Sex in Cinema: Poetry vs. Pornography (Explicit Content)

Sex is Suggestive, Art is Subjective

The debate about the purpose of sex in cinema is one of great depth and bias. The nature of art alone is a perplexing one, and one regarding the nature of eroticism (or pornography) present in art expands to the nature of sex itself and its roles in our lives whether evolutionary, social, spiritual, or other. It would seem that sex can play two kinds of personal roles within a narrative. It can either be didactic in its nature, and symbolic of the character’s psyche’s (that is, the role of the artistic), or it could be used simply for the appeal of watching it (the pornographic).

It is important to recognize that (usually in art films), everything you are seeing was written with some kind of narrative or emotional intention. Even if the sex is portrayed in an explicit and ostentatious way, the question must be asked: Why? This article will tackle how hollywood blockbusters and art house indie films (since they lay on either side of the spectrum of cinema) portray and use sex, and whether this should, in any case, be considered either simply pornographic, or perhaps more.

Appeal and Pornography

When discussing “pornography” in cinema, consider it the use of sex in cinema with the intent of either objectifying the character involved, or as the story just using sex as stimulation for the audience. This entails that the film uses sex between characters simply to get the audience to like the film, specifically because it is “hot” to watch, despite the fact that it contributes nothing to either character or story. When discussing “explicit” sex scenes, consider it the use of sex to the point were no ambiguity is needed, nothing is merely insinuated but shown beyond doubt or question.

Hollywood films such as Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation (2015), True Lies (1994), Battleship (2012), We’re The Millers (2013), and Spectre (2015), have their share of explicit scenes. And tend to be the same in one respect: the sex serves no purpose in regard to character development, revelation of character psyche, or didacticism of the narrative (except for True Lies, which I’ll discuss later). These kinds of movies are generally made with one purpose, to entertain, so that the executive producers can get their return investment from the box office. The people making these movies are going to cram as much product placement and appeal as they can in the roughly two hour span of stimulation they have for the crowd. It seems clear to the producers and studio executives that a decent number of people in the crowd like to see (most commonly) “hot”, half naked women featured in popular movies.

There was a clear example of this in the latest Mission Impossible movie. Isla Foust (Rebecca Ferguson), has multiple scenes in the movie in which she either shows a lot of skin, or the audience gets a close up of her ass as she exits a pool in a bikini. Another scene of this includes the actress aiming a rifle, and using her knee as a rest for her arm. At the time she is wearing a dress, and hikes her leg up to just about chest level, revealing most of her thigh in an already figure-accentuating dress. This is a prime use of sex simply for the appeal of it, to get the audience — quite literally — aroused. It’s void of character development, or symbolism toward the didacticism of the work; largely because Mission Impossible is not a didactic work. But this is no excuse.

The use of the male libido toward women is ever present throughout Mission Impossible, and this is a strong case of how sex is used in cinema to objectify and degrade female talent. For the audience, Isla is, on multiply occasions, used as a prop. The most significant impact her character has in the story is being a body for Ethan (Tom Cruise) to be attracted to. Throughout the story, while at times Isla is independent and strong, she is never fully capable of acting on these qualities. It is easy to say that her character is more of a tease for Ethan than anything else.

The infamous scene in True Lies, in which Helen (Jamie Lee Curtis), performs a strip-tease for Harry (Arnold Schwarzenegger), is another example of this. It is very explicit, and again, but unlike in Mission Impossible, did contribute to the character’s development. The wife in the film feels insignificant and almost a bit naive in her life — as though she’s done nothing worthwhile, nothing dangerous. Going undercover and dancing for a stranger was definitely a big step in her character arch. There is no question about the purpose of it in the film.

What makes this scene explicit is how it was shot. The underlying meaning of the character development soon falls short due to the very “in your face” way it was photographed. This the only attack you can really make toward the scene, but it think its a rail worth riding. The intent of the scene was to have Helen’s character fully break down her walls and do something a little vulgar, and be ok with it. This is a step in the right direction, but lacks creativity and poetic beauty in the face of writing and cinematography. The camera is used merely as ‘the un-blinking eye’ for our (the audience’s) gaze.

Now, Battleship had no explicit sex scenes, but it did use pointless sex appeal very grotesquely in the beginning of the movie. The scene involves Alex (Taylor Kitsch) laying on the beach with Sam (Brooklyn Decker), his girlfriend. Sam eventually straddles Alex (in short shorts and a bikini top), and the two kiss passionately for a brief moment. This may not seem very explicit, but there’s more going on here than just its actual content. During this scene, the viewer’s eyes are drawn only to the fact that the girl is bending over in ‘short-shorts’, and that her breasts are resting on the man’s chest, with her cleavage center screen. These are where our eyes are supposed to go. Yet another example of (1), using sex appeal not as a literary tool or metaphor, but just a thing that these two characters are doing together for our enjoyment (2), portraying the act itself in a very passionless, vulgar way (vulgar in regard to intention), and (3), objectifying a female character, who frankly, nothing but a mannequin in the story. Alex having to win the affection of his commanding officer (who just happens to be is girlfriend’s father) as a backdrop to an alien invasion, is pretty pathetic.

We’re The Millers had one of the most memorably bombastic scenes involving nudity of 2013. In the movie, the “family” gets in trouble with some cartel members, and Rose (Jennifer Aniston), has to prove that she is a stripper to get out of trouble by dancing the for the cartel members. Now, it’s difficult to take this seriously because of how obnoxiously it is portrayed (with the dramatic sparks and random shower in a warehouse), but it is still a very vulgar exploitation of Rose. While Rose is in fact a stripper, the only real purpose of the scene is to watch her dance around half naked for a while. It’s comedic absurdism doesn’t hide the fact that the scene was photographed and choreographed for sex appeal alone. It is more common in hollywood movies to see sex simply as an objectification of women because, unfortunately, that’s what a lot of people want to see.

One of the most ambitious and exciting films of the year, Spectre, turned out to be disappointing to say the least. Lèa Seydoux (Blue Is The Warmest Color/Emma) stared in the film as Bond’s new love interest, Madeleine. Her character, like the female talent in the preceding films of this article, was kind of hollow. While she is fairly well educated in the film, and can fight pretty well, she was really just the new love interest for Bond, and not much of her own person. Her backstory is eroded as quickly as her character came on-screen, and the choices her character makes throughout the film are flat-out stupid. It would appear that Madeleine’s main goal in the film is simply to be the eye-candy for Bond to want to get out of the spy game. She really serves as a mindless character, so much so that it will make you question the writer’s choices and consistency throughout the story. Madeleine changes her mind as if she doesn’t have one. It makes the viewer wonder if her character’s only real purpose is to have sex with Bond whenever he is ready, and to do things around his choices. While there is only one sex scene that is not graphic or explicit, it is more prevalent that her character is so underdeveloped and displayed as compared to say, James Bond.

Symbolism and Eroticism

Some might say that, like intention and approach, sex has a purpose in art just like metaphors and diction have purpose in poetry. That artists recognize that sex is a huge part of life, and should be present in art as well. Blue Is The Warmest Color (2013) took the world by storm when it received the Palme d’Or at Cannes in 2013. This story of a young girl who embarks on a sexual odyssey of discovery and misery broke several boundaries of what cinema is capable of in its depiction of sex. The idea of passionate, or “beautifully” portrayed sex, really lies in the eye of the beholder. If the viewer considers sex in a generally vulgar or graphic way, it’s highly unlikely they’ll see a poeticism in the film. The one thing you can undeniably say about the portrayal of sex in the film is that it’s relevant to the characters, and that the importance of sex to the characters is just as important to the culture of the viewer; which is likely part of the criteria as to why it won the Palme d’Or.

Getting inside the mind of Adèle (Adèle Exarchopoulos), a scene plays out in which she touches herself and fantasizes about this mysterious girl with blue hair (Lèa Seydoux) who she saw on the street, and who she would eventually start a relationship with. The scene is somewhat surreal, at first the viewer is shocked because there is suddenly this stranger in Adèle’s room, but would soon realize that it was a fantasy. This is an example of how sex was used (in an intimate way), to convey character development (as Adèle begins to understand her own sexuality) and to reveal the character’s psyche. In regard to just “showing” sex for the appeal, one of the heaviest objections to Blue Is The Warmest Color, is that about two times in the film, we get a close up of Adèle’s butt while she sleeps. When looking at the themes and visual purpose of the story, it is not crazy to suspect that the director wanted the audience to fully understand the youthful development and naivety of the protagonist (the character was 18). Perhaps this relates to the way in which other people approached her, and how she interacted with other people.

The sex throughout the film is shot in a very beautiful, and intimate way; not only in terms of cinematography, but in the acts themselves. The director wanted the sex scenes to compliment the humanity of the characters. Both roles played by Seydoux and Exarchopoulos are acted to perfection, being some of the most “human” characters in film of the year. The scenes never use sex to demean or be-little the female characters as merely bodies or organs, but as human beings, full of passion and integrity. Each sex scene is shot with writer/director Abdellatif Kechiche’s attention to detail and picturesque glamorizing of the human body. A primary theme of Blue Is The Warmest Color, which, I think, made is so culturally significant, was the idea of sexual fluidity. The audience never knows exactly whether the protagonist is heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, or other. Perhaps the film would say she’s none of these. The notion of sexual fluidity has become more popular as sexuality has become more ‘open’ and understood, and this is the core of what the characters of Blue Is The Warmest Color face throughout the narrative.

Controversially, actress Lèa Seydoux confessed that she felt like a “prostitute” after making the film due to the (at some points) six-hour takes it took on set to get the sex scenes right. And it seemed as though a large majority of real lesbians commented that the films sex scenes were not very realistic in their portrayal of lesbian sex. It is important to recognize that many real lesbians critiqued the film for depicting things like like “scissoring” — a sex act stereotypically common of the male perspective toward lesbian sex. These extended sex scenes do however rightfully portray how two women can be truly satisfied and happy together with no man. A big question to ask is whether or not the film objectified the actress. Many people speculate that while the film certainly did not exploit the actress, the director might have. This is a difficult accusation to weigh against the director, and the details of which would be strip to testimony between actress and crew — but is controversial nonetheless.

Lars Von Trier’s Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 & 2 (2013/2013) tackled sex from a very different perspective. Von Trier has been known for a few things as a filmmaker: (1) he is one of the most visually striking directors working today, (2) he is known to write terrific roles for women, and (3), he is not afraid to shoot sex on screen (as it is a theme in all of his films). The sex that is seen on screen (which actual porn actors were used to shoot) is not what some might call “intimate”, though it serves its artistic and didactic purpose all the same. In fact, one of the largest themes of the Nymphomaniac series was to portray sexuality from a female perspective, in all its intricacies and idiosyncrasies.

Throughout the nearly six hour epic (if you watch the director’s cut), it is a graphic telling of a self-proclaimed Nymphomaniac Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) as she tells her life story to Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård), a late-in-life virgin; the perfect person to hear Joe’s story, as he would not pollute it with his own bias and judgement based on his own sexual history. The story is highly controversial as Joe starts to describe her first sexual experiences as a small child, to her latest violent endeavors involving sadomasochism. Throughout the story, Von Trier incorporates all forms of art and relates them to sexual nature. At one point, the audience watches Joe participate in three separate sexual encounters as a teenager on-screen, while Seligman delivers a monologue of how a Cantus Firmus in music combines three separate voices of music to create one harmony.

The audience does get a lot of close ups of Joe’s butt as a teenager, and usually sees everthing in the sex scenes, but this is not strictly pornographic. One of the largest themes in the movie (and what Joe comes to accept) is that sex, even in its most distant and non-personal side, is ok. Joe starts seeing a sex addiction therapy group to whom she eventually declares “I am a nymphomaniac and I love myself for being one, but above all, I love my cunt and my filthy, dirty lust.” The film gives perspective on everything from abortion, to the hypocrisy of man, to the nature of the “right” and “wrong” in sexual activity. The Nymphomaniac is undoubtedly both a controversial and liberating film.

Themes and Didacticism

Many films portray sex as a central theme of the work itself. Sexuality was a theme of every single movie Stanley Kubrick made whether it was The Shining, or 2001: A Space Odyssey. Films such as Under The Skin (2013), The Master (2012), Black Swan (2010), and Brokeback Mountain (2005) all center around sexual themes and motifs, and involve a decent amount of on-screen nudity/sex.

Under The Skin was an incredibly profound and perplexing work that was not meant to come off as explicit or used simply for the appeal. The story, and all sexual acts within it, have layers of depth and meaning. Scarlett Johansson plays a mysterious woman who takes lonely men to her strange “black room” and tempts them by taking her clothes off, temping her male prey until sink into the floor, where they remain in a gel-like space until they die. The story is about sexual discovery, lust, and the nature of beauty and its power over us. Johansson’s character soon comes to realize what truly lies under the skin and what the essence of her sexuality is. It is important to note that during the film, while we do see the men get fully naked in the presence of Johansson’s character, she never fully reveals herself. The only time Johansson is completely naked is when she is alone, looking at her self, trying to understand her own body. This idea is not a pornographic or exploitative one, but a extremely sincere one. The film portrays a war between human sexuality and humanity, which proves its didactic foundation elevates to something more than simply objectifying its talent.

The Master is one of the best cases to look at sex in film which is used as a literary and visual device to tell the story, and enhance character. At one point in the film, Peggy (Amy Adam) gives Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman) a hand-job in front of a bathroom mirror. This comes off to the audience as very strange and almost manipulative in context, but Peggy uses sex to control Dodd (her husband), and make him do what she wants (she literally demands what she wants while touching him). It’s also an unlikely co-incidence that her name ‘peggy’ is derivative of ‘pegging’ the sexual act in which a woman penetrates a man using a strap-on, thus furthering a literary motif of domination between these two characters. Freddy (Joaquin Phoenix), the film’s protagonist, is constantly with women throughout the film and almost has a child-like naivety which makes him vulgar at times. He sees women as only sexual objects. However, simply because the character is this way does not make the intention of the art that way as well. These ideas and characteristics are present throughout the film, which dominate Anderon’s (writer/director) underlying theme of man being a “filthy animal,” a very Nietzschean idea.

While it could be easily seen as purely graphic, Black Swan is an odyssey of self-discovery and awakening. There are many times in the film (whether it be fantasy or real) that Nina (Natalie Portman) starts exploring her very repressed sexuality. The image above shows the visual motif of Nina’s sexuality contrasted with her conservative childhood molding into her enlightened and adventurous adulthood. All the nudity and sex involved in Black Swan is extremely important when it comes to character development, as the film is a character study about sexuality. While watching a film like this, the audience may often wander “why do they have to show it?”, which is a valid question. The argument could be made that a film is a visual story — thus, in cases of the film being a psychosexual story, as it is here, then certain aspects of that story need to be seen. But there is also the argument of the extent of storytelling. Sex is a very touchy subject and many people are put off by seeing it in film, but if sex dominates the didacticism and ideas of the work, “why should it be excluded?”, is perhaps a better question.

Brokeback Mountain is largely regarded as a groundbreaking “first great” LGBTQ film to go mainstream. While heavily controversial, Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger proudly and beautifully portray what was, in their character’s community, a doomed love. While there is only a small amount of sex and nudity in the film, it is highly important to both the relationships of the characters, and their own arch’s. The first sex scene between Jack (Gyllenhaal) and Ennis (Ledger) is very intense and passionate, while confusing at the same time; there is context in the act. At the beginning, both characters seem to be wanting to embrace, but also violently push each other away at the same time. They literally fight their urges while becoming comfortable enough to indulge in them, and eventually fall in love. It would not appear that these scenes are meant to come off as pornographic or vulgar, but passionate and meaningful. The purpose for this visual storytelling is to instill within the audience as much of a true sense of self-acceptance and understanding as possible.

Poetry and Avant-Garde

Certain films like To The Wonder (2012), Blue Valentine (2010), and Shame (2011), were highly dramatic, experimental, and erotic. Terrence Malick (To The Wonder), Derek Cianfrance (Blue Valentine), and Steve McQueen (Shame) all make visually stunning stories with emotionally charged character studies with either spiritual or social undertones. These emotions would lay a subtext for how the audience was meant perceive the story and its purpose.

To The Wonder is Terrence Malick’s most breathtakingly shot romance film to date. It has been rumored that Malick chose to shoot the film while the script was still being written, and often would give the actors a couple pages worth of descriptions of emotions before tackling a scene. There is only one sex scene in the film but it is undoubtedly poetic in nature, just like the rest of the film. Like with other art films, it is not exploitative in the sense that one character is just serving as just a body to be looked at or groped — for the sex scene in the film is a spiritual experience between the two characters that relates back to the central theme of Malick’ philosophical tale of personal identity, loyalty, and meaning in the absurdity and suffering of existence. Perhaps Malick meant to compliment the beauty of human sexuality, and the wonder it entails when between two people who love each other.

Blue Valentine told the depressing story of a marriage that has disintegrated over a period of several years. There is a lot of explicit material throughout the film but this, however, shouldn’t immediately label the film as pornographic or vulgar. All the sex in the film represents the condition of the marriage, and the roles of each partner in the relationship (not to mention the emotional turmoil between them because of it). The film was meant to portray the brutal reality that exists between a married couple, and sex is often a catalyst for many traumas and struggles within a relationship. The nature of sex in the narrative is a kind of nightmarish metamorphosis — that is, over time, the sex becomes monotonous and routine-like for the couple. At times it seems as though it is the only thing keeping the husband around (at least from the wife’s perspective). The wife eventually gets upset and aggravated after their sexual endeavors, especially when the husband ejaculates inside with — apparently against her wishing. In Cianofrance’s film, sex plays the role of a deep–rooted personification of the couple’s sense of decay.

Shame was a highly emotional and distressing film to watch. While melancholic in nature, the narrative follows a sex addict as he tries to navigate his not-so-cultivated life once his distant sister comes to stay with him for an unknown period of time. Reflecting on some awkward monologues between the two, it’s inferable that they used to be involved in some kind of incestuous relationship. Sissy (Carey Mulligan/Brandon’s sister) says over voicemail (to her brother) toward the end of the film: “we’re not bad people, we just come from a bad place.” They also seem very comfortable around each other (at least the sister does) as she lets her brother see her naked, wrestles with him in a towel, and doesn’t seem to care.

Brandon goes through a descent of his own in the film, and faces many personal obstacles. Often times the audience has no idea of their outcome. While the sex in the film is explicit, is it more of an in-depth look on the condition of our protagonist than it is as a means of objectifying any of the women or men he is with. We often times don’t see any actual intercourse, but when we do, we focus on the state of Brandon’s character and what the physical act means to him, rather than focusing on the act itself.

Prostitution In Film

Prostitution has been subject matter for masters of cinema such as Jean-Luc Godard, Robert Bresson, Pier Paolo Passolini, and many more. It would seem, due to many people’s view on prostitution in general, that stories and films about prostitution might be hollow of moral didacticism and meant solely for the indulgence of the profession or lifestyle. But perhaps this is a wrong turn in understanding art house cinema.

Famous surrealist spanish-mexican filmmaker Luis Buñuel is well known for his career defining work Belle De Jour (1967), about a lonely housewife’s turn to prostitution during her weekday afternoons. The story is not only a humanist approach to sexuality and desire, it longs toward a satirical attack perhaps on the elite lifestyle of the wealthy during the roaring twenties (when the book the film is based on was written), which turned out to be just as revelant in the late sixties when Buñuel adapted it to the screen along with Jean-Claude Carrière.

While the film contains many dream-like sequences that are as ambiguous as the film’s ending, it certainly contains extremely brute — and at times even frightening — portrayals of sexual tendency and desire. Despite personal opinions about prostitution, the film deserves respect for its brave look into the exploration and growth of a woman whose tired of laying down and taking it her whole life. No pun intended.

One of Jean-Luc Godard’s most notable works, Vivre Sa Vie (1962) treaded similar water as Belle De Jour. Vivre Sa Vie, however, is more a descent into the grotesque underworld and challenges surrounding the work and lifestyle of a prostitute. Godard’s portrayal of a woman who begins prostituting herself as a means of financial recourse due to her deferred dreams seems to pose a personal duality. While on one hand it was a liberation regarding the freedom of choice and how women treat their bodies and live their lives, on the other hand the film does highlight the brutality of that particular lifestyle, and it’s degrading nature to the spirit of our protagonist Nana (Anna Karina). There are many sequences in the film of Nana having philosophical ruminations with people about the nature of existence, the “self”, the purpose of language, and more importantly, human communication. Notably, we also watch how Nana’s existential views change throughout the film, all the way to one of the final chapters, in which she dialogues with a philosopher about language. Godard visually shows these ideas often through shots of characters in mirrors, through hallways, and under doorways; all making Vivre Sa Vie a classic art film and existentialist piece.

Arguably the greatest modern American indie film about prostitution, Paul Thomas Anderson’s Boogie Nights (1997) has gained quite a notoriety for itself from its obnoxious cinematography mimicking the high-wire style of the seventies, and its impressive writing from Anderson (it being his second feature). The film’s narrative follows Eddie (Mark Wahlberg), a young man who longs to find out what he’s good at, and who eventually adopts the porn star persona “Dirk Diggler.” The main character, through his fall due to egotism and anxiety, does eventually and briefly start to prostitute himself for financial recourse. Perhaps this was Anderson’s way of separating the stigma between prostitutes and porn actors (since the idea behind the film is that pornography has the capability of being something ‘artistic’). While literal narrative pornography was going on in the film (though the audience rarely sees anything), the audience’s attention is drawn to the naivety of Eddie, or the hollow aspirations of the pornographers looking to make something “real”. Either way, the highlights of the scenes were certainly not about the sex. The film is about deferred dreams, longing, struggle, and egotism, all centered around the blood-rushed rooms and parties of big porn producers, and what it’s like to be a kid surrounded by that.

Objectification and Exploitation

Maybe what separates the objectification of sex, and celebration of sex in cinema, is how it treats the talent involved. Like in Mission Impossible — the vulgar way the director looked at the character Isla really portrayed her as nothing more than an attractive nuance for Ethan. In the films like Under The Skin and Blue Is The Warmest Color however, the sex is never portrayed to belittle or degrade the characters. The sex in those kinds of films is used more so to exemplify and heighten the characters and their own development. An interesting film to look at is The Wolf of Wall Street (2013). Using the criterion and understanding described in this article, The Wolf of Wall Street is not exploitative, or objectifying. This, however, seems strange.

The Wolf of Wall Street is the pinnacle of the popular American film movement known as Cinema of Excess. The most defining feature of movement, that is the quality seen in all films of the movement, is that it portrays immoral behavior indifferently. Moreover, the film itself doesn’t scrutinize or moralize the behavior — its left for the audience to reflect on for itself. The reason that many movies mis-use sex and end up objectifying their talent, is not because of the portrayal of sex alone, but because of it’s depiction and masquerade of exploitation. The Wolf of Wall Street is about lust — of a sexual, and postcolonial kind. The film depicts the realistic (and disgusting) way that powerful people treat others. At one point Jordan (Leonardo DiCaprio) even comments — in a very degrading way — on Naomi (Margot Robbie) while she is displayed rolling around in lingerie; but this is not same case of exploitation as say, in Mission Impossible. The Wolf of Wall Street does not parade around the exploitation of the people like hollywood films often do, it highlights it, because that’s what the film is actually about. It depicts things as they were: rude, vulgar, dirty, and inappropriate; it doesn’t try to play them off as something cool in the movie for your individual enjoyment.

It seems as though it’s rarely the case that men are sexually objectified in cinema. Granted, it is a rarity that films dissect the sexuality of men at all, but that doesn’t change the fact that hollywood knows what sells to the masses. Women are easily victims of exploitation because to a lot of people they are still seen as merely sexual objects, nothing more. Sex being used to objectify or exploit them also relates to the context of the sex itself: How is it being used, and for what purpose? These are questions that should define the work of an artist and their intention of storytelling.

What Does Sex Mean?

Sex has a role in art the same way it has a role in life. Oscar Wilde once said “everything in the world is about sex, except sex.” This can be a practical application of meaning when dissecting many art films. It has also been said that poetry is either about sex or death, so when talking about poetic and artistic cinema, sex likely has an important role.

Perhaps sexuality is not something that can be strictly understood in itself, hitherto applied to something else; characters, context, or meta-poetic narrative motifs. There is undoubtably a role for sex in both didactic and nihilistic art, the trick of it seems to be its application and intention. It’s difficult to try and draw lines in something as abstract and subjective as art, but sex rides a very thin one. There is a pattern of things that can separate sex from being artistic or merely appealing in cinema: the intention of it, the depiction thereof, and whether or not the talent are simply being objectified in the production or whether the actors and creative minds behind the film are trying to make a more profound statement on sexuality and the human condition through art.

What do you think? Leave a comment.