Edited by - Lezzyist on 11/26/2023 3:04:46 PM

[Link]

Some US fans seem convinced that there is a lot more extreme material allowed in Europe that they somehow cannot see, but if there was any truth in that in the past, it has not been the case for a long time. In fact I've rarely noticed much in the way of Euro porn at all in recent years, while there seems very little that can't be shown in the US.

[Link]

The history of porn, as you know, dates back to the beginnings of the motion picture. I think the way the industry put itself on the map was by getting attention. From the moment you could put a coin in a nickelodeon, and you could first peek behind the model's petticoat to look at a genuine, bare ass, the industry was about getting your attention more than it was about showcasing the model. The thing about relying on shock value as a lever to get folks' attention is that its effectiveness wears off. As a result, those who rely on that leverage to legitimize their brands end up entirely dependent upon the fake, ridiculous, sick, and misogynistic stuff -- and it gets more fake and more abusive and less healthy.

Meanwhile, the market is moving. OF and its ilk have shifted the balance of power. Whatever you may say about its quality (and I'm liable to agree with you), it does manage to capture "realistic sex." That is, OF contributors do not appear to be relying upon shock value. OF is more about showcasing the model, relying upon the consumer's want not just to like a performer's work but interact with that performer in some small way. People subscribe to artists, artists have the power, and in order to retain subscriptions, artists choose to be realistic. For whatever that's worth, because let's face it, a lot of unedited, unconsidered, impromptu, "realistic" sex is dull. Correct me if I'm wrong, Reversecowgirlisboring, but I'm thinking when you're talking about "realistic sex," you want to see people make out and have orgasms in a setting that seems enough like a place you yourself would actually be (if you were lucky, and you might be).

If the porn production industry wanted to adapt and evolve to survive, they should perhaps embrace what you may have implied in your statement. People subscribe to live chat because they want something that seems real enough. And they want to see certain people, whom they discover and build some form of social relationship with. OF seems to have brought back into vogue the notion of favorite performers, and building brands around those people rather than around studios. When consumers love performers, they don't want to see them desecrated or abused or made to do ridiculous, sick, and misogynistic stuff. (At least that's what I think; correct me, folks, if I'm wrong.)

This adaptation would require an investment in change, and it's an open question whether the industry is healthy enough to make such an investment right now.

RFB3

[Link]

On the whole, however, I think that EU studios is simply benefiting from the economy in Eastern Europe. "Do this or don't make any money. US girls have more alternatives there. That said, and to be fair - EU Porn can be visually impressive. DAP scenes with monster dicks and drinking liters of piss - that's something else than US DAP scenes with all the small dick dudes or a guy squeezing 1-2 drops of piss out of his limp noodle....if you're into that sort of stuff.

[Link]

Edited by - lexifan99 on 11/27/2023 2:52:58 PM

[Link]

For me, Euro Porn is extreme in the sense that the girls do things with massive dicks, whereas US girls often work with limp and small dicks. For me as a viewer, this is not only a massive difference visually, but certainly for the girls in particular, a completely different way of filming and a completely different challenge.And as I said, for me that is indeed extreme.

[Link]

I assume that when you say you want to see more realistic sex in porn. Do you mean the kind that offers less extreme and over the top performance because I doubt most of us would want to see couples have real sex. For one thing it would likely mean watching all the action from a tripod mounted camera shooting from the same angle and less than ideal lighting.

[Link]

As I said, the difference for me between EU and US porn, and this makes EU porn extreme for me, is that the girls should/want to do things that I found physically impossible or very challenging........while US girls could probably often do their taxes or sleep during the scenes. I really can't say it any other way - the pure sex makes EU porn more extreme for me, not the surrounding or any trash elements.

[Link]

Edited by - lexifan99 on 11/29/2023 5:04:08 PM

[Link]

- Not as many DPs happening across various studios (I know the existence of Legalporno contradicts this - but I'm talking about most average studios shooting DPs as part of their roster).
- "Family" stuff.
- Hyper-plastic "Instagram" women, with big nails and lip fillers. I'd rather no makeup at all than the OTT, Hiphop-video type of girls that appear in porn.

Edited by - red exposure on 11/30/2023 1:24:45 PM

[Link]

Likewise with the "dirty masseuse" motif. Now, I love watching women get massaged, just as I love watching them in the shower or bathtub. Women's bodies are magnificent. Explaining this is like telling people, "You know why I like music? Well, there's the notes. Those are good. When those notes are sung, that's wonderful." If you were to interrupt a great song with the voices of people saying, "Wait, you can't play the guitar like that! You're not supposed to... but wait. You have a large cock. Okay, proceed" - you'd subtract from the production. So interrupting a great massage with 30 seconds or, god help us, a full minute of shock, shock that the masseuse would dare touch her down there, subtracts from the production. I really don't care what the actors pretend to be thinking. They're looking forward to getting it on anyway, and just like us, they're dying to have the fake dialog part be over with.

But you just know that somewhere, there's a marketing study that lays out the demographics and personas of their consumers, and they've segmented out Guys Who Like Massages that Nearly Become Sexual Assault Claims. They use these motifs as artificial market-targeting devices, so when the audience starts dwindling, they can invent excuses as to why that is. (Not that they'll actually solve the problem caused by the motif itself.) This way, they can have 30 or 40 "sites" that all have their own artificial, stale motifs.

Now, imagine an art museum taking the same approach. Rather than displaying exhibits that feature great artists, or periods of history, or styles of painting or sculpture, they drew cartoons on Post-It notes and stuck them to the artworks at random, and then separated the exhibits by the type or content of the Post-Its. People would enter a hallway or wing and see a Van Gogh, an Andy Warhol, a Picasso, and a Paul Klee, all bunched together with no attention to lighting or presentation. But they'd all have the same orange Post-Its with dick pics drawn on them by middle schoolers. Then when patrons started avoiding the art museum, they'd say, "Oh my, Picasso ain't what he used to be. Let's replace him with Paul Gauguin and see what happens." Up goes the Gauguin, with orange dick-pic Post-Its stuck all over it, the patrons still don't come back, and everyone concludes, "Folks just don't appreciate art anymore." Then they do analytical studies on the artists to make up reasons for what's wrong with them.

When you look at it this way, it's no wonder OnlyFans and its ilk have gathered so much traffic. Regardless of the quality of the content, which is all over the map, you have to admit it's being produced by folks who know what they're producing and who they're doing it for.

RFB3

[Link]

Instead we get the herky jerky fucker that been doing crank and will not long stroke the pussy. I'm also tired of too many camera angles. I like a slow zoom and let the actors build a head of steam. Then maybe a zoomed in angle but from underneath so you get full exposure of the penetration. None of this quartering shot where all you see is a thigh and maybe the top of her muff. Vixen and Blacked are known for this.

[Link]

Very true. Besides, the rise of puppet- like bimbos with fake gigantic asses, fake big boobs and fake lips. That seems to the new normal in present day porn.

Edited by - RitaDismyqueen on 12/2/2023 8:09:58 AM

[Link]

I'm trying to decide whether I agree with Cur8t0r about the plague of short, choppy fucking strokes. Yes, Mick Blue does indeed have these little strokes in a fast rhythm, but what I don't see is any evidence that the female performers don't necessarily enjoy the way he works. So I'm not altogether certain this is a bad thing.

But his point about using the whole shaft? There may be something there. Let's do a bit of investigation. Here's some screenshots from the second scene of one of my favorite flicks, Club Elite 2 (2012), starring and directed by the master EL TEA, who on this very forum once wrote, "i do what what i do, i try to stay out of the way and let the girls shine, that's my steelo." The girls are Baby Cakes and Megan Vaughn, respectively and respectfully, who somehow managed to converge their two superior asses on the same couch without damaging the space/time continuum.

Here the Master, L.T., puts on a clinic for how to properly fuck babes. He gives them the length and girth to cover the full distance, and the pumping he provides is contributory. He's not stabbing at these women with his dick; he's providing the proper springboard for these awesome ladies to fully grind on him. Certainly his manhood is proper, and deserves our full respect. But he lets us express awe and wonder at the magnificence of his partners. Sure, I like his work, but he helps make me want them, desire them. And that's what a proper acting porn director does. So there is something to what Cur8t0r is saying that aligns with what EL TEA is saying: Do what you need to do to let the women shine.

RFB3

[Link]

Over saturation is the second problem with today's porn and surprisingly that's not just confined to fauxcest. You even have the anal fans and those normally clamoring for more shock value porn getting tired of it being all but force fed. Over saturation would be less of an issue if there was just as much innovation being applied to future porn scenes. Too many are painfully predictable, outright rushed or worse micromanaged to the point where I am almost certain the female talent is faking the orgasm to appease an impatient director. This is going to sound incredibly cruel but it has to be said: if you want to compel people to pay for their porn, you have to give them scenes worth paying for rather than some lame scenes that can be churned out cheaply with no effort. If you want proof of how much innovation pays off over the standard fare; the Official Dogfart thread has 218 pages while the Blacked thread has 487. Why such a disparity? Because the VMG found a way to flip the typical IR scene into something brand new and unique. The novelty of a group of black performers 'representing' the ghetto intensely fucking some small Caucasian performer as a way of getting reparations for slavery and racism has been pretty much done to death. VMG highlighted that black performers could perform in the same distinguished or complex psychological predator roles as their Caucasian counterparts.
It's no secret that the mind is the biggest sex organ in a woman's body but the same could be said of men. If you doubt that, why do you think we still have strip clubs?? The strip club amplifies the art of the mindfuck, the tease and steamy performance that can get you emptying your bank account just to live in the fantasy zone she's providing for you just a little longer. Shock value porn has a definitive ceiling attached to it while psychological porn that hits you like a glass of wine or a pint of Guinness or a shot of Bacardi or tequila or moonshine has no such limitations. Porn has become weirdly polarized between film noir(PureTaboo/MissaX) style and comedy laden goofy porn that is so silly, it's almost impossible to get excited about. There's ample space in between to be explored, I feel like early releases by Girlfriends Films and Sweetheart Video managed that balance perfectly.

I can't give you a formula for what makes certain scenes pop vs those that don't but there's a few common threads that run through all the scenes that end up becoming my favorites: intimacy - it may sound ridiculous to say this given that sex is an intimate act all by itself BUT I love performers who can tap into an intimate connection that enhances the performance and allows them to get as carried away as I do watching them, intensity - you don't need to go fast and furious to create intensity because in some cases just the right type of eye contact along with facial expressions/body language can ratchet the erotic power of a scene up by 88%, sync - if you've ever watched one of those great B grade action movies with high stakes brutal fight at the end then you know all about the importance of being in sync. The best fights are almost like a lethal dance and porn sex is similar, watching two performers in sync working in tandem to achieve that breathtaking rhythm just NEVER ever gets old.

[Link]

Edit: I think intimacy is missing too. You can see just about any sex act in today's "taboo" (eyeroll) and comedy-obsessed porn consistently except two people acting normal as if they want to be having sex. lmao

Edited by - Lezzyist on 5/1/2024 1:21:19 AM

[Link]

One of your sentences could very well be among the more beautiful and important statements I've ever read here. I'd put it on a T-shirt, but someone would arrest me (even if they agreed with it).

Most of the stuff that's been nominated in this thread as Things We Find Wrong with Porn centers around artificially enhancing or altering something about the scene to make up for some perceived, estimated shortcoming - maybe about the performers, or the pairings, or just the scenery or setting. It's a belief that the audience at large won't just enjoy the sex. That it'll be too "vanilla" if you just get people together and have them fuck. When not only the rise of OnlyFans and the proliferation of services such as Chaturbate make so starkly clear that folks will be perfectly happy watching a woman masturbate for an hour. Maybe only a dozen people at any one time will be turned on by this woman, but multiply that number by a thousand and you have yourself a media empire. As you say, someone somewhere will find a person beautiful enough to want to masturbate. This, contrary to belief, is not a bad thing.

Let me clarify something: I used the word "artificial," and that term applies to several things, but I only mean some of them. Many sexual performers accessorize. You mentioned women with magnificent breast enhancements. You drew the line at butchery that leaves scars (which often isn't what a performer would prefer, but what she's left with) and lip injections that make the face into something weird and inhuman. And I would agree. If I had the metaphysical power to eliminate all tattoos and breast enhancements from the history of porn, we may never have discovered Jayden Jaymes. And that would be a crime against God. Having sex on-screen should be a personal statement for the performers. The statement I see, and which always turns me on, is, "I'm beautiful." If accessorizing and enhancement makes the performer project more beauty into the scene, then I'm for it. If it's compensating for what the performer believes, or sadly may have been convinced, is a personal shortcoming or deficiency or lack of natural beauty or a tendency towards aging, then I would argue for leaving her as she is and helping her see that she's wrong. Accessories should help the performer reveal something, not conceal something.

So I'm not against the enhancements that make the performers more comfortable and confident about themselves. Self-confidence, to me, lies at the very core of sensuality. Some folks are turned on by the appearance of taking that away, but I sincerely believe more of us are turned on by amplifying, supporting, and illuminating it. A greater audience may be out there who might be willing to discard their "taboo" about porn and sensuality, and even shed their socially reinforced guilt around jerking off to naked bodies, if the medium stuck to the theme that people are beautiful.

There are countless FM pairings in scenes where, compared to the guy, the woman is old enough to be his mom or young enough to be his sister. Viewers will draw their own conclusions or concoct their own fantasies without the director's or producer's help. How many great scenes are there with Julia Ann draining the balls of some 20-year-old guy who will never again have such great sex in his life? When a scene spends so much time and effort reinforcing and augmenting and underscoring those things we may be able to conclude or fantasize for ourselves ("OMG, she's twice his age!") then the power of that scene is diminished. Yes, there's a certifiable audience out there who get into "fauxcest" scenes (perfect word for it), but let's be honest with ourselves: Wouldn't that audience continue to think and fantasize what they will about the scene, even without the help of the staging and cheap dialogue? Marketing has this compulsion to segment the audience and play to the segments individually. They got a rise from stepmoms and stepsisters, so they'll hit that same note over and over because they think they've tapped into some reliable, Pavlovian impulse. When their industry at its core is about sex and naked bodies and orgasms, and no impulse is more reliable or predictable or marketable than the one triggered by sex and naked bodies and orgasms.

If there is any serious soul searching among porn producers, and I hope there is and continues to be from time to time, I would have them start with the premise that people are beautiful. Whatever they build from there needs to center around this theme. Then I would ask that they re-examine all the marketing that has mutated their product and diminished its quality, all in the name of subdividing their audience. Chaturbate proves that people will find their own corners, their own niches, and their own turn-ons all on their own without anyone prodding or influencing them.

Start with beautiful people getting it on, and stick with that. As long as you never stray from that premise, whatever emerges from your effort should succeed.

RFB3

[Link]

1. OF
2. Directors who don't know how to shoot a scene properly and think we'll be impressed with their "vision" of the scene
3. Tatted up male "talent" who think the viewers are watching because of them, not the woman in the scene.

[Link]

I think there is a market for good story porn. Back in the VHS days, there was a video store I sometimes went to. In that store, you could rent or buy. They had a classic section, featuring the older X-rated films that were shown in the theaters. I have seen some of those and while the stories weren't that good, I could still appreciate the effort and money that went into making them. Later, after DVD's came out, quite a few of those same films became available on those. They wouldn't have done that if those films were not being rented or sold. It is possible those films are more popular than the new stuff that has been coming out.

[Link]

Edited by - oktotti on 5/2/2024 9:24:13 AM

[Link]

I can't figure out what the point of some of these reels are, as the profiles called up provide me with no clue as to how she might be monetizing them. (Admittedly, I don't know much about how all this works.) With others, it's pretty clear what's up: The About tab on their profiles, or their IG link, leads to a page of more inks, one of which is to OF.

Many of these models possess enough charisma in what I see of them that makes me want to "get to know them more" in a way that standard porn does not -- even though the delivery vehicle (my laptop) is the same. But then I get to the OF page and fund two things that sour me. One is that all the promises are the same -- innocent looking but naughty, nasty stuff, BG, blowjob, fucking, pussy shots, dick evaluations, I do this all myself -- and the whatever it was that made me want to check her out further disappears into an ocean of same-old-stuff. The other is they want me to pay for a monthly subscription and then for each video after that, but I have no way to evaluate the quality of the product before I buy. I was pretty interested in one girl but then some online reviews saying basically that the videos didn't match the hype that drew them to her.

But, to get back to the larger point, I can see how plenty of guys would go for an OF girl who appeals to the fantasy that she's talking to and performing "just for them" as opposed to standard porn videos, even casting videos with interviews, for which it's harder to break that wall down.

I do wish porn could be more realistic, or exhibit a verisimilitude that enables the viewer to suspend disbelief and think it might could maybe actually happen that way. I enjoyed Dancing Bear for that reason. BangBrfos doesn't do reverse BangBus often enough. I wish for more videos like Caroline Daily welcoming the new BangBros employee to the job with a blowjob. I sit alone in an office all day long and fantasize about a blowjob fairy coming in, relieving my stress, and leaving. Tonight's Girlfriend and MassageGirls18 have and had that verismilitude, although MG18 could have benefitted a little more from stripper slides and teasing, a la, "will she or won't she" before she does. The occasional insertion in Manojob and TheDickSuckers was pretty damned erotic. And the lesser-known gangbang and bukkake sites certainly had that sense of real people having real sex.

Just MHO, and worth what you paid for it.

[Link]

Unlike the OP, I thankfully don't see that much piss play in porn though.

[Link]

Granted, it's people wanting to see as close as they can get to pedophilia, SA, and incest without getting in trouble, but it's still all cliche lol

[Link]

So the question is, where do we look for these three vital ingredients? For you, the psychological foreplay, as you called it, amplifies these three factors. And you're clearly not alone with this feeling.

Here's the challenge for me: The three main ingredients you cited, all of which I'd wholeheartedly agree with, are components of the actual sex. These are the things we expect to see when we get down to fucking. It's the qualities that separate a great porn performer from a centerfold model. Valentina Nappi is a stunningly beautiful woman, whom I've praised almost too many times in this forum. Consistently, through each one of her ten thousand or so scenes, she conveys to me strongly the intimacy, intensity, and sync I'm looking for in a scene. Other women have similarly, captivatingly beautiful bodies, but Valentina is the far superior performer. Not because her ass is the reason God created Italy, but because she never dissatisfies, not once.

I'm trying to recall any scene I've seen her in (which may only be a few hundred, or less than one percent of her work) where psychological foreplay enhanced its value. All those three qualities ooze from her actual copulation. When she gets on with it, she shines.

I would argue that productions may rely upon such factors as psychological foreplay to amplify or pre-condition the viewer's mood, in advance of sex scenes that do not feature Valentina Nappi. In other words, if you ain't Valentina, you need all the help you can get.

Maybe these production features do add value to the product. Perhaps they have to. The thing is, when the performers are particularly great at the thing we're there to actually see, those features may not be necessary for all viewers, certainly not for me.

It's when producers come to depend upon these add-ons, these appendages, these "artificial enhancements" that they can only evolve in either of two directions: They can become genuine, artistic, cinematic or near-cinematic efforts at great filmmaking, which is what Digital Playground and some others aspire to. Or, in a majority of cases, they become cliche.

Your clarion call, which we're all hearing, is that porn as an industry must evolve or perish. I would submit that there's only so much evolution you can do, if the ingredient you depend upon for your identity is the "psychological foreplay." Digital Playground takes its direction about as far as it can go. And by definition, cliche cannot evolve. It wouldn't be cliche anymore if it did.

If there's a solution here, I believe it's in determining where the intimacy, intensity, and sync truly come from, and work on a delivery vehicle that give the viewer these three ingredients consistently, at a price point the viewer will perceive as equitable. I do believe this is achievable. We're just not there yet.

RFB3

[Link]

1) The Artificial Erection
Lots of male performers are using Viagra and Cialis in porn. For me this has really made porn better. Longer scenes are possible now. No short scenes from 10 or 15 minutes but up to 45 minutes of hardcore action in a scene. Those earlier scenes were often too short for me. When it got interesting the action stopped. Now the guys can go on and go on for a long time. You can't do that with a natural erection. Now the cocks are already hard when the scene starts so no time has to be wasted and the action can start as soon as possible. I watch porn for sex so the preparations for a good scene have to be done before the scene and not during the scene.

2) The normalization of anal sex
As a big anal porn fan I really like it that there is so much anal porn these days (there is also enough non-anal porn off course). For me the fantasy is that hot girls want it in the ass non-stop. That is why I always watch anal porn. And also here preparation is very important. Girls wearing butt plugs before the scene so the assholes are already loose and the cocks can go into the assholes very easily. Also here the preparation has to be done before the scene and not during the scene. It is also part of the fantasy aspect of porn.

3) The Pissing Trend
I only see that on a few websites. Not something I like because it distracts from what porn really is about, fucking.

[Link]

Edited by - Lezzyist on 5/5/2024 12:50:47 AM

[Link]

Edited by - Lezzyist on 5/7/2024 2:54:11 AM

[Link]

What I meant about the threat of violence is that it's almost too easy if that makes sense. I prefer the quiet savagery of someone who forces someone into a reluctant barely consensual sexual encounter for the eyes of the view with the threat of shame or expulsion or losing their credentials in a particular field etc. I remember reading somewhere about this woman who was shopping for new furniture and basically almost pretended to be bicurious bordering on lesbian to get a good deal from the sales girl who was clearly interested in her. Imagine a porn scene based off that where the sales girl remembers being led on by the woman and plots a meticulous revenge scheme further down the line forcing her to actually have a lesbian encounter with her or have a compromising video be circulated around or be blamed for damage to the company's vacation condo . . . something plausible yet calculating without any threat of physical force needing to be brought to the table. I honestly sometimes think that Bree among others should read the confessions section of magazines like Cosmo and Glamour to get inspiration for new scenes.

[Link]

Anal Sex Is My Thing :)

[Link]

I am glad that it seems that I was mistaken about the pissing trend - maybe it isn't as big as I had got the impression of. But the other two things on my list are certainly prevalent in today's porn - the chemically enhanced erections which make the scenes go on FOREVER (I hate having to use the fast forward button while I watch porn, it takes me out of the moment completely) and the overuse of anal.

When there is no vaginal sex before the anal sex, I just cannot enjoy watching the anal fucking. It's like a four course dinner at a great restaurant where you go directly from the starter to the dessert. The excitement, the antecipation, the build-up, the reward - all that is gone. Bad dramaturgy is what it is. Realism is sacrificed in the name of "give the costumer what it wants" pragmatism.

Realism, really? Isn't that the stupidest thing to demand from porn? Well the thing is, the best porn set-ups balance on the border between realism and fantasy. A completely unbelievable plot is meaningless and annoying, but a half-believable plot can really make a good scene great. And this involves not just the pre-fucking set-ups in the beginning of a scene (or between scenes, in a feature), but the actual sex too. This is why I'm so bugged about the straight-to-anal trend. Everyone who has had the pleasure of fucking a girlfriend anally knows that you have to start with regular vaginal fucking and eventually, when things have gotten really hot and horny, you can progress to the ass, if you're lucky. You ARE lucky to be given the chance to do that. A male performer in a porn scene should also appear to be lucky when he gets to penetrate a beautiful woman anally. But if he does it right after the blowjob, then the whole power of anal sex is lost. And the woman does not give the impression of being so horny (finally, as the result of some hot sex) that she decides to take the next step. Instead she gives the impression of being a sex worker and nothing else. That does not turn me on.

Some have questioned the point of having plots/storyline in porn. I think stories are super important. The stories are what connects the sex to the fantasies of the viewers, of us, the porn consumers. There are so many situations in our everyday lives where we can add just a little imagination and get these perfect sexual fantasies. Not just dreaming about fucking a girl in the gym (a pretty common fantasy, I think) or fucking your new middle-aged wife 18-year old daughter (not as common as the porn industry seems to believe), or your co-worker or whatever, but ANYONE, there are a million of sexy situations, a million fantasies, and I really don't think that porn has explored this territory enough.

I mean, let's just say: a realistic (or borderline realistic) threesome, a realistic DP. Wouldn't that be so much more exciting to watch than the formulaic scenes that the porn industry gives us today? Why aren't they trying harder? Because of the principle that if there is a cheaper alternative, that will always be chosen? But certainly there must be a market even for the kind of porn that I'm talking about? Greg Lansky showed everyone that you can make glossy, expensive-looking, neatly packaged porn and make a great success out of it. I might be bored to death nowadays with the cold and soulless stuff that Tushy and his other brands present, but I think that the porn world can learn from Lansky's example. If you have an artistic vision and work passionately to create just that, people might be willing to pay for it.

[Link]

I'm all for anyone making an effort to contribute artistry to a production. af369 says:

Here's the thing: Where should we expect artistry to come from? When a director makes porn into opera, he's clearly demonstrating to the viewer he's willing to make an effort. He's saying, I'm investing in your want of fantasy, and your need for someone to make it realistic. That's worth respect too.

But as we all have conceded here in this forum, there are performers of such sexual quality that any amount of opera you add to a scene gets in the way. Yesterday I found myself watching Vanessa Cage, who started out around 2014 as a (very) young blonde with a teen's body. Somewhere along the way to 2017, she matured quite rapidly and found some serious curves. As I caught myself rewinding the scene over and over, I said to myself, I could probably just watch this woman's ass at work for hours on-end. Honestly, with this great an ass, what else could I possibly want in the scene? What was I fantasizing about? Sticking everything I've got into Vanessa's ass. What would help me fantasize about this? More of her ass, thank you.

Here's what I mean, in a 2015 scene on BangBros with Mike Adriano. Now, I've seen other Vanessa Cage scenes where there's a little opera going on. She's some lady's best friend and she's been brought into a threesome. There's a get-to-know-you chat before the foreplay. I can vouch for the fact that Vanessa is, hands down, a terrible actress. She couldn't convince me she was acting if she had descended into the scene on wires wearing angel's wings and a halo. I don't care. Vanessa qualifies as everything I could possibly want in a scene. Yes she got fake tits at one point; yes, she didn't really need them; yes, it's a perfect job and they came out ridiculously beautiful. That Vanessa can't act, does not disqualify her in my mind from being the center of my fantasy. I love her enough.

If we're also asking our porn performers to be, in a sense, "opera stars," so that they can act in a cinematic scene where the director is also a cinematographer and editor, then are we not adding a qualification to our enjoyment of the scene that is in a very real sense unrealistic? Yes, there are sexual performers who can also act, but isn't the subset of people who can act realistically and have sex realistically, an intolerably small quantity? Do we really want, to borrow whyspers2scorpio's metaphor, a "boot camp" to make certain every actress not only has the stamina for the job, as Scorpio suggested, but can also double for Michelle Pfeiffer or Scarlett Johansson in a pinch?

If the girl brings all the artistry into the scene that it needs with her body, her chemistry, and her sexual talent, then isn't that enough to fulfill any fantasy we can come up with? If an artistic director like Greg Lansky is pursuing his vision of cinematic beauty, and casts Vanessa Cage for a scene, would she ruin the scene because she can't act? Or would she carry the scene because her sex is magnificent?

RFB3

[Link]