Reviewers Recommend Sharing My Wife 3 (Reality Junkies) - review by Captain Jack Director: Mike Quasar Starring: Shay Sights, Tommy Pistol, Isiah Maxwell, Codey Steele, Victoria Voxxx, Some Dude, Blake Blossom, Izi Blu. Read review
I have been watching porn a while. I think 90% of what they put out today SUCKS! Is anyone else like me in thinking that earlier porn was Much better? It was NO way as much fake as the stuff they dish out now. I am so sick of the fake crap they put out now. Anyone else willing to admit this?
Topic Moved by - stephdunn on Oct 23 2002
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 22 2002 : 11:22PM
mrpeepers, no I don’t agree with you. But let me explain.
What I don’t agree with is that this period sucks, and that period was great.
There was some great stuff put out in the 80’s, and the 90’s, and there is still some very good stuff being put out today. But there are differences and I think it is more difficult to find the better stuff today.
Back in the 80’s and early 90’s there were quite a few less studios that produced stuff. Some of the larger ones commanded a good fan base and I think that budgets to make the films might have been easier to obtain. Also back then, there wasn’t the proliferation of video cameras that anyone could pick up, shoot something, and they try and distribute it. Remember back then that a lot of the stuff went to theatres (sleazy or not) and not necessarily to a person’s home to be popped into a VCR player. Okay, that may have been the 70’s and 80’s but there wasn’t the proliferation of VCR’s that there is now (and now we additionally have the luxury of DVD).
Then there was a period where it seemed like dozens of people had tiffs with the ‘parent’ company and new studios and ventures popped up all over the place. With the proliferation of improved and cheaper video equipment, we now have a large amount of people starting up new ventures, shooting, and trying to get a piece of the market. I would speculate that several of the larger studios have had to tighten their budgets because there is a lot more competition eating away at the porn pie.
Back in the 80’s I think production was in the area of single digit thousands produced each year. Now it probably is in the 10’s of thousands.
Good porn production is a lot more than just a guy with a camera and two or more performers in a motel room setting.
The problem we have now is not that there isn’t good stuff made and distributed, but lies more with being able to find the good stuff.
(Before anyone jumps too hard on me, some of the spinoffs and new startups are now producing better stuff than their ‘parent’ companies. The old entrepreneurial spirit of “I can do it better, but I’ll have to go it on my own” still applies, and has worked for some.)
Yeah I have to agree with DD on this one. I think there is much more variety in porn these days which can only be a good thing. Besides, I think the women look better now, then they certainly did in the 80's. I mean, who wants to see porn with some ugly fat dude with a mullet haircut and a moustache pumping some chic with more curly hair than a poodle's thatch???
If you go back and look at the stars back then and the movies that they made, you clearly see a difference. The women look like they actually enjoyed it. Back then, you could pick up a movie with your favorite star and chances were it was pretty good. Now, you have to try and wade through all the junk. Next thing you know you've spent $25 on a movie and it ends up being lame, again! How do you filter past all the junk? If you were to look at the best 20 movies ever made, I think they will fall into that era. Now every scene has condoms, the acting is so fake and the movies are in no way as good. Not to mention the "big" female stars now won't do anything but lesbian scenes.Chasey Lain, Janine, Jenna etc...
No - I don't buy this argument. I've been watching porn for 25 years and I truly believe that the best porn ever made is available now! That's not to say that all of the new stuff is good, a LOT of it sucks weenies. But the best stuff ever made is coming out now. Just watch Evil Angel, Private, Dorcel, Wicked... great titles come out all the time!
Here is a good example for this. Just go through the reviews and notice what the majority of them are. 3 stars or alot of them less. That is my point. There is so much garbage being put out there now.
OK, but 3 stars means average (actually above average). That means that an even distribution would predict a perponderence of 2-3 star movies. If more were rated 3.5 or higher, it would mean that the ratings were skewed and therefore of less value.
You are missing the point here. The vast majority are being rated that now. Meaning= The stuff now is mostly bad!
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 23 2002 : 9:58PM
Mrpeepers,
In your original post, you said that you felt 90% of the stuff produced today sucks. That still leaves 10%. With the astronomical proliferation of studios and movies being produced, that 10% can be a sizeable number.
That 10% would range from the very good, to the superb, and in sheer numbers I would venture to say that it equals the ‘much better’ stuff that you remember.
I agree with you that there was some very good stuff produced in the 80’s and the 90’s, but where I disagree with you is that there is not good stuff produced today. I think there is.
The stuff that I like wasn't made until a few years ago. It features good looking people fucking with maximum energy (and not necessarily with anal). The men and women are totally into each other, they gaze into each other's eyes with lust and passion while getting sweaty and tired (and sometimes collapsing in exhaustion at the end). I find this sort of scene in many of the movies made by Nacho Vidal, Toni Ribas, TT Boy, and Rocco (his more recent stuff). The performers sometimes push each other's limits, and no one is allowed to "half-ass" (no pun intended) their way through a scene. See movies such as Killer Pussy 8, Orgy World 2, Exxxplosion and Rocco's Initiations 3 for examples of what I mean.
Sure, 90%+ of what gets released is crap, but within that "good" percentage is a lot of fine viewing (too much for me to keep up with).
I'm not sure what you consider crap nowadays. But there is still lots of great stuff beeing released on the market.
But I am going to side with Speelie on this one. The stuff I like is kinda recent. Great movies from companies like Evil Angel, Anabolic/Diabolic and Red Light District. Great producers like Rocco, Nacho Vidal, Antonio Adamo, Vince Voyeur just to name a few. Private compilation are usually a sure thing for me, I cant get enough of those great looking babes.
Also, my favorites performers are usually from Eastern Europe. We started seeing talents from Czech Republic, Hungary, Croatia, Yugoslavia, etc... not that long ago. Since the fall of the Communist regime in Eastern Europe, the number of movies produced in Europe has growned exponentially, which has been great for the porn industry.
There is so much diversity now, from gonzo, barely legal, interracial, amateur, couples, etc.. There should be plenty for everyones taste.
I remember in the early 90's, I was hooked on Racquel Darrian. I was renting/buying most of her movies and I could'nt get enough of her. Janine Lindemulder was very nice too. I saw her for the first time in "Hidden Obsession" and she was awesome. Back then, most of the movies I was looking were either from Vivid or Andrew Blake productions. My porn repertoire was very limited because of those 2 gals.
But looking back, there is no way I would continue with this type of movies today. Since, I started renting EA, Ana/Dia and RLD, my views and taste on porn has changed a lot.
One of the reasons there is a lot of sub par movies today, might be because the market is much more bigger today then it ever was in the 80's and 90's. Sales of porn movies is a billion dollar market in the America alone. So, there is lots of companies trying to get a share of it. The more movies are produced, the more chance crappy ones are released.
Anyways, this is a very subjective question. All I can do you give you my point of view. :)
It is very hard to find the ones that are good now. With so many of the junk movies out there, it makes one mad to spend $25 and find out you have been duped. Whats the deal with all of the stupid condoms? If they think they need condoms, they're in the wrong buisiness. To me that is a complete turnoff. I do like the movies that I have seen with rocco. Who is this Nacho guy?
Comparing 80s and 90s porn to adult now is completely two seperate things. Its like comparing cars in the 70s to sports cars of today. I don't think you can even make a linear comparison. They are different; I had my fair share of men who came into the adult stores I worked in and wouldn't even look at new products because they had their mojo inclined to stars they wacked off to in the 80s. What have you seen? If you are watching 4 hr comps. by leisure time, then maybe this is the problem. Go grab Ass Collector, Raincoater Point of View, Studio A Andrew Blake stuff (girlfriends is a gr8 one,) and then grab a feature such as Flashpoint or Forbidden Tales. Then check out a virtual sex title or my plaything dvd. The amount of variety is so huge that anything you want you can probably find.
The abundance of porn mathematically makes it so that, yes, more shit is out there than ever before, but also that in huge record amounts, amazing porn exists and is released abundantly by respectable companies that respond to fans more than ever before. (check redlight dist. and evil angel, rarely a disapointment.)
Porn made during the Reagan years wasn't very nasty, due to the industry being scared of government crackdowns. At least that's my understanding. This meant almost no facials, little if any anal, and swallowing was almost unheard of. In the 80s, you could easily watch 50 main stream titles in a row, and not see a facial. Let's put it another way, in the 80s Vivid wasn't considered couples porn.
I have a response to this and it will probably be unpopular. My understanding about the adult film market is that the performers get paid by the movie or the scene. I have never heard of performers getting percentage of sales or residuals. If this is true then a performer would shoot a movie, grap their paycheck and then the movie was out of their hands. So to make a lot of money a performer would have to make as many movies as possible. Who cares about quality when your trying to make as many as possible? And then studios take these movies and try to make as many movies as possible(compilations,best of,ect.) With compilations you can make 100 movies out of 10. So with a limited market you try to release as many movies as possible to get as many sales as possible. Quality can easiliy suffer under these circumstances.
My proposal, if my no percentage of sales given to performers is correct, is to give the performers percentages and points. If performers could make more per film they would be more concerned with quality, films would hopefully be better. The number of movies released will go down but as performers demand better movies(better filming, better editing,better sound editing, better lighting,ect) quality should go up. If your upset that your favorite performer will not be in as many movies, so what? Who can really buy or find all the movies some of these people make? It is not uncommon for someone to make 50 to 100 movies. And then multiply compliations and it is ridiculous.Alot of people hate Andrew Blake's genre of film(I am a Blake fan) but they agree that his films are great when it comes to quality. And what does he make, two movies a year?
I think that we have to demand qualtity from the performer and then support them in their quest for better product. If it means less quanity to get more quality I am for it. Will studios give performers more money to get more quality? Snow ball, meet hell. Should we support performers when they demand more from studios? Yes. Should we support them if they threaten to stop making movies(porn strike-film at eleven) if they don't get quality films to star in? Yes.
Remember, porn is entertainment to us, to performers it is a career. Make quality more rewarding to them, dollar wise, and they might make it more rewarding to us, quality wise.
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 24 2002 : 11:00PM
rt,
I think you missed one point in your discussion. Performers, even if they were paid more or perhaps got a percentage, when their performance is done then the movie is out of their control.
The quality you refer to is controlled and dictated by the studio, director, producer, cameramen, and editing/production team.
I will concede to your point that if the performers were paid a little more and didn't feel forced to make so many movies they might have the energy and impetus to put more effort into each production. But once shooting is done, it is out of their hands.
@Mr Peepers : I almost never see condoms in the movies I watch. It sounds like you are mainly seeing features, and more mainstream porn, things such as Vivid and Wicked produce, which normally ahve condoms. To avoid condoms, seek out movies from companies such as Evil Angel, Red Light District, Anabolic/Diabolic, or some Digital Sin releases. Among the latter are the movies of Nacho Vidal, a Spanish actor who worked a lot with Rocco, but now directs and performs in his own all-sex movies. I recommend anll of his Killer Pussy titles between #7-12.
DenverDon, I believe giving a percentage of sales to performers would make them more involved in the total production of movies. A preformer would want a good quality product to be released so as to generate more sales meaning more money for them.
I don't think performers will stand up to studios though. One, it would have to be a somewhat united effort, two, there are too many people willing to work for less- you have a major star complaining about work condition, fire them and hire someone cheaper. Alot of porn watchers just want to see bodies humping and don't care who it is. And how many people would be willing to pay more for a better product? I think those last two statements are what is the basis of porn film making today.
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 26 2002 : 3:21PM
rt,
I think it has more to do with the nature of the contracts that are offered and that are signed by the performers. They sign a contract to do certain things for the camera and in front of the camera - period. Contracts are not offered to be further involved in the behind-the-scenes production and editing process.
An exception might be some of the 'contract girls' for a studio that are also committed to travel to signings for promotional purposes.
Hopefully, someone who is in the industry can give us a better insight to this.
I will still concede to your point that if the performers were paid a little more and didn't feel forced to make so many movies they might have the energy and impetus to put more effort into each production. But once shooting is done, it is out of their hands.
