I have to get this off my chest. Now. I hate when a girl has really phenomenal abs and she keeps her skirt on pulled up around her stomach. WTF is that? Generally, you don't get abs like that without really working at it so you'd think they'd want to show them off. You'd also think a director would realize this is porn gold and he's treating it like an empty aluminum can. Is there anything hotter than watching nice abs flex while a girl is riding a cock? Is there anything that could possibly utterly ruin it more than keeping the clothes on and covering them?
I'm with you. "Rumpled cloth around the midsection" does nothing for me. I'd put "Panties pulled to the side & all twisted up" in the same WTF category, along with "Lingering skin marks from tight clothes for the whole scene". I read that Russ Meyer would tell his actresses to be nude for a full hour before shooting because of that issue.
everyone is different. Personally I don't care. I find clothing more attractive than totally nude. Some people like cake, some like pie Edited by - boogieknight on 12/22/2010 11:04:10 PM
But we have niche fetish sites for that. Though I do agree that sometimes that's what I want, I don't want it often enough that I want to have people covering up their best features with pointless clothing items in every movie.
No matter what size the tits are....play with them.... 732 Posts 12/08
Posted - Dec 23 2010 : 5:09AM
Stretch marks, section scar, fat ripple or even a sticky out belly button may be some of the reasons; certain performers always seem to leave a garment around their midriff. I can understand what you’re saying though, a fit body needs to be adored, but I would imagine the scenario of the movie or scene would dictate the clothing. Maybe movies should have a 'fully nude' tag like lap dance clubs, lol.
Just another bare bum in the shiower 1739 Posts 12/04
Posted - Dec 23 2010 : 6:19AM
Yeah, leaving a dress/top around a mid-section usually indicates an unsightly tattoo, scar or pot belly. I see no reason to keep the clothing on (unless it is a uniform/costume).
If it makes a girl feel more comfortable, or if she likes to wear gear around her middle - maybe that just makes her feel sexier and you as the viewer benefit from that?
I'm more with RP. How many girls have fantastic abs without trying? If they've worked for their fitness they are usually keen to show off. I suspect it's the directors who are wasting an opportunity, or miscasting for the scene they're shooting. Yes, I like clothed sex and fetish clothing scenes, but why choose a girl with fantastic abs to do a scene where her abs are covered?
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Mike Adriano has this really bad habit of making the women in his movies.. He's a really good n im a huge fan.. but i really hate it when he gets these amazingly hot women n then makes them keep their clothes on.
Clothes off but shoes on, I do like those micro thongs that accentuate the ass but even they have to come off. I want to see the rump bump without interference same goes for the other body parts I want to see them move regardless of imperfections.
Clothes can really make a scenario/ fantasy - uniforms/ whatever. However, if the girl has a tight body then she needs to get naked, basically. Exceptions can be made for a cute pair of tennis shoes, a school tie or other incidentals that keep the fantasy going but don't distract from tits n ass.
Well, yeah but what I mean is when you know this particular girl has great abs because you've either seen them before, you saw them on the cover, or you saw them earlier in the scene somehow. When there's no doubt about it, that's when it drives me nuts. Nice abs one of those things that really turns me on so when I see that one of the girls has them, I can't wait to see them and then the whole thing is ruined. I really don't mind girls with softer tummies. That turns me on too but that isn't a rarity in porn. Really defined abs are.
Honestly, I don't think that's it in most cases. I think that generally, the girls leave all of these kinds of decisions up to the director. My guess is if the director thought of it and asked if she'd mind taking it off, most of them would. It's porn, after all. Most people probably don't go into making porn with the expectation of keeping their clothes on. If there was a reason for it. If she was hiding an unsightly scar or something, I'd certainly understand. I just don't get it when they have a great bod. Edited by - randomprecision on 12/24/2010 12:07:36 AM
I love the female form - even if they aren't a size 2. Frankly if they are too big (like as in hefty) where there excess body weight would bother me being seen... Then I'm not going to be turned on by their bodies anyway, regardless if they cover up part of it. I loathe clothing left on a girl. I understand if it's one of those "fresh out of HS" type videos where they are going for the schoolgirl look... Still I hate that... But I understand some might be into it. But other than those niche plays, it really aggravates me to see a gorgeous woman, and her chest covered up partially either by a shirt pulled up, or a bra pulled partially down, or a shirt around her stomach. Seriously... wtf.
Maybe. But they're not paying me to watch them fuck the way they want to. I'm generally watching because I want to get off. Edited by - randomprecision on 12/24/2010 2:41:12 PM
I think it's the result of a sort of "porn blindness". The directors/cameramen are unable to recognize or appreciate the subtle unique things, or can't be bothered to take notice of them. It's not only abs which get overlooked. It's big clits, great legs, small perky boobs, strong muscularity, exotic clothing, etc. I believe shooters should make an effort to point out to the viewer, those unique things. I have a SSBBW scene which is (unintentionally) hilarious because the cameraman fails to alter his standard technique and standard camera distance and standard zoom setting. The result is a disaster because the camera dude is too damn close and (apparently) too damn clueless to know he needs to move back further in order to properly shoot a girl who is 2 times larger than the "typical" porn chick. Many of these guys seem to be working on autopilot. Autopilot just says "aim here, aim there, zoom here, point there". Autopilot is unable to think/notice: "Hey, those are some well-developed calves, lets take a moment to show them off."
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 2:07PM
I'll go back to my orginal assertion that it's just laziness or apathy or some companies just don't care. Maybe it's my fading eyesight, but can someone tell me what "flaws" are on Lexi Belle that need covering up? Here's a snippet from a recent review: Lexi looks great giving head to both of the guys, but for some reason we have jerky camera work. “Aaah, guys. It’s a very cute Lexi Belle giving two guys head, aim the camera at her face and hold it there! It’s not rocket science! If you’re bored, put the camera on a tripod and grab a bagel.” We then moved to the MFM. For some reason, the guys pull her panties down to about mid thigh and she starts riding cowgirl while fully clothed. Again I say, “AAAh guys, you’re not in the back seat of a car and under a time deadline, you can undress the girl, we’ll wait.” I mean really, at this point we have extended shots of stretched out panties, Lexi’s ass, and lots and lots of cock and balls shots, with an emphasis on lots of cock and balls penetrating Lexi. It’s probably ¾ of the way through the scene before we lose the stretched out pink panties and the top, but by this time I was tired of the amateur camera work and a un naked Lexi so I hit the FF button to the popshot.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 2:27PM
I think you're assuming what you don't like is universal, I don't care if this is done, I suspect some directors just leave it up to the performers and in the spur of the moment they're not thinking of removing every article of clothing.
No. But I am assuming that there are more people want to see naked women than there are people who want to see women having sex with half their clothes still on and bunched up in an untidy mess covering what most people would see as a pleasing part of their body. I think the mass of porn probably should be made (with a few exceptions) according to what appeals to most people. We have had and will probably always have a problem getting porn made for people with unusual fetishes or interests but that doesn't mean everything imaginable should be put in porn that is intended for everyone.
The first time I saw a skirt hiked up around the gut, it seemed totally urgent and hot, like I'm sure they always intend it to be. Lately, any such sense of urgency has evaporated out of the scenes, which are all geared to be endurance sessions instead. So if she's fit, yeah, lose the clothes from around the midrif. However I'd say her top should stay on when she has 'true cone' implants lurking beneath it. If a lass with cones can find an awesome titshirt with great cleavage that makes her look mouthwatering, I say leave that on (or partially on) for as long as possible into the scene, because being framed by that titshirt provides a better show than triangular boobs from the science channel.
I'd like to add my personal list of No-Gos. That's not pathetic at all. I'd consider myself as one of those few people who are still spending lots of money on good porn, so critics should be allowed on some basis: - false advertising. Just saw a teen movie with really "old" women (not teens at all) ... - huge asses on kinda small dicks - HD camera made porn with awful dark colors that could make sense in an horror movie - awful boob jobs on girls who had lovely pert tits before - pubic hair on girls. Might be the new trend but personally not my cub of tea - David Perry - compilations and parodies. I want me gonzo! ;) (not in particular order) Cheers!
Trophy Wives 2 - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Dec 22 2010 : 5:13AM
).