Mia Malkova defintely seems to be too sweet for porn. Her fresh face and vivacious nature are definitely two of her most appealing characteristics. It will be a real shame if she loses this. I guess there's a real risk of this, especially with the porn biz the way it is now.
^Nice, I haven't had a chance to see her scenes yet. I primairly watch JAV (Japanese Adult Video) because the film quality is so good, the scenes are interesting and it's amazing how many truly beautiful women there are. Even an "average" star in most JAV is gorgeous.
"My asshole just naturally opens up because that's what I want, I'm so horny for it" 8498 Posts 1/13
Posted - Mar 21 2013 : 2:34PM
Abella Anderson is waaaay too fucking hot. For me, she is one of those select few stars you just need to look at and instantly feel the need to bash one out. If you saw her on the street and you didn't know her you'd think she was some catwalk supermodel used to advertise perfume or clothes. The smooth skin, the penetrating eyes, the sweet smile, the perfect teeth, the naturally pouting lips, the beautiful sleek hair, the incredible body, the awesome ass, and the flawless natural complexion. In essence, abso-fucking-lutely irresistible and she loved anal. She really did belong into the 'Too Good To Be True' category of pornstars with the likes of Anikka Albrite, Tori Black, Mia Malkova, and Bree Olson. Too bad she retired though, she was really on a roll .
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Mar 22 2013 : 12:58PM
So many girls today would qualify for a "too pretty for porn" assessment. For the life of me, though, I don't know why so many of them overdo the tattoos and piercings? These things tend to detract from being "too pretty." In any event, the overall attractiveness of today's pornchicks, taken as a group, is really impressive by historical standards. There have always been drop-dead gorgeous pornstars, but never so many. In my day, and over the years, girls like Annette Haven, Shauna Grant and Racquel Darrian just leapt-out at you and were jaw-dropping. It's hard to explain this to perverts who didn't live through experience (i.e. just how hot they were, and how they stood out). Today, Annette, Shauna and Racquel would still be regarded as "too pretty," but there are probably 50-100 girls that are also at their level. What I would find more telling, setting aside the single consideration of "too pretty," is how many girls that have the money, connections and education to do whatever they want (i.e. the qualifications) choose to do porn over more traditional careers? There are plenty of smart pornchicks that use their porn careers to put themselves through school and/or get the training and credentials to move onto the next phase of their lives once they retire from porn, but I don't know that we have so many girls with an MBA from Harvard choosing to do porn as their first choice. FYI, I consider porn to be a viable profession and career. The girls that succeed in porn can build a very lucrative career and nice lives for themselves -- and I mean far better than the vast majority of jobs and careers considered mainstream.
"My asshole just naturally opens up because that's what I want, I'm so horny for it" 8498 Posts 1/13
Posted - Mar 22 2013 : 2:58PM
It is an entirely subjective thing. I for one am a big fan and believe they make the woman more attractive. It would appear to be becoming more of an acceptable thing in porn, which is great news because it shows it is becoming more of an open-minded and less judgmental industry. Just look at two of the most sought after stars in the last year, Christy Mack and Bonnie Rotten, and the rave reviews they've been receiving not only on their performances but their all-round incredible natural beauty. To me that speaks volumes and I for one am quietly optimistic that it will continue and become more diverse over time.
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Mar 22 2013 : 3:46PM
The topic is about "too pretty for porn," not what individuals find "attractive" and/or "acceptable" within the context of the porn industry. Look at what are considered to be the standards of beauty within the mainstream industries that sell attractive "too pretty" women to the masses for a living. When we start seeing the Victoria's Secret models looking like Bonnie Rotten, then our societal standard for what is "too pretty" will have changed. Bonnie Rotten has a smoking body and is, indeed, hot and attractive. But, she is not "too pretty." Playboy centerfolds are "too pretty"; Biker chicks covered in tattoos and piercings -- no matter how hot, attractive and desirable they may be -- just don't play track on the "too pretty" scale. Also, consider what is the subtext of the "too pretty for porn" question. So, Bonnie Rotten would win "too hot to be prom queen," but not "too pretty for porn."
"My asshole just naturally opens up because that's what I want, I'm so horny for it" 8498 Posts 1/13
Posted - Mar 22 2013 : 8:18PM
^Honestly, I was slightly deviating from the topic of the thread and was just addressing your views on tattooed girls as a separate subject in itself, rather than suggesting that Christy or Bonnie are "too pretty for porn". It may have been the way I worded my post. I agree with you on the points you made about them being "too pretty" (putting aside the fact that there is no such thing for the sake of discussion), but on the subject of tattoos degrading their appearance - or performers in general - I respectfully disagree. Hence, why I explained why I disagreed and for what reasons. Hope that clears things up.
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Mar 22 2013 : 8:44PM
Is it possible that girls can overdo tattoos and piercings -- as that was my point (not that pornchicks have any tattoos and piercings)?Does the quality of the tattoos matter to you, or at all? How about location. Are tattoos on the face consistent with being "too pretty"? I maintain that there is a commonly understood standard for "pretty." We need to stay with the concept of what "pretty" means, so that we don't keep dancing around how many angels are dancing on the head of a pin. "Attractive" is not the same as "pretty"... "Hot" is not the same as "pretty"... "Sexy" is not the same as "pretty"... "Stylish" is not the same as "pretty"... These words have their own meanings and connotations. Hope this clears things up
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Mar 24 2013 : 9:38AM
There is no such thing as "too pretty" for porn. It almost sounds like some of you guys would prefer fat, ugly, hairy, and toothless wonders for your performers.
[Link]
JackSparrow Deactivated User
7235 Posts 7/11
Posted - Mar 24 2013 : 11:37AM
^ damn right rosco ,but i would say too ugly for porn is a possibility ,but if i rethink that some of the male dudes are ugly so that would speak not for my theory with the ugly part ;)
^^&^ Yeah I don't know why a thread like this exist. It's almost like saying that the women being named are so beautiful that they could have had done anything other than porn while the others are so ugly that they were doomed to a career in porn. I always assumed that most girls choose to do porn and the only thing about their look is that they may appeal to a wider audience than other girls and therefore will be more popular.
"My asshole just naturally opens up because that's what I want, I'm so horny for it" 8498 Posts 1/13
Posted - Mar 25 2013 : 5:37AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought it was established earlier that "Too pretty for porn" is not a judgment on a performers choice to enter porn because of their good looks. I prefer to see it as a way of saying the that some women are so hot or so cute that it's like a dream come true that they do porn or that some women you think are so good looking they would not look out of place as a supermodel or an A-list celebrity. The way I interpret this discussion is that we are not judging the performers for being in porn - as in, they could have chosen a more socially acceptable job because of how attractive they are - but rather we are expressing how thankful we are that these women who could have chosen anything other than porn, but they did chose porn and did so willingly because they want to fuck on camera. So, as I see it, saying somebody is "Too pretty for porn" is a poorly phrased compliment. I think what it really means is "How lucky we are that this girl is so hot she could be a supermodel but she chose to do porn instead because she wants to fuck on camera". I think if we look at it this way we can talk freely and positively without having to worry about appearing judgmental. Edited by - Mackochist on 3/25/2013 5:38:52 AM
[Link]
Todd Gack Deactivated User
"Oh, of course. Todd Gack." 849 Posts 6/12
Posted - Mar 25 2013 : 10:33AM
Too pretty is far too subjective to qualify with too many potential names you could list. IMO it's easier to note girls who are "just pretty enough for porn". Those would be the D-listers with meth mouths who weren't attractive enough to do features but would fit in just fine by getting pissed on by Max Hardcore, being slapped around by the facialabuse guys, or having their assholes gaped in gangbangs. I will say that in the last decade the number of girls with above-average looks has increased in porn while the type I mentioned have decreased, at least from what I can tell as a casual viewer.
I agree with most of this, but I prefer the ones not attractive enough for a feature. These girls, many are amateurs, and escort thankfully, will usually be getting nasty Right away, so we never have to see a thread wondering if one of these girls is gonna do anal, or interracial. The competition, and demand for perfection makes it necessary for these girls to do more,they know it and most dont mind and enjoy it if they are Submissive. Some have hot fuckable bodies, combined with a really nasty ( in a good way) attitude, these sluts are great.. That said, some "perfect" looking girls have gone on to do some really great nasty stuff.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Mar 26 2013 : 6:02AM
^I find this ironic since most of the girls who I see on feature boxcovers by companies like Wicked and Vivid are not attractive to me. Most of these girls are only getting feature roles with these companies because of name recognition, not their looks. As strange as it is, with the way porn is now, a girl doesn't have to be the hottest girl in porn to be a big name, as long as enough people know who she is. A girl who's a 10 may not be anywhere near as popular as the broad who's a 5, but still manages to get feature roles just because she's been in the business a lot longer and has a bigger following. Unfortunately, the porn business now is all about name value, not looks. For this reason, I've found that the hottest girls in porn tend to be the ones who don't get as much work, and don't stick around as long. And again, there's no such thing as "too pretty for porn."
Russian newbie, Sheron, can be a contender in this elusive category: http://www.eurobabeindex.com/sbandoindex/sheron.html http://ddfnetwork.com/preview/17351/untitled.html
My whole way of thinking about "Too Pretty" has changed since I saw the "PORNSTARS WITHOUT MAKEUP" article. Not saying those girls where ugly but I noticed that some of the girls who started out looking best naturally without all the makeup didn't all end up looking the best when they were made up compared to some of the girls who didn't start out looking as good naturally. In other words, the naturally better looking girls didn't always end up the being the prettiest when the makeup was applied and and all was said and done. So the girls who I think are "too pretty" may just be the best made up.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Mar 29 2013 : 9:40AM
This is exactly the same way I feel. As I said before, the people who think that a girl can be "too pretty for porn" must only want to see ugly broads doing porn.
I'm laughing at some of these photos. A lot of these girls look like the belong in porn. I think the only girl I've ever seen and said wow she definitely doesn't need porn is Tori Black. I'm not saying these other girls aren't pretty or hot but tori looks like a model and there is a difference to me.
A friend of mine used to be a fashion photographer. He once told me that the models were NOT in fact especially beautiful, and that without makeup they were fairly bland looking. According to him, a good model had a face like a canvas that could take on whatever look the photographer was aiming for.
^ In my mind Ashlynn looks so much like Bree Olsen if you mention Ashlynn you gotta mention Bree too. I've never gotten into Ashlynn for that reason. If a person likes that look, why watch the vanilla version when the better performing twin is more readily available? You might not agree but that's how I see it.
I enjoyed both Bree and Ashlynn when they were performing. Even though Bree was sluttier, and a more outrageous performer, I always liked Ashlynn's more reserved performances.
Yeah, that's true. Tyra Banks has said she doesn't look like Tyra Banks when he wakes up in the morning and she really isn't as goodlooking as the finished product. Makeup plays a big part of a pornstar's look. Two girls that come to mind are Marie Luv and Jana Oso. I've seen Jana in some bigger budget porn and think to myself that (facially) she could easily be on cover of a glamour mag. With Marie I think she could give Halle Berry a run for her money in the looks department. But then I would see both of them in lower budget porn and then think to myself if I saw them walking down the street I wouldn't give either a second look. Apparently not every makeup artist in porn is/was as good as some others. Also, I think some people can't really tell the difference between makeup and plastic surgery. They see a pornstar or celeb looking different than they used to and immediately say/think that person had work done when it's just she's wearing her makeup differently.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 10:29PM
I've said that numerous times. I've seen Gisele up close and personal when she wasn't in character or with make up on and she didn't warrant a second look.
[Link]
The Douchebag Deactivated User
32 Posts 3/13
Posted - Apr 2 2013 : 12:32AM
There is no such think as "Too Pretty For Porn" actually it should be "The Prettier The Better". More and more hot girls are entering porn and that's good. "Worse than a asswhole, not quite a motherfucker."
[Link]
adultsurfer Self-removed
1902 Posts 8/11
Posted - Apr 8 2013 : 8:47AM
...and a suberb ASS!!! ;)
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Apr 8 2013 : 12:49PM
So if people are complaining about good looking women in porn, I'm assuming they'd rather see this. [Image not found DB]
Sometimes life is goofier than a monkey on ether 12073 Posts 7/10
Posted - Apr 8 2013 : 1:21PM
^ What's her ethnicity? Does she do anal? Does she do IR? Does she do DAP? Does she do double vag? Edited by - PornStarNamedBuckNaked on 4/8/2013 1:25:46 PM
Kelsey Michaels is incredibly beautiful and that smile is so adorable! Check her out! PLEASE recommend any girls that carry the of charm or look like Kelsey. She is so perfect!!!
I definetly would say, Tori Black, Sasha Grey and Bobbi Starr !
[Link]
La Lunitica Deactivated User
Zenogias 181 Posts 6/13
Posted - Aug 11 2013 : 12:28AM
Tori Black qualifies, and too pretty for B/G porn would be Shyla Jennings, Malena Morgan, Elle Alexandra. Zoe Voss was a former model and didn't seem to belong looks-wise. For the record, I don't think by porn fan standards, any Asian girl would be considered too pretty since they are universally objectified.
Zoe voss. I literally get anxiety looking at her face she is so pretty. There is just something about her face and eyes that makes my heart skip a beat. I don't think I have ever seen in person or in a photo of a celebrity , a model, etc anyone that matches her
Most porn stars look average without their makeup, and I date prettier women... It's what they do in front of the camera which makes them beautiful. That said, Kitty Jane is a babe: Edited by - properM on 8/25/2013 12:08:08 PM
[Link]
rtj2v0a Self-removed
Sports is to war as pornography is to sex. ― Jonathan Haidt 222 Posts 10/13
Posted - Oct 21 2013 : 1:35AM
What should the hypothetical girls who are "too pretty for porn" do?
I don't remember names but I have seen a few scenes with absoutely stunningly beautiful girls. And their beauty was a big distraction; she was always looking in the camera and the cameraman was always showng her face. Kinda similar to what happens with bigbooty girls or bigtitty girls: the cameraman gets fixated on one bodypart. But it's porn so booty fixation and titty fixation are perfectly acceptable. But if a girl is so distractingly pretty that the cameraperson can't properly shoot her fucking, then, yes she is too pretty for porn.
Alexis Love Bobbi Starr Claire Castel Jada Stevens Laure Sainclair Rebecca Linares Remy Lacroix Taylor St Claire And Many moreeeeee.. I thank all of them! Edited by - gamiant on 1/26/2014 9:10:34 PM
Forbidden Love (Love Her Films) - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Jan 17 2013 : 8:38PM
.
