I haven't seen enough porn in the past couple of years to make a truly objective judgment. Based upon what I have seen, I think some studios and directors have improved, some haven't and some have gown downhill. But it really seems to be hit or miss. Hitting all the right notes in porn is so hard to do even the best can mess up. There are so many variables that it's almost luck when everything goes perfectly even for one scene. Not to mention a whole DVD. I wouldn't doubt that on most productions, everybody is wound up so tight, it's really hard to get the right atmosphere. The performers need to appear to be doing everything spontaneously but how likely is that under the kind of pressure all of these people are undoubtedly under? I think there are some who are really trying. Then there are some who can barely afford to be in business and are doing the best they can with what they have to work with. Then, inevitably, I'm sure there are some who just don't give a shit. Edited by - randomprecision on 10/31/2007 6:37:02 AM
Women's necks are too damned sexy for me! 756 Posts 3/06
Posted - Oct 31 2007 : 10:00AM
It appears to be going in both directions at the same time. While there are clearly more films destined for the trash can, there are many others like Jenna Haze Darkside that clearly take porn to new levels of high. What I think needs to happen is the industry just need to offer more variety. Watching the same movies played out over and over with the only difference being the actors is ok, it's fast and easy to make, but consumers need to see more variety in themes and story too. I have been pushing for more fetishes to be covered as one suggestion. When it comes to porn, variety sells and reruns become stale very fast.
Overall, the quality of porn is going down (IMHO). That does not mean that there aren't beautiful women and rock hard men, many more titles from MANY more production comapnies and many more places in which to buy porn (and different venues to view it). Some of the big picture issues I have are: - Gonzo/All-Sex titles are the standard and features are dissapearing. This means that the same scenes are being shot over and over again with slightly different backgrounds and an ever changing cast of women/men. - Titles that focus on an Act or Body Part - Ass, Anal, Big Breasts, Small Breasts, Cunfarts, Cream Pies, Anal Full Nelson, Double Anal, DPP, Black on White, White on Black, Blowbangs, Gangbangs, rough sex, fetishes, Milfs, handjobs, blowjobs, Gagging, cumswapping, etc., While this lengthy list might seem expansive and works in giving the customer specifically what they want, I submit, in reality it shows how little creativity exists. When one must fall back on a single act or a body part, exactly where does the creativity come in? In the selection of the body part? (Not all of this is bad, but it could be so much more - one example of a titles that completely worked is "G for Gianna" where there are nine new scenes featuiring Gianna in nine different acts. Sort of a compilation, but not. Kudos to whomever thought that one up). - One-upsmanship - Once in a blue moon, someone does something original. Like a school of fish, the rest of the industry follows. Worse than that is the pushing of limits. Fisting is a taboo, so someone makes a fist-dildo and uses that one screen. Then someone uses something bigger and so on and so on until we have Belladonna fucking a fire hydrant. Years ago, the occasional throat grab or ass spank was the exception. Then the one-upsmanship came and how rough sex dominates - The existence of contract girls prevents the "sought-after" women from different companies from working together. Who'd like to see the Vivid girls get wiggy with the Wicked Girls? Sign me up - There are too many fly-by-night production companies putting out crap that floods the market-place that it makes it harder for the average fan to know what is good and what is shite. - Much of what is shot is not shot for a particular movie and is thrown together with a bunch of other scenes shot the same way. This ruins the flow of a title and makes for bad viewing. - Artistic porn - there is an oxymoron if I ever heard of one. Who buys and watches artistic porn? What is the point? Is it cinematically worthwhile? Is it jerkable? Do these movies make money? Seriously, who watches this stuff? Also, Club Jenna is putting out Way too much of this stuff. - Where is the eroticism? Is show-up-and-fuck the best we can do? The "tease" has to be more than how a women strips off her clothing. In Hollywood, they will erotically kiss and fake-fuck but in porn, they fuck and fake kiss. - The Burnout Factor - It is hard to reconcile the fact that some women have 300 titles under their belt two years into their career. Most gonzo women seemingly age about ten years over that span. They look haggard, their vagina's look old and tired, etc., In the "Golden Age of Porn" women would make one or two movies a month, and these were features where they acted. Ginger Lynn retireed after three years and 69 movies. That is just under two titles per month. Nowadays, with a pricelist featuring each act, some women shoot two scenes per day. Everything has been amped up so much. Give me a few brilliant scenes instead of one hundred buy-the-numbers-boring scenes. More later.......................... Edited by - bigfoot on 10/31/2007 10:28:17 AM
Didn't Adam & Eve and some other company with a contract girl do something like this with Carmen Luvana and who ever that other company's contract girl is. Maybe that's the next trend - loaning out contract girls. See how memorable it was? heheAmen! The hot factor is typically a thousandfold higher in mainstream with nary a genital in sight. Porn production is so fast. They shoot entire features in as little as 2 days - they don't have time for eroticism. Wham bam, thank you ma'am.You're comparing apples and oranges here. Ginger Lynn is a porn star. Gonzo girl #2037 is a worker bee. Stormy Daniels has 72 original titles to her name in 5 years. Tera Patrick has 82 titles in 8 years. Melanie Moore, the equivalent of a gonzo girl in the early 90s, has at least 300 original titles for her 4 years in. Yes, that's not in two years, and yes, there is much more production these days, but I can't subscribe to this idealic notion that girls didn't bust their asses back then too. Their names have just been largely forgotten because aha! They weren't STARS. But I really enjoyed your post. Can't wait for the continuation. :)
A lot of very valid points here - all I can say is: thank god for online reviews or I don't know what the hell I would do in this cluttered marketplace!!
I think it hasn't been so great lately. I usually can't go through a week without renting some flicks but have been noticing that they constantly use the same girls but with different set ups and sometimes I'll see the same chick wearing the same outfit in a different movie. For there to be such this influx of talent why aren't they using it? I was a huge fan of Vivid Alt but they are constantly using the same chicks in every movie...there are directors out there who think they are Michael Ninn and Andrew Blake and it blows. There are contract performers who are better as free agents. I'd kill to see Jesse Jane do a Jules Jordan flick!
Actually I think features may be returning, although at a still slow pace. I think feature directors and companies are finally starting to understand that the sex really matters. That and the understanding that restrictions simply have to be removed and are. Unfortunately the collaborations seem to have stopped. The single focus on a single body part or act is severely hurting the industry. Sex is simply more than a big ass, a creampie, rough sex, dirty talk, a huge dick. Those that can't keep pace or consistently produce, will simply parish. So I really agree there. And unfortunately there are way too few G for Gianna's or Jenna Haze's Darkside to take up the slack. I really don't have that much of a problem with artistic porn, or at least the concept of it. In my opinion though, sex still has to matter, and can't be an afterthought. The term artistic porn tends to be used rather loosely by those that don't like anything they think resembles it, but it clearly has it's merits and heat-factor if done correctly. Maybe they could start by separating the two, or simply making their films and sex scenes longer. It's really not rocket science. If cable tv is the culprit, maybe release an extended version later. As far as eroticism, I agree totally. Unfortunately a good many, and more than a few from this very forum, will have you/us believe such a thing doesn't matter. As long a their favorite hole is being filled, or their favorite actress/actor performs certain acts, that is all that is needed. I say I prefer seeing a wet pussy over a dry pussy, as I do an aroused woman over an emoting one. Sometimes that simply has to be worked for. Most of the time it simply isn't going to just happen. Edited by - scipio on 11/10/2007 7:32:11 AM
I'm very happy with the quality of porn right now. But it was good a couple of years ago too. Back in 2001 too - not always, but when I check back on stuff from 5 to 7 years ago, I'm usually pretty pleased.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 1 2007 : 4:32AM
I don't think the lower number of films by Lynn had to do with the fact that she was a star, but that the films cost a lot more to produce when they were features and so the girls did fewer scenes. It wasn't just for the stars, a cult actress of the 70s like Terri Hall did a lot of films but a typical girl today probably outperforms her entire career in 3 or 4 months!
porn is certainly at a standoff, perhaps even it's usual rut. a slight rut at that. But nothing near the bottom-of-barrel period of the early to mid 90s.
A big downhill for me. All my favorite directors and favorite companies are not producing the great stuff they did years ago. But at least Black Market and The Candy Shop are giving me a little hope of buying good porn.
Bigfoot makes several vaild points! Listen to BigFoot! The porn looks all the same. The women are dressed the same (with high heels, fishnets, etc.). They have a thick layer of makeup (which makes them look similiar to each other, in my opinion). I'd like to see creativity. Do something different. But, all I see is conformity.
Here's an idea for a video series: No Makeup girls. Yes! Your favorite porn stars... with no makeup. Wearing simple clothes. In their houses. Hee, hee. Ok, some of you may be thinking, "Are you out of your mind?!" Hey, when I wake up with a woman sleeping next to me, she's usually not wearing makeup. But the sex is all good. Famous pornstars with no makeup. No outrageous sexy wardrobe. Well, think about it.
CZ doesn't make a lot of my favorite movies. So far their BM/WF movies have been strictly Europe. Black Ice is pretty good when they don't use Pumper but often they do.
[Link]
Kensington Chapp Senior Citizen
Mine is the biggest. 610 Posts 7/07
Posted - Nov 3 2007 : 7:33AM
As Drac said, it seems to be going both ways. The girls get hotter year after year, and the technology improves too, which allows for higher quality smut. Unfortunately, few seem to take advantage of this. The flipside is that you no longer have to be talented to produce dirt; somebody said 90% of porn directors are just guys with cameras. "Show up and fuck" and "paycheck syndrome" and "quan-titty not quality" cum to mind. Perhaps it's that there is just greater diversity in porn, from the pityful low (Monsters of Cock meets Amateur Cum-farting Felchers 37) to the pinnacle of porn (Darkside etc).
As far as I'm concerned, 95% of what actually streets is shit, and I don't see that having changed much in the last few years. There are great directors who consistently put out stuff worth at least a rental, and an even smaller number that I consider must-see DVD, at least in a few particular niches. Jake Malone's oral-themed movies are a no brainer, as are Joey Silvera's. "Maestro" Claudio at PXP is doing the best "pure" blowbang movies right now, and I'll probably buy the next installment sight unseen. There are lots of problems with the new high-def cameras - lighting, color, etc. are all suffering as the camera guys and directors learn how to film with these things. I imagine that will get cleaned up within another year or so. A basic idea to remember is, there's nothing wrong with using a very high-quality camera that shoots in 4:3 aspect ratio. If you watch any Joey Silvera movies, you'll see the best lighting, color, image quality, etc. that you can find in ANY movies - and it's still in 4:3 Maybe the best thing right now is all of these new girls that are growing up watching porn, and are jumping into the fray as soon as they're able. Paige Taylor, god bless her, shot a BJ scene on the DAY she turned 18. This trend makes up for almost anything else that's wrong with porn right now, because getting to watch new girls like Paige, Claudia Downs, Hannah West, etc. doing blowbangs is so great that it eclipses all the negatives.
[Link]
ragingbull Deactivated User
404 Posts 5/07
Posted - Nov 3 2007 : 6:28PM
I just thing thie beig difference over the last thirty years or whatever is that at one time when porn was shot of film the movies attempted to be films. Meaning some kind of character development and a contrivd story. Now with the proliferation of affordably semi-pro cameras anyone can shoot. So more out their more documentation of sex. Tons of circus style stuff, but very little fun or creativety.
Women's necks are too damned sexy for me! 756 Posts 3/06
Posted - Nov 3 2007 : 7:00PM
There is something very special with porn movies that have a combination of beauty, energy, and variety. I have a closet full of porn movies I've only watched once and don't care to watch again because they were boring, stale and every camera angle was a close-up of a pussy. I was hooked into buying these films through deceptive advertising. These films ruin it for the ones more deserving of my cash. And there are many good films worth it, like Jenna Haze Darkside, which is a classic. I think things are changing though. With these rental programs offered by company's like ADE, consumers can sample far more movies at less costs and buy just the porn we really want. This can put a strain on producers of films with deceptive ads and hopefully even put the bad apples out of business. Then, as the better producers step in and fill the void, the quality will rise.
I agree 100 percent that the influx of teen girls entering the porn industry is about the only good thing we have going as of lately. Hopefully this trend will continue to catch on and more girls like Paige Taylor will come along. She deserves praise just for starting on her 18th birthday! The only problem I have is that most of the new teenage girls stick to softer 1 on 1 scenes and almost none of them are doing DPs, DPP, DAP or gangbangs. At least a few years ago there were some teenage girls appearing in gangbang movies or doing things like DAP/DPP too. I wish we had more Aurora Snow's, Tiffany Holiday's, Kayla Marie's, Katie Rae's, Kacey's, etc. These girls did some cool stuff I wish the newer teenage girls would do. And just image a teenage gangbang series... now that would rule!
Mod: excessive quoting snipped - especially as this post is in reply to the two directly above. Hey I'm 19 and new to the industry..and I do dp's and gangbangs you should check them out! Edited by - scipio on 11/10/2007 7:40:12 AM
[Link]
dvd4dvd Deactivated User
292 Posts 6/07
Posted - Nov 4 2007 : 3:36AM
I believe the quality of babes have gone up. now as for the quality or nastyness of acts, I have a split.
Hmmm. A teenage gangbang series? Wow. That would totally rock. But maybe we could dispense with the formulas, and let each girl choose just how many guys she thinks she can handle, and there might be anal or not. In fact, how about a series in general where the girl decides the setup ahead of time, and the director books the talent based on the GIRL'S preferences. Maybe Courtney Cummz or some othe female director could make this happen? Ahhh, I'm living in dreamsville, I guess. @Claudia: For newcomers, you and Paige Taylor look unbelievably comfortable doing blowbangs, and multiple guys in general. It's awesome.
................Some more reasons why the quality of porn is decreasing - - The Featured Formula - Once upon a time, when the entire porn world was features, you never knew what you were going to get. What you did not get was a formula that requires plot, sex scene, plot, sex scene, plot, sex scene, plot, sex scene, plot, sex scene and closing credits. I'm not pretending that all classic porn is great or better than what is out today. What you can say about classic porn is that it popped, was creative and trailblazing. There has not been a whole lot of trailblazing in feature porn in the last decade. - Extras Needed to Add Value - Personally, I like the addition of Behind-the-Scene (BTS), Bonus Scenes, Accumulated Pop Shots, etc., However, with much of porn that is released, those extras are needed or else you feel ripped off. That means the title by itself was not satisfying. Back in the days of VHS (and even reel to reel), there were no special features. There was the feature and some 1-900 sex number ads. The feature had to stand by itself because there was nothing else. Nowadays, most titles would not cut the mustard without special features. - Accessibility to the internet and pornographic images, stories and movies devalue the experience - Here's my opinion. When I was growing up in the 1760's, there were no DVD's or VHS's (hell, the closest we can to porn was when the chick with the scarlet letter "A" [definately not her cup size] on her dress occasionally walked barefoot - hell, she was already shunned - Oh, what ankles!). If you wanted to see an adult film, you wore a raincoat (in August) and went to Adult movie theater seven towns over so no one would know you (except for the other 20 guys from your town that also came seven towns over). Beyond that you needed 8mm loops for your home projector. They were sold under the counter in adult bookstores or by shady peddlers. Selling or possessing them was a crime back in the day. The loops usually came in white boxes, black & white was one price, color was a higher price. A film like this could cost $20 to $100 per loop...and that's '60s and '70s money! And you never knew what you were getting. Later the loops would be labeled with names like Pretty Girls, Golden Girls, etc. Most of these loops had no titles, and after repeated playing, the film would get old and simply break off. The point is that we value items more if we have to spend more (time, money, effort, etc.,) to acquire them. Anyone who can turn on a computer and hook up to the internet need only type the word 'sex' in the search engine and poof!} you get eight billion sites to explore. It is too easy so we devalue the product. The shame is that the women and men who are in front of the camera do so much more in order to produce these titles. Christy Canyon recently said that if she were 18 in the year 2006, she would not be able to do the things required of the women in today's porn. Furthermore, when I was a child, the mere sight of a Playboy Playmate was enough for me and my friends to form a circle jerk. It has been at least 15 years since I have been aroused by anything in Playboy. and finally... - People embarrassed by their porn - Porn used to be something my friends and I talked about and even watched in the same room. That was when Seka, Ginger Lynn, Annette Haven and Angel ruled the roost. We'd play cards while "Deep Throat", "Blame it on Ginger" or "New Wave Hookers" (WITH Traci Lords) played in the background. These days, we still play poker, but no one wants "Anal Cavity Search 2", "Meatholes 6" or "Anal Cum Swappers 2" playing in the background. Perhaps something like that is more popular in today's frat houses that the old standard features, but in my day, it was the bad acting, implausible story lines, Kandi Barbours nipple/tit size ratio, bad writing, WAAAAAYYYYY TOO MUCH PUBIC HAIR and extreme anatomical close-ups that made great gristle for us to chew. We were MST3K before there was an MST3K. I put it forth that Gonzo/All-sex titles do not work nearly as well with the MST3K style of smart-ass comment making. After two lengthy postings bashing the adult industry's efforts/results over the past few years, it is important that there are several arguments that support the argument for the increased quality if porn. That will be my next posting in this thread................... Edited by - bigfoot on 11/8/2007 10:45:01 AM
People often praise the so-called Golden Age of porn, but frankly I haven't really seen anything from that era that matches up with the best stuff of today. Still, in a way I'm a more dissatisfied customer now. When watching porn in the eighties I personally was just happy that it existed. Nowadays, knowing how much porn is produced it is sooo irritating that what I have to choose from is so repetetive and monotonous. With the girls and the technology available now, the potential for producing great porn has never been greater, but virtually everything I have to choose from is shoddy products from people just caring about making a quick buck.
In all honesty I think it is going down. They are either lightning the load by producing films that are too tastefull in the public eye. By that I mean it is nice to have budgets that are one million dollers or two but you can not forget that the sex has to be equally as great, which three quarters of the time it isn't. I love features or even the build up to a great scene but if there is no lust what is the point. In the late nineties this decline started out small now it is every where. Gonzo is keeping my love for the biz intact with its growth but not every girl does it so like I have read in some fellow members posts the girls that do it are in every movie and it is starting to get a little to repetative.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 8 2007 : 3:11AM
I would say that in general the sex today is more 'efficent' in terms of being strokeworthy, but definitely lacking in terms of film technique and storytelling skill. Today, there is so much more sex being shot that it is inevitable that there would be more great sex scenes, but then it is harder to find because those scenes are buried in an ocean of mediocrity and/or crap. But in terms of storyline, acting, editing, etc there is no real comparison, the 'Golden Age' films are much better on all counts. What I would like to see if a real hybrid of the professionalism of the best 'classic' films (Damiano, Metzger, Spinelli, DeRenzy, Vincent, Cecil Howard, Rinse Dream, etc) with the best of 'gonzo' style sex (Mason, Jake Malone, Robby D, William H., etc). Right now, imo, only Eli Cross, John Stagliano and Brad Armstrong come close to this ideal.
How do you define quality? If you talking about stuff like storylines, acting, plots, etc... it has been going down each year since the golden age of porn back in the 70's and early 80s where they did it right with a story, erotica and such thinks. Today it all hardcore stuff for the most part; with alot of gonzo throwing in for those who have seen everything else and needs the extreme action to be "entertained" their desires. I am right now in the blending of both so I just watch mostly the Rocco videos. I like Michael Chapman's performances in the Rocco features; it so funny and it over the top entertainment. I am surprise he is not a bigger star in the U.S. Vivid has try to do full feature videos with complete stories but they are to softcore for today's adults in my opinion. But they still make alot of money so what do I know?
What's the fun of getting old if you can't be dirty? 141 Posts 4/06
Posted - Nov 9 2007 : 1:16AM
Wow... There's so much I'd like to say in here on this topic I could spend the next week typing. But who'd want to read it? At this moment, creatively, and as a whole, I don't think this industry has a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of. I'm really proud of a few of my shows -- Upload and Corruption in particular -- but I've made a lot of crap as well. I think a lot of the points bigfoot makes are close to being right, although some of it just doesn't jibe with my experience of being in the industry for nearly two decades. The fact is that most people in this industry have no interest or desire in putting effort into their product, and this includes many of the company owners. When I ran AVN, Steve Hirsch (Vivid's owner) once told me with pride, "I have never seen a Vivid movie all the way through." How the hell can you care about your product when you don't even watch it? And he's not alone. One of the things I love about SexZ is that Bo -- the owner -- watches everything we produce. He's the only company owner I've ever met who does that. As for the quality of the directors, I've said it many times that the only qualifications you need to direct porn are a camcorder and a thumb. That has led to a vast culture of "I don't give a fuck" in the industry. I get so much shit from other pornographers for the effort we put into our big shows. Y'see, in the industry, it isn't cool to care too much about what you're making. It isn't cool to get turned on by a scene when you're shooting it or try too hard on a movie. That's what makes Jake Malone's stuff pop -- he's a genuine pervert shooting the stuff that turns him on. Just a few days ago, I had a performer on set -- one of the absolute best in the business -- and he was watching a scene from Upload over Derrick Pierce's shoulder. We got to talking and I told him about the budget, the 20-day shoot, the months of prep, the months of editing, blah, blah, blah. He looked at me when I was done and simply said, "Why on Earth would you do that for a porn movie? I could make fifteen movies for that money?" This is a guy I like and respect, but it came crashing down on me -- as it so often does -- that porn isn't art. It's commerce. Another huge part of the problem is that the production companies are dying because so many of them have made horrible deals essentially giving away their product on the web. But that's a topic for another day. In closing, I want to address two final points. The first is about your dreams of contract girls and crossovers. As a guy who has shot dozens of contract girls in my time including many mentioned here, let me burst your bubbles a bit: with very, very few exceptions, contract girls are the absolute antithesis of good porn. Almost to a one (as noted above, almost), contract girls are surly, ill-tempered, don't want to be there, don't want to do anything, don't care about of the quality of the product they are in, despise doing sex scenes, arrive with a list of "I don't do that"s longer than the script, and care only about how soon they can go home. I wish this was not an essential truth of this business. But it is. And no truthful director working today could or would ever deny it. The last -- and related point -- is the complaint about directors using the same talent over and over again. I'm definitely guilty of this. I have a repertory company of people I use time and time again because they're dependable. Until you've been in this business you really can't imagine how flaky, unprofessional and downright irritating a lot of the talent can be. It's mind-boggling. Then again, what can you expect when you give a nineteen-year-old $20k a month and say "be your own boss." Out of respect for this desire to see new people I try to put at least two talent I've never shot in every show I direct. Fully two-thirds of them either A: cancel for one reason or another (as happened with Claudia Downs on my last shoot, though through no fault of her own whatsoever, and I'm looking forward to shooting her sometime) to get replaced with one of my regulars (I ended up replacing Claudia with Trinity Post), or B: they go on the Never Hire Again list for some egregious bad behavior or lousy performance. Okay, you see what I mean? I could go on like this for days. Someone stop him. You folks make a lot of good points, and I'm gonna go before I try to address the rest of them, fer chrissakes.
David Stanley has written novellas about the frustration of caring about making a good movie in the adult industry. I thought it was just his typical hyperreactive behavior. So needless to say what you write verifies his statements and I'm disappointed with the industry as a whole. The chances of me finding the sort of adult film I'm looking for are pretty much nil. I suppose I'm just wasting my time. It also makes me think how sad for these people who believe their career is a joke, a fluke, a big fat "whatever". There is nothing more disgusting than apathy. I would ABSOLUTELY LOVE TO READ what you write on this topic even if it takes a week. I think a lot of people on this forum would too.
Who cares? If you think/know you're putting out a quality product, I wouldn't worry about using the same talent. I know it's not quite the same but I don't think any Wes Anderson fans are shying away from his new film because he has Bill Murray in it. It really isn't that different. You know the effort you're going to get from performs you've worked with in the past and if you think it's still going to be top notch, why change? If you're committed to bring in a few fresh faces per project and you're asking/challenging your regulars to bring something new, you're going to keep creating something you can be happy with. Porn isn't that different from Hollywood in that fans tend to follow certain performers and/or directors. You'll gave problems if you or your performers aren't bringing something new... but that doesn't appear to be a concern.
I'm sure there's a lot of crap going on in the porn business, but every business will at least partly be a reflection of consumer behavior and with porn there seems to be a lot of consumers that are really watching a lot of porn and that would rather have fifteen so-so movies than one great movie. And then that's what we'll get.
I am very disappointed the Features being released today. I know a Director has his 'Vision' and that rules. I just wish the Directors had more of an appreciation for the consumer watching their poor picture quality production. We get scenes in various tints (red, yellow, orange, etc) and we even get complete scenes in black and white. Fog machines and white-outs seem to be the norm. We had this kind of picture quality 50 years ago. I don't want to be reminded of the old 8mm's, I want to see some good picture quality that matches the TVs and DVD players that you buy at discount stores today. Let's try making Features that are at least as good picture quality as TV? Den
What's the fun of getting old if you can't be dirty? 141 Posts 4/06
Posted - Nov 9 2007 : 12:54PM
Den, You are a really nice guy, and I like you a lot, but you & I couldn't possibly have more differing views on this. Obviously, I am frequently guilty of all of the above. But surely you understand these are -- dare I say it? -- artistic choices. To simply call them "poor picture quality" is unfair. I would argue that Upload is one of the most technologically cutting-edge, and best-looking adult features ever produced. We set out to make that movie look like Minority Report (for the most part), which has a heavy bleach bypass look, and overall, we succeeded. I'm extremely proud of how this show looks. But my absolute favorite scene in the movie is the all-anal threeway with Kylie, Delilah & Derrick which is a virtual nod to 50s film noir and is, yes, completely in (gasp) black & white. And it's gorgeous. It's rich, contrasty, crisp black & white that looks like we shot on silver nitrate stock rather than HD. That scene looks almost as good as Michael Chapman's cinematography in Raging Bull. It also makes the scene seem that much more dirty since it has that vintage feel. Both girls are talking a dirty blue streak, taking it in the ass, and Kylie even fists Delilah while Derrick is banging her butt. And all in glorious, beautiful black & white. You can't think that all happened by mistake, right? That scene was an enormous pain in the ass to light and shoot. Obviously, we planned it that way. Like it or hate it, you can't just call that 'bad picture quality." If you hate it, that's fine; as you know I have no issue with bad reviews (I assumed Upload would be getting your lowest rating), but give credit where credit is due. That black & white footage was my idea, not some fuck up in post! Blame ME, dammit!
Eli, Upload is a very fine movie and I know it is your 'Vision' and not some screw-up in editing. I certainly appauld you for the fine effort and the very good extras and all the work you did on this. No doubt about it, it is a 110% over the top DVD. I can't image the amount of pre-production, production and post-production you put into it. You are a very nice guy and I have loved for years visiting with you and Kylie at the AVN conventions. I would like to ask a favor of you. Would it be possible for your blockbuster epic movie next year that your 'Vision' be a 2008 storyline that places the focus on very good picture quality. I am talking about something that when we play it we say 'Now your talking!'. You already have very good complelling storylines and you already have awesome sex action (including fisting that I love!). Please give this some consideration. We may differ on some things, but I really appreciate all the effort you put into your projects. It is a labor of love for you and it shows through loud and clear. Thanks for all you do. Den
I don't know about you guys but to me, good porn is porn that looks like two...(or three or four or whatever) people having sex because they are horny and want to fuck! And there happens to be a camera present. Beyond this, our own fantasies role played by the performers, interesting acts, fetishes, interesting angles, sets, set-ups can only add to this... seems to me there is more emphasis on the second part than on the first part! There is nothing hornier than (good-looking) horny people having hot steamy sex...but these days porn is a bit like watching robots/or on the other end of he scale, some kind of circus performers/athletes performing difficult/filthy acts! I have no problem with rough sex, but only when there is an underlying chemistry, and both performers are clearly aroused... I think one way to get better chemistry might be to ask the women what they want from a scene...and ENSURE they get a good orgasm or two or three! from a scene...porn is severely lacking in female orgasms...surely men want to see this? I remember a scene from hell cats, i can't even remember who was in it, but it was just sooo hot because the girl was getting so wet and into the scene that she would do anything!
What's the fun of getting old if you can't be dirty? 141 Posts 4/06
Posted - Nov 9 2007 : 5:34PM
Den, I would love to be able to say yes, but unfortunately... The first big show for next year is actually two interwoven timelines with one in modern day and the second in the 16th century. As the two timelines mesh one will go from being stark black & white to vivid color, and the other will do the opposite, shifting from super-saturated color to stark black & white. Sorry, pal...
+1 , i couldn't agree more. porn is porn whether it's feature or gonzo - so if u can't see the action clearly then what's the point? if u wanna show black and white footage/dark footage/slow motion or any other artistic crap just shoot regular movies and not porn(sorry for that crap word- but there's nothing more irritating than watching great action while the director ruin the scene with b&w footage or other artistic elements). eli - i don't usually say bad things about directors but in your case i haven't seen one film that u directed or held the camera that u haven't ruined the action with bad lighting or very bad camera work . u do shoot great sex most of the time but u keep ruin it with bad camera work and lighting. i just hope u can realize that 99% of those who watch porn do it to jerk off (feature or gonzo) and doesn't really care for all these artistic crap when it comes to picture quality . u can still show your art in the action and story line where u obviously good at. Edited by - scipio on 11/10/2007 8:58:38 AM
I agree times ten! Eli Cross, I found what you wrote to be more interesting, educational and head-bashingly dissapointing (in the industry, not what you wrote) than anything I've read in these forums in quite some time. Take all the time you need. You have a reader here who will see what you've written in the past and will anxiously wait to see what you write in the future. Edited by - bigfoot on 11/11/2007 12:38:48 PM
[Link]
conquistador Deactivated User
Hellhamster. 2947 Posts 10/03
Posted - Nov 9 2007 : 7:04PM
@Eli Cross: It was really interesting reading your posts, please carry on. This thread is entertaining and informative.
You hit the nail squarely on the head. Porn is moving further and further away from anything authentic. I have this mental image of the female performer before a shoot going though their pre-game ritual getting mentally prepared for the epic ordeal, suiting up in the porn outfit bouncing on their toes while slamming their fist into their palm, repeating I won't tap out, I won't tap out. From what I read on here lately this is probably not far from the truth. piercedpixi wrote: There is nothing hornier than (good-looking) horny people having hot steamy sex...but these days porn is a bit like watching robots/or on the other end of he scale, some kind of circus performers/athletes performing difficult/filthy acts!
[/quote]
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Nov 9 2007 : 10:07PM
In the end, porn becomes repetitive. It can not be escaped I don't watch features, and in the last year, barely porn at all. I don't caret about a director being true to their art. That is what Scorsese is for. I want to pop! Story lines wear out FF buttons. Regardless, after 1,000's of years of recorded sex - in one form or another - it all becomes the same thing
I think porn quality has gone up. Girls don't get any prettier than Bree Olson or Amy Ried. Also with the amount of 18 and 19 year old girls in porn. And the best thing I'm enjoying, Porn on DVD in 480p and widescreen on my 50 inch plasma HDTV. I can't even look at my old VHS tapes anymore. For so long I watched my old tapes on a 27 inch regular TV and thought it was great.
Make sure you buy porn DVDs that were released this year that are shot in HD widescreen. I just bought I love Bree and Dreamgirlz on DVD and the picture quality is awesome on my plasma. A year ago I bought some cheap DVDs from a friend for $5 a piece and without knowing the were 5 years old and the picture quality was horrible. They weren't even good for VHS quality. Edited by - scipio on 11/10/2007 9:02:08 AM
