(1) ‘Too much porn is colors-by-numbers-porn. Or, there is too much porn à la carte’
(2) ‘The difference between American and European porn. You know when an American porn girl has made it when she drops her surname. You know when an European porn girl has made it when she adds a surname.’
(3) ‘Production values in porn are almost never right. There is either too little or too much. Too little as in, "we don’t have any, so why bother". Too much as in, "we have gone to the expense of getting some, so let’s REALLY focus on it, whether it benefits the scene or not".’
(4) ‘The difference between porn acting and mainstream acting. “Good” mainstream acting is about pretending to be somebody else and succeeding to do so. “Good” porn acting is about pretending to be yourself and failing to do so.’
(5) ‘The key to ‘good’ pornography – both producing and watching it: empathy.’
(6) ‘A hardcore porn video should never contain obvious signs that a soft cable version was shot at the same time.’
(7) ‘For me, a cumshot signifies the end of the scene, nothing more, nothing less… well, especially nothing more. In fact, for me, their most important function is that they are a clear sign that I can stop pressing the fast forward button when watching a mediocre scene. There is always hope that the next scene will be better, no?’
(8) ‘Beware of porn fans who speak of “us” or “we” when they are advocating “their” taste.’
(9) ‘I don't watch porn to see a formula, I watch porn to see people fuck.’
(10) ‘I am not gay, no matter what threesomebody says.’
Erm... it is not necessary to pick a favorite here (but nobody will say anything if you do). You can just read them, or discuss them. You know agree or disagree with them. IOW, this is NOT a poll.
Brandon Iron said: “We are all heading towards being worm food....some faster than others. But until my day comes, I want to enjoy my candy-eating teens who ask me if it`s alright if they have a Snickers before dinner.....dinner being a dozen loads of cum for the next A GOOD SOURCE OF IRON.”
#1 comedy award goes to: (10) 'I am not gay, no matter what threesomebody says.'
However it is later disqualified for not being a reflection on porn and the award goes to the first runner-up: (2) 'The difference between American and European porn. You know when an American porn girl has made it when she drops her surname. You know when an European porn girl has made it when she adds a surname.'
#1 in the 'so true' category: (1) 'Too much porn is colors-by-numbers-porn. Or, there is too much porn à la carte'
#1 'wishful thinking': (5) 'The key to 'good' pornography – both producing and watching it: empathy.'
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Dec 1 2005 : 7:09PM
‘The difference between American and European porn. You know when an American porn girl has made it when she drops her surname. You know when an European porn girl has made it when she adds a surname.’
I would like to pick up on this part of (7) as I feel this encapsulates a significant part of the appeal, or rather the pull , of pornography over its viewers - one only has to view how hotly the next eagerly awaited release is anticipated on these boards to realise that the sense that the feeling that "next time they'll really get it right" is a major factor in motivating fans to keep on buying.
Hardware reflects on the truly prodigious output of the porn industry, yet there are few other businesses that have a fuller grasp of the idea of keeping 'em wanting more.
Can't let that go by without adjoining that I try to avoid restaurants with laminated menus, or worse, with pictures of the dishes on offer. Equally, movies with a bill of fare that can be readily described on the cover in a few succinct acronyms.
If memory serves, it came from the same disc that provided the much fawned over glass object d'art. Interestingly, I still remember the object, but who was in scene or what they did (let alone why they did it) has faded from memory. Is this what they mean by "erototoxin"?
Walter Burns wrote:The cumshot is one of gonzo’s few narrative devices isn’t it? Once the man has cum, where else in God’s name could the scene possibly go anyway?
Does porn art imitate life or does life imitate porn art? In this case, I hope neither.
This one has epigrammatic zing, but I confess it leaves me puzzled. Would you connect the dots for me, Walter?
Gabriel Nine wrote:
That’s a very insightful point. I know I’ve felt that way.
but but that are known success patterns. you are just jealous you dont have any skeletons, diamond stash, starships, nazi belladonnas, hummers with spinners and French periwigs in your own productions
(2) ‘The difference between American and European porn. You know when an American porn girl has made it when she drops her surname. You know when an European porn girl has made it when she adds a surname.’
two. make that two.
(3) ‘Production values in porn are almost never right. There is either too little or too much. Too little as in, "we don’t have any, so why bother". Too much as in, "we have gone to the expense of getting some, so let’s REALLY focus on it, whether it benefits the scene or not".’
you do not need any if you have the right people, however finding them is an entirely different one.
(5) ‘The key to ‘good’ pornography – both producing and watching it: empathy.’
hmmmm empathy, you used the spellchecker, right? Now that we know about your concept of blissful rupture it is fair to say this contradicts your quote (4) ‘“Good” porn acting is about pretending to be yourself and failing to do so.’
(7) ‘For me, a cumshot signifies the end of the scene, nothing more, nothing less… well, especially nothing more. In fact, for me, their most important function is that they are a clear sign that I can stop pressing the fast forward button when watching a mediocre scene. There is always hope that the next scene will be better, no?’
Masel tow!
(8) ‘Beware of porn fans who speak of “us” or “we” when they are advocating “their” taste.’
Same goes for porn talent. I thought I mention it.
Brandon Iron said: “We are all heading towards being worm food....some faster than others. But until my day comes, I want to enjoy my candy-eating teens who ask me if it`s alright if they have a Snickers before dinner.....dinner being a dozen loads of cum for the next A GOOD SOURCE OF IRON.”
to complete your post with a Brandon iron quote already gives away the value of the rest.
Okay okay I am not like that so take it with a big at least now that you know there are no more angels movies you can finally stop watching porn altogether. What better mark of respect is there? Besides you owe me a set of dishes.
I really shouldn't take shots at Pirates when I haven't even seen it. But the other day I read "over 350 special effects shots" and my prejudices got the better of me.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 5:01PM
Short answer.
Exhibitionism.
Let's leave the mainstream part for what it is -- it may be straightforward and self evident, but in fact it is a bit more complicated than that. Let's move on to porn acting. It is my contention that porn stars are playing a role when on set. They are creating/hiding behind their 'porn persona' -- it is not really me who is doing all these ATM, that is just 'Rita Faltoyano' -- and then are trying to convince the viewers that that persona is really them. In fact, they are only pretending to be themselves. And so, they become 'Rita Faltoyano, the glamorous porn girl we have all come to love' (Private ad copy). Thing is, I am not interested that much in 'Rita Faltoyano, the glamorous porn girl we have all come to love'. I am much more interested in those moments during a scene when that persona, created by the performance of the 'real' Rita, is broken down and ruptured and we get a glimpse of not the 'porn persona' she was pretending to be, but the real person she is. And so, I am interested in moments of non-performance, if you like, where porn stars stop pretending/acting to be themselves and start reacting to what is happening at the moment as the real persons they are. You might say I not only want to have access to their bodies, but also to their souls. Damn, this sounds like something Doctor Evil would say.
So in fact, this quote is a direct consequence of my 'blissful rupture' theory and by no means in contradiction with it.
Long answer.
Authenticity
Of course, trust me to find a way to make it a bit more complicated. Let's reintroduce the mainstream part in the equation. Then it becomes clear that acting is not just about the tension between two spheres -- the 'real' person and the 'star persona' -- but that there is an additional sphere -- the fictional character inhabiting the diegetical world of the movie. We could turn this into a model like this:
Sphere 1: the 'real' person (Archibald Leach)
Sphere 2: the 'star persona' (Cary Grant)
Sphere 3: the 'diegetical character' (Walter Burns in His Girl Friday )
Now, it is my contention that both mainstream and porn acting can be judged by way of their level of authenticity -- which is not to be confused with the concept of realism' -- but in rather oppositional ways.
Mainstream acting in fact more or less does away sphere #1. Authenticity here has all to do with the tension between the 'star persona' and the 'diegetical character'. Unity is the operative word here to reach the desired believability of the performance. That is why the star system in the classical studio system of Hollywood went hand in hand with well defined forms of typecasting.
Porn acting in its purest form does away with sphere 3 and is all about the tension between sphere 1 and sphere 2. Rupture instead of unity is the operative word here to reach believability. Authenticity here has much more to do with the actors losing themselves in the spur of the moment: acting becomes reacting.
btw, this is part of the reason why I believe that gonzo has the potential to be the more pure form of porn, while features have a potential insurmountable structural problem. Remember a quote from one of the earlier 'quotable' reflections: “‘Gonzo’ (whatever that may be) is easier to produce than feature porn. Interesting ‘gonzo’ is much harder to produce than interesting features. In my opinion, interesting ‘gonzos’ tend to be more interesting than interesting features.” You see, features add sphere 3 into the mix, but don't want to lose sphere 1, where the real exhibitionism takes place. However, sphere 1 and sphere 3 are figuratively if not literally a world apart and are very much at odd with one another. In fact, they can only be reconciled, so it seems, by a very narrow form of type casting, leaving the number of topics to be explored in a successful way by porn features as very limited. Yet another old 'quote' comes into play here: “The easiest way to explain the difference between porn aesthetics and classical narrative cinema. Imagine a story in which a boring sex scene is compositionally motivated. For classical narrative cinema, no problem. For porn, an insurmountable problem. You either end up with a boring sex scene – which is bad porn – or an interesting sex scene that is NOT compositionally motivated – which is bad storytelling.”
And finally, this is by no means a plea pro gonzo or contra features. In practice, very little gonzo actually succeeds in capturing the tension between spheres 1 and 2, probably because very few gonzo makers are interested in it to begin with. Likewise, features have the potential to offer different kinds of pleasure, which, alas, are also seldom created in a successful way. In the end, I would rather like to propose a third alternative: features which blend spheres 2 and 3 into 1 sphere. The original work of John Stagliano, when Rocco Siffredi was 'Dario', comes very close.
croy said: “ADT forums helped me get over my morbid fear of keyboards.”
I really like it when you see the personality of an actor or actress. Although this can lead to not liking someone..
I haven't watch a lot of gonzo, but I watched one series that was kind of documentary, because you had a group of people around over some period of time.
Situations like a male porn actor has sex with girl, who is the girlfriend of one crewmember, is priceless. Or we get to know their fetishes by the time and part of their attitude.
Or girls, who think that the interview will be edited are wrong when everything is in the movie, including their strange attitude.
I like those spontaneous moments, especially when it has something to do with fun...
When you see a crew of, people shoot nearly every day to get a whole series completed, you get to know their work life. You realize when they are relaxed, stressed, bored, excited or tired.
"[O]ne only has to view how hotly the next eagerly awaited release is anticipated on these boards to realize that the sense that the feeling that 'next time they'll really get it right' is a major factor in motivating fans to keep on buying."
After 20 years in porn, both as a fan and an "insider", I'd be lucky if I could name two or three titles that really had it all and the way I like it. But I'm sure that next time they'll really get it right.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 8:01PM
Bob, I am not sure I understand your question correctly, but as I see it, the difference would be exhibitionism, which should be at the center of the porn aesthetic and which seem to be missing from your version of the quote.
I should have explained my version in more simple terms before. Here, let me try a second time.
Porn acting is about prentending to be yourself, while in fact you are creating a 'porn persona'. The most interesting moments of a porn performance for me personally are those moments when the porn actor is failing to pretend and actually shows his own (private) personality. That is why I am bigger pervert than all those ADTers wanting to see bigger gapes and more DAPs combined. What saves me from being a complete asshole, is that I don't just crave any kind of rupture, I crave 'blissful rupture'.
I hope this kinda answers your question?
threesomebody said: “1. Thou shalt not ask questions whose answers can easily be found using the search function 2. Thou shalt not make guesses in the Walter Burns Mystery Babe contest that have already been guessed 3. Thou shalt not call other posters ‘gay’ merely because they would like to be fucked in the ass by a dominant strap-on-adorned woman 4. Thou shalt not EVER let the AGSOI #5 thread on The Porn Pool forum fall off the first page 5. Thou shalt not out-Neech Nietzsche by posting world news that he will likely post momentarily 6. Thou shalt not post Ejac’s phone number, although one might have it. 7. Thou shalt not start a new thread inquiring as to what 2257 means 8. Thou shalt not criticize Kami for being a wannabe slut simply because she doesn’t like the taste of cum. 9. Thou shalt post topics in the proper forum lest they be moved by irritated moderators 10. Thou shalt not be considered a senior member for reaching 1000 posts unless thou has posted a nudie picture of thouself” (#10 is otherwise known as the sunchen clause.)
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 8:15PM
I don't remember using the words 'we' or 'us'. And I did put 'good' between inverted commas, stressing its subjective nature.
Endless Loop said: “It seems to run in direct confliction with the standard format, that dusty, age old blueprint for shooting porn dating back to somewhere around the Cretaceous period.”
I've read it thrice, and I don't see any such disclaimer.
Don't get me wrong, Walter. Of all people, I'm the last person you'll see getting upset if a person state their personal preference as if it were fact. I'm just surprised to see you, of all people, doing it!
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 8:42PM
What part are you going on about then? Quote it completely and not just the first few words so I can see what you are talking about.
BigFerret said: “It is my sincerest hope that porn will veer towards a Shakespeare/cumfarting synthesis ultimately delivering A Midsummer's Night Anal Creampie Dream and followed closely by The Merchant of Anus .”
If you insist:FWIW, that 'private personality', or at least a reasonable facsimilie of it is the only devise I can (currently) thing of to employ to watching strangers fuck enjoyable. More than on reviewer has called our film more uncomfortably, yet more pleasurably intimate than any porn they've seen previously.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 9:04PM
Then I suggest you read it a fourth time. I have helped you by highlighting the relevant part in the above quote.Like I said, I -- and so I would think now, they -- are bigger perverts than all the gape and DAP lovers combined.
dragonsbum said: “armpits: the third and fourth vagina.”
A grammarian could tell you why the high-lighted section in the above paragraph does not refer to the first sentence. I just know it doesn't because I'm a native English speaker.
Again, no issue taken with the sentiment or the way it's expressed – just surprised to see it coming from you Walter
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 4 2005 : 9:25PM
An attentive reader could tell you that the first sentence has nothing to do with my taste either. It is an ontological claim on my part -- a claim about the nature of things which is true for everybody regardless of matters of taste -- that might be proven false or true. A personal taste OTOH can never be false or true. It may be sick, perverted, unhealthy, ... I start explaining my personal taste or preference in the second sentence only, which contains the "for me personally" disclaimer. So, quote 8 still stands and has not been contradicted in any way by what you think I have written.
Phlogiston said: “Nobody wants a small dick. (Even vicariously!)”
I framed the alternative quote in response to this passage (as edited by me) from your first short answer:
In my interpretation of this passage, I thought you were saying that "good" porn acting occurs when the performer (let's say, Ginger [Lynn] Allen) fails in her attempt to inhabit her porn persona (i.e., "Ginger Lynn" -- that persona constituting somebody else other than Ms. Allen) and, in the wake of that "rupture", her true self (i.e., Ginger Allen) comes through instead, inadvertently.
Now that you've explained further, however, I can see that your original quote has a more paradoxical spin than my alternative formulation does, and probably better captures the complex psychological dynamic toward which your analysis points.
Bob - face it you're a pervert, just like the rest of us.
I've lost track who wrote the bit below in the current format, if there was a previous incarnation or if it's as it previously appeared elswhere...but I just wanted to say yes , me too, I like this when it happens, I really do. It's very sexy indeed.
"It is my contention that porn stars are playing a role when on set. They are creating/hiding behind their 'porn persona' . . . . and then are trying to convince the viewers that that persona is really them. . . . I am much more interested in those moments during a scene when that persona . . . is broken down and ruptured and we get a glimpse of not the 'porn persona' she was pretending to be, but the real person she is."
Walter wrote all the good bits -- I've just been quoting him profusely.
Of course I'm a pervert () like the rest of you; porn really gets my little head working. Walter sometimes gets my big head working. Unlike Walter, however, I have no original ideas such as "blissful rupture", merely a penchant for parsing other people's.
I understand the phenomenon on the American side of things: Name recognition is important to marketing -- the ultimate recognition for the uber-stars being that no one else could use the particular first name effectively ("No, I'm not Janine -- I'm Janine Smith. ").
Is there a logical explanation for the European way? Or is it just that Euro porn producers regard the girls as being so fungible that, in their view, it's not worth "bothering" with a surname for them?
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Dec 9 2005 : 9:01PM
Better ask Sbando. He has much more experience with the curious species known as Euro Babe. See this funny/sad thread for both an example and a start of an explanation.
All I can think of is that many Euro Babes don't consider porn as a career.
p_ramezap said: “My God. This is a dream cast. Amber, Jamie, Clair and kat all in one film, wow. And they all do anal too. It's casts like this that make porn watching a hobby”
Paying trib-ute to SinncentVanSage 1412 Posts 12/04
Posted - Jan 5 2006 : 10:46PM
(4) ‘The difference between porn acting and mainstream acting. “Good” mainstream acting is about pretending to be somebody else and succeeding to do so. “Good” porn acting is about pretending to be yourself and failing to do so.’
I knew at once this is one of the most intelligent quotes I ever read though I obviously didn't get it the way it was meant at first. Now I think I get it, and I can compare it with my own behaviour in public: Playing myself and being myself is not the same at all, the former is a pre-booze state, the latter a post-booze state. I'd say as soon as someone gives you the advice to "just be yourself" and you decide to take the advice you will always end up just playing yourself. Damn - I always thought many people wear masks in public but it never occurred to me that many wear masks of themselves... well, join this porn board or die ignorantly.
(2) ‘The difference between American and European porn. You know when an American porn girl has made it when she drops her surname. You know when an European porn girl has made it when she adds a surname.’
This one is very interesting, too. I'm not at all familiar with Euro Babes but I definitely realised that not each of their 27 aliases contains a surname. As for American Babes I can only say woohoo! Gauge never even needed a surname. Neither did Cytherea.
(8) ‘Beware of porn fans who speak of “us” or “we” when they are advocating “their” taste.’
You so got me there. I've used that little trick countless times. When I say I need more squirting, then who cares? But when I say "we" or "porn" or "the world" need(s) more squirting, it sounds quite important, no? And it's not even a lie. "We" is everyone except "them"; and if "them" is everyone except "I", then "we" and "I" is the same.
How can an industry where women earn much more than men be misogynistic?
This thread is *exactly* the sort of thing that delighted me when first discovered ADT, and I suppose I stick around for the same reason that a lot of people still watch porn – all of us waiting, hoping for a few more sips of that first intoxicating taste. 46 hundred post later, and despite the various cruelties and outrages blunder across these pages, on the whole I still find ADT considerably less disappointing that porn, in no small part because you and the other clever and kind people who've posted to this thread.
Little Puck Interview
Posted - Dec 1 2005 : 12:27PM
