QUESTION:
These are the RA movies Nat hasn't seen.
Which one is she missing out on the most?
POLL RESULTS:
Cleopatra: 0 (0%)
Casualty: 0 (0%)
Doctors: 0 (0%)
Cold Feet: 6 (4%)
Ultimate Force: 3 (2%)
Between the Sheets: 57 (46%)
Macbeth: 3 (2%)
The Golden Hour: 25 (20%)
Inspector Lynley: 5 (4%)
Malice Aforethought 1 (0%)
George Gently: 16 (13%)
Miss Marie Lloyd: 3 (2%)
Ordeal by Innocence: 0 (0%)
Frozen: 3 (2%)
My original plan was to watch the poll winner and give a review.
These are the RA movies Nat hasn't seen.
Which one is she missing out on the most?
POLL RESULTS:
Cleopatra: 0 (0%)
Casualty: 0 (0%)
Doctors: 0 (0%)
Cold Feet: 6 (4%)
Ultimate Force: 3 (2%)
Between the Sheets: 57 (46%)
Macbeth: 3 (2%)
The Golden Hour: 25 (20%)
Inspector Lynley: 5 (4%)
Malice Aforethought 1 (0%)
George Gently: 16 (13%)
Miss Marie Lloyd: 3 (2%)
Ordeal by Innocence: 0 (0%)
Frozen: 3 (2%)
My original plan was to watch the poll winner and give a review.
It seems many of you were anxious to see my reaction of "Between the Sheets"
or more likely, my reaction to Richard's bare nekked bumsky!
I'd heard enough talk of RA's "peaches" to know that nobody
was referring to produce, and that the famous Armitage peaches
was referring to produce, and that the famous Armitage peaches
make an appearance in "Between the Sheets."
After hanky-panky week, it may come to a surprise to some of you that
I'm rather old-fashioned when it comes to my viewing tastes.
I enjoy love scenes, but prefer some things to be left to the imagination.
I enjoy love scenes, but prefer some things to be left to the imagination.
(Which is why I probably love costume dramas.) I'm not a prude. I don't think nudity
or intimacy are dirty, but would rather not watch anything too graphic.
or intimacy are dirty, but would rather not watch anything too graphic.
It's just a personal preference... I don't judge others who have different perspectives.
A few people warned me that the unedited version of this movie is very explicit.
I became curious. "How graphic could it be?" I thought. I decided to find pictures online
from the famous peach scene (is there more than one?) to see if reports were accurate.
I thought, "Still images wouldn't be as explicit as film, right?"
I thought, "Still images wouldn't be as explicit as film, right?"
Um, wrong.
All I can say is that my jaw dropped.
Richard and Julie Graham were in their birthday suits~ stark naked, people!
(Except RA was wearing socks... what is up with that!? Does he have Hobbit feet?)
(Except RA was wearing socks... what is up with that!? Does he have Hobbit feet?)
And it's not the nudity that shocked me
(since I expected some, although not to the degree that was shown)
but the fact that they were doing the deed with no covering at all.
All the contortions/thrusting/porn-type stuff in plain view!
(since I expected some, although not to the degree that was shown)
but the fact that they were doing the deed with no covering at all.
All the contortions/thrusting/porn-type stuff in plain view!
Can you tell I don't have HBO?
Everyone else is probably thinking, "What's the big deal?"
I can laugh about it now, but at the time, I was rather traumatized...
and not because RA looks like THIS in one of the scenes:
(Although this is creepy.)
It's my own fault that I looked for those pics in the first place... darn my curiosity!
(And whoever voted for BTS, it's party your fault too. ha.)
Quick... we better look at another Paul Andrews
picture to get the last one out of our head!!!
(And whoever voted for BTS, it's party your fault too. ha.)
Quick... we better look at another Paul Andrews
picture to get the last one out of our head!!!
Perhaps I've focused too much on the
bedroom scene than the movie's overall message which may be unfair.
Maybe there is artistic merit to which I haven't given due credit.
I've heard that the dialog between the characters is very interesting,
bedroom scene than the movie's overall message which may be unfair.
Maybe there is artistic merit to which I haven't given due credit.
I've heard that the dialog between the characters is very interesting,
so perhaps I'll watch the edited version of "Between the Sheets."
I don't know if I can ever bring myself to watch the unedited version...
even though I'll admit, it took me a few minutes to look away from those pictures.
As much as I like to swoon over RA or other actors,
my husband is the only man I care to see in that respect.
(You can roll your eyes and call me old-fashioned, I don't care.)
By the way, I really don't buy any of that "I don't view myself as a Sex God" crap now.
The leather, the speedo, the peaches... whatever, Richard. You know you're workin' it!
To read about the plot and a few of RA's quotes about "Between the Sheets"
(which I found interesting) visit Richard Armitage Online HERE.
.jpg)
28 comments:
Nat, this shows that the overwhelming majority of your readers have dirty minds! Nah, not really. I suppose it's his only other significant role with decent screen time.
Actually I haven't seen the peaches you talk of. Can't do it!
You aren't missing much. I don't have a problem with nudity, and I wasn't that shocked by the sex scenes, but I thought the miniseries was . . . bleh. (To each her own; clearly a lot of RA fans loved it.) It was 6 hours of silly, selfish, self-absorbed people. I get enough of that on American TV.
See Marie Lloyd or George Gently instead. They're both interesting and well-done.
BTS is my least favourite thing Richard has acted in. I remember all the hype on TV when it was going to be shown. I normally love Kay Mellor's writing, but not this one (Fat Friends was great!). I watched about ten minutes of it and then switched over. Crap is what it is. It was pure titilation and the subject matter could have been better dealt with than it was if that was what it was truly meant to be about. I mean his sexual "problem" didn't last long did it? A quick peaches rub down and he was raring to go! I loved all the other characters but those of Paul and Iona seemed to be just an afterthought tacked on by the author to try and tidy up a few loose ends. In all truthfulness it should have been Alun Armstrong and Brenda Blethyn acting out the storyline to do with "lack of functionality". It was badly written and directed, sorry fans but it was. Richard looked very wooden in some of those scenes (not the bare backside ones obviously). That scene where they are talking to a therapist and he says "I did very well at University" (and I'm not talking scholarly pursuits here) had me wetting myself. Another scene was where the camera was held on him far to long at the beginning of the scene where he is supposed to be in bed and answers the phone. Did you hear it ring, because I'm damned if I did! The fight scenes I notice always seems to be a problem for Richard, he just doesn't seem to be able to generate enough real anger from within himself. Very wooden and artificial (don't tar and feather me girls please!. I've yet to see him argue with someone and make me feel like he is really losing it.
Nat my advice is to watch Marie Lloyd, that's if you can bare to listen to Jessie Wallace's terrible cockney voice, which grated on my nerves, but Richard's dulcet tones more than made up for it. Now there was a certain "love" scene in that but it was tastefully done and not explicit. Less is definitely more in my view!
Yes, I agree, Richard knows how to "milk it" for all it's worth.(Damn him!) I loved the character of Lee in Cold Feet, he was a love-rat but a convincing and lovely- with-it love-rat. Actually I think Lucas North has a little bit of Lee in him (and I don't just mean the content of his speedos!) He certainly stood tall and let it all hang out in that scene didn't he!
I posted a reply on the forum for you, Nat. I'm hiding behind the sofa right now because I voted BTS.
Yep, it has a bunch of messed up people in that mini series - but I loved watching it - all the same.
Well BTS was not my cup of tea either but I will have to say the only thing I did like about it was, RA's acting. The wooden aspect I thought blended well with how the character Paul was. There was a shallowness to Paul that came out loud and clear in those wooden moments.. well at least I thought. Paul is a nasty piece of work, yet I found myself unable to decide if he was guilty or not, which again, I thought was brilliant acting. The rest of the actors/characters I could have done without completely! (but that's just MHO)
Interesting how each of us can see things so totally different!
check the forum for me as well.
I have to say in all fairness I loved this BTS.
It was not just for the peaches scene but I liked how they took frank adult manner and did not try to treat it like a neat clean tied up sterile story. Real life is gritty and this show was for me something I found drawn into. Maybe because I am an old married lady I found some common ground with some the struggles.
So watch if this one is not your cup of tea watch another. You know the nice thing about Richard is he tries to have variety in his work for all of us sinners and saints.
I've heard about the "Peaches" in BTS and I've seen pics but I've never seen the series myself.
I do have it but have yet to indulged. Truthfully, I don't know if I want too. I'm content having the image of RA as Thornton. Just seeing him in the black coat with the cravat and I'm already wobbly in the knees.
I'm no prude either and I've written enough JT love scenes to prove the opposite. Still, I kind of like the idea that I haven't see it.
I guess I'm just strange that way.
First off nudity, porn, strip clubs, doesn't bother me. And I loath admitting this as I am probably the worst R.A fan EVER but I have heard everyone rave about his naked butt and I ordered the DVD from the UK (It has not arrived yet and his sex scene is not the only reason I ordered it, really, I want all of his movies) Anyways I did the same as Nat, I googled the pics and I REALLY thought I would like it, but to my own dismay I did not. Maybe watching the film I will change my mind but I doubt it. I won’t state my reasons but it just did not do it for me. I think he is sexy as Gisborne..... And Lucas is handsome..... Maybe it is the costume or the role that I found attractive.
And by the way Nat, Cleopatra is a good movie. He is not in it much but the movie was interesting in my opinion but then again I am a history freak so what I like, others may not.
i cant remember what i voted for. probably Golden Hour. I havent seen taht OR BTS.
lol i dont have probs with sex scenes and stuff....though if i do watch them i would rather watch on my own...coz i just feel weird watching graphic stuff with other people in the room with me. i suppose if i had a SO i could cope watching with them. :D
but i totally understand your point of view mate!
i am almost tempted to seek out the RA bum pics ....for research purposes of course! lets see how long i resist...
IMO, BTS must've been partly subsidized by the UK's national healthcare budget with the intention of saving funds by eliminating sexual dysfunction for both sexes:) That said, the dialog is interesting and RA plays the part with great sensitivity. We need to keep in mind when he accepted this role--it was pre N&S therefore he couldn't easily dismiss a role that would receive major national attention. Everyone makes crucial decisions in the early stages of their career. I totally agree with the remark that lightly veiled sex act scenes are more seductive than graphically raw nakedness. Richard looks sexier in form fitting jeans, etc than bare bum nekked. Besides, all major film stars must be willing to let it all hang out these days....sad but true.
I agree, Richard was probably glad to get the work, no matter what the drama was. If he had been offered a role to play the back end of a pantomime cow I suspect he would have grabbed their hands off! We must also remember that this was taken quite a few years ago when Richard had to make the transition from stage to screen, which must be quite difficult to get used to. I remember Richard saying in an interview that he was that thrilled to be up for the role that he forgot to read the director's notes. I'm not at all sure that this is quite true, or just Richie's sense of humour (or excuse for the bare bum scenes). I was quite surprised at those scenes actually. He has got a big bum hasn't he? Julie Graham constantly digging her heels into his backside must have left him feeling a little bruised too! Love those little white bobby socks! But hated the oasis look!
That scene where he turns over to face Julie Graham (buck naked)after having his dumplings pummelled for dear life, and she says to him "it worked then". They both look as though they are ready to burst out laughing and I can't help imagining the mischievous Richard wearing a strategically placed "kiss me quick hat" or a "keep of the grass" sign or something that only Julie could see. Oh how I wish I could have shared the view she had of him!Lucky beggar!
LOL...actually, my first reaction to the first sighting of peaches being massaged was "doesn't Alona have a tiny little a$$." When I realized it was actually RA's posterior it became perfectly clear why he could wear Guy's leather second skin with such finesse--thanks to his little bitty bum:)
Never in the history of mankind have peaches been discussed in such a profound manner. LOL
RiCrAr said...
[QUOTE] Never in the history of mankind have peaches been discussed in such a profound manner. [QUOTE]
No never! But I am so-o-o-o enjoying all the comments. :-) Thanks.
I've seen the non-nekkid scenes on YouTube and the nekkid scenes on a blog somewhere, and it would be interesting to see the whole show. I thought the pics and videos are a bit... embarassing. I'm a bit prudish as well when it comes to certain things, and with actors I have a fangirl crush on, seeing them naked or in graphic sex scenes is just too strange. While they might make me melt and make me hot under the collar while they're dressed, if they're not, I don't quite know where to look. Seeing some random actor I don't care about strip off is not the same. Couldn't care less. Only the ones I really love are strange. Like seeing an old friend, in a way. It's too private, maybe? With RA, I love his acting work and respect him as a human being, but... seeing him without clothes just feels too personal. Maybe they feel like friends (even though they of course aren't, in any way, and will never be), and seeing a friend get naked and getting it on with someone... it's "too much information"! Hmm. Does it make sense, even though it probably sounds weird?
P.S. When he says "Lie down" with a sort of half-smile... OH. MY. GODS!!! *dies* And those peaches look very ripe for squeezing... ;)
I can see where viewing the scenes out of the story context would confuse you a little.
You have to remember that this couple (as portrayed by RA and Julie) is working through some very serious relationship issues...of a sexual nature.
Unless you know someone who has been there? Or you have been there...the scenes in question probably wouldn't strike a chord with you (I'm guessing)?
Richard has potent acting ability, that's why it's definitely a bonus to get all the delicious eye candy along with his fantastic performances. In all honesty, his mind and warm personality are the attributes I appreciate the most about him. BUT being human, must admit his rippling chest muscles do more for me than the produce dept:) If Nat doesn't mind, anyone who's interested in that area of the male anatomy can see for themselves what I consider one of the finest examples to date by clicking on my username...then scroll
Nat's excellent blog inspired me to give it a go...be kind, this is my first time - it's still in the incubation stage:)
Traxy, you described how I felt about the situation better than I did in my post. Seeing RA in all "his glory" felt weird because it was like seeing a friend naked! (Like RA is our imaginary buddy or something.) Too personal for me.
I know others enjoy the movie for not only the love scenes, but dialog and serious adult subject matter that they may have experienced themselves.
Perhaps it is hard for me to relate since I have never been through anything similar.
Differences of opinion are always welcome, so thanks for your imput either way! :)
I've said more than enough about BTS.
I jus' wanna comment on that peach you found. Is that thing augmented, er, enhanced? :D 'Cause it resembles a butt more than any peach I've ever seen. LOL!
Bzirk, the peach picture was not enhanced. The crack/fuzz were found as-is. :) tee hee.
When I googled pictures of peaches and that photo popped up, I thought "perfect!" haha.
I just had to come back and make "one more comment". (sorry Nat).
The bedroom scenes in BTS were so much more convincing than the bedroom scene in SPARKHOUSE...on the wedding night.
***did anyone else notice??***
Even my husband had to comment on the placement of things (like their bodies) under the sheets).
I remember that we both commented on it at the time. :-)
I'm not complaining...I was just making an observation. (I swear.) I loved SPARKHOUSE!!
Count me in as one who will not be watching BTS. There are movies WITHOUT nudity that don't appeal to me because of their content for different reasons. I find it frustrating when actors that I like are featured in certain films that I would like to see otherwise for the great costumes, etc. Plus there are so many dramas that I'd like to see but haven't had time for yet! For instance, I hate to admit it here but I've yet to see Spooks and Robin Hood! Yes, that's how behind I am...I'm even neglecting Mr. Armitage.
It will be interesting to hear your thoughts on Spooks 8.4.
Maybe we Americans really are more provincial than our sophisticated counterparts in the UK. :D
Bzirk, I didn't have a problem with Spooks 8.4 because it was just his naked backside, like Kevin Costner's in "Dances With Wolves." Those peaches weren't engaged in any inimate moments at the time. :) I don't have a problem with nudity so much as how/why/when the nudity is being exposed and the degree of explicitness. Some things I'm okay with, others not. (I hope that makes sense.)
Yes, I am American. Yes, I am a prude. I nearly fell over watching season 8 episode 4. Especially, the naked buttocks. As a mother, I wanted to cover him up. I felt a bit dirty. I have the uttmost respect for RA and his work. It felt a bit cheesecake-y. Like in the past, they have exploited him and his looks a bit. He is such a fine actor and it is so not necessary.
I agree that it's not necessary. In fact, I really don't want to see him naked. Makes me feel like a voyeur, and that's something I never want to be.
Frankly, I think I'm a curious blend of a prude and someone with an earthy sense of humor. I can make jokes but to actually have someone's backside thrust in my face? No, I'm not diggin' that at all. So as much as I like Richard Armitage, I'm not in love with his ass.
I can't find BTS to watch anywhere, it's not on Netflix or any sites I usually watch content on. Any suggestion besides buying it without every having seen it? Thanks.
Now it is very easy to contact with doctor.
Post a Comment