Following on from the topic "The Problem we all Face" I am driven to ask: do you believe that porn has any cultural merit? Does it have a function beyond simple masturbation? Should we preserve porn for future generations, like we preserve art, books or film? Will people in 200 years time learn something from "Deep Throat" or "Operation Desert Stormy".
Deep Throat, YES! Operation Desert Stormy, MAYBE. Why do I say this? Deep Throat has obvious historical and social merit. It's not a great film but it's an important one. ODS is part of the dime-a-dozen mentality that modern pornographers churn out each year. Big budget or not, it's not memorable nor is it important. I think the biggest fallacy present in most everyone is the assumption that explicit sex only serves to arouse. Sure, it can, but does that mean that a film which contains explicit sex is only there to cause arousal? No! Of course not! I'd be surprised if anyone were to be genuinely turned on by watching Cafe Flesh, 3 AM, Through the Looking Glass, Bacchanale, Roommates, The Taking of Christina, Forced Entry, Night Caller, Angela the Fireworks Woman, and others. Sure, the titles I just listed are films which are intentionally unerotic. And sure, that might not represent the majority of X Rated films ever made, but still these films are worth saving because they all have CINEMATIC VALUE. Those films and many others like them, whether someone wants to jerk off to them or not, are films made by real filmmakers who happened to be working in the realm of explicit cinema. This does not undermine or diminish the quality of their work and if anything, makes their films more unique. People always ask me why I try to defend XXX features from the 1970s and my answer is this: In c. 1977, you could get arrested and jailed for making an X rated movie. So why would a producer invest $50,000-$200,000 into a feature film? For that much money he could make 50-100 loops and make an even greater profit! The answer is because the films being made were real films. Not jerk off material with narrative filler in between as so many so-called "features" being made today amount to, but real films which were watchable from beginning to end and often stand as great cinema. This of course is not to say that every movie made in the 70s and shot on film is some hidden masterpiece, but just like all movies, there are good ones, bad ones, and inbetween ones. Henri Langlois, founder of The Cinémathèque Française famously said after deciding not to buy the last remaining prints of an early 20th century silent film series (which were soon after destroyed in a fire) simply because he didn't like the movies, that one's personal taste should not sway them from preserving history when given the opportunity. So, whether good or bad, X Rated films should be preserved just as all other types of cinema are. That's my argument.
Yes, absolutely it does. Our pornographies are one of our cultures' most meritorious products. As deceptive as it may be, in its essence pornography never lies. Its fraudulences betray its most exclusive truths. At the very least, threads like the one cited in the original post show that there will indefinitely be a market of people who will want to purchase it in its prior forms.
There are many porno films that take porn away from being so-called jackoff material. Besides the ones you mentioned, there are also movies such as "The Fashionistas" and "Black Worm", two modern-day examples. I should also mention "Thundercrack", a cult film from 1975 that happens to have hardcore sex scenes but is even less erotic than all of the movies mentioned here. That movie was never even marketed as porn.I totally agree with you. These are just good movies, period.Again, I totally agree with you.
Yes, I keep forgetting to mention Thundercrack! I actually met George Kuchar at a lecture he gave at The Art Institute here last year during which he talked almost exclusively about Tundercrack! I've heard nothing but mixed reviews of The Fashionistas and nothing but positive reviews of Black Worm. I know I should check those two out. Since I don't get new porn screeners very often, and I almost never buy DVDs, I doubt I'll get to see these any time soon. Maybe I'll splurge and buy those 2.
That's cool you got to meet George. He was funny in the movie. I've written to Melinda McDowell several times. She was planning to release a DVD of the movie, but so far it hasn't come out. It was supposed to be released three years ago. I've completely given up on it. As for the movie itself, it's placed alongside the likes of "Rocky Horror Picture Show" and "Eraserhead" instead of the Golden Age porno movies.I highly recommend both movies. Like with the Golden Age porno films, the plot is the driving force, and that's what got me interested me in them. For me the sex was the least interesting part of both movies.
Just another bare bum in the shiower 1739 Posts 12/04
Posted - Mar 25 2008 : 7:58AM
Just like we now know much about the world of the Ancient Romans because a heavily graffitied brothel was preserved in Pompeii by volcanic ash, who is to say whether the only surviving future record of the 20th and 21st centuries will be Max Hardcore's complete dvd library stored in a nuclear-proof bomb shelter. If nothing else, porn will provide future researchers with evidence of historical trends in female genital shaving and piercings.
In the mid 1970s, I saw a porn short on 8mm called The Secret Spanking Cult about the same time my Dad took my under-aged ass to a double feature of Inserts and Last Tango In Paris. These days, I look for porn films like Last Tango that incorporate the sexual situations into something resembling real life and not many films fit this category or even attempt to achieve this goal. Classic porn like Babylon Pink fits the mold and actually has some cultural merit. Of the newer stuff, I kinda liked that film with Raylene called Busted for its attempt at incorporating the hard-core scenes into a plot that's sexually themed. I dunno. If any new films/dvds out there approach Babylon Pink in the way that I described, let me know of a few titles---B0B The Film SN0B
Of course. Porn is a part of our cultural heritage. Even the porn movies, whose solely posession now is a crime. I think even in 200 years, people will look at the 70s as the decade of sexual liberalization, but also as the decade of madness ( child porn, cruel and brutal animal porn movies ). But I dont think, that our governments will allow future generations an authentic view into our past. Many movies will never be released, partially for legal reasons, partially because of a legal struggle, partially because nobody cares, partially because of no demand. So future generations will only see some feature movies and some legal loops. And some of them will wonder, why so many journalists called the seventies the "10 years of madness" ? Theyve read about this in books or on microfilm, but they cant verify it. Edited by - Caroline-NL on 3/28/2008 5:32:32 PM
That's something that's always amused me. If our (the US Gov. that is) knew how many 70s films which are out there right now featured underagers, they'd go insane with prosecutions. For that reason it's a good thing most directors and actors haven't come forward to spill the beans on who was how old when they did what. But the stories you'll hear when you talk to the right people...
I recently watched that Inside Deep Throat documentary. I can believe that the film only cost $25,000 to make but the $660 million gross seemed a bit far-fetched. In any case, the film made a helluvalotta money compared to its meager budget. And all the hoopla the film genenrated certainly left its mark on our culture---B0B The Film SN0B
True. I can only think of about 8 or 9 "unknown" underagers who were underage in maybe 1 or 2 of their early, next to impossible to get films. I'll say this: all the ones I know of appeared in low budget NYC films first. Of course you may have heard the Jean Jennings stories (about how she was supposedly 16 in Defiance). That, as far as I know, is false. Most of my info on supposed underagers came from directors themselves. There were actually very few underage women or men in straight features, just because legal actresses were so easy to find. In gay films from the 70s, the case is quite different. A lot of X rated films made in the 70s used minors as actors (Both Ways, Tongue, Through the Looking Glass to name a few) but they weren't nude, let alone in sex scenes.
[Link]
the dark knight Deactivated User
46 Posts 1/08
Posted - Apr 14 2008 : 4:10AM
Do any of you realy think Porn is more then Jackoff material?? if not i personally think you are crazy you can deeply debate and phisophilise all you want but no porn film can match any mainstream film in existence imo the stupid storylines in porn are only short interludes between the fucking why has Gonzo risen to be the most poular of the genre? because it knows what it is it dispenses with the crap and gets to the business.
Yes, I do.But things have changed. We're now seeing feature porno films where the plot is the driving force and not just filler in between the sex scenes. You're right about gonzo, but that's why feature porn has to take a completely different approach, and many of the newer ones have.
I'm not sure what mainstream films the dark knight is watching, but as far as I can recall, most of every bit as ridiculous as the average adult feature.
Thanks Myload! I'm always happy when people feel that way. I think the argument is simply this: Any movie, whether it has hardcore sex or not, which is made by a REAL FILMMAKER i.e. Radley Metzger is going to be a REAL FILM. To say that a good movie must have the most complex of storylines is ridiculous. To say a good film must have a multi million dollar budget is also ridiculous. Armand Weston, Chuck Vincent, Gary Graver, Alex DeRenzy, Anthony Spinelli, Gerard Damiano, Roberta Findlay, etc. were all serious cinematic artists. Their films, despite lower budgets and sometimes inferior acting, were just as seriously made as any other filmmaker working at the time. I cannot comment on the state of hardcore films today but I can most certainly say that to just dismiss sexually explicit films because of their content is an insult to the many serious filmmakers who have worked in these films.
Who cares? Jacking off is part of our culture, and so jackoff material is culturally significant. Let's not be art snobs here. It should all be preserved, and probably much of it will, on hard drives, tapes and DVDs in private homes. Not in my home though. I give away my DVDs to friends after I have watched them. In these days of witch hunts, having a porn collection in your home is a bad idea.
John, I never thought of porn as jackoff material, not even gonzo porn. For me it's all about entertainment. By the way, I think we're both looking for the same thing when it comes to feature porn.I totally agree with you on that. There are lots of Hollywood films with enormous budgets that I think are crap. What matters is that a movie has a story that grabs your interest and that you want to follow from beginning to end. The inclusion of hardcore sex scenes doesn't change that one bit. If anything, the sex scenes are meant to help the story.I agree with that also. Too many people dismiss porn because of the sex, and that's a real shame. It should just be about movies, period.
Yes, good porn can be a source of entertainment as well. Many years ago some friends and I used to watch features just for the fun of it. It wasn't to jerk off, it was to just enjoy the titles as movies. Some favorites were Debbie Does Dallas - Part 2 and Rocco Never Dies. Companies today still continue to release porn that goes beyond just jackoff material. See Corruptiona and Upload from Sex-Z Pictures, Black Worm and Dolores of My Heart from Pulpo, Succubus from Evil Motion, Spunk'd: The Movie from 6969 Entertainment, Operation: Desert Stormy and Camp Cuddly Pines Powertool Massacre from Wicked. This isn't the entire list, this is just a portion of it. Watch many of the porn films from the 70s. Part of the reason that I love what was produced back then is that it was more than just jackoff material.
I watched a documentary recently about Vatican supposedly having a secret stash of porn (art works) which the Church has confiscated throughout centuries. Porn has been, is, and will be - and clearly not only for jerking off. I honestly don't believe ancient Greeks were masturbating to sexually explicit frescoes (but who knows???). So yes, I do think that it has additional value for historians (mostly psychologists, probably, who study human sexual interests).
Oh yes, the ancient Greeks had porn -- although they probably didn't see it in the sordid way society sees it now. They loved their erotic pottery. However the ancient Greeks thought that women were for babies and boys were for pleasure, so there were some big differences between then and now. Erotic images have always existed, and always, will despite the attempts of our "moral" leaders.
Does porn have any cultural merit? well some porn stars have become so famous they are now household names. So yes they are a part of modern culture in a way. As for the actual movies themselves, I suppose its down to the charisma of the stars rather than the sex they're having.
Does porn have any cultural merit? At some point long ago, there were probably people who asked if the Kama Sutra had any cultural merit? Sexuality is a large part of our culture. How we choose to express that sexuality, in particular with pornography helps define who we are as a people.
demicomix.com Carnal Comics - True Stories of Adult Film Stars 105 Posts 6/04
Posted - May 27 2008 : 6:55PM
In the book, "Here Comes Harry Reems," Harry wrote about himself, Fred Lincoln (Oceans 11) and Sean Casey (Cobra) making 150 loops during the Summer of 1971. According to Reems, "There was Karate Zabeth, a petite sixteen-year-old from Brooklyn with a magnificent body who, as her name suggests, was an expert in karate. Cobra discovered her in a massage parlor where she was massaging and giving blow jobs for about $30 a day." Reems says "Karate joined us and never had any regrets." http://www.demidemonessmovie.com http://www.demicomix.com/Carnal01.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/carnalcomics Edited by - Jamie Gardner on 5/27/2008 7:00:09 PM
"cultural merit"? please define this term. this discussion is useless without a definition for this. is it a merit to/within a culture? a merit of culture? a merit that pertains to culture? if you're asking does it serve a purpose/function? yes or: does it have enough esteem to be considered cultural? possibly. not in western, judeo-christian society.
Posted - Mar 23 2008 : 2:04PM
