Realistic vs. Stylized Sex in Porn | Porn Fan Community Forum

New Pornstar Interviews - [more]

Introducing Natasha Carter

"Dirty talk is a really big thing for me."

Participate...

log in
register

Browse...

Etiquette
Active Topics
Popular Topics
Member List
Search

All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 418 > Realistic vs. Stylized Sex in Porn

Author	Post
jayo All-Star Member 2117 Posts 7/04	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 5:05PM I'm asking this here rather than in POLLS because I think this forum yields a better discussion of porn content. I was watching a DVD to review, and it's all very fake. In this case it's a masturbation video, but I've seen this in other genres: some things look realistic, and some just look like the performers are putting on a show, like watching a stripper on stage. In the case of the stripper on stage, it's meant to be an erotic dance. It's drawn out, it's choreographed. Hopefully it's interesting in some way that makes it more than just a woman taking off her clothes. You don't expect her to strip like she would if you picked her up for a fuck. What do you like in porn? I want it to be realistic. I don't want to watch the girls make faces and do a stylistic dance and fake everything. I like being a fly on the wall--watching, but not being an audience. But from what I've seen, I'm in the minority. Most porn I see is fake or fakey. Only a little bit actually tries to look realistic. [Link]
realtip Deactivated User 2301 Posts 6/04	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 5:35PM I agree with you. I prefer for the action in porn to look realistic rather than performed. I don't know if we're really in the minority on this, or if the people who make porn just don't give a fuck. Maybe they just rather stick with the same old porn-making formula that is used in every single sex scene. This is a large part of what I think is contributing to the triteness and unoriginality of porn. Most porn now makes it clearly obvious that it's being made for an audience. I would rather see it be made as if there were no audience. As I've said before, this is often why I find the BTS sex better to watch than the sex that's in the actual movie. [Link]
ntfighter Member 645 Posts 7/07	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 6:04PM I certainly agree. The stylized movie version that is the mainstay of all of the big name studios leave me cold. As I've posted before I believe that seeing people have sex in more normal positions plucks a visceral, small brain response in the viewer. The fact that porn has its own nomenclature to describe sex positions announce that its porn, and not sex. The fakery is enhanced by every director insistence that the participants arrange themselves to give the camera a better shot of their genitals. So the idea isnt to capture people/bodies having sex, but to film the penetration at all cost. I've often thought that sex should be shot the way sports are. No one shot M.J. Hands exclusively. [Link]
picman Senior Member Nothing says I love you so much as a tongue in the ass. 2884 Posts 1/03	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 7:53PM I can understand the need for open positions, and even though I detest it, fake verbiage, seeing how dead silence would be a total scene killer in most cases. What I'd really like to see is a departure from these things if chemistry dictates that the performers are really getting into it. Use the porn conventions as foreplay and scrap the script at the first sign of something real happening. Nothing in porn delights me more than spontaneity and two way communication. Give the scene a chance to breathe and let it get real if it's there. Unfortunately, most directors are fulfilling an agenda and menu on an assembly line, and even the editors seem to shy away from anything that deviates from the norm. [Link]
Mr Springer Member You don't do more with less, you do less with less. 61 Posts 1/09	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 8:37PM I like chemistry (real or fake) between the performers. It can be stylized or fake, it just needs to look good at the end of the day. [Link]

BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 10:29PM I like a good performance that I can't TELL is fake. Most porn consumers either can't tell what is real and what is fake (note the various posters here taken in by clearly phoney and/or overacting performers) or don't care. I've seen others complain (ironically) that porn forums are just full people bitching about the quality of porn but that's because these are the only semi-public areas where viewers can discuss their thoughts about pornography openly and it seems clear that a lot of viewers are not really satisfied with the quality of most of the pornography on offer. Edited by - BlackSix on 4/11/2009 10:29:21 PM [Link]
Royal Tee Member 665 Posts 6/07	Posted - Apr 11 2009 : 11:32PM This is kind of off topic but I much prefer for the ladies to wear "real" clothing rather than "porn style" clothing. To me a woman wearing a tied t-shirt and sexy jeans is way sexier than one wearing a patent leather corset or something of that nature. [Link]
cand86 Member 164 Posts 8/08	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 1:53AM I tend to prefer things real, which I know puts me in the minority. It vastly limits what I can enjoy, but thank goodness I've found a good niche of producers and companies who are dedicated to just that sort of thing. I'm also glad I like BDSM porn, because you can really get some great realness there, or at least, moreso than in most vanilla productions. [Link]
Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 3:07AM For many reasons I often find it hard to tell real from fake. The girls may be new and don't know what is expected from them, they may actually enjoy themselves but exeggerate emotions making it look fake. Maybe they masturbate all night thinking about the scene. So I'm assuming that it's real in Some Way if I'm not sure, because it doesn't make sense assuming people do not enjoy sex, even if it's in a porn enviroment. I like it when it starts out aknowledning the audicence, and then becomes a thing between the performers, because it's not realistic that the performers should completely forget they're on camera either. Mainstream porn don't appeal much to me though, with lots of cuts and diffirent angles, scripted positions, a certain number of minutes for every position. Once the scene starts there should be as few interruptions as possible so that the performers can get into a flow, if they're good they won't need much direction during the scene anyways. Regarding the criticism towards porn by fans, well it seems to me many have very very specific tastes, they want porn to be exactly like they would shoot it. I find it more satisfying to accept that it's not perfect and try to enjoy it for what it is. In the end it is still fucking awesome to be able to watch so many hot naked girls on video. [Link]
Hardware All-Star Member Your other left 14595 Posts 3/02	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 5:19PM I think one can go too far either way. I doubt that realistic sex would be particularly erotic cinema - think Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris. On the other hand, if it is too plastic it becomes just as unwatchable. Hence, the need for photographer and editor to know their art form. Even then, there's so much discrepancy in viewers' expectations that you aren't going to please everybody. [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 7:08PM Hardware wrote: Hence, the need for photographer and editor to know their art form. Even then, there's so much discrepancy in viewers' expectations that you aren't going to please everybody. Click to expand It would be interesting to discuss with some photographers/editors to learn why do things the way they do. Is it a case of "I shoot what I like to see", or is it "I shoot the way I was trained to shoot", or is it "I shoot according to how the director says they want", or is it "It varies with the scene and the girl and the action; I try to capture the best of what is there", or is it "I just shoot the way I see everybody else does"...how does it usually work? And how do the editors decide what to chop and what to keep? Why do they decide to cut from fully clothed to fully naked, and edit out the act of undressing? [Link]
Fireyfox Member 233 Posts 4/02	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 9:27PM Surely most porn scenes are faked or staged to give us watchers the most entertainment? Afterall in reality 2 people having sex are unlikey to go through 5 or 6 positions before climaxing after 20 minutes. I don't mind how its all stylised as long as both are really into it. What I can't stand though it when its all shot in that awful soft focus shit. [Link]
junglew Senior Member 1042 Posts 12/02	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 9:33PM As far as realistic fucking is concerned, when is the last time you saw a good old missionary position? I am not talking about the bastartization of the missionary position where the womans body is angled toward the camera to get a 100% shot of the genetial. Am talking about both legs in the air and the man pounding her for a full minute. Sometimes you see this in the behind the scenes shot where they get together for some private time after the scene. Never saw preformers using the reverse cowgirl in the private time. To me the main purpose for a scene is for the woman to be in the most comfortable position for her to possible reach organism. Fucking on a scaffolding ten feet in the air on a piece of plywood does not meet the requirements. That is a actual scene for a Vivid movie I once saw. Don't mind some fake sex talk aka Bree Olsen if it is done well. Wayne In Dallas [Link]
john lyons Senior Member Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome 1188 Posts 1/08	Posted - Apr 12 2009 : 11:32PM BlackSix wrote: I like a good performance that I can't TELL is fake. Click to expand I mostly agree. If the film is about "real people" then I want the acting, sexual and otherwise, to be believable. However, if the film is more surreal, the sex too should have an avant garde tone. [Link]
Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05	Posted - Apr 13 2009 : 2:14AM junglew wrote: As far as realistic fucking is concerned, when is the last time you saw a good old missionary position? Click to expand I've seen Manuel Ferrara and Michael Stefano use them, though quite briefly, they are both quite dynamic performers which I like. Edited by - Gunzo on 4/13/2009 2:14:33 AM [Link]

Dan Senior Member 2056 Posts 6/07	Posted - Apr 13 2009 : 2:34PM jayo wrote: I'm asking this here rather than in POLLS because I think this forum yields a better discussion of porn content. I was watching a DVD to review, and it's all very fake. In this case it's a masturbation video, but I've seen this in other genres: some things look realistic, and some just look like the performers are putting on a show, like watching a stripper on stage. In the case of the stripper on stage, it's meant to be an erotic dance. It's drawn out, it's choreographed. Hopefully it's interesting in some way that makes it more than just a woman taking off her clothes. You don't expect her to strip like she would if you picked her up for a fuck. What do you like in porn? I want it to be realistic. I don't want to watch the girls make faces and do a stylistic dance and fake everything. I like being a fly on the wall--watching, but not being an audience. But from what I've seen, I'm in the minority. Most porn I see is fake or fakey. Only a little bit actually tries to look realistic. Click to expand Perhaps the main difference between realistic and non-realistic sex-show is whether the interaction is mostly one-way or two-ways. A stripper on stage dances and strips for a bunch of passive guys who don't do much else besides watching her. Which is one-way interaction only. The lady shows off herself to the guys. A more realistic sex-show would be where the dancing and the stripping lady evokes natural reactions from the watching guys. And they paw her body whenever she shakes her booty or dangles her boobs too close to them. While she slaps their hands away from her pussy with some shock and indignation and continues to dance. Two-way interaction is what you need for a realistic sex-show. Whenever either the lady or the guys become passive and the interaction becomes mostly one-way. Then the realism is lost. And it becomes the so called stylized or artificial sex-show. I of course prefer to see a two-way interaction between the lady and the guys. Whenever the guys do something to the lady. Then she should do something appropriate in return to them. And the guys should respond likewise, whenever the lady does something to them. A constant tit for tat kind of thing between the lady and the guys is best and most enjoyable to watch. [Link]
Dommale32 Member 11 Posts 3/09	Posted - Apr 14 2009 : 6:08PM Lots of girl-on-girl action is so stylized as to be unwatchable. I know how to lick pussy--it doesn't involve sitting at a 90 degree angle so that a camera can get a close up of it! As a guy watching, I'd rather see a woman INTO what she's doing rather than posing for the camera. One rather obscure example of doing it RIGHT (at least for a portion of the scene) was Tracey Adams and Amber Lynn in "Tracy Takes Paris" (yes, they mispelled Tracey's name in the title if memory serves me correctly). [Link]

All Forums > The Porn Pool > The Porn Pool Forum Page 418Realistic vs. Stylized Sex in Porn

Previous topic: What film are these still images from?
Next topic: something about porn star 18 year olds

Link to this post

Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post.

URL of this thread

Link to this post with HTML

Link to this post with Forum Code