Has anyone else noticed that starting with the videos released in the last 45 days Dreamgirls seems to have imposed a new level of censorship. I first noticed it with Sorority Strip Off 17.
It appears to me they are not showing below the waist shots on any girl that's not one of their "models". As you probably know they seed the contests with strippers/models that encourage the "normal" girls to go further. It appears to me now that they won't show the "normal" girls below the waist. Is this a change in the law or their policy? I sent them an email or two, but they won't respond.
For example, in that video there are actually instances of where a girl pulls down her panties and the camera turns away which is unheard of in the Dreamgirls world. The same things happens on WildWett.com 03 and Dream Girls: Naked College Coeds 44 which came out since.
They are required by law to have proof of age and ID on file for any person performing anything that can be considered a sex act, or sexual in nature. Maybe the gals in question didn't want to give their ID.
I thought that, but why then would the camera turn away just as the girls are flashing below the waist? It looks to me like they are purposely avoiding recording the footage.
You can tell who the "models" are because they appear on the Real Adventures doing flashing around town.
See for yourself. You'll also notice a lot of edits just as something good is about to happen.
I assume the camera turns away because the producer believes that let's him claim that he's not really filming sexual conduct, he's merely implying it. Whether it actual let's him off the 2257 "hook" is beyond the scope of my knowledge on the subject.
You know I just went back and watched UpTheSkirt #1 from DG which is about 5 years old. I think if you compare that to what they have been producing lately it is clear they are capturing less and less spontaneous activity.
That whole series (UTS) seems to have been discontinued too. I think they are just gradually tightening up.
Does GGW shoot normal girls in public any more either? I don't watch their stuff, but their TV ads are now focusing on non-spontaneous stuff like a coed olympics and porn looking girls kissing each other on a set.
Everything I've heard about the producer of GGW is negative, so I've never bothered to watch his stuff. Obviously if what he's been shooting is subject to 2257 then spontaneity is problematic.
It seems to me that the law requries them to have a copy of the drivers license for everyone shown.
Here is an easy solution. They clearly have a club in Key West and a club in Tampa they work with. They need to provide the club with a machine to scan IDs when the bouncers are doing the already mandatory ID check. It would just take a few seconds to scan it and store it away. Then if there was any problem in the future they could pour over the night's scanned IDs and find the girl.
Anyone who thinks that DreamGirl's material is lacking these days is flat out crazy. It is as good as ever - and that is good!
The only sad thing is watching their releases and realizing that, once they use up their HUGE supply of Mardi Gras footage...it will be a long time IF and WHEN they get Bourbon Street back in the swing of things...
That doesn't even come close to satisfying the new 2257 requirements. Read up on it - you will be amazed what is required. Your idea of a "club scan" would never come close to working.
As for the law requiring them to have a copy of everyone's driver's license - that specifically is not a requirement.
OK, folks, let me put this entire topic to rest. I spoke with Hayden at DreamGirls and he assured me that the following is true and accurate: when the new 2257 came out it put everyone on alert (not just his company - ALL providers of adult content). Nobody was positive as to exactly what to do as the new 2257 actually provided for more questions than exact answers - so for the next 3 or 4 releases AT THAT TIME they were very careful - as well they should be - and made certain that anything that could be considered sexually explicit also had a damn good model release to go with it. That said - yes, portions in those 3 or 4 titles only were "tamed down" in the editing room - but again this was ONLY for the 3 or 4 releases that came out right after the 2257 debacle.
SINCE THEN EVERYING IS BACK TO NORMAL and ALL releases after this initial dampening scare contains their usual sexy, revealing content.
If they're still the same then I will still buy their movies. I consider them the best when it comes to this stuff.
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Sep 8 2005 : 12:27PM
Would you want to go to a place that 'scans' your ID and keeps it on file? A lot of people I know would say WTF and never return to that place. Business would most likely drop. Mandatory check for proof of age yes, scanning IDs, no.
Then apparently you don't even need a scan of an ID. I'm a little confused why "toning down" 4 videos would eliminate their legal risk. If somebody was going to prosecute them it is unlikely they would do within a month of the video being released (they put out more than 4 titles per month).
I was just watching Wild Party Girls #29 which isn't even on their website yet and I have already spotted at least 3 occasions where a "non-model" girl in public is starting to pull her panties down and there is an obvious edit to later on.
Am I only the only with access to their recent releases? Does anybody else agree or disagree who has seen:
Dream Girls: Naked College Coeds 44 Dream Girls: Sorority Strip-Off 17 Dream Girls: Special Assignment 42 Wild Party Girls #29
I think you are missing my point. If the new law only requires verification the naked person is at least 18 then a scan might suffice, but if you are correct and the new law requires a model release then you have verified this whole thread by acknowledging that nothing in Dreamgirls Videos since the change in the law is spontaneous.
Once upon a time Dreamgirls products were 100% composed of regular non-actress/strippers in contests or just in a club. There were no releases and no IDs on file and if a girl saw a camera and pulled down her top it was an educated decision on her part.
Agreeably over time they started to insert their own models to spice things up and encourage the non-models to go further, but at least for me if full nudity has now become 100% models and the non-models are just wallpaper which get edited out I'm not interested any more. Few if any normal girls are going to sign a release particularly when they aren't even getting paid.
At that point it's just porn actresses without porn content. If the whole things is going to be staged they might as well have the model/actress jump into the crowd and start having an orgy, at least that would be unique.
The question remains is that still the case? It would appear because of either the change in the law or fear of litigation or some other reason they recently started requiring model releases for below the waist nudity...or at least it appears that way.
Today Dream Girls: Real Adventures 74 was shipped to me (which was JUST released) so hopefully Dirty Bob is right and it will be back to their normal practices.
I just finished watching Real Adventures #74. The good news: I think it's their first video on a DVD-9 instead of a DVD-5. I know, big deal...
The bad news: It's actually not that bad, but in terms of below the waist nudity I believe the policy is still in force. The occasions of below the waist nudity are the model that flashes between scenes, the obligatory Ponderosa Sun Stripper festival footage, and there is one retread scene where two girls pull their panties down...but I've seen the scene in another volume and the two girls are models they have used for their flashing footage in the past.
There is once again zero below the waist nudity in the spring break, wet t-contest, booty shake, etc.
While there is still some good stuff left I'm not sure its enough to keep me as a customer (speaking as someone who has seen 95% of their library).
This thread has unfortunately angered me to the point that I have been forced to respond. I hate having to defend my company to monday morning quarterbacks who have NO IDEA what they are talking about. To Dirty Bob and the others that took up for us I thank you.
Here's what is going on:
1. When the new 2257 laws were passed, we TEMPORARILY toned things down until we joined the Free Speech Coalition, which gives us an exemption until September 15th. This totaled about 6 (SIX) videos. 2. We joined the Free Speech Coalition because we needed the time to organize our documents the way the government wanted them instead of the way that we had them - not because we don't have the information - AS WAS IRRESPONSIBLY STATED earlier. We have over 14,000 model releases. Most of our titles have over 100 girls in them, so its adds up quickly.
3. After conferring with our legal counsel (who has reviewed all 42,500 pieces of our documentation, we have turned the heat back up on our releases.
So - it is back to business as usual here at DreamGirls. We apologize for any inconvienence that this may have caused. If anyone has any questions feel free to contact me at 800-566-3998 and I will answer any questions that they may have. I would much rather do that than have to come on here for the first time and defend uneducated and irresponsible commentary.
In that case let me try to ask an educated question. Will you guys release the first 9 volumes of Real Adventures on DVD? I mean I bought the complete serie on DVD from volume 10 to 60 but that's why I also want the first 9 volumes on DVD so I can have the complete serie just like all the other series I buy from DG.
Nothing personal, but it kinda bugs me when people (like YOU did above) assume that they have the answer and, by implication, make it a negative connotation that may then be repeated as rumor.
Saying above that it "...MUST be some legal reasons" doesn't make it so.
In reality, you have no knowledge of why or what they may have planned for those Vol. 1-9 in the future - if anything at all. Don't assume it is for legal reasons 'cause that same line of thinking can also be taken as saying that there is something not legal about the same volumes - which is not true as they are still available on VHS. Some people may read your statement above, remember it, and from then on believe it to be true.
Be careful how you phrase statements, Grasshopper...
Dirty Bob, thanks againn for stating the obvious to Ramsey. If it were for legal reasons then real Adventures 1 - 9 wouldn't be available on VHS either.
because 1 -9 had already been released before DVD was a financial option. When DVD first came out cost was very high and demand was very low. When the decision was made to start producing our titles on DVD, Real Adventures 10 was where we were at, so that's where we started.We do appreciate the fact that there are collectors that like to have a complete library of a series, but the bottom line is it would not be cost effective.
Sorority Strip Off 17, Special Assignment 42, Wild Wet T 3, Naked College Coeds 44, Wild Party Girls 29, Real Advnetures 74 & Special Assignment 43. Joe, thanks for your support.
OK, I think we milked this one to the bone. May I suggest a slight branching to this thread with this question: WHAT OTHER EVENTS WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE DREAMGIRLS COVER?
As I've said in the past the most exciting thing in a Dreamgirls Video is when a shy/normal girl is motivated into "keeping up" with the stripper type girls in order to win the contest. More of that is optimal. It's also hot when a girl in a bachelorette party get-up starts stripping on stage.
I've always thought they should put a fantasy series on another label that has contest girls pulling guys out of the audience and letting it go a *lot* further on stage. It wouldn't be that hard to get 25 guys to make it look like there is an audience and fake a really out of control contest. I say another label because I know Dreamgirls wouldn't want to confuse their brand. There is a Japan AV series similar to this, but it's a little too hard edged and I can't translate the title.
Ramsey, we try to put a little Nudes A poppin footage in most of our Real Adventures. Also on Oct 17 Evil Angel releases Buttman at Nudes A Poppin 18 (VHS & DVD).
I'm actually the opposite on Nudes a Poppin. Being teased by an amateur is exciting, but being *only* teased by a pro "stripper/actress" is a let down.
As a viewer of virtually every DG title (except the Girlfun series) the contests and club footage are what interest me. When a girl with 20 tattoos and 8 piercings is totally naked in round one of the wet-t a bell goes off in my head - stripper. It kind of ruins it, at least for me. This seems to be a growing phenomena in DG titles. I know DG has some involvement in the contestants, perhaps this could be improved? I think it's much better when an apparent shy girl comes out of her shell in a desperate bid to win.
One more super important question. That song "Yo Puerto Rico" which is played in the background in a bunch of the club scenes. Do you know the name and artist of that song? It seems to be played regularly when you are in the DJ Booth with a girl? Strange coincidence, ehh...
Lesbian Superstars 5 - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Sep 4 2005 : 10:08PM
