| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| sdc Member 236 Posts 4/03 | Is there anything other than the year of production separating a vignette movie from a loop-carrier? Obviously there are stylistic differences - with the movies of Andrew Blake et al. being much more polished than the loop-carriers of old - but, aside from that, they appear to be one and the same. [Link] |
| juha Senior Member 2752 Posts 3/05 | |
| Lazerus Member 187 Posts 9/03 | I suppose we could therefore call any film with separate, unconnected segments which are actually shot at one time with a particular feature in mind a vignette film (but I'm making up this classification system on the spot here, so don't take it as gospel). Actually, as much as 60-70 percent of all classic adult features fall into this category, if you think about it. The set-ups might by more elaborate, and even have a thread of a narrative (as in something like Take Off , for example, or any of the Blake films I have seen), but the premise is the same. Some people would argue that this is the best type of adult feature, because of the flexiblity it allows for presenting a range of different sex scenes with different erotic situations. |
| sdc Member 236 Posts 4/03 | I think it does make sense to suggest that films conceived as a whole – rather than constructed around previously shot, disparate, footage - are best referred to as vignette. Of course, the evidence at hand – the finished films – won’t always be conclusive; for example, Maraschino Cherry would still be considered a loop-carrier but, at a guess, something like DeRenzy’s Let’s Get It On wouldn’t. |
| 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 |