For another example, as I recall, there are scenes in Rocco's Initiations 3 in a kid's room too, in the house used in scenes for e.g. the Sylvia Sun scene in Animal Trainer 4.

Edited by - Gabriel Nine on 11/28/2004 4:23:56 PM

[Link]

What's in the Rocco scene aren't props - that's a bedroom and toys that belong to a real child. Besides, there was no apparent reason why they had to use that particular room. The house, which was in Prague, was large enough to have a billiard room (used for one scene) and a small indoor pool or hot tub, I couldn't tell which.

[Link]

Malachi Ecks

[Link]

Mother and child are always gone when we shoot.

Steve Holmes

[Link]

paraphilias.

Myk

[Link]

Now if someone filmed in my friend's basement that would be eerie. It's filled with clown dolls.

[Link]

There were no age play aspects about it at all. That was just how she lived.

There was no rocking horse, and the room was much smaller, but otherwise your two images reminded me of that time.

The backgrounds of porn sets are part of the experience. People respond particularly well to images that remind them of places where they experienced their earliest feelings of sexual arousal. I imagine that is why a lot of scenes are set in school classrooms. With that in mind, I feel sure that this particular set will strike a chord with some viewers.

Renee, if this particular background makes you feel uneasy, I respectfully suggest that you are being a little too sensitive. What harm do you imagine could come from it?

Edited for typo error

Edited by - licker on 11/29/2004 7:21:34 PM

[Link]

JESUS CHRIST, THAT COULD BE MY NIECES' BEDROOM! THEY'RE N0T GOING TO SHOOT IN THERE, ARE THEY? WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING?

Hey, that was my gut reaction. And if what Steve Holmes says is correct, this is a real child's bedroom, not a room in a house that is no longer occupied by a family, nor a room occupied by a 20 year old. I don't have much of a problem with the room being used for Makeup or changing, but for a sex scene, no.

Am I being too sensitive? From my perspective, no. Besides, if you look around at this forum, you'll see just in the past week, thread's entitled "Why are women treated so poorly in porn now" and "Gagging, How can people watch that garbage" and "Scenes featuring guys with wood problems" (in which fans haven't hesitated to name guys with said afflictions).

Frankly, I'm surprised how many people have read this bedroom thread, it's only a day old.

[Link]

This scene triggered a reaction from you and I'm sure there are other people that felt awkward or turned off. You're justfied in your opinion and reaction, just turn off the video or press fast forward.

Edited by - oatmeal on 11/30/2004 7:45:25 AM

[Link]

We'll assume Rocco sprang for the steam cleaning.

Edited by - Endless Loop on 11/30/2004 12:02:44 AM

[Link]

Edited by - Loraine on 11/30/2004 1:36:48 AM

[Link]

your posts suggest that you would not be concerned if this was a set in a studio with identical appearance. Am I interpreting that correctly?

Is it an "invasion of personal territory" thing?

Are you worried that one of the children's friends might recognise the room on screen? I would assume they could not legally watch the movie when it is released.

What I would genuinely like to know, if possible, is the reason(s) for your strong emotional response that I quoted at the top of this post.

[Link]

If it was just a movie set I'd still find it inappropriate.
But if it's an actual kids bedroom?!? Yikes.

Overly sensitive? Could be, but then my avatar is a pussy.

[Link]

Licker, I don't know exactly how to explain my strong reaction to you in words. I'm not certain how much time you spend around young children, but from spending time with my nieces, I'm simply more sensitized about what's appropriate or not for kids, probably much more than I would be if those kids weren't in my life.

For what it's worth, I didn't randomly pick out this movie. I read the one thread about this film that was running back in Sept, and even asked if it was on the rough side, or more like one of Rocco's Initiations movie. There's only one brief review of it, and neither that nor the thread mentioned anything the bedroom scene. I checked out the boxcover on the Evil Angel site, and that also shows no photo stills from the bedroom.

Now, if this were some Rocco/Kelly Stafford film, I would expect there to be some shocking stuff in it. But honestly, I wasn't expecting anything like this POV scene, and after I watched it, my enthusiasm for the rest of the movie went downhill.

[Link]

I guess I'm somewhat gobsmacked by the storm of horrified shock here. The majority appears to feel the same as you do, Renee, but no one seems to be able to say why something is inappropriate or what harm is being done.

Edited by - licker on 11/30/2004 10:59:18 PM

[Link]

In the States, they will have sexy images together with their product. Cigarettes are a prime example. Often, advertising will create a sexual imagery around smoking. It serves to create the illusion that smoking is sexually charged. In reality, your just inhaling the smoke of burning leaves. But the strategy works and that's why advertisers use it continuously.

So, I hope I've made a sensible point in that the mere joining of sexuality coupled with a childs room seems to link them and is considered inappropriate. It's just the way the human mind tends to work.

[Link]

I don't think this is what is bothering Renee, because she says it would be o.k. by her to duplicate the environment on a studio set. If the concern was purely that of linking the two images, then doing it on a studio set would also be wrong.

I guess also that I personally don't buy into the "innocence is good" concept very much. To my way of thinking, innocence in that sense is just a mix of incompetence and ignorance. Sure it's cute, like kittens are cute, but the main purpose of being a kitten is to learn how to be a cat.

We could keep people innocent for their whole lives by never letting them go to school, have friends or have a job, but I don't think they would be better people as a result.

Sorry, that's off topic, but I mentioned it just to explain why I personally didn't have the reaction you described.

[Link]

I don't believe you can keep one "innocent" by doing all the things you say. The "innocence" of a child is unique to little children.

[Link]

Edited by - oatmeal on 12/1/2004 5:19:45 PM

[Link]

Perhaps you're looking for a fully thought-out answer from me, to what was, I will fully admit, a strong emotional response to that scene from myself.

Perhaps an analogy would help clarify things. More than once, guys on this forum have said quite vigorously that they don't want to watch female-on-male strap-on scenes. Are they expressing their opinions based on some well-reasoned, logical framework that they've meticulously pieced together? Or is it based on some rather deep-rooted feelings they have about these sexual encounters, which show a man being penetrated anally? It seems to make no difference to these guys that the men in these scenes enjoy what they're doing, may well do it in their private lives, and that it's all consensual behavior between adults. Whatever the reasons, I respect that some fans don't want to watch these movies.

Myself, I don't want to watch scenes shot in a child's room (or on a playground, or at day care center, or the like).

[Link]

I guess I was hoping for the "fully thought-out answer", but if your feelings are entirely instinctive then that answer doesn't exist.

I guess the analogy from my point of view would be rough sex scenes. Even if you conclusively proved to me that the performers loved to get slapped in the face and it gave them the best orgasms, that still would not make me enjoy the movie.

My instinctive reaction to dislike what I saw would overcome any logic, and I wouldn't be able to explain it either.

Thanks for your patience.

[Link]