The porn industry is full of way-tired formulas. And the big companies won't change because hey, they're already making money, why bother? I'm here to clue the companies in to some other ideas regarding their product. (Stands on soap-box.) In the seventies porn was fantasy: a guy fucks a nurse or a teacher or whatever, and we watch it because we wanted at one point to fuck a teacher or nurse. Today, you only see guys fucking pornstars, which is pretty fucking cool if your dream is to fuck a pornstar or a hooker or a stripper (cause that's all you'll see.) Stars in the nineties and late eighties looked way too "porny." Big hair, fake eyelashes, tons of makeup, fake tits, nose job, tanlines, whatever. Yea I know they still make movies about nurses and teachers, but they all look like porn sluts damn it! AND I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT COUPLES PORN EITHER. All branches of mainstream porn have given way to these weary porno cliches. (Gonzo flics have all these problems too!) How about sex scenes that last twelve minutes, what's up with that? I don't need to see the guy fuck her in EVERY position. I really don't. Why not pack two scenes into that amount of time huh? In a GOOD sex scene, the heat should rise, and eventually peak, instead of rise, plateau and go on and on until the viewer is bored and thinking about dinner or something else. Do you know what the viewer does? He watches two or three minutes and fast-forwards to the cumshot. I can't stand watching the chick moan before she's even touched. The fakeness of soo many porn chicks ruins the scene by building contempt in a viewer like myself. It's kind of condescending on their part. The chicks get out of their clothes too quick too, like whatever happened to suspense? Don't get me started on misleading boxcovers. And what's up with that shitty porn-kissing. Tongues out in the air waving at eachother. We know the guy is disgusted with the girl and vice versa. Real kissing or none at all please. I want variety, I want a scene to be one minute and another to be six minutes. I want a facial for scene one and titfucking for scene two, a swallowing scene, and an ass covered in cum scene... hell maybe even an internal. Some chicks that look like strippers and some that look like girls I know. Ideally, the guy should actually WANT to fuck the girl and vice versa. And now that I've condemned the ENTIRE industry for making bad product, let me say that I really like the industry lots. There are plenty of good porn producers out there. I personally like John Leslie, and Tom Byron..... and sometimes Antonio Passolini, Paul Thomas and Mike John. I am a fan looking for something more is all. I'm sure if changes were made for the better, audiences would show their appreciation (through higher sales.) Who knew six years ago how big swallowing vids would be? Or ten years ago how big blowjob vids would be? Producers had to deviate from the norm to find their new cash cows (better product - more variety.) Whew, what a rant.
BAD EDITS - One more thing I hate is when they cut from blowjob to sex or from missionary to doggy or from fucking to cumshot. These cuts are obtrusive! I know sex scenes are shot over a long period of time, but show the actors changing from position to position or from position to cumshot please! I also know that sometimes the guy has to jerk off for 10 minutes to get the pop, and I'm not suggesting a scene without cuts, just one that doesn't move so damned mechanically! I think first penetration is important and should be emphasised, not glossed over, and I think when the chick goes down for the facial, we should see her go down! Ok, I think I got it all covered now.
A very good statement, I can 100% agree to that. And I guess know what I am talking about after I have seen hundreds of titles so far. It's funny I find myself watching classics again, there is more passion, more film, more naturalism. Although I have to say there are still some new productions coming out I really like but they are rare indeed.
Peter
Edited by - ORGAZMIK on 10/1/2002 11:24:28 AM
[Link]
Rumplestilt Skin Deactivated User
931 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 1 2002 : 1:34PM
@Rutigar Some well said points. I agree, porn today can be so predictable. You're right also, in most part the element of fantasy has been removed and glitz and tiresome, arty direction has taken over. It isn't all bad out there but there is definitely a lot of room for improvement. Regards, Rump.
the worst is when they have rotate and reply the same scenes.. you see this happen a lot on Playboy because they can't show any of the good stuff.. So you get to see Foreplay, Sex, Foreplay, Sex, Foreplay .. then fade to black...
not very creative.. the problem is really that there are so many movies and some many chicks that they don't care and just crank them out as fast as possible.. The Andrew Blake's and Michael Ninn's are few and far between..
Ninn is different. His movies look more like MTV videos much of the time. Strange cuts, bizarre scenery, pulsing music. Very artsy, but also hardcore (unlike Blake). Problem is, I also think he is very cold. I know there are lots of folks who will not agree with me on Ninn, and I'm not crucifying him here - some of his scenes are great! For example, I love the Diva series. Anyway, Ninn uses nice looking ladies but I think he loses the stroke factor due to his artsy fartsy MTV cuts. If you've never seen his stuff, you really owe it to yourself to check one out. You might just love it.
Thanks for the info. I may have to check one out, though I have to admit that I'm not a fan of the artsy kinda stuff. The only stuff that I have that is kinda artsy is Call Girl bt Private/Penthouse on Video. I don't really watch this much as it's too artsy, though I quite like the scene with David Perry, Sylvia Saint and Kate Moore.
Yeah, I've got Call Girl too. I love Adamo though! I think he's brilliant. I know it's artsy, but it's got heat. The girls are beauties and the scenes are focused on sex.
That's where Ninn is really different. The scenes are more focused on being scenes (I know that sound weird, but it's almost a scene for its own sake kind of thing). Definitely NOT like an Adamo scene. If you want to check one out, the classic is probably Latex.
completely agree with all the above comments, and also what about crap cameras, poor lighting, my no1 bug bear
I have paid so I can spank my monkey, I would like to see It clearly and in focus please!!!!!
I posted a thread about 10 seventeen dvds i just bought £130 from erodvd not their fault by the way,
lets just say, the ol stuff is far far more erotic, if european porn is going the way of a lot of american studios then god help us all, squid, if you want to see some classic hardcore check out goldlights, salieri classics very erotic, for pure hardcore and butt busting anals you would do a lot worse than all of JY LECASTELS "private the matador" series very good shot properly and good lighting though i wish jy would perform again and not just direct.
with regard to michael ninns stuff, not only is it arty but also a bit strobe lighting, and flashbacks and snippets of good hardcore, usually based around a pretty lame story though you might want to check out "new wave hookers" which is pretty funny and hardcore,
I still have loads of stuff from euro hardcore satellite way better than a lot of the new stuff, sad really.
I too think Michael Ninn is over-rated. I like New Wave Hookers 5 but it could be better. He goes overboard with editing the way Andrew Blake goes overboard with slo-mo and softcore devices. I think the strobe effect in Ninn's work is kind of hypnotic and makes his movies visually interesting but not much hotter than others. Andrew Blake bores me at this point. He is the Playboy of hardcore. I like alot of the stuff Antonio Passolini did but not really as porn. His sex scenes are almost always too long, the performers always go through the motions (positions,) and he goes for the way porny chicks too often. My biggest problem with the 70's stuff is that it's from the 70's! I'm not a fan of wall to wall carpeting.
[Link]
Rumplestilt Skin Deactivated User
931 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 2 2002 : 2:25PM
Michael Ninn and Andrew Blake remind me of David Copperfield. They have the same sort of magical tricks.
Edited by - Rumplestilt Skin on 10/2/2002 2:39:09 PM
One more thing that sucks in porn - When the music is louder than the moaning or when it sucks soo bad that it distracts from the moaning. OR when there are no sex sounds AT ALL, just music. Most porn music is completely unnecessary. It's not like we'll lose interest if we don't have a crappy keyboard beat in the back.
And on the topic of directors - I'm also not too fond of Woodman's stuff or most of that Private stuff, where you get REALLY hot girls who are not really into the sex and constantly posing. The posing for the cumshot and looking at the camera whilst still cum-dodging is very lame. They could all take a lesson from Kaitlyn Ashley or Jeanna Fine.
[Link]
Rumplestilt Skin Deactivated User
931 Posts 7/02
Posted - Oct 2 2002 : 2:38PM
...and f***ing slow motion and smoke and mirrors...blah, blah, blah...
I also am not generally fond of Woodman. Many of my brethren believe that Woodman is Private, and maybe that's why I never got a woody from Private. However, I do like Kovi and Thring (I believe they are both dependable, working class porn directors) and I love Adamo (kind of artsy, but definitely smut). As far as eye contact, I find it sexy as hell!
Eye contact is great. It's just the posing that I'm criticizing. The cock cumming on them becomes irrelevent, almost pesky when they do this. The action stops to become a still shot, and everything is ruined.
