Hollywood made a big change several years ago, when many productions began using intimacy coordinators to help plan sex scenes in television shows and movies, like the 2025 movie schedule entry, Marty Supreme. In fact, that film stars one of a growing number of detractors to the relatively new profession, Gwyneth Paltrow, who went viral and took some heat for noting how she’d feel “stifled” if a coordinator was overly involved with her sex scenes.
Now, a well-respected member of the profession has spoken out about why they’re actually very much needed on set.
What Did An Intimacy Coordinator Say About Why They’re Essential On Sets?
The #MeToo movement sparked a lot of public conversations about just how prevalent sexual violence and abuse had been in Tinseltown, but few probably expected the conversation to alter the film and TV industry the way it has. One thing that came out of this was the realization that many actors (especially women) had felt taken advantage of during the filming of sex scenes, or retaliated against if they’d opted not to take part (or at least take part in ways directors had wanted them to).
Intimacy coordinators have become Hollywood’s answer, and while actors like Olivia Colman have praised those in the profession for being able to give “great” direction during those intimate moments on screen, others like Florence Pugh have noted that the burgeoning field is more “complicated,” especially if you end up having “a shit example” when working with one who ends up making the process “so weird and so awkward.”
Recently, the Daily Mail spoke to veteran intimacy coordinator Yehuda Duenyas (who also trains those in the field through his own SAG-AFTRA accredited program), and about those who’ve had negative experiences he said:
If an intimacy coordinator works in a rigid or intrusive way, the process can feel stifled. That criticism points to an implementation issue, not an existential flaw in the role. A skilled intimacy coordinator who works as a genuine collaborator brings a finesse to make the process seamless and to elevate the artistry of the scene.
Though we’ve heard some positives about intimacy coordinators over the past several years, it does make sense that there would be some variety in how people do the job, and that some might not be as suited to it as others. This is the case with every profession, and as Duenyas noted, it isn’t a reason to dismiss them as a whole.
Some actors have said that they believe having sex scenes be so fully choreographed (to the point that there is a strict nudity rider that must be changed and agreed upon if an actor changes their mind, and there’s then a waiting period of 48 hours before the scene can be filmed) kills whatever natural chemistry the actors involved have, but Duenyas disagrees:
If the actor is worth their salt, spontaneous chemistry absolutely coexists with structure. Good choreography does not kill instinct. It gives the actors a safe container to pour their instincts into. Safety and authenticity are not opposites. The idea that you lose creative freedom when you protect consent comes from a misunderstanding of how craft works…When intimacy is shaped with sensitivity and cinematic intelligence, it feels natural and alive. The audience feels connection rather than choreography.
While Duenyas makes some solid points, there will likely continue to be a lot of debate about what intimacy coordinators do, and whether or not it’s beneficial for every performer. Stay tuned.