Intimate

Thanks that was fun
Don't forget, no regrets
Except maybe one
Made a deal, not to feel
gosh that's dumb
- "Thanks That Was Fun", by The Barenaked Ladies


In just the past year, three movies have come out with the same theme: boy meets girl, girl invites boy to have casual sex with her, boy agrees and they begin to do so regularly, boy and girl start to fall for the other and (spoiler alert) the two that previously decided that committed relationships were for the birds end up together. I'm talking about "Love And Other Drugs", "No Strings Attached", and the upcoming "Friends With Benefits". Yes, yes ... I saw the first two. When I saw a trailer for "Friends With Benefits" I couldn't help thinking, "Really? Another movie with nearly the same plot? It's so predictable. So cliche." Of course lots of movies are cookie cutters these days, but on to my point.

To be honest, I was mildly attracted to the first two movies because of a similar theme: mainly, the question of whether or not purely sexual relationships can thrive without turning into deeper feelings of affection and love. I believe that the answer is no, one cannot separate their feelings into jars and trick their hearts into staying on the shelf until they're ready to commit, as much as today's society tries to tell us otherwise. So what did these modern, sexed-up films say? SPOILER ALERT: the answer that these secular films gave is that no, they can't. They actually agreed with me! Which maybe isn't such a spoiler since I guessed from the trailers that they had happy endings. Happy endings meaning that they ended up together: in other words, that they characters fell in love and committed themselves to each other on an emotional level, not just physical, which is why I was interested in seeing the films.

The strange thing is this: in a large way, don't endings like that go against one of Hollywood's main themes these days? Namely, that people can fall in and out of bed with each other as much as they please without any major consequences? It's portrayed all the time on television and in the movies. The fact that terms such as "casual sex", "friends with benefits" and "sex friends" exist is a testament is how lax our society views the most intimate of acts. It's all a part of free will, free love, free choices for all. That is, as long as one can afford birth control, condoms, and even an abortion if necessary.

Thus the thing that surprised me somewhat about these movies is that while Hollywood played full-on into the casual, commitment-less sex message, the endings spoke a different message entirely. In "Love And Other Drugs", Jamie, (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) is a self-focused medical drug rep who feels secure that, given time, he can get any woman he wants to sleep with him. Anne Hathaway plays Maggie, a forward woman who copes with her struggles with Parkinson's Disease by matching Jamie's self-confidence. After beating him over the head (literally) for standing in during her doctor visit, she looks him in the eye and invites him to have sex with her. One frantic tumble later leads to a string of others. It is all very surface: don't call me except for sex, don't get attached. Yet through their bravado both characters are both deeply uncertain in their own ways. They each need something real to cling to. As much as they might reject the idea, they need someone to love. They can't keep the intimacy of their bodies from creating an intimacy in their hearts.

A side plot line in "Love And Other Drugs" follows Jamie's brother: a fairly unattractive guy who is successful in business, praised by his parents, and envious of Jamie's easy charm with women. When his girlfriend breaks up with him he is crushed. At a party a girl woos him into having sex with her, but instead of empowering him - as is the most common message of today's media - it deflates him. He bemoans an empty feeling and says he is jealous no longer. He doesn't want any part in his brother's one night stands. His surprising reaction solidified the theme of commitment and it's importance that ran through the film. Yet a word of caution: it would have been nice if the film didn't use so many partial nudity scenes to tell their story.

"No Strings Attached" follows an remarkably similar theme. Natalie Portman plays Emma, a busy doctor who reasons that humans really aren't meant to be monogamous, believing that it just won't work out in the end. Thus she proposes a strictly sexual relationship to a handy guy friend, Adam (played by Ashton Kutcher). They go so far as to lay ground rules so that they won't fall for each other.
"No cuddling" she says, firmly. That could lead to having feelings for each other. He agrees. His guy friends congratulate him, saying that he's living out every guy's dream. Until violins begin to play whenever he sees her, and suddenly it's time to get committed to get out of there.

Another curious thing is that both movies (and seemingly from the trailer, it's the case in "Friends With Benefits" as well), have the female characters initiate the whole casual sex deal. Then again, isn't the fact that a girl initiates a sex-only relationship the thing that seems to make it okay? If a guy did that he'd be a jerk who was only after one thing and tossed some poor girl's heart around. But when a girl suggests it then everything is fair game. She knows what she's getting into and the guy in each of the stories is happy to go along for the ride. That is, until they guy and girl start falling for each other, despite the ground rules. So they try actually dating and it doesn't go so well because one of them is still stubbornly insisting that they only want one thing from the other person. Heartache follows for both individuals until they come to their senses and decide they actually want to be with each other, so they do things like hold hands in public and be an emotional support for the other person. They get together for real, playfully comparing flaws and seriously talking about their futures.


Of course, few Hollywood happy endings mirror real life. Plenty of girls moan about how Disney ruined them because all they've ever expected and wanted is Prince Charming or Mr. Right but all they can find is a surface-level charm of Mr. Right Now. The curious thing then, is that although the movies above portray attractive characters who sleep around with whomever and whenever with a winning smile, in the end it's not okay. In the end they each have to realize that they are a flawed person who somehow loves and are loved by another flawed person. They realize the stupid mistakes they have made in the past: namely, all their other sexual relationships that left scaring heartaches. Suddenly they are naked in a whole new way. They are vulnerable. They've reached true intimacy and it's just as terrifying as it is wonderful. It's not easy. It's love. They realize that maybe they did things backwards after all: first comes love, then comes commitment, then come sex. Because it's better with some strings attached.