New Pornstar Interviews - [more]
Introducing Natasha Carter

"Dirty talk is a really big thing for me."
Participate...

log in
register
Browse...

Etiquette
Active Topics
Popular Topics
Member List
Search
All Forums > The Feature Side > The Feature Side Forum Page 44 > Film is Dead, Long Live Film
AuthorPost
john lyons
Senior Member


Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome
1188 Posts
1/08
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 2:32AM
If anyone’s been keeping up with the biz press lately or happened to be perusing this month’s issue of AVN, they might have noticed a little news blurb buried on the bottom of page fifty something, beneath the who bought who nonsense everyone seems so interested in, that is probably one the most important events to occur in the cinema world so far this century.
The article was headlined something like “AVN Awards to Discontinue “Film” Categories” and went on to say that for all future nominations and awards given by AVN, there will be no distinction made between those productions shot on film and those shot on video. OK, big deal, right???
No! AVN was the only award show or festival to separate awards be medium used to create the work. In doing so, they were also the only awards show or festival to acknowledge the intrinsic aesthetic differences between the mediums. Now that they are no longer separating film from video, I fear less people will shoot film out of the knowledge that they will not even stand the possibility of receiving an award which in part honors the medium in itself.
Furthermore, the merging of the two mediums propels the dangerous public misconception that film and video are interchangeable. THEY ARE NOT! Each has a set of aesthetic qualities unique to the medium itself. Neither one cam mimic the other.
Don’t get me wrong. I love video (I’ve just finished a video feature) but I also love film and I feel that both ought to be respected individually as they are separate mediums.
It really saddened me to see Paul Thomas get on stage to receive the last award for Best Film. Especially in what really could be a revitalization of porno chic and a possible, if only partial return to theatrically exhibited hardcore films, now more than ever there ought to be a push to continue shooting on film.
Alas this is not just the case in X Rated as now nearly 45% of all Hollywood productions are shot on video and over 90% are edited digitally.
So, as Paul Thomas so bleakly stated last night, is film dead?
Yes. Film is dead on all circuits. It hasn’t been buried yet as people are still flocking in to stare at its open coffin, but yes. It is dead. It’s a shame too not as much for the loss of the medium but for the sheer lack of interest in its passing.
So then the final question is: is the future of cinema looking bleak?
No. The cinematic horizon is just as majestic as ever but the beautiful sunset of yesteryear has been replaced with a group of black, cookie-cutter high rises.
Film is dead…Long Live Film!

[Link]
BlackSix All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 2:50AM
What I think is significant about this is that by dropping film the industry is in many ways giving up the ghost of a chance that porn could ever be a legitimate 'art' in the the same way written pornography is (Sade, Bataille, Nicholson Baker, Roth, Apollinaire, Jean De Berg, etc).
Not because you can't make a good film on DV, but because I think this is a reflection of the mentality that porn should no longer attempt to make real features. Features have long been associated with shooting on film.
Of course this is a long lost battle, it became clear decades ago that most porn fans don't care for storylines or characters.
The ironic thing is that in the last decade or so there have been 'mainstream' directors (Breillat, Dumont, Carax, Von Trier, Mitchell, Winterbottom, etc) who have tried to integrate pornographic sex into their feature films.
For over a decade in the 70s the same experiment was attempted by the 'other side' (ie. the porn side) and only now that it has been abandoned is there interest from the mainstream; even if it is the art house mainstream.
Go To Top of page
[Link]
Tristram
Member

80 Posts
2/06
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 2:34PM
The only real loser here is Vivid, they'll have a harder time winning AVN awards once the film categories are dropped. If you look at the nominations for the film categories this year it was just silly, a small number of Vivid films getting most of the nominations. These categories just had Paul Thomas competing with himself.
Film when done well can look great, but that's never been the case with these Vivid features anyway, so there's no reason to keep an incentive for them to produce them. At any rate, you can certainly still shoot an ambitious quality feature on digital video and since mainstream is moving that way as well the death of film as a porn medium won't drive any further edge between porn and mainstream.
Film in porn has been dead for quite some time, it just became official now.
Go To Top of page
[Link]
john lyons
Senior Member

Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome
1188 Posts
1/08
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 3:28PM
"Film when done well can look great, but that's never been the case with these Vivid features anyway, so there's no reason to keep an incentive for them to produce them."
Agreed. Vivid does lousy transfers of their film features, but even so, I give them a lot of credit for allowing those directors such as Thomas to at least shoot on film.
"At any rate, you can certainly still shoot an ambitious quality feature on digital video and since mainstream is moving that way as well the death of film as a porn medium won't drive any further edge between porn and mainstream."
But that's exactly them problem. Yes, of course video can and should be used to shoot features, shorts, or anything else. The problem is that both the mainstream and porn don't respect the differences between the mediums. Video cannot replace film simply because it is not the same medium. My argument is based in aesthetics not commercial trends. Hollywood's push towards video is just as big of a problem as porn's.
Go To Top of page
[Link]
wusshater
spunkdthemovie.com

I'd rather go to work and be abused by others than stay at home and abuse myself
197 Posts
10/06
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 3:48PM
There should still be a "Best Film" category, but that is all. I think it is completely stupid to differentiate between film and video for other categories - "Best Actress - Film", and "Best Actress - Video", for example. The acting and the performances have nothing to do with the medium on which the movie was shot. If Penny Flame wins Best Actress - Film and Eva Angelina wins Best Actress - Video, then who really won Best Actress?
Go To Top of page
[Link]
 
BigBobxxx
Senior Member

2681 Posts
5/04
Posted - Jan 14 2008 : 6:50PM
Exactly the correct solution.
Go To Top of page
[Link]
BlackSix All-Star Supporter
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07
Posted - Jan 15 2008 : 1:59AM
I agree, it would be best to simply have a 'best film' or 'best feature' category.
BTW am I the only one who finds the niche awards 'Best Anal/Cum farting/Group Sex scene with Squirting' silly?
Edited by - BlackSix on 1/15/2008 2:00:55 AM
Edited by - BlackSix on 1/15/2008 2:01:15 AM
Go To Top of page
[Link]
john lyons
Senior Member

Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome
1188 Posts
1/08
Posted - Jan 17 2008 : 11:20AM
Totally! I couldn't stop laughing when that ridiculous automated voice happily announced "Ass Blasting Felching Anal Whores: There are Some Things Even an Asshole Shouldn't Attempt" had won an award!
Go To Top of page
[Link]
All Forums > The Feature Side > The Feature Side Forum Page 44Film is Dead, Long Live Film

Previous topic: Annette Haven's orgasm in Hot Pursuit
Next topic: 300



Jump To: