Just got done watching "Kill Girl Kill," 1 and 2. There's stuff I like -- the graphics, sort of punk-rock/Gregg Araki sets, raincoat sex in a non raincoat setting, fewer couches, the hipster veneer, some cool girls you haven't seen in an RLD flick.
On the other hand, this sort of thing has been around since the Dark Bros./"Cafe Flesh" and was more artful/fucked up/erotic in the Lydia Lunch/R. Kern days of 1980s NYC pseudo-smut S&M smack cinema. And/or Gregg Araki. And/or William H.
I think if the movies were more technically polished I wouldn't notice the gimmicky aspects so much. And the angles/framing of the sex could be more fluid and on-point. But I really like the ideas, and the feeling that I'm not watching just another gonzo. Kill 2 is better than Kill 1, so I'm interested to see what he does with "Neu" Wave Hookers."
I'm curious if anyone else has seen this stuff. I'd really like to see the concept of alt-porn take off. Even if it's not original it feels like variety.
The year is 1996. I'm sitting in a Arby's in some dumpy town in Rockland Country, having lunch with Dian Hanson. The Arby's is accross the parking lot from a tattoo parlor where Rock Rose is getting a rose tattoo on her ankle. Rock has recently been named the publisher of Juggs Magazine, and Dian has asked me to photograph the whole adventure for an upcoming issue of the magazine. I've shot layout for Dian before, for both Leg Show and Juggs, but I'm I'm feeling restless with the overlit, big-boobed, blonde haired stripper aestetic that dominates the genre.
"Couldn't we do something a little more arch? A brunette with a bob haircut and small boobs?" I ask.
"Look around," Dian responds, "what do you see? Women with fat asses, mousey brown hair, and small tits. A guy doesn't want to open an issue of Leg Show and find a Vogue model – even if she is showing pink."
Not too long after that converation Core magazine folded with the publication of their premiere issue. Buoyed by their internet success, Nerve tried to go paper, but failed. People might like the idea of artsy smut, but apparently their only willing to pay for personal ads. Add to the roster of failed alternaraunch titles Libido, Yellow Silk and a few others whose names I've forgotten.
DVDs offer some hope. The economies of scale don't kick in with paper until you get to mid five figures; keep your production costs under control and DVDs start to make economic sense at about 2500. It's a narrow seam, but not so narrow that a cat like can keep his bills paid, keep his car insured and keep working. In some ways it's not so very different from the way that Richard Kern and others used shooting mag layouts to support themselves while persuing their more personal vision. No one gets rich, but no one goes broke either.
This morning I got ADT mail from this thread from DVDwishes, with a link to his [invalid URL removed]Rock Rose interview, which was strangely coinscedental because these last couple of weeks I've been corresponding with a NY artist/writer friend who's up against the timeless quandary of what can I do?/what do I want to do?/what am I willing to do? Not too long ago the "willing" part of the question was jabbed at in an unpleasent way on a porn shoot out in LA, and he's a little twisted up over it.
As I've said many times before, the things that make porn the way it is have as much to do with the way the business works as they do with any vision or lack there of on the part of producers and directors. A few months back Joanna had a post on her [invalid URL removed]blog that Hustler was having trouble moving Joanna's Angel's 2. I don't know how that ever worked out, but whatever the end result I'm not surprised that a BA title was a tough sell for Huster sales people. Not because of any creative aspect of what Joanna & Co. do, but because Larry built a machine to sell blondes with big tits and a SoCal tan, not pale chick with mondo tats, piercings and angry hair. If my next title was a la Jules Jordan, my customers would be confused and cautious about numbers too.
What's different about NY now vs. a decade ago is that (at least from my point of view) it's harder than ever to make ends meet doing offbeat things while you find your way as an artist. I remember hearing Philip Glass talking about working as a mover and only really being busy around the 1st and the 15th, and having the rest of the time to work on his thing. Now days NY is so fucking buttoned up I think it's harder than ever for an up and comer (or even an old hand) to strike a balance between what you need to do for money, and what you need to do for yourself.
Of course I remember reading back in '86 that the skyrocketing cost of living was killing the arts scene in NY, and that was a good 5-6 years before I came to NY to stay, and I ended up doing good enough. There's nothing new under the sun.
A few years ago I went to visit a friend who was teaching in Bushwick. Fuckanaye what did I see? Hipsters! Skinny pants, gasoline jackets, black rimmed glasses–you know the type.
Here's the thing. Most of the people who come chasing the dream come chasing a dream that died 5 or 10 or 20 years ago. My film broker had a 3000 square foot loft on 10th street that she didn't pay rent on for seven years. But that was in the late 70s and early 80s, and you had to be on tough motherfucker to live in NYC back then. Back then that was a "why the fuck do you want to do that?" move.
I'm not sure where this revived thread is going now. But I'll try and respond to the original question. I've seen a good amount of the stuff that's been classified under the alt banner in the last year and a half and no its certainly not all all that new, and maybe there hasn't been anything that groundbreaking come out of it yet, but I think it's just starting to take off, and with that will probably come some very interesting work, in fact the first Vivid.alt release, Rebelle Rousers, shows that the "genre" is still expanding in its aesthetics and approach as more people may be getting a chance at the direction and production and with a decent budget. Of course, with that will come, and has already come the attempt to stick second rate productions that don't really belong there under the supposed "genre."
I think one thing it is doing is opening up the possibilities of what types of settings and styles are being shown in porn, outside of the omnipresent "goth" look that's been everpresent as a porn alternative.
I've really liked some of McKai's scenes, and I'm excited about the stuff he might be able to do with the vivid.alt label.
While people may have wanted to trash it for being different, or for some of the stuff not being simply "strokable"... I think it's just starting to take off in a lot of directions and that should be a good thing all in all.
I suppose my point is that I think we're unlikely to see porn/sex on film go in any meaningful new directions until the economic model changes, or someone finds a way to work outside of the economic model. After all, it wasn't an aethetic drive that moved porn from of the legion hall loops to theatricial features, it was a court decission that allowed pornographers access to the revenues that a theatrical run could generate, but those revenues were only available if you could produce something people would line up outside a movie theater to see.
I nearly died for Tony's art. That is how much I care.
But, I digress.
No ... I just wonder to what degree so called "alt" can really BE alt, in that so much of its style is borrowed from '80s "cinema of transgresson,' the R. Kern tradition of punk-bartender-girl bruised cheesecake, and campy bi/glam dress-up culture/couture? Mostly, for me, I simply enjoy seeing girls who look real (or like my punk-bartender-grrl), and seeing "plots" driven by a female perspective (post-Steinem, whatevs), where, in fact, the dudes can be objectified a little, and where the girl-girl scenes are done by girls who really love doing girls. I'm thinking mostly about Joanna Angel's stuff, because that's what I've enjoyed the most. Haven't seen "rebel rousers" yet, or "squealer," though i would say the alt porn guy who really is way fucking alt, so alt he's "out," is Joe Gallant, who even has guys fucking guys in his movies ... Blood sugar sex magick, rinse, repeat.
It is truly a wonder their were no fatalities in cast, crew, or onlookers that day.
On the rest, I wish I didn't agree, but 'alt' only looks new if you've had your head up Steven Hirsch's ass for the last 20 or 30 years. That the downtown look has only now finally found it's way into commercial hardcore is a measure of just how ossified the genre is. But then I'd bring that back to economics.
There's nothing way the business works that encourages innovation, and less so today that ever before. Every creative change, from the rise of features in the 70s to the rise of gonzo in the 90s to the rise of whatever you want to call what we have today can be seen as a response to changing economic conditions, ie the possiblity of theatrical distribution, the possiblity of home distribution, the incredibly lowering of barriers to entry resulting from DV/DVD. Those are the real drivers in this business.
But I do think we have reached a moment when someone could hit one right out of the park. I think there are enough people out there who are intersted in the idea of a dirty movie but find what's available laughable that if someone ever made (for lack of a better comparison) a porn "Clerks" they might well sell 100,000 or even 1,000,000 copies. But it would have to be something genuinely fun to watch and genuinely sexy; something people would tell their friends, "No, this one really is different. Best night in we've had in years. Get a copy. You'll love it."
Hey, you didn't pull a gun on anyone ... like, er, Werner Herzog ... or Alex Chilton.
True. I hear happy noises from non-"hardened end users" (thanks DAC) -- soft-boiled eggheads? -- about anything Belladonna. I think, perhaps, plush toy outfit porn is tomorrow's wonderment today. I also notice a lot more lately girls like Sasha Knox and Mia Rose doing the hard gonzo trip who vibrate like filaments jolted with juice, and seem to offer a better window into their own pleasure. But they're doing their producers a huge favor.
Yeah, it'll be a "Clerks" moment ... and it won't be anything with sponsorship or advertising. And it won't come out of LA. Whatever it is.
This is probably my number one irritation with "the industry". There are some goddesses out there, and some of them even want to be goddesses on camera. One of the last videos I rented was GBG 17 and I was totally drawn in by Tricia, then pushed right back out again by the totally haphazzard, don't give a shit, it's just porn production.
If you've got a Tricia, or a Bella, or any other woman who is the real deal, don't you owe it to yourself, and her and the precious moment that's infront of your camera to do something more than be just another jackass with a handicam? It doesn't matter how into it the girls are, if they're rolling around on a piece of remnent carpet in the garage-converted-to-office of a suburban McMassion, it just looks hump to me.
