When most people say "couples" what they usually mean is a film that a porn-enthusiast husband can show his wife and still have some prayer of getting laid later that night. My wife and I gave up looking for those sorts of films years ago. I jerk off to old issues of Penthouse, and she watches gay porn. The mutual enjoyment of pornography is not a part of our sexlife together. But as it happens, we skimmed For Women Only yesterday. As always, her observations were deeply insightful.
Upon seeing the DVD menu she burst out laughing, "It looks like a product safety insert for a feminine hygiene product!" I went to the bathroom cabinette, and damn if she wasn't right. It just goes to show that something can be aimed at women's sexuality without being the least bit sexy. We skipped ahead to one of the scenes.
"It looks like an infomercial. I keep expecting Connie Selica to walk onto the set." You know what? She's right. Video doesn't like deep shadow, video doesn't like hot highlights. You really can't do much with video except fill the room with light and put a heavy ProMist filter over the lens. The result? The way your sexy video looks has a lot in common with things that aren't very sexy.
Of course there's a lot more: silly cocaine era art direction, fake boobs, disinterested looking male talent, overly enthusiastic female talent, etc.
A comment about the back cover arts of Wicked movies. It is better not to have pictures of sex acts on the back cover. This is not to attract unnecessary attention from the customs. An example of an ideal back cover art without sex acts is "Scent of Desire". I think people who buy couples porn know what to expect from the movie so putting pictures of sex acts on the back cover is not necessary.
Your front cover arts are excellent. I can hang up huge posters of these cover arts.
I'm happy to hear that you're pleased with the packaging for Scent Of Desire. And thanks for your other thoughts - I'll will pass them on to our Art Dept.
When I'm looking for an adult feature the first thing I look for is the director. However, to broaden it out slightly, I would say that I want the film to look like a film. I want to see evidence of care and imagination on the part of the producer, director, cast and crew. I don't mind features being shot on video but I don't want something that looks amateurish.
When you're talking about feature porn I think it's difficult to underestimate the importance of the narrative. I'm not expecting anything particularly profound or moving from an adult feature (although it would be nice) but an engaging story is crucial. I want the narrative to drive the feature and hold my attention for the entire running time.
I'll try to be a little more concise with reference to things I don't like.
Guys jerking off. Whether we're talking about feature, vignette or gonzo, I have no interest in watching some guy pulling manically at his meat.
Randomly inserted sex scenes. I want to see sex scenes that are motivated by the narrative and move the film forward. To have the narrative interrupted every five minutes just reminds me that it's often only there to provide an alibi for the sex. There was an interesting discussion here recently about the difficulty of integrating sex scenes into a narrative framework. All I'll say on the subject now is that it can be done convincingly but rarely seems to be.
Formulaic sex scenes. Sitting through a sex scene that follows the standard progression of positions and lasts the requisite 10-15 minutes makes me yearn for the relative unpredictability of the Golden Age. The fantasy blowjob sequence in Falling From Grace is an excellent example of how a short and simple scene can be far more effective than the usual oral, mish, doggy routine.
Faux lesbianism. I don't mind group scenes but rarely have the patience to sit through the obligatory girl/girl scene.
I like to consider myself somewhat of an afficianado on couples films, given that my wife and I watch all our adult films together. We both like the same things, and both hate the same things.
A great "couples film" --
1. Is respectful of women. And more often than not it revels in their beauty. It celebrates the female form.
2. Includes passion as an emotion. Sex is exhibited as an act expressing the emotion. Sex is not just a base act done simply for pleasure.
3. Contains character development. There has to be something going on between the characters to make the sex more than a base act.
4. Contains better than average production values. The sets, the lighting, the costumes, the music, all help to set the mood. And I might add, properly it is shot on film not video.
5. Contains attractive men.
Things we require --
a. Female orgasms, even if they're fake. b. At least some full body contact & slow grinding. c. Passionate kissing. d. Eye contact and smiling during sex.
Thing we most want and find it hard to get --
More internal cumshots and fewer popshots! And for crying out loud, no more jerk-off finishes.
Things we don't have strong feelings about one way or the other --
a. Anal Sex. b. Fake breasts. c. Tattoos and piercings.
Things we try hard to avoid --
a. Double Penetrations b. Orgies, etc. c. Sexual Violence (including hair-pulling, gagging, etc.)
To sum it up, a couple's film is not about masturbating. A couple's film is about setting a mood so that the couple will feel like doing each other. It is respectful and celebratory of the sexual act. It would do nothing to degrade the act, or either partner.
But at the same time a couple's film does not have to be boring. As you read on another thread, my wife and I have just discovered Jonathan Morgan's comedies. HERCULES could have easily been turned into a couple's film like I have described here, just by changing some of the sex acts.
Oh, and then by shooting it on film.
By the way, I also believe that what I have described above also is what paves the road to mainstream acceptance of adult films. And more mainstream acceptance means a larger market by the creation of "crossover." But that is just my opinion.
_______________________________
"The greatest argument for the existence of God, is the beauty of the female form." -- Blake_Fan
"The great ambition of women is to inspire love." -- Moliere (1622-1673)
What I like in a couples film is, a plot that is more advanced than just to connect the sex scenes. For instance, most of my past girlfriends have enjoyed the classic Nurses of the 407, due to the humorous plot. Tease scenes, where just a little happens, but not a full scene. A blow job or the sort. A movie that looks more like a mainstream film (shot on film, widescreen, decent camera work, good sets/locations). Stars that have acting ablility. Eye contact during the sex scene. More time enjoying each other's bodies.
What I don't like in a couples film is the men jerking off to completion, too many tattoos/piercings (especially if they don't fit the plot), fake breasts.
And let Jonathan Morgan make more features with a good budget. Hercules was one of the best adult films I've seen in years.
I'm a female viewer of porn, and most of it is gonzo stuff because I like the realism of it, and the lack of fakery in it.
I don't care for features that much because I can't stand lame acting or dialogue - If I want to see decent acting, I'll watch a mainstream film.
That said, there are things that you could put in your films that would make them appeal to more women.
1. More full body shots, less genital close-ups. 2. No fake orgasms or fake tits or excessive tongue/pussy piercings. This stuff just screams out out "Artificial" "Plastic". You're not fooling women when it comes to this stuff, and you may just be turning them off from enjoying porn. For instance, I like watching Chloe perform versus Brianna Banks in a film; one is attractive in a natural way and definately enjoys sex , the other is pierced and implanted to the max, and looks like she is just going through the motions . 3. A mix of body movements, some slow, some fast. I've actually seen some great erotic moments in mainstream films, that if the actors were naked would have been plenty fine for a porn film. For instance, in "Quills" (the movie about the Marquis De Sade, but don't let that bother you), in a later scene with Joachin Phoenix and Kate Winslet, the actor just pounds away at her in a slow, deliberate manner, like he is overcome with lust. Terrific. Another example is "Romance", the French art film that featured Rocco Siffredi in one sex scene. Here, the female director was able to lasso him in; he moves his whole body like a tiger in heat. To add to the effect, the camera pans up and down the length of the couple during the scene as they lie in bed; your eye never gets bored . 4. Last, but not least: Show at least one scene in a film where there is a good long camera shot of the man's face as he cums. When a woman is in bed with a man, this is what she sees, and it's a delight to behold . If you don't want to focus only on his face, then pull back and show all of their bodies during the critical moment. And, in case you don't know, women could care less about the duration, quantity, thickness etc. of a guy's load.
Well I can't say for sure what makes a good couples film after viewing all the other posts. I guess it all depends on the couple. As for my wife and I we enjoy watching realistic sex. If a company is going to show an anal scene why not show the prep work? Rather than just go to the ramming a cock in the ass? Go ahead and show the guy saying this won't hurt at all and then while he piledrives the woman show her eyes bulge out of her head, just kidding. Show him pull out the lube and lube her ass, then enter a finger to relax it, then coat his cock in lube and enter her slowly. Show the couple that anal sex can be good rather than skip all the bullshit. How about adding some commentary to a blowjob? Like take it deeper, ouch, wrap your lips around your teeth, don't suck so hard, just lick it and so forth. Couples like to learn and experiment with different ideas not just watch a lame ass plot with mild sex. Couples already get mild sex from each other, we watch porn to get new ideas.
For a little more guidance, check out this past weekly poll on studio's biggest mistakes in trying to appeal to women.
As to the specific question, I'd have to say balance and continuity. The sex and non-sex should feel balanced and belong with each other. The scenes shouldn't feel forced, and normally there should be a caring feeling between the performers. The sex should also feel continuous and free. One of the easiest ways to ruin a scene for me is to feel like the performers are made to have the scene either harder or softer. If anal is a natural progression, then anal is fine. If anal is a natural progression and the performers fondle each other instead, then it's not okay.
There have been many good posts to this thread, and I already posted on the weekly poll that astroknight provided a link to. I won't go into great detail here, but I do want to make a couple of points.
I agree with natural progression. Watching the guy pull out to hurry around and jerk off for a facial slooge on the woman isn't high on my erotic factor list. If she is giving him a closeup hand job or blowjob with the intention of making him cum it is. Oh, and it's ok for him to kiss her with cum on her mouth. Really. Oh, and it's ok for her to play with his ass if she's giving him a blow job. Really.
Hopefully this isn't a total hijack, but when I was watching Nasty Nymphos 8 yesterday I realized why most male ass-play is so bad in hetero flicks - the guy almost never reacts. What's the point of giving the guy an ass rimming if he's not reacting or the camera doesn't capture his reaction?
