There used to be lots of period costume drama type stuff with bubbly chicks in big dresses stripping off all sweaty and hairy and fucking with french noblemen and servants alike (rocco was in lots of them). These films were great fun and would be better than most stuff produced today if only the quality was better. Not sure if it would work today with the shaven pussies , tattos and breast and butt augmentations. Todays bodies are better suited to sci fi parodies maybe.
I think if you re-shot those old movies with today's talent and film quality, you would have something. Then again, with today's society having widespread ADD and such a high need for instant gratification and shock and awe, maybe not.
I totally don't get the nostalgia for most of the old 70s feature porn. The stories really weren't that good and the sex scenes were way too short and often badly shot in my opinion. Most of those old scenes didn't even show that much actual penetration. Just lots of face reactions and positions that made it hard to tell if actual penetration was happening. Plus there were only a handful of truly hot women. I actually like some of the women of that era like Kay Parker, Sue Nero, Candida Royalle, Summer Rose, Viper, and a few others but their scenes are so short and having to wade through a movie plot I don't care about to get to that short scene is often annoying. I so get why porn transitioned to having the sex and women be the focal point of the movies. Most people want to see more sex and less story. Why sit through a usually poorly done Porn movie for a story when there's plenty of far better mainstream stories being told in movies? Porn always does best when it sticks to it's strengths....showing sex.
^ Agreed. I watch gonzo (read: plotless) porn pretty much exclusively, though I do feel a tingle of shame for doing so. I'd like to watch feature porn, I really would, but I just know my finger would be twitching over the fast-forward button. Out of interest, what are the best plot-driven porn films? And which are the nastiest, in terms of sex acts? One of the things that puts me off them is feeling that they're made for couples.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 4:29AM
Fans of 70s features tend to be fans of 70s exploitation, so we're use to the 'limitations' of the film genre but some of the best of them are much better than you suggest (eg. Taking of Christina is as good as any 70s rape/revenge film). It's also not nostalgia as I didn't see these films when they were first released. As for 'better mainstream stories,' firstly I would disagree that modern Hollywood displays any facility at telling stories, secondly the appeal of the 70s features is that they deal with sexuality and taboo subject matter in a way that the mainstream avoids like the plague. If you can think of many mainstream films that give you an experience similar to watching Waterpower I'd like to hear it.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 4:43AM
There are numerous threads on this in the Features forum, but do you mean modernish (90/00s) or the 70s/80s? The eras are very different. For the 70s/80s I'd say a generally agreed upon list of some of the best include The Opening of Misty Beethoven, Nothing to Hide, Sex World, Corruption, Odyssey, Take Off, Sexcapades, Firestorm, Pretty Peaches. These do tend to be comedies of a sort or dramedies but some like Pretty Peaches, Corruption and Odyssey are quite dark (PP is nasty, dark and funny all at once). In terms of nasty, I'd say modern porn has nothing on the 70s for nastiness, although what is more often nasty are the themes of rape, incest, S&M and degradation: Waterpower, Forced Entry (Costello directed, not the Rob Black garbage), Femmes de Sade, Sex Wish, The Devil Inside Her, Appointment with Agony, Baby Rosemary, Sex Psycho, The Taming of Rebecca. That's some very strong stuff, trust me. Unfortunately there's no great print currently available but Zeb Colt's Unwilling Lovers combo of murder, necrophilia and sex with the mentally disabled (all faked of course) has yet to be topped anywhere outside of the unhinged films of Sady Baby from Brazil. Edited by - BlackSix on 1/30/2016 4:48:40 AM
[Link]
Ben Mockridge Deactivated User
382 Posts 9/15
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 6:46AM
I think a film about sex with the mentally diabled has promise. Imagine our hero stumbles upon a remote mental asylum where the all occupants are georgous chicks with a variety of afflictions ranging from acute nymphomania to having the simple and innocent minds of 3 year olds etc etc. I think it appeals to the idea of having georgeous objects without the normally attendant complication of intricate and complex personalities and problems.
I've only ever seen the trailers but some of the works of the late John Leslie - stuff like 'Dog Walker' and 'Drop Sex (Wipe the Floor)' - look as if they might very well deliver what I'd be looking for from a feature film. Can anyone attest before I invest my time/money?
^ They're great. My favourite of his is CURSE OF THE CATWOMAN, though. For feature movies with long and heated sex scenes, THE LAST X-RATED MOVIE qualifies. It's long (four hours), but I watched it in two sittings and it was fine.
Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 1/30/2016 8:59:44 AM
Like a lot of people, you watch porn for the sex. Anything that isn't sex you probably feel is just in the way or wasting time. I tend to think that with a lot of people the desire to watch porn and the desire to watch an actual movie with a story are two different things. It's probably hard to get invested in the story if you're just there to get off.
I'm actually a fan of the 70s exploitation stuff. I have a bunch of stuff from SOMETHING WEIRD, ALPHA BLUE, RUSS MEYER, TINTO BRASS, other collections of that era. I like the look of the girls from that era and I find that the exploitation stuff was "sexier" in a lot of ways. But the actual 70s porn of that era doesn't do much for me. I know it seems strange that the soft-core stuff from that era is more appealing than the real hardcore stuff but I just don't think those old sex scenes were shot very well as apposed to the more modern stuff. From what I've seen I think porn directors overall didn't figure out how to shoot sex scenes until somewhere in the 80s. That's my limited opinion. The only reason I buy the porn from that era is to see certain performers not for story quality. I'm sure there are some great sex scenes from the 70s that I haven't seen but there's some I have and I just not crazy about the way they were shot and how short they are. I haven't watched or seen the movies you mentioned here which I think of as "grindhouse porn" with rape, torture, and taboo subjects. I know ALPHA BLUE puts out that stuff but it doesn't appeal to me. Also, SHOWTIME or one of the cable channels had a show on the top porn movies of all time where pornstars talk about the best porn features through the decade. That was interesting to watch. I never seen most of the movies they mention and I believe people when they say how good those particular movies were but I think most features overall from that era weren't up to those standards. But this is all based on what little porn I've seen of that era and most of the stuff I've seen from that era is compilations of the performers of that era I like to watch.
I like context also but just don't like sitting through long stretches of it to get to the sex. I'm more of a quick set-up to propel the sex type guy. Because I'm there to see sex.
^ Right. I'm just clarifying that I (and presumably a lot of other feature fans) are also there to see sex. I don't watch softcore, for example. I want to see unsimulated sex. We simply have a difference in taste re: format.
^Yeah, I get it. Just talking for the other side of the coin. There's no right or wrong about it. But I do think features of the past did some things better than the ones of today. The sex was more natural. In current feature porn no matter what the situation the sex always ends up looking like a carefully choreographed generic porn scene just slapped into the story. In a feature telling a story I think the sex should reflect the characters and situations. That means sometimes the sex should be awkward, sometimes quick, sometimes with clothes on, sometimes rough, sometimes kinky, etc...That's why I could never get into the parodies or features of modern times. Feature sex should be some of the most interesting and different because it should service the story instead of always being and looking so typical and safe.
^ Totally agreed. Part of my interest in hardcore is seeing something bizarre, something unexpected. I have watched a *lot* of porn, and old features most consistently make me say, "Well, I've never seen that before..." There is some truly crazy stuff from back then. Furthermore, the sex is typically hotter to me, due to the reasons you outline. Finally, as someone who enjoys watching men, older features tend to provide a little more of the male body than modern porn does. I find modern porn frustrating in its limitations--the "safe" nature of it, as you put it.
I think Tinto Brass was great. Earlier I compared porn features to musical comedy– with the story serving as a frame for the sex scenes. But I realize that "opera" might serve as a better comparison. In musical comedy, the singing stops and starts, but in opera it never stops. I don't mean to say that features should be wall-to-wall sex, but they should be wall-to-wall titillation. (Once the titillation stops, viewers' fingers will move to the fast-forward button.) Tinto Brass was a master at this, but also shows how easily it can be done. He worked with beautiful women, dressed them in revealing outfits, and he aimed the camera with a lustful eye. Edited by - cumminglinguist on 1/30/2016 10:27:26 AM
I started off writing a post about Taboo, and ended up writing about Tinto Brass. One of the things that, in my opinion, made Taboo so good is that the first scene shows Kay Parker having sex in the context of a bad marriage. This might seem a bad way to get a porn viewer excited, but I don't consider a big problem On the other hand, it makes it very clear what the main character's problem is and it sets the stage for the rest of the story She gets dressed as they break up, which speaks to my point of titillation.
I am one that likes the stories from the 70s. I feel that giving characters depth and a reason for the sex adds to the eroticism of the film verses two or more people just having sex. I think on average, directors from the 70s were more talented than the ones today. I think they knew more about making a film and tried more with what they had. I think that on average films were shot better in the 70s and early 80s than today. The shots are different, partially due to the size of a film camera back then verses the much smaller and lighter digital ones today. But I think those who were lensing the films knew more about what to include and not to include in a shot. This obviously isn't a blanket statement. Some of the directors and cinematographers of the early films were completely incompetent (Bob Kirk comes to mind) and some of todays are very talented (I can't find the name at the moment but last year's Wanted was beautifully shot).
^ Larry Revene was an incredible cinematographer. He really knew how to light and shoot sex scenes. I also enjoy Henri Pachard's sex scenes for how they're shot.
I know this feeling well. It's difficult to find porn that I like as I get older. Several reasons. 1. The novelty is gone, so things that used to be great when I was a teen are no longer interesting. When I was a teen it was all new and mind blowing. 2. I have a much clearer notion of what I like and what I don't. As I get more specific, it gets harder to find things that push the right combination of buttons. 3. I don't like hip-hop. So much of porn now is styled to the legal teens and 20somethings, and that means Ink, funky hair, piercings, etc. On women I find most of it a turn off. On guys it makes me want to turn off the scene and watch something else. I'm not interesting in a MF scene with wannabe gang bangers, tweakers, escaped convicts, etc. I don't expect porn producers to change anything to suit me. But I think my experiences and atittudes are commonplace. For the young people who love modern porn--it'll happen to you, too.
[Link]
ultimate_sperminator Deactivated User
837 Posts 12/12
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 4:05PM
best porn can be filmed when enough money is in the industry. Most money ever was in the era 2000-2008 until the pirate thing started. There was also the biggest output ever and when you look at the majority of the material that was produced in this years you can easily see that hard gangbangs / blowbangs bukkakes were the most selling thing and every big label had some movie lines in that genre. So I would say it´s everything we really want to see is depending on the money.
[Link]
fredgee Deactivated User
350 Posts 12/13
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 4:36PM
When porn became monopolized it was the beginning of the end. The only way it will improve is by breaking the monopoly. Consumers will have to do it the best way to start is by appointing a porn czar who will give them what they want.
I grew up in the 70s and even then I wasn't impressed with the porn. We had one theater in our small town that showed porn. Oddly enough it was porn all week, and then Disney matinees all weekend. How fucked up is that? During the week the marquee just said XXX, you never knew what you were going to see, but it was always a double feature. I forged a fake I.D. at 16 and would go see them. I was an anal lover since before puberty and getting a good assfuck scene was few and far in between. I remember the first time I went in and had to wait 20 minutes into the movie before the sex even started. I was thinking "This is what the big deal is all about?" Usually the girls were unattractive (most, not all), the acting was terrible, and the music was pure shit. Even back then, I was thinking "Just get to the sex!!" I welcomed the video age of just pure fucking. If I want plot and storyline, I can just watch a real movie. Porn, to me, is about the sex.
[Link]
Ben Mockridge Deactivated User
382 Posts 9/15
Posted - Jan 30 2016 : 5:48PM
^ Yeh i guess its easy to be nostalgic but the reality is that most of the old stuff was mediocre just like most of todays stuff is mediocre. I used to watch all those old classics on fast forward just the same as i fast forward through todays stuff - only difference is then it was vhs now its digital.
I don't think that yearning for the porn of yesterday needs to means wanting the old movies back, or even thinking they were all that to begin with. But I do think that there was a decency in them, as much as there can be in porn, that is missing today. Again, not across the board, as I get there was some crappy porn back then and is some really good porn out there today. Maybe the story lines were long and stupid back then, but it gave the actors personalities. If something out of the normal took place, there was a good chance they at least made an attempt to make it part of the story. I remember seeing a movie way back 30 or so years ago. There was a woman on her hands and knees as a center piece on a serving table with a carrot sticking out of her snatch. I don't remember the movie other than that scene, but I do remember thinking, wow, that is different, and that it was meant to be artistic. If they made that scene today, it would be a full bag of carrots or a watermelon, and there would be no expectation that we even question why it's happening. So yeah, I want to see the sex. But I can't help but feel that we are close to the point where they can just replace the girls with silicone sex dolls and no one will even notice.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 12:30AM
^It sounds like perhaps you haven't found a pornstar working today whose work you really enjoy. I say that because plenty of consumers would indeed notice if their favorite performers were replaced with silicone sex dolls. On the "All things DAP" thread, Bob, another user, asked me who my 10 favorite female performers on Legal Porno are and it took me almost two weeks to narrow all my favorites down to just 10. Now, LP is very much a gonzo site and the sex acts are usually the same from scene to scene, but the performers are still far from interchangeable to me. That's just one example from my own personal experience, but here, on other forums, on social media, and among people I know I see a lot of love expressed for this or that pornstar specifically. This was true even at the height of the gonzo era. I rarely watch features, but I do occasionally encounter one that I view as having artistic value. I also actually find beauty in the primal, frenetic energy of a lot of old gonzo scenes, but that's just me, lol.
Kay Parker is a fav of mine. The movie TABOO is one of the few features I find watchable mostly because of Kay Parker's beauty and presence. The story is simple and one that porn could handle. I think some of the features back then don't work for me because they try for a type of sophistication they just didn't have the talent to pull off properly. I'm also a big fan of Tinto Brass. There has been actual sex in some of his movies but what I like most about Brass' movies is there's constant titulation all through the movie even when there's no actual sex scene going on. I think of Brass' stuff as "erotica" and not porn per se. He made sexy movies. Throughout his movies that I've seen there's usually something sexy going on or sexual tension of some sort.
I agree that the directors, cinematographers, and crew were probably more skilled at actual movie making overall compared to the ones today but I think most of today's porn makers are going for a different thing as apposed to the porn makers of the past. The directors and such from the past were more skilled at making movies with sex scenes in them but I think today's directors are better skilled at making the type of porn the porn biz makes today. Which is...getting the best positions, best angles, directing the talent, and knowing where to place the camera. If you got a big name HOLLYWOOD director to shoot something goofy like BIG TIT ANAL MILFS II will he/she actually make better porn than the top porn directors of today? Not saying the HOLLYWOOD director would shoot it badly but I don't think they would understand as well what fans look for and what works best for a porn scene. I may be totally off on this but I think a skilled seasoned mainstream director could shoot typical Gonzo porn that much if any better than the top porn guys working today.
I think the porn audience is partly to blame. The porn audience likes their porn a certain way and if a director deviates from that too much the audience doesn't like it. Many claim they want something different but really they just want more goofy stuff tossed into that same old formula. You like to watch the men probably mostly because you're a woman but guys don't want the guys to be anything more than a prop that isn't focused on. In the case of some guys the men are just a battering ram to do things to the woman. Much of today's porn isn't about a couple having sex as much as it's about what and how much can be done to this woman. The male performer doesn't have to be good looking, smooth, charismatic, or skilled. Just have a big package and go on in there and give it to her....and remember to hit all the usual positions.
^^ I kinda disagree with the idea that a "mainstream" director couldn't shoot porn any better than the top porn directors. One of my most basic issues with the way porn is shot, and it's the biggest thing that differentiates the "softer" X-Art/Lansky style of shooting from regular gonzo when it's done well, it's that the directors are too focused on the action to the detriment of the overall image. So it's like, yes, I can see the penetration very clearly, but if I back away from that and look at the whole image it looks rough for any number of reasons. I think a mainstream director that's any better than decent could shoot the actual sex just as well (with some practice), but would actually make sure that what we see around the action looks more appealing as well.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 4:11AM
The films in SOMETHING WEIRD's catalog are rarely strong in terms of 'story quality.' Certainly the best xxx films are as good if not better than the average SMW film. I do know what you mean about the sex scenes, at the beginning there are way too many meat shots in 70s porn but the best directors and films moved away from that fairly rapidly and by the late 70s and early 80s there are many sexy scenes (eg. almost all of Gary Graver's films, Alex De Renzy, Anthony Spinelli). I think the non-feature porn of the 80s if far more incompetently shot sex than almost anything I've seen in 70s features. TINTO is great, but I would say it is only his late films that are conventionally sexy. I think the idea that male viewers don't want to see gonzo performers in relation to each other is not true for many, many viewers. Many of the top gonzo directors are praised for the fact that they have full-body shots where we can see the performers in the same space relating to each other. I consider it central to any capturing of chemistry or heat and is one of the reasons I dislike Mike Adriano's shooting style. We know he has his vocal fans but there are as many who dislike his approach.
[Link]
Ben Mockridge Deactivated User
382 Posts 9/15
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 4:47AM
The irony is that when porn films had plots and characterlines everyone (forgive the generalisation b6) said cut the story and just give us sex , now everyone is lamenting the loss of the preamble/plot. Personally as a consumer i veered towards a product that offered me just sex and just specifically the sex that i wanted - for example complilations of black chicks giving bjs etc.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 4:51AM
I don't doubt that the majority didn't want porn with plot although it seems a pretty significant number of viewers like porn with context as that adds to the fantasy.
[Link]
Ben Mockridge Deactivated User
382 Posts 9/15
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 5:15AM
^ I agree , i myself can see the charm in the cheesy porn with the more human face, but the fact remains that when push came to shove consumers opted for straight up porn without the trimmings. In todays pornland where people pay per scene for the latest mechanical triple anal its not surprising people are reminiscing about the merits of porn of a more holistic nature.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 5:45AM
It does seem likely features were just a historical phase in porn, due to the law and social expectations of the time they needed to add some kind of narrative to justify social or artistic merit, and this had the happy side-effect (for those who like features) of allowing filmed porn to expand in tone and genre (comedy, melodrama, crime, surreal, sleazy psychodramas). Once VHS took over porn reverted to something close to (but not exactly like) the loops of the outright illegal years. Actually it took a while for porn to move to that, I think we're closer in the internet years to loops than in the classic 'gonzo' years. Of course you also see the half-hearted hipster reaction against mass production with the trends towards cassettes, LPs, handcrafts, 'organic' produce, etc. Could the same thing happen for feature porn? I think it is unlikely. North American hipster culture has a powerful undercurrent of puritanism when it comes to sexuality and so it seems there will never be enough of them to support porn features. Despite the various issues with the public showing of feature pornography back in the day I wonder if the retreat of porn into the strictly private realm, first via VHS and now the net, just helped reinforce societal hypocrisy around pornography. Hence why porn is both declared to be more 'mainstream' yet also kept marginalized and outside 'polite' or even just honest public discourse.
I never saw a gonzo scene - even the hardest of the hard - that wasn't immeasurably improved by having a 'set-up'. If I just wanna watch the sex and nothing but the sex, I'll watch a compilation vid (as I believe someone said above). It's not the presence of a plot per se that puts me off features, it's the preconceptions I have that the sex might not be as hard as I prefer, given the types of audiences the producers probably have in mind when making these things. Is there such a thing as a really - and I do mean really - hardcore feature, containing gonzo-like sex? If not, that would appear to be a serious gap in the market 'cause I would certainly patronise a movie like that. Maybe the kind of thing I'm looking for are films which straddle the porn/horror genre? Stuff like: I actually own this but it's languished in my backlog for many a year. I think the time may have finally come to view. Love Audrey Hollander; I see her name on a movie, I know I'm in for a good time.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 6:06AM
From what you describe Noodles I think you'll like Squealer and the aforementioned John Leslie films like Dogwalker and particularly Drop Sex. My favourite Leslie features are Curse of the Catwoman and Chameleons: Not the Sequel, they both have very, very hot sex imo but perhaps not what you're looking for? The sex in these last two is closer to gonzo than stereotypical 'couples' porn though. I'd also suggest you would like some of Eli Cross' features like Upload as they have hard sex, DPs, fisting and even overt watersports in the uncut editions.
I get why early porn had a story. They were played in theatres. It would be strange to be sitting in a theatre with other people with nothing but sex playing on the screen and stay there for over an hour of nothing but sex. I think there'd have to be some sort of entertaining story (hopefully) keeping people's attention. Plus, some of the early porn makers wanted to feel like they were creating something more than just smut. I think a lot of early porn creators wanted to be "legit" film makers who ended up shooting porn because they didn't get a shot at mainstream.I don't think it made or makes a difference. So many people have a problem with anything sexual being in public. People want sex shops, strip clubs, adult magazines and such to go away and usually use the "A kid might see it" excuse get rid of that stuff. One of the reasons many porn theatres probably went away is because of public protest.
I'm a fan of the set-up and a reason/story of some sort for the sex to happen. But just like with feature plots I want it to be short and to the point, if not it needs to be interesting or entertaining to keep my attention. There are some porn scenes that have a set-up but spend too much time with guys yapping. The most common is the guy driving around talking to the camera for waaay too long before the girl enters the scene. If it's the girl(s) talking it up before a scene it's not so bad but I just have no interest in listening to guys talking for so long. It almost seems like with some of that stuff they're just doing something to make the scene longer. The people who shoot the tease and straight to sex type of porn can have it's own appeal. There are certain girls and certain body types I like watching just pose and tease. And there are some directors who are better than others at knowing how to shoot it. Again, my biggest problem with it is it often goes on too long as if they're using it to add time to make the scene longer. I'm guessing why we don't see the hardcore Gonzo stuff shot with a set-up is because it's just so much easier not to do it. Shooting that stuff takes a different skillset that the director may not posses. Now you're having to come up with stories, writing dialog, girls have to memorize lines, actual acting may be involved, special lighting, etc... Some girls have no desire to act. Some directors don't understand how to put together such a scene or don't see it as worth the trouble. And it seems like those directors/studios are the ones who often shoot the hardest scenes. I'm not totally convinced most of the fans of the more hardcore stuff want any sort of story or set up. I think if you would talk to the people who make porn with many things the reason they are the way they are is due to the way the audience reacts to it.
What I don't understand is why performers tend to be so stoic in their performances. Do people truly find verbal communication between sexual performers a turn-off? I just don't get that. And I don't mean the generic, robotic, "Yeah, take that cock" or "Yeah, fuck that pussy," but more like direction, guidance, and more organic communication even if it's an impromptu "let's try it this way," or "wait, no, more like this," etc. To me, that's a way to render a sex scene that is ostensibly plotless or contextless much more interesting and hot.
This is important to remember. Many performers don't get paid enough to do the extra labor of acting. It's a lot to ask of them, and to be compensated merely by pride, as if performing sex on camera isn't work to be proud of in itself.
Practically all the old Gangbang Girl (Anabolic) scenes had set-ups, as do Kink's Hardcore Gangbangs nowadays. There's actually some pretty imaginative scenarios going on in Hardcore Gangbangs. The 'acting' need not be Oscar-worthy, in fact, when it comes to porn, the cheesier the better I find. Why can't someone string a bunch of such vignettes together with a semblance of continuity to create a feature film?
I think you are missing my point about the dolls. That statement was mostly tongue in cheek, but I'm referring to the idea that now it's mostly just "assume a position and lets see what we can do to you". But to your reply, there are pornstars that I do really like. But for the most part, they get paired with guys that suck, end up going in a direction that doesn't work for me, are put in crappy scenes, ruin themselves by doing something to their body (take your pick, the choices are growing), etc. As I stated in my OP, and I have been generalizing throughout my posts, what I feel is mainstream porn has been infested with some form or other of fringe porn that is taking a hold as mainstream.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jan 31 2016 : 11:26AM
That's actually why I used the example of LP specifically. Yes, "assume a position and lets see what we can do to you" is the setup, but many different pornstars do very different, exciting, interesting things with that direction. Do any of the erotic porn websites interest you? Greg Lansky, for example, apparently isn't too big on ass 2 mouth, and I know you're not either.
Thank you for saying this. Sometimes I wonder if viewers willfully ignore any and all performer agency and intervention. I absolutely avoid the kinds of scenes that wish to dwell on a woman's (or man's) unsimulated misery, but your point applies to a lot of different kinds of content, imo.
Posted - Jan 29 2016 : 4:18AM
