What's going on at Evil Angel? Some of their AVN award winning films have scenes lasting over 40 minutes? Haven't been able to review them because they're not internet rentable because of multiple disc content. I thought 30 minute scenes were repetitive and tedious; 45 minutes that's truly incredible.
Anybody watched these and have any feedback? Ass Worship 7 - 6 scenes - 4 hrs 4 min total Invasion 2 - 7 scenes - 3 hrs 30 min total Slut Puppies - 6 scenes - 3 hrs 21 min total Service Animals 21 - 9 scenes - 5 hrs 16 minutes total
Is this a new trend in marathon scenes and epic porn videos?
I'm sure most gonzo directors shoot that much material or more,it's just that Evil Angel doesn't leave much on the cutting room floor.I appreciate the extra footage,even if it's not necessary.
I think that a lot of director's wanted to make longer movies for a very long time. If you go back and look at old Evil Angel movies, you will notice that virtually all of them were 2 hours 19 minutes long. That's because that was the longest that they could put onto a single quality video tape.
I'd be willing to bet that, when editing their movies for content, all of those directors ended up with movies longer than 2hr 19 min long and then they would have to continue editting for time (while removing content that they would have preferred to keep).
DVD has eliminated that problem. It also has made dual "media" releases economically feasable. DVD's cost less to replicate than VHS and the packaging for a dual disc release is essentially no more expensive than that for a single disc release, while the packaging for dual VHS releases is very expensive.
[Link]
tritone Deactivated User
1009 Posts 4/03
Posted - Feb 18 2006 : 1:26PM
What do you mean "not internet rentable"? I have rented many multi-disc Evil Angel things from xrentdvd.com without a problem at all. Who do you rent from?
I'm hoping for 8 hours soon! Can you imagine a Tiffany and Cumpany that stretched out like a lazy saturday fuckfest, with conversation and food and real orgasms and such. Watch the BTS in Anal Romance with Manuel and Tiffany for an idea of what I'm hoping for. I think Steve Holmes or Manuel could do this easily. All in high def of course...
I like the way Rocco's movies are set up, particularly, with about two really long scenes per (certain) DVDs, and an epic bonus scene tacked onto the extras. The scene can go thru permutations, so it breaks into smaller scenes or the ratios shift, but it still has a different vibe. I tend to really dislike the way most porn is compartmentalized. It's so fucking BORING. Yet, even the best directors appear stuck with it or to it. I do see -- mostly Evil directors -- get creative with the format sometimes. Let it rip!
Maybe the directors at EA feel more free to edit in a way that fits their own vision. Although each owns their own lines so I don't know why it would be an issue. It certainly makes individual personality and style more obvious than on some of the chop jobs out there. If true, it might also give EA an edge in signing some of those directors out there whose line they would like to carry.
For me quality is always better than quantity. I would rather buy a 140 minutes movie with 3 very good scenes rather than 6 lesser scenes. For me great scenes are always too short.
I don't see any direct correlation between the length of the scene and the level of interest. As Skronker & Threesomebody point out, it depends on whose movies' you're watching.
Way too many directors are either happy or obliged to stick with a formula approach and accept that a "scene" consists of some permutation of tease/oral/fuck/anal/cum (with optional DP) and nothing more, so it is understandable that you might consider 30 minute scenes to be "repetitive and tedious".
This is the real strength of the Evil Angel set up in that the directors are free to express themselves without having to adopt a "house style". As, for example, Rocco Siffredi, John Stagliano and Joey Silvera demonstrate, with a modicum of creativity and imagination it is simple to break free from this formula, and I echo Skronker's call for other directors to rip it up, and sharpish. And that doesn't mean just copy them...
In other companies compression is a problem and you have to keep it a certain length or it gets compressed before its just like yall figured it had to be 2 hrs cause of vhs
Nothing says I love you so much as a tongue in the ass. 2884 Posts 1/03
Posted - Feb 19 2006 : 8:40PM
Kami, compression is the same problem for everybody. If a company has a policy of 5 scenes or no policy at all, they still both have the same 3+ hrs. of quality video available. Directors like Rocco have always chosen to show epic scenes as opposed to tightly formatted ones, so he'll only show three scenes instead of five. There are still companies that want to stay within the 2:20 of VHS because they haven't given up on that media yet. They'll fill the DVD with extras to compensate, but if their mandate is 5 or 6 scenes at 2:20 it forces the director to edit more than he might like. Sometimes having the time limitation forces an editor to make a tighter product and having more time to play with brings out the excessiveness in scenes. It's all in how you use it.
Rodney Moore has had scenes over 40 minutes in some of his movies dating back to 1990s. Often these scenes involve set up skits that act like tease segments or have elaborate combinations of activities like mini-scenes within the scenes, driven by the plot of the skit. He is really creative in this way. I like it!
the first scene I cut was 42 minutes, I thought it was genius, haha I was wrong *edited to add it took me a full year to realize it, and I lacked the experience that these directors have
A stage we all go through when learning. What is that saying about not knowing enough to know I didn't know enough? Or learning enough to realize I know nothing?
I think the increasing length of sex scenes is one of the more interesting elements in video porn these days. Stagliano was probably the first to really do it in some of his late 1980's features (which used to run 2+ hours, considered insane at the time). With him it wasn't a question of editing, it seemed to me, but a desire to retain a more natural sense of continuity in the sex scenes, as well as bringing them closer to "real time." Some of you who watch older features have noticed that the five minute, heavily edited sex scene was the norm in those days, and fans got sick of it real quick. What you got was usually 30 minutes total of sex and 60 minutes of inane dialogue and bad acting (can anyone say Paul Thomas?). in other words, the continuity of the narative was maintained at the expense of the continuity of the sex. History has shown that most fans prefer it the other way around.
But the amateur sex craze of that era was a factor too, and this was probably a combination of no editing craft and the desire to pad feature length amateur videos. I dusted off a lot of the old Pearl Necklace stuff not long ago and there were plenty of 30-40 minute scenes, slowly paced, looped, etc. The pros of the era couldn't believe anyone would sit through that kind of thing, but those tapes sold well, because people were tired of bad features with no action in them.
In general, I think most scenes today, both by EA directors and otherwise, are too long. More doesn't equal better. Ten minutes of robotic anal in the usual 2-3 positions doesn't equal quality. But if, as Gabriel and Scronker say, there is a long scene which encompasses a series of transitions, where something new and unexpected keeps happening, then the length is justified. I'm all for unconventional sequences in the sex scenes--surprises are the essence of good porn. The question we might be asking is this: whether hit or miss, why is it that only EA directors seem to "mix up" the usual sequences? If what Silvera and Leslie and Rocco often do in their scenes is effective, why isn't everyone doing it, particularly now with the move to the dvd medium?
Your post was a little wordy but had some great thoughts like many videos we see. I don't go to 3-hour movies, don't practice 40 minute sex scenes at home, think the best pornos I have ever watched were the shorter ones with natural flowing scenes that culminated in a real female orgasm which to me is far more titillating than seeing some jerkoff jerk off.
Only thing I don't like about this idea is that if a particular video happens to have actresses or actors that I'm not all that fond of, well...if you only have two or three long scenes.....and you don't like one of them...you only have one or two more chances to save the value of the video for you. At least if they have 5 or six shorter scenes, you have more of a chance of finding something ytou like.
That's one way, another way is to have just one girl per DVD, which makes more sense. One artist per title, just like in the music biz. Can't pornstars have their own "albums" like rockstars? People aren't interested in a compilation that has Pink Floyd on tracks #3 and #8, they want Dark Side of the Moon .
You might be right, Jacco. Perhaps I should have said, most "raincoaters" prefer it the other way around. Perhaps the audience for hardcore video has become broader these days, and many of these viewers like the classics because they are used to "real" films, and the classics fit that bill.
Actually, I don't think most of the best classic porn films ever sacrificed sex for story, nor do I think they shorted fans on sex action. Scenes were shorter, but there were a lot more of them. What characterizes the best features circa 1970-85 is that they combined the two things--sex and narrative--more seamlessly than pornographers have done since, and used the story elements to make the sex more erotic, rather than detract from it. Also, because most of them were "real" filmmakers, they also managed pacing, editing, etc. a lot better. And they had the advantage of working from film stock, which creates a different viewing experience than video.
It's also possible that people today have finally become bored with sex without any context. Or with the same kind of context, which a lot of fans are increasingly turned off by.
You are brilliant, simply brilliant. People today do have shorter attention spans and are easily bored. Everything does move faster now than it did 30 years ago. Watching a 10-minute blow job at the beginning of every scene bores me silly. Watching a dick go in and out of a pussy or asshole for 10 minutes non-stop is boring, uninteresting, unimaginative. How else can you get to a 40 minute scene other than bore the shit outta me? Watching people go through the same sequence of positions, ATM's etc in all 5 scenes in a video is boring, repetitive, unimaginative. Yes, some of the classics did make the sex scenes far more interesting. The story didn't interfere in many of them like it seems to in all of the films nowadays. Green Door is one of my favorites (68 minutes, 7 scenes), but I hate Deep Throat so Classics can be just as bad. I appreciate the directors today who can put together an interesting dvd with 5 different 20-minute scenes. I prefer gonzo because most stories today are so distracting from the sex. I don't need to, want to and won't spend 4 hours watching a porno to get my money's worth or for any other reason. The favorite tools I have are the skip forward button and the eject button and I rarely watch a dvd all the way through without using them.
I like the scenes where the performers stick to each position for a while and get a good groove going. It doesn't bore me at all, as long as the action is captured well and the female is enjoying it. One of my pet peeves in porn is guys who keep pulling it out and pausing repeatedly. It interrupts the flow of the action, and seeing all of the ATMs or PTMs does not make the scene hotter. In my opinions, ATMs and PTMs are more effective if used occasionally and only in moderation.
I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but I don't pull out and pause every few seconds while having sex. I'm not sure why things are done differently in porn. Does anyone know?
Posted - Feb 18 2006 : 8:08AM
