Jamie Brooks

Max Booty
"Making people struggle a little bit is not necessarily the worst thing."-Sen. Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania Republican, warning against the idea of child care as an entitlement.

[Link]

What the fuck! I'll say exactly what I said about Michelle B...now I couldn't care less about this once beautiful girl.

Is corellation causation? Think about that when I say this:

Michelle B is represented by LADirectModels. She just got implants.

Jamie Brooks is represented by LADIrectModels. She just got implants.

I doubt that this correlation acutally equals causation. In other words I doubt that LADirectModels is responsible in any way. It's just that they have quickly become one of the best agencies in the biz and two of their hot blondes just got implants. Let's hope none of their other girls follow suit.

Kelly

Edited by - tscfan317 on 1/31/2004 11:03:17 PM

[Link]

I wonder if those girls realize those moves gets them UNPOPULAR.

[Link]

To LADIrectModels's credit, they've updated their website for both Jamie and Michelle to show the hack jobs.

I think it was said that Michelle tried to sign on with Spiegler after surgery and was turned down. To bad she didn't talk to him first.

The only work I image such implants being an advantage for is topless bars (drunks, dim lighting, mostly viewers far enough away to miss the scars).

[Link]

If implants are only good for titty bars explain why a lot of high paid contract girls have them.

Michelle works as much as she wants with Direct, I don't think she is mising out by not being with speigler.

Edited by - kamiandrews on 2/1/2004 5:06:15 AM

Edited by - kamiandrews on 2/1/2004 5:08:11 AM

[Link]

Also, do Vivid's girls make money than other performers? I thought it was all about having to perform less, and having a "guaranteed" low flow of work. For example, a Vivid contract girl might only have to perform once a month, whereas non-contract girls won't make the same amount without working much more, and needing to find that work as they go along.

In Jamie's case she hasn't bloated the way some girls do after implants, and I don't see the scars in these two pictures. The "shiny" look is obvious, and the bottom line is that she now looks pretty ridiculous, very unnatural.

[Link]

Kami Andrews-
Here is the problem, in general, with the theory of cause and effect, aka correlation and causation. Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. So, as you said so many girls get implants for so many various reasons that just because two girls from the same company or institution get them in close proximity to one another does not mean that said company is in any way responsible. The problem with your example of a supermarket, though, is that female employees at a supermarket do not make their livelihood based upon their bodies. Women represented by LADirectModels, for all intents and purposes, do make their livelihood off of their bodies. So if two of their girls suddenly get implants it is much safe to assume some liability on the agency's part. Then again, the agency might have nothing to do with it. They might have actually argued against implants. In that case, then that assumed cause would transfer from LADirectModels to the pressures of the industry in general.

With Vivid girls hell yeah there is a correlation. We should all be grateful that Autumn Austin escaped their grasp before they made her get implants. With LADirectModels it is less likely. If Dana Vespoli and Brandy Nash and August Night and any of their other girls start getting implants then we would all have to be very weary of that agency. As Kami thankfully informed us, the much more plausible correlation is that Michelle B. and Jamie Brooks are roommates.

Too$hort-
You hit it right on the head. Vivid Video and topless bars most definitely do not constitute the view of all porn fans. It does seem that most hardcore fans do not look on girls with implants favorably.

That all said, I do not like implants but I don't hate them. There are some girls I like who have implants, such as Renee LaRue. The real issue with Jamie and Michelle B. is the fact that we have all now seen them without implants. As it stands, I have never seen Renee LaRue without implants. She had them when she entered the industry. With Jamie and Michelle though it is like forever and ever all of the hardcore scenes these girls have committed to video will act as "before" pictures. Such an example I can think of is Kaitlyn Ashley, who did a couple of Max Hardcore (way back when he was actually a hell of a pornographer) scenes with her perfectly beautiful natural chest before getting very similar looking implants to Jamie's. What I am tring to say is that with these girls we have seen them before their surgeries and saw how fine they looked which makes the implants much more upsetting.

Kelly

PS...I would grant that has illogical as it was for Jamie to get implants at least her bolt-ons look much better than Michelle B.'s new cartoon breasts.

Update-Some other examples of girls whose busts have un-naturally and sometimes unfortunately grown during their careers, beside Kaitlyn Ashley, are Bridgette Kerkove, Miko Lee, Sunrise Adams, etc.

Edited by - tscfan317 on 2/1/2004 1:46:14 PM

[Link]

Kami-
I do agree. Logical or not, it does seem that the porn viewer can become possesive. So when a girl who previously looked beautiful to them cosmetically alters her appearance it can quite illogicaly seem like a violation of sort. So, if I sounded like I was insulting these girls I apologize. Perhaps the fairest path to go is to merely say that I don't think the implants look good and leave it at that.

Kelly

[Link]

She looked so much better pre-op. But if it makes her feel better and confident, then good luck to her.

Samurai Dai

[Link]

And I know someone will respond - but she can make more money doing gonzo film scenes, 5 a week if she wants. In the short term, yeah, she'll make more money. But long term, not. The gonzo studios appear to always be looking for fresh faces (supposedly to satisfy fans), so with or without implants, an actress can get old pretty quick, say in less than a year.

On the other hand, the feature studios have a vested economic interest in grooming their actresses, for name recognition, if nothing else. Plenty of people choose a movie because it has Jenna, or Brianna Banks or Tera Patrick in it, looking as beautiful as can be, and that's all those fans know or care about. And there are legions of those fans out there, not just buying DVD's, but watching porn on cable TV or in hotels. So, at least the contract actresses can count on having a career that lasts several years, not months, and they might get to work under more pleasant conditions, and have some say about which men they work with.

There was a thread a few weeks ago (I can't remember where), in which Tricia Devereaux said in her opinion, there were no negatives associated with an actress getting a contract (and this is from someone whose husband heads up one of the best and biggest gonzo studios). Another porn actress also said on the thread that she'd love a contract.

So, there you have it.

[Link]

Someone needs to pay a girl like Claudia Jamisson to speak to girls thinking about having boob jobs. I am especially digusted Mel B had the boob job. I mean, Claudia is a gorgeous girl with really meagre breasts, lets face it, who still drips sex like she's a wet T-shirt. If she can be a supernova, why can't other girls? Bring Claudia in as a consultant, get her to talk to all small-breasted girls thinking of defacing their molehills.

In this damn day and age, we all should all be able to celebrate small breasts as well as big!

[Link]

Jamie, you're funny and cute as hell and hopefully happy too. Good luck with everything.

[Link]

Welcome to the forum Jamie. Good luck on everything for you.

[Link]

Looking at the first two photos at the beginning of this thread, that were taken in a photo studio by a professional photographer, with Jamie in well-done make-up, I saw what would be obvious to any feature director - she is naturally photogenic, blonde, and can exude sex appeal. Just the thing that a feature actress has to have at a minimum. Just some tweaking with the anatomy, and she's there. It's not fair to compare the 3rd and 4th photos to the first two, because they weren't done in a studio by a professional.

Someone's gonna think - but a guy watching her in a Vivid movie is gonna remember her from her gonzo work. No, he won't, because this kind of viewer doesn't watch much gonzo stuff, not regularly. He'll only see her glamourous porn work, and be happy as a lark, and he'll shell out the bucks for the privilege to do so.

[Link]