signed : a very, very angry Paul Thomas lover.
Audrey Madison Interview| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| ObiBong Senior Member 1162 Posts 12/02 | This Paul Thomas feature won Best Film at AVN this year, so I thought I'd check it out. And I miss Sunrise Adams, so I wanted to see how she's doing these days. First impression: Oh yeah, this is why I hate Vivid discs. Four inescapable minute-long ads, and some more bullshit after that before I can access the menu. God, I fucking hate that. Yes, I could FF them, but they each had their own chapters, so I had to do it over and over. I hate, hate, hate having to futz around before I can get to anything. Goddamn it. There are two major themes in this movie: sex addiction and choppy editing. That's not a joke -- the sudden cuts and lack of transitions must be a deliberate stylistic choice. The plot is pretty light, but that's fine. Randy Spears loves his wife; on the other hand he loves squalid, dangerous sex with hookers. Can he control those urges and build a nice, happy family with the lovely, pregnant Ava Vincent? (Guess not.) The film basically follows Randy from one encounter to another, and in between he feels guilty about them. The most interesting thing about this movie is its structure: There are a ton of sex scenes (10 or 11), and they're all short, some as short as three minutes or so. Not all of them are consummated with pop shots. There are repeated, brief pairings of the same characters, particularly Spears and Dru Berrymore as his go-to prostitute/dominatrix. And within each of these short scenes, the shots are very short -- sometimes you get literally 15 seconds of a position, and that's it. Then there's a jarring cut, no transition attempted, to a totally different position in a different part of the room. It's an interesting choice. I'll stop short of calling it a good one. It could be tough on viewers who are conditioned to expect the specific kind of flow we always get in porn scenes. And if you see something you like, well, you're not going to see it for long. Pros: Hey, those are Adams' real breasts, the ones I remember. I had assumed she had them done before she started her contract. Good gaddlemighty, she's beautiful. * Good acting. Spears is always reliably good, and he has to carry the movie -- he's on screen an awful lot. He plays the furtive, closet sleazebag just right. Berrymore does a nice job with her wise-hooker role. Sunrise handles her dialogue (not that she has much) very capably. Vincent could play the sweet wife role in her sleep. The characters aren't exactly complicated, but no one does a poor job, and that's rare enough. Cons: I was watching with interest, but I wasn't "viewing with a purpose." If I were looking for something to whack to, the speed with which Thomas gets in and out of the scenes would be a drawback, even though the sex mostly looks pretty good, while it's happening. * There's a non-sex sequence that doesn't belong in the movie. Most of the plot is consistent and well integrated, but I don't know why we need Randy taking a walk with his senile dad in the wheelchair. What the fuck? * Ava Vincent looks great as usual, but she has about one minute of sex in this movie. Seriously, that's it. I mean it, like 60 seconds. Damn. Bottom line: I wonder if the brevity of the sex scenes, and of the individual shots during those scenes, is some kind of experiment in the science of what's "good for couples." Maybe some couples would like to see sex scenes that don't dwell on repetitive bang-bang-bang for minutes on end. After all, in 15 seconds of doggy, haven't you seen about all you're going to see? Is that what made this an award winner? I know, I know, ads in AVN made it an award winner. But maybe people are looking for something like this. It is unique. [Link] |
| vodka tonic coolest cucumber who 1243 Posts 11/02 |
|
| ObiBong Senior Member 1162 Posts 12/02 | And I don't think Vivid hacks up its movies anymore. I had always heard that that was during the days when they were making DVDs with the same shitty masters they used for VCDs that had to be 74 minutes. More recent films have been intact. But I could be wrong. |
| monkey power Member Tim? 868 Posts 1/03 | With the ads, I don't own any of their dvd's so it's not a big problem. That would get really old after a while though. Forgot to say: (I've only seen the preview for Heart of Darkness and judged to be unworthy of a rental. If you like Sunrise, that "Under Contract" thing has 13 looks at her, several before the implants, and it looks like they might not be edited down on that dvd after all--her movies may just have had this choppy editing thing in them from the start.) Edited by - monkey power on 4/21/2004 8:59:51 PM |
| nipfan Member caught! 271 Posts 10/01 | Marissa is another very good PT film that has crazy editing. If it's meant for artistic reasons it didn't work for me. The sex is so choppy, going back and forth, it makes me wonder if the VHS is different. Has anyone from Vivid posted here regarding their DVD policy? |
| Huggins293 Member 608 Posts 5/04 | |
| Huggins293 Member 608 Posts 5/04 | But even with so called couples video, I have never was impatient getting to hot sex scenes quickly by hitting the FF button. I like vivid because they don't over do it with facials, superloads, spitting, and 100 dicks to one girl. The women look like supermodels and they love to celebrate their sexual prowess. Also I might add that a lot of them are good interviews. (Edited quote to relevant part. --YG) Edited by - YogaGrrl on 5/13/2004 4:33:43 PM |
| Huggins293 Member 608 Posts 5/04 | |
| YogaGrrl self-removed user 757 Posts 12/01 |
| 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 |