... or do we buy and rent what's produced because that's what's available? There seems to be a high degree of dissatisfaction with a lot of the porn that's produced today, and that's been produced in the past, so I thought I'd ask the question. I lean more toward the side of buying and renting what's out there because it's the only way I can see some of the performers I'm interested in. I find a lot of stuff to be just flat-out uninteresting once I have it. Sometimes it's because the girl is simply a pincushion. Whether it's because she's overwhelmed by what she's doing, or just doesn't know how to fuck, I'm just not interested in a performer who's nothing more than a receptacle. Sometimes it's because the set-up to the scene is just stupid. Big Sausage Pizza? Sleep Creep? Jurassic Cock? Come one. Sometimes it's because the execution of the scene fails to live up to the promise. Think what Amateur Allure could be if someone more inventive was running it. Sometimes it's the presentation: I see way too many pigtails, plaid skirts, fishnet hose, overly made up faces, to pull items from two overused ways of presenting girls: schoolgirls and strippers/whores. I'm also way burned out on girls starting out in flip-flops, denim skirts and t-shirts. And are there no MILFs besides those with big, fake tits and blonde hair? I guess that amounts to a pet-peeve list, and, in case anyone got lost on the way to here, I'll reiterate the question: Do you buy or rent porn the porn that you'd like to see, or do you buy or rent what's being fed to you?
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 28 2008 : 12:56PM
I think it's mostly the first reason you gave. We consume what is out there, and not because that's what we necessarily want or like. Porn directors and producers will tell you they make what consumers out there are demanding, but I don't buy that. They make what they want and when they want it. And they expect us to buy it. In another topic there was an indication that rough stuff in videos is a result of what the female performers want to put on display. Even if it's true, it only demonstrates it has nothing to do with us, but what they want to act out or film. If we enjoy any of it, it is only coincidental in THEIR overall startegy. I don't think movie directors or producers are running marketing studies, make the rounds of shopping centers or stop you in the middle of the street, or even ask you in their websites as to what you like. I recall several months ago Pink'o ran a questionnaire in their website as to what porn consumers wanted to see. I wonder to what extent they changed their "marketing" plans to accomodate the responses they got.
To answer your first question - I would say both. The producers goal is to present the girl of your wet dreams even though you have no idea who she is yet. Even with your favorite actress, there is only so much they can do before you eventually get board with her too.
There's enough choice in DVD and web based porn nowadays that you should only be buying material that you like. If you aren't, I would say you need to look harder and you will almost certainly find what you want. The only time it has become a problem for me, is when a particular girl I like is contracted to a Studio I don't like. Then I guess I have been "fed" her work. Usually I just wait for a particular girl to feature in a series or genre I like, then check out the rest of the cast and if I like them too, buy. I find it's never that difficult, I usually know straight away if I want a title or not. I'm very rarly dissapointed, I actually think the standard of porn movies is better now than it's ever been. Edited by - bobcat on 12/28/2008 1:27:16 PM
The first answer, we buy what is available, because its all that's available. Any choice is fantasy that the consumer constructs. In the sixty's, Swedish Erotica was the first to shoot sex as performance. They followed a formula that has become a schematic for producers today. The only thing I've noticed that has changed due to consumer demand is the male cum-face, and it still manages to show up in a few new productions. There is always a fresh new crop of consumers coming to the market who are blown away by naked bodies. Light the scene like an operating room, include penetration and there you have it.
I have an appetite for sexual fantasy, so I buy and watch porn. For example, if some porn went off the market, I'd simple buy what's remaining. Because there is an abundance of it, so I can be finicky. I don't have an infinite amount of money, an infinite amount of time and an infinite libido, to watch ALL the porn out there. Maybe this was possible back in 1976. I have a collection on my computer hard drive. If I don't like the new material being marketed, I simple don't buy. I'll just re-watch my old collection. Or find something else to do. Go out to the local watering hole, buy a local woman a drink and talk all night, no sex necessary. A shocker, huh? I try to use bulletin boards to like this to make requests of producers, stars and directors. That's all I can do.
Absolutely. There really isn't any reason to complain about not getting what you wnat to see because chances are whatever you like is available in abundance. For the guys complaining that the old stuff is better there's plenty of old stuff available. It's not like someone is taking it away. There are such a wide variety of companies, directors, performers, fetishes/genres out there doing different things with everyone trying to find their own niche how could you not find stuff you like? Let's be honest...the real problem is people who aren't content on watching what they like. They spend too much time worrying about the stuff they don't like seem oddly annoyed with the fact that product they don't like exists. The guys who like interracial can't simply watch the 100s of girls doing interracial and be happy. They've got to fixate on the ones who don't. The guys who complain about the lack of features don't really even support the features that are made and complain about the amount of gonzo titles. Plenty of girls doing anal and plenty of anal themed movies yet the girls who have chosen not to do anal are the ones some guys are most fixated on. This type of mentality goes on with pretty much any type of porn you can name with some people.
I buy/rent/watch porn that doesn't interest me all the time, in order to sift through and see that which does interest me. I think this is true for most porn consumers. The problem, IMHO, is that, the porn studios mistake this for the customers really wanting the content that they are producing. How do they really know why the customer chooses anything. Take fake tits and tattoos. If I'm to believe what the majority of ADT posters say about these topics, natural tits are almost always our preference. And, tattoos? The fewer the better seems to be the consensus. On the other hand, people seem to like anal. I could care less... I would much prefer to see more vaginal sex. So, I tolerate a great deal of anal in movies in order to see the stuff I like. I believe that most studios try to appeal to all bases by including a bit of everything in their movies. One thing I'm pretty sure of, however, is that (using anal as an example), customers that want anal will not tolerate (i.e. buy/rent) product without it. Whereas, those of us who don't care for it will tolerate it, and still buy/rent product that emphasizes anal. Thank God this is also the "Facial Era"! Porn without a facial, is like cookies without milk.
I buy porn based on who is in it... like I am a fan of Cassandra Calogera, Gianna Michaels, Angelina Valentine, Whitney Stevens, Rachael Roxxx, Adrenalynn, Amy Ried, Alexis Texas, Natasha Nice (is she even still in the biz?), and so on... so I buy movies that they are in. Personally, I would like to see way more emphasis of using one star in multiple scenes rather than the current, most often used method of five scenes, five different girls. And I wish it were true that anal was in more videos, because in my experience that is not true at all. I also wish that movies had more variety... maybe it is just the movies I purchase, but more often than not, what I see is five scenes with five girls that are all very similar.
I think one of the problems here is that the internet porn community thinks for whatever reason that they in anyway represent the "norm" if you have more than twenty movies you're not normal. There is nothing wrong with you but you're clearly not the normal guy and should probably stop thinking that you are. I see the same thing with video games and with wrestling. Guys who buy four games a month or who can quote from memory the the titles that Hulk Hogan has won don't understand that casual fans out number us by a rediculous margin.
Casual fans often have different tastes compared to hardcore fans. (Hardcore as in level of interest, not as opposed to softcore.) Message boards are often filled with hardcore fans. Take a look at the mainstream movie industry. What kinds of movies do people who watch a lot of movies like to watch? How often are those films the biggest sellers? High-quality porn, whatever that is, is not necessarily going to be the most popular porn.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 30 2008 : 9:18PM
It's a mixture of both. I don't buy the 'there's something for everyone' argument, as there are lots of areas that modern pornography fails. For example, where is the straight version of Abby Winters? Basically you have Comstock films, and if that doesn't do it for you, you're up shitcreek.
I can look past the stupid premises, sometimes. But Sleep Creep is one stupid idea. I don't want to see a guy having sex with a girl while she's sleeping. Porn has proved that girls will do anything to have sex (or make money) on film or it's probably more correct to say that guys can coerce girls to do anything on film. I have seen enough poolside porn scenes. It's a poor place to shoot a scene. The quality and quantity of movies has waned over the last 2-3 years. The influx of European (Czech, Slovakian, Romaian, etc.) girls in the early 2000's gave a great boost to the big production companies (Red Light, Platinum X, 3rd Degree, Evil Angel) but now those girls are in semi-retirement. Some of the wacky films in the 90's like "New Wave Hookers" and "Party Doll A Go-Go" series were well shot and contained good sex. The early "Buttman" series was different but pretty hot.
Exactly. That just illustrates my point. What someone may consider "High quality porn" may not be the most popular because the majority of porn fans may not care about or buy/rent what's being termed as "high quality" by that person. If someone considers "high quality" to be big production value porn like PIRATES then that's not the type of porn everyone people go for. That particular movie did well but a lot of the "big budget" stuff doesn't exactly set the porn world on fire. Lots of guys don't care about feature or storyline porn. They just want to see the hot girl get banged with little interruption before hand. It's clear that "Gonzo/wall to wall" is the most popular type of porn but some people just swear it's only because not enough features are being made. Right or wrong typically most people simply like what they like and "quality" has little to do with it. If you look at the majority of Oscar films, even though they are supposedly the best (quality) movies done most of them aren't big money makers. Yet, pretty much everyone thinks that the stuff they like is quality stuff. People like what they like and proclaim it's "quality" because they like it. What exactly is a "quality" porn fim? It's different for everyone. Plus...If we all agree what a "quality" porn movie is does that mean we all think that's the "best" type movie that we like to watch? Just because it may be a "quality" production doesn't mean I want to see it.
High-quality, to me, has nothing to do with the type of porn, or preferences. It has everything to do with quality video, with good lighting and sound. Competent camera work and editing matters! A decent set helps too -- even if it's just a rent-a-house. Attractive performers, with some attention paid to make-up, grooming and outfits. The things I've mentioned cost relatively little, yet add so much to the finished product! Edited by - BigBobxxx on 1/1/2009 11:55:31 AM
Sure I can. Judging by what little you described and knowing what I like, yes I have the opinion that I'd find it boring. That's not a fact and it's not a slam against you. It's an opinion based on the info given.Facials might be a bad example. Even if there wasn't an outcry for it fans seemed to embrace it. There are movies where facials are the selling point. I've seen a lot of guys on this board complaining if a girl doesn't do facials and have a name for those who don't. I truly think that things are tried in porn to see if people like in large enough numbers and if it isn't it goes away or isn't done in large numbers or on a regualr basis afterwards. I'm sure that most if not all the things people are listing in this thread has been done or is being done and it probably didn't find a large enough audience to make it more of the norm. If more people were digging features, we'd see more of them. If more people were into "softer" sex, we'd see more. With so many companies in porn everyone is going to try to tap into a different market to try and be the next big thing. Some of those attempts fail because the number of people who are into (Fill in the blank) weren't enough to make it popular or the norm. Lastly, there are all types of sex being shown out there. BLACK MARKET stuff isn't the same as JULES JORDAN stuff isn't the same as VIVID stuff isn't the same as EVIL ANGEL stuff isn't the same as EVASIVE ANGEL isn't the same as KILLERGRAM isn't the same WESTCOAST PRODUCTION isn't the same as BANG BROS isn't the same as DEVILS FILM, etc..etc...
^^^I might be wrong, I have been before. Point me to the differences in the producer products. It would certainly make my porn viewing experience more enjoyable. Everything in porn sells, mouse stomping, vomit, scat. IMHO the only thing discarded was authenticity. Facial were introduced simply a way to expedite things, move them along. There was never a guy thinking "the fan are going to love this". We were led to love it.
I beg to disagree. Where's the guy who's doing the same thing that Amateur Allure does -- nice-looking girls who actually look like they might be students, or waitresses, or retail or office workers, rather than girls who look like they just walked off the stage at a strip club -- only better? Where's the U.S. equivalent to the classy Europorn scenes -- beautiful, well made-up women starting off in elegant attire, undressing to and then getting fucked in hose and lingerie? Where's the U.S. equivalent of some of the Japanese stuff, where the girls give body rubs, handjobs and blowjobs, and rim guys, with the obvious intent of bringing their partner great pleasure (even if, later, during the fucking, sometimes they look like they can't stand it), as opposed to looking like the director told them to do it? Where are the MILFs I see in the mall -- the ones that don't have 36DD sillycone tits? Is there really a market for Big Sausage Pizza and Sleep Creep, but not for elegance? I don't find much of what I rent or buy to be terribly stimulating or erotic. The bottom line, though, is that it gets the job done, something I'm sure those who produce it understand all too well.
I'm not following. How is it faster to cum on the face than on her back, stomach, breasts, legs, feet, or inside of her? No, the decision to jizz on her face is a deliberate aesthetic choice.
Since I've never commented in this thread before, I'll say supply and demand are equally important to the porn economy.
It's a waste of time for me to name or explain what I see as the differences in the products/companies/directors/lines out there because you've convinced yourself they're all the same. I'll simply point out that if they all were the same they'd all sell the same or have the same degree of popularity. After all, if they're all the same why would people choose one over the other. If we follow your logic then I could hand you any porn by any company or director and it would make absolutely no difference to you. You'd be equally happy or unhappy with any movie? I find that very hard to believe.Someone already beat me to this one...How in the world does it move things along faster by cumming on the girls face vs on her chest, butt or in her hands? Is a scene slower moving if the guy cums on her feet? How much faster or slower does the scene go if he cums in hair? So you think that the facial is the result of directors wanting to "move them along" and not a deliberate decision to make the scene more intense or hotter? So all the guys who give facials or want to give them in their personal lives do so because they want to move things along?! Men out there are thinking to themselves while they're having sex "I'm going to cum on this girl's face so we can move this along and get it over with" Then in time they were "led to love it"?Wow...that's quite a theory you have there.
Weird reply! You've disagreed with me, then asked where can you find porn the same as you've already got but made by someone else. I don't get your point! Btw, I'd could probably give answers to all of your requests anyway. Edited by - bobcat on 1/1/2009 12:17:51 PM
You (and others) are missing the point. The poster said that between DVDs and web based porn you should be able to find stuff you like. You obviously found stuff you like because you name it in your post. It obviously exists because you've seen it. Your problem is that there isn't as much of what you want being produced as you'd like to see. That's a totally different thing than saying that stuff isn't being made or hasn't been. I'd argue that most of what you name is being done in U.S. mainstream porn but it's an arguement I'd never win no matter what type examples I give so I won't waste my time. No offense but this is a classic example of "Midget porn guy". To each his own and a person likes what they like but the stuff you say you want more of probably isn't the type of stuff typical porn watchers want to see more of. Personally, I'm not big on seeing more of the type of stuff you seem to want. I think some of what you name already exists in reasonable amounts and I don't see the need to create more of it. And apparently the majority of porn watchers don't feel to need to see more of it because if they did there would be more of it. Supply and demand...if there were more demand we'd see a bigger supply. But "Midget porn guy" can't or refuses understand that because he's a minority and companies would go under making a big supply for such a small demand.
It must be. in my opinion a guy like me who likes the Bruce Seven/Bionca style rough sex G/G fetish movies get very little of what i want.and get very few of the girls i want to see in those kinds of scenes togather.the porn business better wake up before it's to late.start giving the fans what they want seems to be an insult to many Directors and performers.in this Economy from now on im only going to be very selective in the porn i buy or rent. i have not always been that way in the past.
The Best things In Life Are Chocolate 732 Posts 11/05
Posted - Jan 3 2009 : 12:44AM
I've always bought/rented my porn based on who was in them. Back in the 80's when I was a teen my friends and I loved Amber Lynn, Porsche Lynn, Ginger Lynn for example. I couldn't wait to see those chicks's movies. I started to DJ at a strip club out of college and some of the porn stars of the 80's and 90's would feature dance. So Lois Ayres, Christy Canyon, Madison, Samantha Strong, Nina Hartley to name a few. So I would rent thier movies to see them. Tori Welles and Jenna Jameson were my favs in the early 90's. My porn interest waned into my 20's. I was more into the partying so the who's who in porn I never kept up with. Enter the 2000's, we finally had PPV Porn in Canada. I started to watch it for free and thought wow who are these chicks? Never seen em or heard of them. Sydnee Steele, Tabitha Stevens, Ashton Moore, Jenna Haze, Alexis Amore, Alexa Rae. So I started being interested in those girls. And would be watching thier movies. So now I have most of Jenna Jameson's movies. Most of Jenna Haze's movies she did with JKP, became a fan of Jada Fire 2 years ago. I don't just buy any porn, I want to know what I am getting for my money. And so who is in them is what matters. Marie Luv, Jada Fire, Cherokee, Melrose Foxxx, Nyomi Banxxx, Lacey Duvalle moves I get BUT only thier IR ones and all girl ones.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that the second option is the case. A ton of hot girls that have come on the scene in the last couple of months -- Natalia Rossi, Danni Cole, Amia Moretti, Tara Lynn Fox, Heather Starlet, to name a few. I knw they're popular here, and deservedly so. Me, not so much, because everyone seems to be doing the niche thing now -- Sleep Creep. Jurassic Cock, Disgraced 18, Fuckedhard18, FuckedUpfacials, MonsterCocks, every teen-themed site imaginable (I swear, if I see another set of freakin' pigtails on a 19-year-old woman, I'm gonna ... do something). I'm watching the scenes because that's the only way I get to watch these little fucktoys do their thing. I'm hoping they'll stay around long enough to shed the legwarmers, visit a hairstylist, and do some scenes with a more general appeal before they burn out and head home.
^ I agree, I've never really been fond of the "teen" thing.. but you kinda have too.. bc thats the only way your gonna see these girls. I could care less if she's 18 or 21.. in the porn world, it seems like its a huge difference. Some of these girls can't do anything else tho, because they look young. That's why they go off, and get fake boobs..
We didn't bring a compass 'cause we ain't got nowhere to go 173 Posts 4/09
Posted - May 13 2009 : 7:18PM
A bit of both, really, since i only know if i want to see it after i've seen it. There are some themes i avoid like ageplay, Sleepcreep and basically all that other gimmick stuff many people here seem to dislike, too, and i hate it when eg a great performer like Sisi Sinz appears in this kind of scenes. But what made me think of her as a great performer were at least 2 or 3 scenes that i can rewatch a dozen times and never get bored by what she's doing. So first i have to watch what i get fed, then i can decide what i like. Same with Sasha Knox, Mary Anne or Sierra Sinn, all of whom i discovered after a huge porn break long after they left the business. Great performers, don't like everything they've done, but there is some great stuff that is worth watching many times over. The only reason i watch new stuff is the hope to sometimes discover such talents. Or find rare gems like eg the babysitter23 scene with Sasha Knox and Dirty Harry, which has three elements i hate: Babysitter setting, music throughout the scene and in a way the jurassic cock theme, although Harry comes off handsome here. So obviously i watched it only for Sasha. But surprise: Not only is her performance one of the best she's done (say: acting), there's also chemistry between her and Harry, and the music is actually kinda cool (kind of if Marcus Miller would do porn music). This is really the mini-feature they try on most of the Babysitter, Highschool etc stuff but miserably fail most of the time. But you have to wade through waves of crap to find something like this. And other people might not see such a scene the way i see it. In a way, it seems to me there has to be an ocean of crap because tastes are so different. What's crap to me is obviously gold to thousands of others and vice versa. The monster cock stuff has got to have lots of fans, i don't think they'd put all the new girls in it if this wasn't the case.
I believe porn is now market-driven, and has been for a long time. Simply a case of follow the leader, to follow the money. What sells well, will most certainly be copied soon after. Luckily for me tastes change, as well as peoples minds. I can recall wishing there were more older female performers, well thanks to the MILF craze, there now are...with more coming in and returning everyday. So what's old is new. I learned a long time ago that my preferences would probably rarely make the top 50 list, so I've adjusted my strategy years ago to compensate. I simply go where the hot girls are. If I can get at least 2 of them in one film, it has to be good enough for me. Unless it's a star vehicle of some sort, the chances of me liking all 5 sex scenes are slim. Now 2 out of 5 probably isn't what most aspire to, but I'd rather watch 2 really hot girls/scenes then watch 4-5 lame ones. Truthfully, I hate to compromise, but experience has told me I usually will have to.
I wouldn't say that as much as it shows how fragmented the porn market is. We don't have Pepsi versus Coke, we have endless combinations and permutations of performers and sex acts.
We didn't bring a compass 'cause we ain't got nowhere to go 173 Posts 4/09
Posted - May 13 2009 : 9:02PM
Granted, but on DVDs, the performer aspect has less impact because, as aplus put it, you tend to buy DVDs because some of your favorites are on it. Maybe you buy an anal-themed DVD with 2 of your favorites in it, even if you don't care for anal (but don't particularly hate it). That's a distortion. Edited by - poloprinz on 5/13/2009 9:02:59 PM
I understand; and that DVD also has performers in it that you may not want to watch, and that's another distortion. Unless enough of us are willing to pay the actual cost of producing a single scene with our favorite performer doing exactly what we want, we have to accept some approximation which yields a better ROI to the producer.
We didn't bring a compass 'cause we ain't got nowhere to go 173 Posts 4/09
Posted - May 13 2009 : 9:51PM
I don't really view this as a problem because wading through the oceans of crap, i found my favorites because they already were in scenes that were exactly what i wanted to see. It's just that for porn to be "market-driven" imo there should be more than such approximation. But maybe my view on this is distorted.
Agreed, but truthfully that isn't the way I really want it or would like it. I'd prefer to buy a dvd expecting to watch every sex scene it in. With Gonzo/All-Sex it's rare for me to know I'm gonna enjoy every scene. If I'm lucky, I might at least find them interesting. With certain features it can work, since they tend to be more tailor-made for my all-around tastes, but even there I find I have to compromise way more than I would like. Now back in the day, I used to pretty much know or know of every female performer. Nowadays, I'm lucky if I recognize two women in any given film.
I have to work too hard to find the porn I like. Lately I'm getting into amateur single-girl sites and amateur sites and small producers who sell clips at places like clips4sale and clips.com. The clips stores are basically $1/minute, but if you calculate the cost of a DVD vs. the number of good minutes you get out of the DVD, it's not that much more expensive. So, for me, porn is not market driven. But maybe overall, it is market driven and I am just out of step. This forum is abuzz with fans singing the praises of this performer or that director or studio or label...so somebody must be getting stuff they like via the mainstream porn route.
Porn, like all other forms of entertainment media, is driven by 2 main forces; business, and creative. In todays industry reality, niche' content is rewarded...and will eventually be required as the volume of product increases. The emphasis on gimmicks is because studios & directors need their product stand out amidst a vast sea of competing content. It used to be enough to show 2 average people, having average sex. Those days are over...and thank god for that. Creatively, any producer/director is going to have instincts, and should follow them. If art is truth, then we should strive to be as honest as possible with our casting choices, sex acts, and vibe. Like Hollywood, adult studios & directors shape our popular culture. Our values & views on "normal" sexuality are driven by porn. The obvious example being if it wasn't for the rise of porn in the 1970's, todays girls wouldn't be shaving. I guess what I'm saying is, consumers are the ones who decide what is produced at the macro level. "quality" is defined by fans hard earned dollars. The mass market decides what kind of movies continue to be made long term.
This sounds accurate enough for me. General understanding of the basic concepts that suit mainstream interests, have long defined the products found on the display racks, hindering change, inhibiting creative effort, and likely will continue until forced to do otherwise. If the makers of porn were at all committed to learning, or discovering new market interests, it's plausible the Polls section would occasionally be used for gathering more than whimsical and ubiquitous opinion.
I believe we buy what's available because it's either that or no porn. Certainly we try to find some that suits us better than most but it's often in vain. I've often found that if (say) I go to the video store and spend an hour and a half trying to find the best stuff in the store, it's usually monumentally disappointing when I watch it and I could have almost done better going in blindfolded and grabbing random titles. Much porn is grossly misrepresented by it's cover. You look at the cover and it's beautiful. You watch the movie and you wonder what the fuck happened to all that great looking stuff you saw on the cover. At some point, you just give up and give the cover a cursory glance, try to grab titles made by directors you know do decent stuff and hope for the best. Eventually, you find ADT and say "Man, what the fuck? Why is porn so crappy?". Because you've been buying crappy porn for 20 years? Edited by - randomprecision on 5/16/2009 8:27:25 AM
Yes, I hate when that happens. Totally feel you on that. That's why I purchase titles by studio -> director -> male talent. Not that I'm attracted to the dudes, mind you. But them and the director are the ones who drive the scene.
