikipedia notes (EN):
'Based on a true story of a Japanese prostitute, features fellatio and other non-simulated sexual acts.'

The Sex:
Yeah, it is pretty much the most hardcore film on this film. It goes pretty much non-stop and I think it is the closest thing you will be to get an Art-house pornflick.

The Movie:
It is definitely a bold affair. I mean, it is not only about sex, it is also about love, domination, submission, madness and many other things. I thought it was pretty good, I especially enjoyed the directing but, to be honest, the whole thing was not really pleasant to watch and, at the end of the day, it is an intriguing experiment but not much more than that, I’m afraid.

Wikipedia notes (EN):
'Uncut version of this film includes several authentic sex scenes, including penetration, fellatio and ejaculation during the six minutes worth of inserts shot by the film's producer, Bob Guccione. The sex shot by Tinto Brass in the rest of the movie, although very explicit, was simulated.'

The Sex:
It is such a weird movie. Indeed, out of nowhere, you get some random sex scenes which don't even look half bad but which don't have anything to do with the rest of the story at all. Basically, it is really sleazy and trashy.

The Movie:
Even though this movie has a really lousy reputation, it might sound weird, but I don’t think it was that bad at all. Indeed, since this movie dealt with Caligula, the most decadent Roman emperor, I thought this movie eventually fit the man quite well. Indeed, the main character was just despicable, mad, tyrannical, and indeed, you had a few hardcore sex scenes here and there but it didn’t really bother me. As a matter of fact, it might sound odd but I think those scenes made the movie even more surreal. I’m not saying that those inserts were a good idea but I don’t think they really ruined the movie. Basically, it was pretty much like watching ‘Gladiator’ on acid.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film directed by Paul Verhoeven features explicit hardcore sex scenes, including oral sex.'

The Sex:
Verhoeven is such a sleaze... There was indeed some short (gay) oral sex but nothing else really explicit if I recall correctly.

The Movie:
It has been a while since I have seen this flick and I should probably re-watch it at some point. To be honest, I always had a hard time to get what Paul Verhoeven was trying to achieve with this movie. Anyway, it was really controversial when it was released in the Netherlands and the fuss around this movie was one of the reasons why Verhoeven decided to leave the Netherlands to work in the USA instead.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'In the uncut version, Béatrice Dalle kisses the penis of Jean-Hugues Anglade.'

The Sex:
I haven't seen the uncut version so I have missed that scene.

The Movie:
In France, it is a pretty much a classic and it launched the career of the really notorious Béatrice Dalle. Personally, I'm not a huge fan but it is still a pretty good flick though.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Dumont included extreme close-ups of penetration to emphasize the animal nature of the sex act.'

The Sex:
Bruno Dumont has/had a rather peculiar directing style as he would add some very explicit sex scenes in his movies with no really obvious reasons. In this case, I think it was just one single pretty graphic scene.

The Movie:
Dumont makes some really gloomy and dreary movies and I'm not a huge fan but this movie was pretty good though.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Lars von Trier features penetration and group sex.'

The Sex:
There is one massive orgy at some point and von Trier, always looking for some good old controvery, inserted some real penetration in the mix.

The Movie:
I remember it very well, I actually saw this movie in the movie theater when it was released which was pretty weird because I had never seen some actual sex on the silver screen which was pretty weird. What I didn't know it at the time, is that Lars von Trier, with this movie, would have a huge impact. Indeed, at the end of the 70's, most of the censhorhip laws were removed in Europa and many film makers took advantage of this releasing many mainstream features with some hardcore elements. However, it all stopped in the 80's following the new laws regulating the X rated movies. Well, this changed with the success of this flick which launched a wave of art-house films with explicit content (see underneath).

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'The film is Gaspar Noé's first feature-length production and features several actual sex scenes.'

The Sex:
Like most of the movies directed by Gaspar Noé, the whole thing was so disturbing, I didn't register any of these explicit sex-scenes.

The Movie:
It has been a while since I have seen this flick but, since it is really dark and gloomy, I'm not sure if I will ever re-watch it. Still, there was something quite mesmerizing about the damned thing.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Directed by Catherine Breillat, features male and female masturbation, fellatio, penetration, ejaculation, and sadomasochistic bondage.'

The Sex:
There are indeed a couple of unsimulated sex scenes but the mood is so gloomy and dreary, it feels like sex is a real chore when you watch this flick.

The Movie:
It was a decent watch but I can’t say I was blown away by the whole thing. Indeed, the sex scenes were not bad but, to be honest, there was such a heavy and gloomy mood throughout the whole thing, it made the movie a little bit depressing. On top of that, the tale and the characters involved were seriously murky so I had a hard time to connect with this flick. Still, I think it was an intriguing feature.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'A film by Bruno Dumont contains sex and nudity, including three hardcore scenes.'

The Sex:
Again, with Bruno Dumont, this movie has nothing much to do with sex in general and, yet, the guy has added a couple of explicit scenes anyway.

The Movie:
Even though this movie was critically heralded when it was released, I thought it was incredibly frustrating to watch. I don't know, even though it wasn't bad at all, it was impossible for me to connect with the characters and I thought that their behavior was sometimes borderline infuriating.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Contains several actual sex scenes, including penetration and fellatio.'

The Sex:
The explicit sex scenes were the reason why this movie made some waves when it was released but, to be honest, they didn’t have much value narratively speaking and it seems that they had been added just to create some controversy and to make sure that this movie got more attention that it actually deserved.

The Movie:
Even if it was expected, it still turned out to be a cheap and nasty piece of work. Indeed, the beginning scenes were pretty messy and awkward and, from the moment the main characters met each other in the most random way possible, the whole thing became some kind of (very) dark version of ‘Thelma & Louise’. At least, even if Karen Bach and Raffaëla Anderson both gave some poor performances, they actually had some charisma and a nice chemistry together and, with some slightly stronger material and some better directing, they could have delivered something interesting.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Features fellatio.'

The Sex:
Yeah, the whole thing is about some gloomy and rather depressing sex relationship so there is a lot of explicit sex scenes. I thought there was in fact even more unsimulated sex stuff here but it shows how convincing the whole thing was.

The Movie:
Even though the artistic merit of this movie can be disputable, I thought it was quite fascinating to behold. Indeed, there is something terribly messed up here but I think it resembles how totally weird a sexual relationship can become.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Bertrand Bonello shows many hardcore sex scenes, including penetration.'

The Sex:
With such a title, yeah, they had to show the real thing. However, the description above is vastly exagerated and it basically shows only a handful of, indeed, real sex scenes.

The Movie:
Half-artistic, half-exploitative, I actually have a weak spot for this one. Basically, the main purpose of the whole thing was above all to show the paradox of a director who wants to remain artistically relevant within an industry (the porn business) which doesn’t care about Art at all and just wants to make the cheapest movies possible. So, that was an interesting idea but, to be honest, it never really became more than just interesting, I’m afraid, and the whole thing was still a little bit pretentious.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Julio Medem contains several real sex scenes, including penetration and fellatio from the porn movie made by one of the film's characters as well as manual stimulation of an erect penis and cunnilingus performed by and on another film's character.

The Sex:
It have seriously don't see what they are talking about here. I mean, it has been a while since I have seen this flick so maybe I missed something or maybe I just saw the R-rated version and not the unrated one missing therefore most of the naughty bits.

The Movie:
The whole thing was indeed pretty steamy but you may wonder if all this nudity and sex was really necessary. On the other hand, it is definitely a solid movie and there was something quite fascinating about it.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Gaspar Noé shows unsimulated oral sex.'

The Sex:
Again, with Gaspar Noé, the whole thing is just so disturbing and nauseating that you barely register this (very quick) unsimulated sex scene.

The Movie:
Watching this movie is like watching a massive train wreck in slow-motion. Deep in yourself, you know you should actually be doing something else, something else that might cheer you up instead and, yet, you can't look away. It was quite controversial when it was released and, more than a decade later, it still deserves its notorious reputation.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'An actor masturbates until he ejaculates.'

The Sex:
This another one is pretty much some wall-to-wall very explicit sex scenes so you might consider watching something else with your girlfriend. There is a fair chance that most of it was simulated though (I hope so, at least).

The Movie:
Another movie with quite an infamous reputation and it completely deserves this status. After all these years, I still think about it from time to time and I can't make up my mind if the whole thing was either completely misguided or in fact quite fascinating to behold. Watch it at your own risk.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'The actress Eva Green pulls down the underwear of Michael Pitt and discover a picture of herself sticked to his penis. Louis Garrel, seen from the back, is vigorously masturbing while watching a picture of Marlène Dietrich.

The Sex:
Even though there was some nudity, I thought that the whole thing was pretty harmless regarding the sexual stuff.

The Movie:
To be honest, if you have watched the fascinating and rather disturbing 'Ultimo tango a Parigi' before, this movie is actually not really amazing. I mean, it was not bad but it seemed that Bertolucci was trying to recycle the same thing 30 years later.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Several non-simulated sex scenes, including penetration, fellatio, cunnilingus and ejaculation'

The Sex:
Apparently, it is one of the most sexually explicit mainstream films to date, largely because it includes several scenes of real sex between the two lead actors. At first, I thought it was too bad that both leads were rather average looking but the girl did grow on me after a while.

The Movie:
Eventually, the whole thing felt like a missed opportunity but I still think it was a brave and interesting experiment. Indeed, the sex scenes were actually well done but it's too bad everything added to those sex scenes was just so underwhelming.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'It shows some fellatios, a penetration involving Anapola Mushkadiz and some other non-simulated scenes involving some supporting actors.'

The Sex:
Well, this one doesn't bit around the bush and provides, right from the start, a massive blow-job in close-up so you have been warned.

The Movie:
What was this all about? On one hand, the intro is rather well made and definitely striking and the whole endeavour was absolutely bold. But, on the other hand, it was also really distracting because during the rest of the movie, I kept thinking again about what happened back there when I was supposed to focus on what was going on at that moment. A part from this, like some other directors like David Lynch, Carlos Reygadas doesn't care much about the plot. What you have instead is a succession of weird scenes which goes all very slowly and I'm not sure I really understood what was going on. What was the motivation of the characters? What was the motivation of the director? I can't say I have an answer. Still, I make it sound as if it was a bad movie but it's not.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'Several actors perform real sexual acts including explicit masturbation, autofellatio, coitus, and heterosexual and homosexual fellatio'

The Sex:
Right from the very beginning, you get several sex acts going from masturbation, to straight sex, gay sex and even some SM. At the end of the scene, you even get several ejaculations, even a guy ejaculating in his own mouth which was something I seriously didn't expect. To be honest, even though there were a lot of gay sex, probably more than 50%, I think the explicit scenes were actually very well done and they didn't really make me feel uncomfortable, at least, not too much.

The Movie:
Concerning the rest of the movie, I think the Shortbus club was quite fascinating and the group of characters involved were also interesting. Unfortunately, the running time was rather short (just above 90 mins) , I think there were just too many characters and, to be honest, some of their stories were either far-fetched or rather half-baked. Eventually, for an experimental feature, I thought it was not bad and it could have been much worse.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'It contains numerous sex scenes which are, according to the insinuations of the director, partly non-simulated.'

The Sex:
I have my doubts about this one. I mean, sure, the sex scene were indeed really steamy but I'm pretty sure those were simulated. If Ang Lee really insinuated that those scenes were not fake, I'm pretty sure he did that just to create some buzz.

The Movie:
I didn't expect this but the plot was rather similar to 'Zwartboek' directed by Paul Verhoeven. Anyway, I heard about the infamous sex scenes and indeed, they were rather .... graphic. Eventually, even though, the story was not always great and even confusing at some points, I still think that the directing was quite amazing and the acting from both leads was pretty impressive as well.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film, directed by Gaspar Noé contains some unsimulated sexual activity.'

The Sex:
It is easily the most complex movie directed by Gaspar Noé and there was so much going on in this flick that I didn't notice anything really hardcore in the sex area. On the other hand, the description above is so vague, it could mean pretty much anything.

The Movie:
You can say whatever you want about this director but, from a visual point of view, this flick was quite impressive. I mean, right from the amazing title sequence, I was sold. It seems that he simply refuses to make conventional shots and during the whole thing you wonder how he managed to do this or that. Of course, it is a little bit nauseating (something reminiscent of his previous movie ‘Irréversible’) and all those shots above buildings and walls might seem gimmicky but I liked the approach and there was something quite mesmerizing about following most of the actions above the shoulder of the main character.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Lars von Trier features a scene of penetrative vaginal intercourse, and also includes graphically violent sexual imagery. Body doubles were used to make the film.'

The Sex:
It definitely deserved its notorious reputation on that level. Indeed, there was some real sexual intercourse right from the start, some (fake) female masturbation, some (real) male masturbation resulting in some ejaculation of blood(!). To be honest, it was probably one of least erotic depiction of sex I have ever seen.

The Movie:
Well, I definitely had some mixed feelings about this one. Indeed, one hand, it's beautifully shot, highly artistic, and the two actors involved were quite amazing but, on the other hand, it was just so unpleasant to watch, it was pretty much an actual nightmare so I'm not sure I really cared for the whole thing after all.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'The brief real sex is used to establish the unusual and dysfunctional lifestyle that results from the isolation orchestrated by the dictatorial father, including incest.'

The Sex:
There was indeed one explicit sex scene (incestual, on top of that) and, pretty much like the rest of the movie, it looked more weird and absurd than anything else.

The Movie:
Well, how can you define this movie? I don’t think it really qualified as a comedy but it was definitely not a drama or a thriller either. The fact that it definitely didn't belong to any genre made this movie really stood out and, only therefore, it gets a few extra points from me but I can’t say I was really blown away by the whole thing though.

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'A 2011 French film, directed by Laurent Bouhnik, which features several graphic unsimulated depictions of sex.'

The Sex:
There were many pretty girls in this flick and a lot of very explicit sex, most of it unsimulated so, in this area, it is pretty much the real deal even though it feels rather often pretty random.

The Movie:
Unfortunately, it turned out to be some really average TV feature with some very explicit and quite often unsimulated sex. Concerning the acting, there were many good-looking girls involved, I’ll give you that, but the performances were at best bearable but sometimes really pathetic to behold. On top of that, I thought that the whole thing was seriously poorly written. Indeed, I don’t mind that they didn’t provide a main plot but this combination of half-baked sub-plots was seriously underwhelming.

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'In the non-censored version, you have some explicit sex scenes shot with some porn actors and then they digitally added the faces of the actual actors who therefore didn't take part in the displayed acts'

The Sex:
Eventually, for some reasons, there were much more dialogues than I expected but there was still definitely a lot of explicit sex involved, that’s for sure. From a technical view, it was actually pretty flawless as it really seems that the actors were actually having sex.

The Movie:
As usual with this director, the whole thing was really dark and gloomy but I was this time quite able to connect with this material, even if it was indeed pretty messed-up. At least, you have to give Lars von Trier some credit. I mean, who else would dare or even be allowed to make something so transgressive?

Wikipedia Notes (FR):
'In the non-censored version, you have some explicit sex scenes shot with some porn actors and then they digitally added the faces of the actual actors who therefore didn't take part in the displayed acts'

The Sex:
To be honest, I wasn't expecting even more sex but maybe it was because I already saw the 1st installment or maybe it was because it was even longer. Anyway, there was plenty of explicit scene, especially the one pictured above which ended up with some massive double-penetration.

The Movie:
Eventually, so many crazy things happened during this dark 3 hours long roller-coaster and, to be honest, it was sometimes pretty random but it was always rather mesmerizing to watch. Eventually, the masterstroke was, just as with the previous installment, the long conversation between Joe and Seligman and how their relationship eventually ended in this movie was just spot-on and really priceless .

v

Wikipedia Notes (EN):
'This film by Gaspar Noé features scenes of unsimulated sexual activity and is notable as being a 3-D release'

The Sex:
While watching the damned thing, I was wondering if some of it was simulated but, no, apparently, it was the real deal in all these numerous sex scenes. You pretty much get the whole package here : masturbation, fellatio, penetration and ejaculation, all in glorious 3D (at least, if you see it in the movie theater).

The Movie:
Most of the sex scenes were well done and usually in a tasteful way and they took the time to develop the characters which was really appreciated. Still, I can’t say it completely worked though. First of all, the damned thing was just too long. I mean, you had here a movie focusing on 2 characters and their relationship which was fine but for more than 2 hours, they didn’t do much, except having a lot of sex and some random conversations so I think they could have easily removed 30 mins. Still, in this genre, it is probably the best movie I have seen so far.