SATIRE OF "THE BLACK SWAN", A TERRIBLE MOVIE.The main pic of the black swan,natalie Portman,shows her so skinny,thin,and unsympathetic character,and so UNSEXY,the director and Portman could not fool the audience;she was sexless,bland,and never got any personality,or humanness.She just got the part of Swan Lake.A soda straw in toe-shoes.Added to that,(which is why this is an ADULT drawing,)Portman's character hallucinated that she had a lesbian sex scene with another dancer(who was a lot better looking.)--so that shrouded,dim dream like scene,is off to the right of the black swan.The back-end of the nude girl,is the other ballerina.Portman's character is just startled. It's a satire of the "The Black Swan,"cause in this scene,she is the black swan,but she;'s supposed to be scintillating,and finally sexy,and a good dancer,by now.But,anyone that unsympathetic,insipid,and still non-personality,is not a good main character.Plus,Portman actually fit the part. ha.So,maybe she wasn't acting!!She's been more appealing,more attractive,in other movies. I used to like Portman as an actress,but now i think she's a dip.UGH. "Hollywood"-pathetic.Plus,this movie has virtually no plot,is boring,"one-note",and has a huge budget,and is billed as "great,wonderful picture."UGH. I'd rather watch Frankenstein.The ballet is pretty,sets lavish,but the character,lesbian sex scene,and dull plot,really kill it.HOW this director make money,I do not know.I saw the movie online,pirated,and I would not have paid to see it.Plus,the end was no surprise.Ignore it,unless you can see it for free.

Whenever I say "Natalie Portman couldn't act her way out of a brown paper bag," all my guy friends jump all over me to defend her because they find her hot. I heard most of it is a dream? Or at least it has a lot of dream-like things in it. I love that you're so inspired by how bad it was.

I thought the movie was pretty good. I probably would have preferred watching something else, but it was better than all the other terrible sequels and remakes in the theater. I agree the main character was kinda of boring, but I'm just curious Is part of the reason you dislike the movie because it has lesbians? I kinda got that feeling from your comment which makes me sad. Anyways, this is actually one of my more favorite art works by you. It's really stylized, but cool looking. I like how you made her outfit look.

No, it was not because it was lesbians;I was annoyed,cause I think the male writers threw it in,for MEN.It was meant to be tantalizing to men,"Oh,virgin,and hot ballerina,make it,"BUT I've noticed that stories having to do with real lesbians,do not usually look so "adorable to men"-style.

Also,where did it have anything to do with the PLOT?She didnt make it with a man,or a "three-way",it was set up for males who "like to watch women get it on,"but it has nothing to do with BEING Lesbian.Where did she turn into a Lesbian,or deal with that in the movie,besides the hot sex scene?Sheeesh.

If I had had a hot scene in my head,with another woman,I'd like to deal with it,and say,"What's going on?Am I bi?Am I a lesbian?Is this just a "first sex crush"?Nothing. So,how can you take it seriously,that sex scene,as anything more than a men's male fantasy of women?And it still did not prove to me that she was more sexy,or sensual.Any sensuality was meant to go into the DANCE,and the person was still the same old,perfectionist,crazy,obsessed frantic ballerina.

That scene read like a bit of hot candy,thrown in there,to get men into the movie.Men hate ballet.But they like to be voyeurs,watching women.

I thought the whole "Black Swan"was like a blown-up version of a short tale of "Tales from the Crypt",or "Tales from the Dark Side,and not much of a plot.I've seen movies from that director,before,and he never has much plot,just lots of beauty,special effects,and extreme-head-trips.If you like good movies about women,I'd advise renting Almodovar movies,in Spanish,with English subtitles;he makes lots of good movies about women,I loved "Volver"with penelope Cruz,too.His female characters are REAL,most of the time.

Yeah,it is true,all the new movies are bad remakes,sequels,bad action junk,horror.The best movies are now all the old 40's,50's,60's,70's,even 80's.Sigh.Hollywood is so overwith.(There are some good movies about the Iraqui war,if you can stand it.)"Stop-Loss."

Now that you mention it, I agree. The main character didn't have any "I'm so confused"-ness afterward. It does kinda seem thrown in. Hmmm...

Wow. Black Swan wasn't that great, was it? XD

Scenes like that appeal to men because, to us, sex is simple. We might be interested in the character's journey of self discovery. But there are a billion things in the world to care about and be interested in, and we can't care about and be interested in everything. Sometimes, all we want is to see something hot. This is perfectly natural and good. Evolution gave men and women the gift of sex being a pure, simple thing. It is only the corruption of modern society that turns sex into a complicated, stuck-up waste of time. If someone gets horny and they want to get off, then so what? It's just a simple bodily function. If you want to tell me you have never in your life had a carnal fantasy devoid of complex character development and other miscellanea, go ahead. I just won't believe you.

If you watch it again, you see that is one of the characters mix ups of what is real and what isn't. It was her fantasy mixing up with reality, and she couldn't tell the difference. There was a point in the sex scene, it was of her discovering more of her dark side. It just happened to be 2 girls in that. I thought the scene had a legit point and I loved the movie as a whole, but you are entitled to your opinion.

I'm just gonna throw this out there - it's an Aronofsky film. For the average movie-goer, his movies aren't very accessible.
But, I haven't seen it yet, so I'll reserve judgement.

But that pic made me lol so hard.

Also, the sex scene is sort of a metaphor :/ Look it up. It's an art film, you haveta be really, stupidly, open.

Seconding Crash's comments here. If you're familiar with Aronofsky's work then you go in bracing yourself. Also Portman probably had to slim down and I know she had some dance training for the film; many dancers have bodies similar to hers. So don't get too offended by her shape. The movie has a lot of elements and a very intense dynamic. Her experience is psychological and disturbing, even to herself. I think a lot of people had the wrong idea about the film, either because they were not familiar with the director or the publicity for it seemed misleading..somehow. I mean, I saw parents bring their little kids into the auditorium. So I guess I can understand how a certain demographic could be offended, but as an artist or conceptual individual this shouldn't be so alarming. Even as a woman it shouldn't be. Unless you just misunderstand it.

I finally have seen this movie and I now can finally comment. I am a man and I went to see this because I enjoy psychological thrillers. The lesbian sex scene was indeed eye candy, however it was in essence a metaphor of the release of the characters rigidity. I don't feel it was as tacked on as you say it was, because we see instances of Natalie Portmans character hallucinating about everything, so the other woman was basically a symbol of her inner black swan, the sex scene was pretty much her embracing the black swan at the horror of her mother under the influence of drugs. Also the point you make about her body is pretty subjective. Yes she's stick thin but that does not make her "sexless" I think that's a terrible thing to say. She was meant to portray a fragile and timid woman with inhibitions baked into her from her dubious mother. Just because she had small breasts doesn't make her sexless. The themes of sexuality on someone so rigid was a key target to attack to successfully unlock her black swan. She was actually pretty good in the film. Much better than star wars.

Well, I've seen better "art films" than this,in fact.I liked David Lynch's "Mullholland Drive" a lot better than this.To be frank,I think Lynch is a better writer,director,than Aronofsky.Aronofsky gives you a boring,unsympathetic character,who's going nuts.We KNOW THIS.We're not surprised by the ending.AT ALL.We don't even really CARE about the character.She's a stereo-type.So is the mom."Ballet-obsessives."Aronofsky is a HACK,trite writer,who depends on fancy settings,spectacular action,and pretends to be an "art film director",using people as symbols of dark,light,with contrived "changes to the sensual side"like he's using Barbie Dolls. Look at the difference between Aronofsky and Lynch;in "Mullholland dr."the sympbolism is not just worked by pushing characters around like Barbies.They are real people.The young blond actress wanna-bee is real.The young director is a real person.The acting is good;the writing is better.It not just a symbolic film,it's got real feeling and depth.The tragedy feels REAL,not staged.You CARE about the characters.It has surealism,but it fits in. The difference between Lynch's tragic female actress,who lost everything,bitter,has depth;Aronofsky's tragic ballet dancer is like a little wind up doll.She never becomes a REAL PERSON to us,she's too stereo-typed,even to her success.She's like a stock-character,the crazy girl,in a "Twilight Zone"episode.WHERE is the pathos of a desperate fragile character,driven mad?Compare this tragic ballerina to the title dancer in "The Red Shoes".THAT tragedy we fully believe.The writing is better,the acting,the directing.That movie has plenty of fantasy,(the ballet)and is far better adapting the dance,dancer,and the whole troupe,supporting cast,with the action and feeling of the story. At the end of "The Red Shoes",where that ballerina dies,we do see, and feel the whole tragedy of the story.The whole dilema. Ditto the tragic,bitter female in Lynch's film.But for some reason,the tragedy of "The Black Swan"does not reach us.Aronofsky can't connect us to the film,or the poor,crazy,ballerina's fate. I'd say,Aronofsky should stay in small-size "art"films,because his artificiality is too remote from the larger audiences.WHY they let kids into this movie,is wierd.Isn't it R-rated? I find Aronofsky to lack depth,meaning,pathos,and real tragic feeling. I can feel more for a character in "Law & Order",a good episode,cause the writers get you to care about them.Aronofsky has "fantasies" that never really GET to you.Little head-trips,on film,private ones. But most of us can't relate to any of his characters,and they remain head-trips,private ones,of his own.Some of you can.But a lot of us can't.I think that's the difference.

Furthermore, about "The Black Swan"'s fight with reality,not knowing what was real.I've seen that handled a LOT BETTER than this.Watch the movie"Repulsion,"(Roman Polansky)(old,black/white)and see how much better a character who is losing her mind,having hallucinations,and losing it completely,is acted and depicted."Swan"is nowhere as DARK as "Repulsion",and the strength of the insanity is formidable,powerful.It's believeable.It has force,intensity,horror. It literally sucks you in with it's power.THAT is what "swan"could have been like,with the right director and actress. Plus,she has all the correct behavior of a psychotic person,who is losing her mind. She even had the right personality,starting out. The really "tragic" thing is that directors,writers,like Roman Polansky,the directors of "The Red Shoes",and David Lynch are not in the mainstream of movies now."Repulsion"still stands up,as does "The Red Shoes",and "Mullholland Drive".If you want real "art,"I would watch their movies.I frequently have to watch old movies,cause the present crop is so tawdry,insignificant,and lack-luster.Or,it's just movies for kids.Television itself is so bad,I have resorted to old movies,old tv,and books.I have even heard,real entertainment business has switched to India,China,foreign,and Hollywood hardly exists any longer. I would watch some good old,art movies,to see how really good movies should be made.That's why so many of us still watch them;we can;t find anything else.

probably you should know more about film as a whole before you make such damning assumptions. you use such inflammatory language but without the wherewithal to back it up. just say, "I hated this movie," and you're fine. trying to reinforce your opinion so heatedly without the background makes you look ignorant.