In mainstream Hollywood it is still uncommon for performers to be successful directors. The same was true of XXX Hollywood, back in the day. Legends like Henri Parchard, Gerard Damiano, Bobby Hollander, Alex deRenzy, Suze Randall, the Mitchell Brother, the Dark Brothers, Andrew Blake, F. J. Lincoln, and Anthony Spinelli directed the majority of adult releases, it seemed.
Today, in an era dominated by gonzo, performers are more likely to be sitting in the director's chair. John Leslie, Tom Byron, Lexington Steele, Brandon Iron, Jules Jordan, Christophe Clarke, Randy West, and other present and former talent now rule the roost. If sales and fan feedback mean anything, making an adult movie that can arouse the more jaded 21st century adult consumer seems to be a talent that comes easier to those who have had experience in front of the camera.
Recently I was watching Ginger Lynn's "E. True Hollywood Story". During one of the segemnts Suze Randall made the following comments (with a laugh) that I found very interesting, "We thought we were artists making real films. We didn't know that people just wanted us to get to the sex." (or something to that effect). That got me to thinking. Are features even necessary? Does anybody watch them without using the fast-forward button? Should every release be gonzo? Does great sex equal great porn? Do perfomers make better directors?
[Link]