Why Florence Pugh's remark about intimacy coordinators exposes a deeper problem the industry doesn’t want to admit.
Hollywood loves symbols. A new job title, a fresh policy, a rewritten code of conduct — anything that lets the industry say, “See? We’ve changed.”
For years, intimacy coordinators were often viewed as the last resort.The safeguard Hollywood could point at whenever someone questioned how actors were protected during vulnerable scenes.
And then Florence Pugh said something simple:
“I’ve had good intimacy coordinators… and I’ve had bad ones.”
It sounds harmless, almost casual — but if you understand how Hollywood operates, you know comments like these don’t slip out accidentally. They leak.
And once they do, they reveal everything the industry quietly hoped you wouldn’t notice.
This is one of those moments.
How a Single Sentence Cracked Hollywood’s Carefully Built Illusion
For years, intimacy coordinators have been sold to the public as proof that Hollywood has evolved past its predatory history.
And sure, the job was created out of necessity — after decades of exploitation disguised as “art”, and directors calling coercion “spontaneity.”
But Pugh’s remark slices through the PR gloss.
Because you don’t have “good” and “bad” versions of a role that’s supposed to be standardized, regulated, and essential. You have that when the system is still messy, inconsistent, and half-built.
Her words don’t expose a flaw in a few coordinators. They expose a flaw in Hollywood’s entire approach to intimacy.
The Job Hollywood Created Without Building the Infrastructure Behind It
There is no universal definition of what makes someone qualified to be an intimacy coordinator.
There’s:
no industry-wide certification
no standardized training
no regulating body
no evaluation system
no clear chain of command
no agreed-upon workflow
no measurement for “competence”
In other words, Hollywood built a position without building the structure it needs to function reliably.
It’s the same move the industry has been pulling for decades: Create the appearance of a solution, skip the work of designing a real one.
And Pugh — whether she meant to or not — just exposed it.
What an Intimacy Coordinator Is Supposed to Be
The PR-friendly description is neat and tidy: someone who ensures the physical and emotional safety of actors during intimate scenes.
But in reality, the role demands something much more complicated.
A good intimacy coordinator must:
understand actor psychology
manage emotional vulnerability without infantilizing anyone
protect boundaries without killing the creative flow
block the scene with precision
maintain trust between actors and directors
articulate what can and can’t be shown
support consent but also performance
This is one of the hardest jobs on a set. It requires emotional intelligence, artistic sensitivity, technical skill, and social navigation — all at once.
And Hollywood pretended it could mass-produce that overnight.
How Bad Coordinators Slip Through the Cracks
Pugh didn’t specify what “bad” means — she didn’t need to. People who work in the industry already know.
A bad intimacy coordinator isn’t dangerous in the old Hollywood sense — not predatory or coercive — but they can still damage the process in major ways:
-They treat scenes like bureaucratic checklists.
Safety becomes rigid rules instead of emotional understanding.
-They misread actors or misunderstand boundaries.
Protection becomes interference.
-They clash with directors.
Scenes become battlegrounds instead of collaborations.
-They make the space feel policed instead of supported.
Actors freeze. Scenes die.
- They forget that intimacy scenes are still acting.
They focus on restrictions instead of connection.
When this happens, the scene feels hollow, mechanical, or awkward — and actors lose trust in the process entirely.
If Florence Pugh experienced this, imagine how often it happens to actors with far less power.
The Quiet Power Struggle Nobody Talks About
Behind every intimate scene, there’s a subtle tug-of-war:
Director vs. Coordinator vs. Actor.
No one wants to say it publicly, but the hierarchy is blurred.
Directors want full creative control. Coordinators want authority to protect actors. Actors want to feel safe without being micromanaged. In the best cases, these three forces align.
In the worst cases — and this is what Pugh hints at — coordinators either:
overpower the director, frustrate actors, or become so timid they fail to protect anyone
Hollywood still hasn’t figured out how these power lines should be drawn.
So everyone improvises. Improvisation doesn’t belong in safety structures. That’s the whole point.
Why Actors Rarely Criticize Intimacy Coordination
Pugh’s honesty is unusual — almost risky.
Most actors stay silent because criticising intimacy coordinators is political dynamite. It can be misinterpreted as opposing safety, opposing consent, or undermining progress.
So when someone at Pugh’s level publicly acknowledges inconsistency, it’s not just a comment. It is evidence that something is wrong enough that she’s willing to take the hit.
If she’s had bad experiences, imagine what younger, less powerful actors deal with.
Hollywood’s Favorite Trick: Pretend Change, Avoid Change
Hollywood’s reform pattern is predictable:
-Public backlash erupts
-A new policy or role is invented
-Press releases celebrate the “solution”
-The industry stops there
-Problems quietly continue behind the scenes
This cycle has played out so many times you could turn it into its own genre.
The intimacy coordinator role is just one of the latest examples.
Instead of building structure, training, oversight, and standards, the industry slapped a band-aid over a decades-long wound and called it healing. Pugh just showed the band-aid is peeling off.
What Happens If Hollywood Doesn’t Fix This
If the system stays this inconsistent, expect: more actors speaking up, intimacy scenes that feel stiff or unnatural, public trust in “safe sets” decreasing, another scandal where someone gets hurt, studios scrambling to pretend they didn’t see it coming
The irony is brutal:
A role designed to create clarity is now revealing how unclear everything still is.
Why Florence Pugh’s Comment Will Age Like a Warning
In a decade, people may look back at this comment the same way we look at early warnings before a collapse — the moment someone brave enough pointed at the crack before the wall split open.
Hollywood wants you to believe the problem is solved.
Pugh hints at the truth: The industry is still improvising with something far too sensitive to improvise with.
Until intimacy coordination becomes:
standardized
regulated
professionally trained
consistently implemented
…actors will keep having the same experience Pugh described:some good coordinators, and some glaringly bad ones.
For an industry built on performance, this is the one act Hollywood can’t keep faking.