Why did 1970s and early 1980s porn look more (page 2)

Author	Post
mrputitbackin Member 51 Posts 12/09	Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 9:44AM I prefer todays porn over the 70's and 80's porn. The girls look better. I remeber even when I was like 11 in the 80's and sneaking around and watching some porno tapes from my dad's collection, the girls were ugly to me especially the Black women in porn back then. There were very few stunners. The camera work and lighting also was worse back then than now. In fact I wouldn't even buy a porno movie that was made before 96. The quality of the girls back then, ofcourse there are a few exceptions, but in my opinion they pale in comparison. Also Porno is supposed to be fantasy. I don't want to see two average looking people in a missionary position. I want to see wild sluts doing ass to mouth, gargling cum etc. [Link]
Mojo Deactivated User 1223 Posts 9/03	Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 11:24AM I hate mad tilted angles and fast non-stop camera movement. I also hate strange un-naturtural sex positions just so the camera can get a good view of the penetration, like doggy position where the guy holds off from going deep and penetrates at an angle. Lastly, whatever happened to kissing? For example, in cowgirl position the girl hardly ever kisses the bloke and more often than not twists her waist to one side to look at the camera, which is often behind her. Naah, I want hard bangin’ and heavy duty snoggin’, not all this “Look at the camera babe!” or “Hold back from the fucking so I can get a look!” bullshit! [Link]
spitty Member 730 Posts 12/04	Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 2:04PM Nice post Mojo...and I agree 100 %. [Link]
Lethena Member 45 Posts 5/09	Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 3:15PM I think it goes to that porn have grown into a big industry. I wouldn't say pornactors today don't enjoy it, but still there is a difference. In the older day you weren't shooting sex scenes, you shoot people who had sex. Sex how it could look like in the bedroom with a little twist of course..today's movies, how many go at it like that at home? I don't think they directed it very much in the older days either, or cut it. It was...in the lack of word..more genuine. I like vintage porn as a complement to todays work :) [Link]

Stalag Deactivated User 476 Posts 1/10	Posted - Oct 23 2010 : 6:22AM Could not handle the lack of variety back then. [Link]
Karloff Deactivated User 319 Posts 7/10	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 12:29PM cantgetlaid wrote: comfortable? Just looks like today's isn't actually enjoyable.. Click to expand It was women's porn. [Link]
elgringoviejo58 Senior Member 1460 Posts 1/07	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 2:20PM Today's porn is more about sex as a series of stunts, porn has become sort of a can you top this thing. [Link]
backdoorman Senior Member Shake for me girl... I wanna be your backdoorman ! 2776 Posts 10/07	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 4:21PM Circus act vs. an attempt to really make a movie. Most of todays porn does very little for me ! [Link]
Draxxx Senior Member 3831 Posts 2/07	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 7:32PM elgringoviejo58 wrote: Today's porn is more about sex as a series of stunts, porn has become sort of a can you top this thing. Click to expand Today's porn offers a lot of variety that simply wasn't available back then. The wilder stuff is there for the people who enjoy it (and it's obvious that some people do) and there's still plenty of stuff that is done closer to the 80s style stuff. The VIVID and WICKED stuff was typical porn back then and both companies and other still put out that same type of porn today. With all the companies out their doing all types of porn there's really no excuse for anyone to watch stuff they don't like. [Link]
JohnnyVelvet Member The Gothic South 40 Posts 2/05	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 7:51PM There is something to be said for seeing a truly beautiful woman, and there are shockingly many in porn these days, getting fucked franticly in every hole by the stud, most of whom act like they're utterly insane. But I would take a scene out of New Wave Hookers 3 over anything shot today. Passion and emotion are what are missing these days. The mechanical act of sex is boring without it. [Link]
Nameless1 Member 165 Posts 10/10	Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 10:43PM Something I've noticed watching older videos is that the movies look more realistic and "mainstream". The sex is also a little more realistic. Seems like they put a lot more effort in blending movie and story. There seemed to be more of a balance. With that said, there are companies that still follow this formula today. With great success. Edited by - nameless1 on 12/25/2010 10:45:41 PM [Link]
Endless Loop Senior Member Tomatometer 1129 Posts 8/04	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 4:41AM Comfortable? If you mean people fucking without a care in the world they were being filmed, thats one way to describe it. From my perspective, unaware of what exactly everyone else was watching, other than for the review listings in the smut mags, I recall the blur of feature porn in the late 70's and 80's more like an incessant stream of bullshit that stretched across the decades. I recall being at the complete mercy of an industry that filmed, boxed, and shoveled out garbage with absolute zero regard for consumer interest year after year. Its why I look upon the few pioneers who helped lift it from that quagmire of banal sex, of cheese scripts that eventually led to the banal sex, and rampant deception of just how banal that sex would be, with great appreciation. Some things never change, but with the vast array of selections available today, filmed to meet specific interests and genre's, accurately labeled of their content, with what seems an endless pool of beautiful starlets to perform in them, I have no idea why anyone would want to return to those dogcrap days of porns defunct past. Comfortable sex? Check under "Amateur" Edited by - Endless Loop on 12/26/2010 5:12:53 AM [Link]
Draxxx Senior Member 3831 Posts 2/07	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 7:57AM I think some of you are looking at that era through rose colored glasses. You're remembering the best of the best and thinking it was typical. You're remembering your fav performers and thinking they were the norm. The 70s and 80s had plenty of not so great movies and not so great performers. I still buy stuff from the 70s and 80s because I like the look of certain women and I don't see it as being superior overall compared to today's stuff. Yeah, the 70s stuff had stories but in most cases the story overshadowed the sex. Sometimes the stories may have been interesting but if your into watching an interesting/great story why go to porn looking for one? I can understand people wanting a story in their porn but at the end of the day the main function of porn is to supply sex. Most of the 70s stuff failed at that because in most cases 70% of the movie is story. To me it's frustrating/annoying fastforwarding through a story that I don't care about (and isn't that good) to see the girl(s) I'm interested in have a 5-10 minute sex scene that often didn't even show that much actual sex. Most times I watch those old movies I'm wondering how much actual sex was going on and how much was simulated since about half the scene never shows actual penetration. The 80s did a better job of balancing sex with story and the girls were overall much better looking but the stuff I see from that era has it's share of goodlooking women who don't seem to be that into the sex. From what I understand the pornstar Savannah(sp) who committed suicide was one of the most popular girls of that era and yet everything I've read about her says she wasn't into sex at all. There were lots of pretty women in the 80s but other than being eye candy were their performances really all that good? Then some of you are comparing Gonzo to feature type sex and in my mind they're two different things. Features will often show (or try to) couples "making love" or try to be sensual. Gonzo for the most part is about sexual performace and harder/wilder sex. I think some or most of today's features (and even some Gonzo) still do "lovemaking" and "sensual" sex. But mostly that type of sex is considered "couples" porn because that what most women tend to like. Some Gonzo tends to go for the wild over the top stuff that doesn't typically happen in real life. Gonzo is hyper fantasy. Features are real life fantasy. [Link]
john lyons Senior Member Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome 1188 Posts 1/08	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:14AM The three primary differences between how sex scenes were shot in the 70s/80s and how they're shot today are as follows: 1) The actors: The mentality of most of the actors in 70s/80s films was that they were making movies, yes, X rated movies but still, a form of cinema. They didn't treat fucking each other like some kind of mechanical performance that just needed to be repeated to order. 2) Film: unlike with video, where you can shoot for hours, when one is shooting film, there's no time for waste or excessive coverage. Sex scenes were planned and completely staged. The cinematographer and director would set up shots, as opposed to just letting them go at it and filming the process. 3) Story: Fucking in character is a lost art. Most good directors in the 70s/80s insisted that their actors not break character while having sex. Thus the sex scenes have an emotional and realistic resonance that's in keeping with the rest of the film. [Link]

Stalag Deactivated User 476 Posts 1/10	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:56AM Most of the porn shot in the 70s were 15 minute loops for the peep market. I don't think the girls in these loops had a clue what they were doing, and it showed. If you wanted to see Linda Lovelace in Deep Throat, you had to wait in line at a theatre. If you wanted to see her getting it from a German Shepherd, you went to the peeps. And made sure the door was locked. [Link]
pat362 Senior Member 10083 Posts 3/10	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 11:36AM I think John Lyon pretty much covered everything that I would have said. Some have said that porn made in the 70's and 80's wasn't very food and I tend to agree with them. It's for sure that all those loop mini films which were probably all shot on 8mm and/or 16mm don't compare to anything done today but I'd never use one of those as comparaison betwen porn made back then to the one done today. The only to be fair is to use only films made on 35mm. If you do that then I'd say that more than 30% of those made in the 70's and 80's is still better than 50% of what's made today. My main beef with Golden Day porn is usually the lighting which wasn't always the greatest. [Link]
Draxxx Senior Member 3831 Posts 2/07	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 8:28PM john lyons wrote: The three primary differences between how sex scenes were shot in the 70s/80s and how they're shot today are as follows: 1) The actors: The mentality of most of the actors in 70s/80s films was that they were making movies, yes, X rated movies but still, a form of cinema. They didn't treat fucking each other like some kind of mechanical performance that just needed to be repeated to order. Click to expand I still think that today's performers shooting features feel like they're making movies. The girls and dircetors at WICKED, VIVID, SIN CITY, etc., seem to be into it and take it seriously. And the ones shooting Gonzo don't because....they aren't. 2) Film: unlike with video, where you can shoot for hours, when one is shooting film, there's no time for waste or excessive coverage. Sex scenes were planned and completely staged. The cinematographer and director would set up shots, as opposed to just letting them go at it and filming the process. Click to expand I actually prefer longer shoots with less strict staging. The sex is the most important component of the product. I think it's better to have more actual sex in a sex film. If the couple enjoy or are more comfortable in a certain position or are really into the sex of the moment, why break it up prematurely just to hit another position? Why the hurry? 3) Story: Fucking in character is a lost art. Most good directors in the 70s/80s insisted that their actors not break character while having sex. Thus the sex scenes have an emotional and realistic resonance that's in keeping with the rest of the film. Click to expand Now this I totally agree with! It's the reason so many of the parodies they do fall flat. They go to all the trouble of trying to make the perfomers look like certain characters, try to re-create sets and write something that resembles that paricular show but when it comes to the sex performances they might as well be inserts from old/other scenes because the performers/directors end up doing their typical generic sex scenes. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 8:34PM Once porn switched to video in the mid-to-late 80s is was unbelievably ugly for a decade at least. Then in the 90s a lot of porn was reduced to absurdly sustained close-ups that seemed to never end. So boring, although there are obviously some who still love that stuff today. There were enough crappy sex scenes in the 70s and 80s where they shot the penetration where you could only see the penis, vagina and the guy's junk and asshole, but in the 90s some scenes were reduced to nothing but that for minutes on end. Rex Borsky, formerly the great comedic director Alex De Renzy, produced some of the worst of the worst during that period. The likes of male 'performers' like Ed Powers just sealed the deal. I didn't watch porn for another 10 years. Edited by - BlackSix on 12/26/2010 8:35:00 PM [Link]
mcewan All-Star Member 1294 Posts 8/08	Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:19PM BlackSix wrote: Once porn switched to video in the mid-to-late 80s is was unbelievably ugly for a decade at least. Then in the 90s a lot of porn was reduced to absurdly sustained close-ups that seemed to never end. So boring, although there are obviously some who still love that stuff today. There were enough crappy sex scenes in the 70s and 80s where they shot the penetration where you could only see the penis, vagina and the guy's junk and asshole, but in the 90s some scenes were reduced to nothing but that for minutes on end. Rex Borsky, formerly the great comedic director Alex De Renzy, produced some of the worst of the worst during that period. The likes of male 'performers' like Ed Powers just sealed the deal. I didn't watch porn for another 10 years. Edited by - BlackSix on 12/26/2010 8:35:00 PM Click to expand BlackSix,excellent post here and I agree with everything. That's why in late 1993 early 1994 I was extremely happy when John Stagliano started building his Evil Empire.During that time period late 80's early 90's John Leslie (R.I.P.),John Stagliano and Gregory Dark were the only ones putting decent material worth viewing.There were several others that would release a decent product once in a while and when they did it would truly stand out.It was extremely few and far between though. The beginning of the shot video era it just became about quantity not quality. It was all about making a quick buck and taking the viewer for an idiot with a compilations,putting a gorgeous girl on the cover sometimes she wouldn't be in the video itself,shooting on the cheapest quality video and you're right Ed Powers was like the icing on cake. This all had me very worried and thinking will porn ever be descent again like it once was.I truly missed things like East Coast/West Coast rivalry,I absolutely hated it when Hustler Magazine had to change their format for their X-Rated Reviews because shot on film was a thing of the past,also the death of the X-Rated Theater.The X-Rated Theater could be sleazy,gross,etc that was appeal to it as well.What felt really weird and definitely not right was going into a theater and seeing a shot video product up on the screen. Jerry Butler mentions in his 1990 book Raw Talent one of the people most effected by shot on video was Gerard Damiano (R.I.P.).Gerard Damiano did put out an excellent shot on video for a company by the Vidco called Candy's Little Sister Sugar,Ariel Knight (a.k.a. Tammy White)best known for her excellent performance in Alex DeRenzy's (R.I.P.)Pretty Peaches 2 and John Leslie was in this video too. BlackSix,great avatar of Jack & Lenny (John Leslie & Richard Pacheco). [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11017 Posts 5/01	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 12:30PM Draxxx wrote: I actually prefer longer shoots with less strict staging. The sex is the most important component of the product. I think it's better to have more actual sex in a sex film. If the couple enjoy or are more comfortable in a certain position or are really into the sex of the moment, why break it up prematurely just to hit another position? Why the hurry? Click to expand You do realize that much of what you see is staged. Real sex doesn't look good on camera, you can't see anything for the most part. [Link]
Draxxx Senior Member 3831 Posts 2/07	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 9:34PM Flash wrote: Draxxx wrote: I actually prefer longer shoots with less strict staging. The sex is the most important component of the product. I think it's better to have more actual sex in a sex film. If the couple enjoy or are more comfortable in a certain position or are really into the sex of the moment, why break it up prematurely just to hit another position? Why the hurry? Click to expand You do realize that much of what you see is staged. Real sex doesn't look good on camera, you can't see anything for the most part. Click to expand I know it's staged...That's why I said "less strict staging". And you're absolutely right, "real" sex doesn't look good on camera because you can't see anything...which is why the "real" sex of 70s porn doesn't do much for me. [Link]
Gore Gore Girl Doctor of the Erotic Arts 7238 Posts 1/09	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 10:30PM Draxxx wrote: ...there's still plenty of stuff that is done closer to the 80s style stuff. The VIVID and WICKED stuff was typical porn back then and both companies and other still put out that same type of porn today. With all the companies out their doing all types of porn there's really no excuse for anyone to watch stuff they don't like. Click to expand ...and... nameless1 wrote: ...there are companies that still follow this formula today. With great success. Click to expand This simply is not true. I am constantly on the look out for recent feature porn that replicates the formula/conventions/tone of 70s/80s porn. Some films have made noble efforts, but in the end it doesn't exist. Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:32:29 PM Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:33:38 PM [Link]
ILVBUTT Member Nice & Juicy! 925 Posts 9/09	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 10:58PM BlackSix wrote: Then in the 90s a lot of porn was reduced to absurdly sustained close-ups that seemed to never end. So boring, .........but in the 90s some scenes were reduced to nothing but that for minutes on end. ...I didn't watch porn for another 10 years. Click to expand Lol! Wow, we must be on the same wave length! I did the same thing myself! Oh, and let's not forget the dreaded edited loops they put into those scenes as well, making them even longer. Serously, I had stopped watching porn from at least '93 to '02. Porn had no fascination for me then, because of how BAD I thought it was. ('course, back when I was younger, I didn't have much time to watch anyway). I watched my first porn again in 2002 with the movie "The Uranus Experiment" with Silvia Saint. I remember saying to myself..."Man, they sure fuck different these days!"....hahaha, but that movie got me back into watching more porn again. And once the big butt craze hit...I was hooked. I was glad that FINALLY, big booty girls were starting to get their due. [Link]
Nameless1 Member 165 Posts 10/10	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 11:26PM Gore Gore Girl wrote: nameless1 wrote: ...there are companies that still follow this formula today. With great success. Click to expand This simply is not true. I am constantly on the look out for recent feature porn that replicates the formula/conventions/tone of 70s/80s porn. Some films have made noble efforts, but in the end it doesn't exist. Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:32:29 PM Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:33:38 PM Click to expand I stand corrected. When I said companies still follow this formula, I maybe should have elaborated more. I think I simply wanted to say that some companies nowadays try to focus more on film making, trying to make a movie with more meaningful plots and stories, better acting, production value, etc. Not just something that's thrown together plot or story be damned. [Link]

backdoorman Senior Member Shake for me girl... I wanna be your backdoorman ! 2776 Posts 10/07	Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 11:45PM You know what's missing in todays features ? The rebellion and anarchy. The folks of the 60's and 70's and somewhat the 80's battled censorship and pioneered erotica for a new generation. [Link]
Digmen1 Member 629 Posts 7/07	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:03AM Cuddly Wombat wrote: Oh yeah, that bloody reverse cowgirl position! I hate it. I know it is uncomfortable for the girl and it makes me uncomfortable to watch it. I only like watching reverse cowgirl when the girl is petite and is being fully supported, and 'spun', by the male. Click to expand I tend to agree I don't hate it, but it does look best with a nice small girl. ( It really turn me on when they put their feet on the guys thighs!) [Link]
Digmen1 Member 629 Posts 7/07	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:13AM A great topic and some great intelligent comments. I saw a few movies in the 70's and some in the 80's. What I do remember was guys pounding away in the mish position and long close ups of the guys face that pissed me off. Then they usually came on the girls stomach or tits. There were hardly any facials, let alone swallows, and very little anal, and no ATM. You young guys have got it much better than we did ! But I did like some of the stories. Porn is just like any other "art" you have to keep pushing boundaries, and you can't keep doing the same old thing. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:53AM ILVBUTT wrote: Lol! Wow, we must be on the same wave length! I did the same thing myself! Oh, and let's not forget the dreaded edited loops they put into those scenes as well, making them even longer. Serously, I had stopped watching porn from at least '93 to '02. Porn had no fascination for me then, because of how BAD I thought it was. ('course, back when I was younger, I didn't have much time to watch anyway). I watched my first porn again in 2002 with the movie "The Uranus Experiment" with Silvia Saint. I remember saying to myself..."Man, they sure fuck different these days!"....hahaha, but that movie got me back into watching more porn again. And once the big butt craze hit...I was hooked. I was glad that FINALLY, big booty girls were starting to get their due. Click to expand The big butt phase helped draw me back in as well, the women look more natural and the sex is less mechanical these days (in the best gonzo titles). [Link]
mcewan All-Star Member 1294 Posts 8/08	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 5:39AM backdoorman wrote: You know what's missing in todays features ? The rebellion and anarchy. The folks of the 60's and 70's and somewhat the 80's battled censorship and pioneered erotica for a new generation. Click to expand Backdoorman,I think you hit on something right there. There was a time when filming an X-Rated Movie if it was proved where the film was shot the whole cast and crew could be placed under arrest.A simple thing like a street sign could do the trick.Also a lot of the material shot in 70's early 80's on the West Coast was shot in Northern California to avoid being busted by vice which would happen frequently in Los Angeles.Also during that time period if you noticed a lot of the talent used many different aliases. [Link]
mussy New Member 5 Posts 12/10	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 7:50AM ninja1 wrote: Because the sex was mechanically more authentic. It was pretty much the same kind of sex real people were having in real life. Same pace, same places (more beds), same positions, with slight allowances for open to camera. Today things are more athletic and high intensity and high speed, with the guys pounding away at 200 strokes per minute, and the girls feverishly trying to keep up. Lots of uncomfortable positions, especially the couch scenes. It's hard to look like you're having fun when you're working so hard, under uncomfortable conditions. Click to expand I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread. My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently. Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it. Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey..... Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff? Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM [Link]
T0MBOne Senior Member 1200 Posts 5/08	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 9:54AM Over the years, I've shown my SO quite a few features; she falls asleep watching anything that's gonzo or even features that are gonzo-like. (more sex than feature) She says she likes ROOMMATES and BABYFACE because "they pretend to have stories." That's my girl. LOL [Link]
pat362 Senior Member 10083 Posts 3/10	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 9:07PM Something that was common in older porn is that each actor had a specific personality that was representative of the character they played on screen the and that added an emotional response to them. This gave an extra dimension to the sex scenes. Today's performers are still playing a part but it's the part of a porn performer. It's made the sex scene technically more interesting but it's removed any emotional attachment to the characters. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 10:38PM mussy wrote: Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey..... Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff? Click to expand I've heard good things about Nica Noelle's videos for Sweet Sinner, mostly I find what you're describing more common in g/g videos for some reason. There are examples in some Elegant Angel titles that would also fit, usually in scenes with Manuel Ferrara and Kristina Rose, Sunny Lane or Mia Rose. [Link]
T0MBOne Senior Member 1200 Posts 5/08	Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 10:39AM Mussy---Check out Nica Noelle's CHEATERS RETREAT. Once Nick Manning's relationship guru character leaves the scene, the other folks at this Couples Workshop swap partners; the build-up and sex scenes are at that more deliberate pace, which I found refreshing. [Link]

zambi Senior Member 1451 Posts 3/10	Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 6:12PM cantgetlaid wrote: comfortable? Just looks like today's isn't actually enjoyable.. Click to expand Today there is way too much emphasis on "opening up" to the camera. Guys fuck a girl doggy style and instead of squaring up and grabbing her hips like you would is real life they put a knee up on far side and twist back on the near side to open up for the camera. Same thing for mish .. they sit up or lean way back instead of laying on top of the girl. Likewise the girl doesn't wrap her legs around the guy she tries to keep them flat to open up for the camera. It all looks un-natural. But don't forget the 70s and 80s had problems also. Remember "monster shots" where they would get the camera really close up on genitals. Stunt cocks and looping the same clip over and over to extend time. [Link]
Nameless1 Member 165 Posts 10/10	Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 10:53PM I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread. My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently. Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it. Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey..... Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff? Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM Click to expand Nothin' wrong with some vanilla. Sounds like your wife would like "feature" porn. Look at studios like Wicked, Vivid, Adam and Eve, New Sensations, and Digital Playground. Of course I'm leaving out a bunch of studios. Wicked is coming out with some new stuff that is supposed to be more on the romantic side. New Sensations has some more romantic titles as well. As you probably know, there's so much out there. Edited by - nameless1 on 12/29/2010 11:01:21 PM [Link]
editorbb Member 363 Posts 7/10	Posted - Dec 30 2010 : 4:24PM classic sex wins anyway..especially the moaning..today i think the girl have their pussies and asses numbed...if today pounding was delivered back then..you would see girls breaking window glass with their screams. [Link]
mussy New Member 5 Posts 12/10	Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 7:09AM BlackSix wrote: I've heard good things about Nica Noelle's videos for Sweet Sinner, mostly I find what you're describing more common in g/g videos for some reason. There are examples in some Elegant Angel titles that would also fit, usually in scenes with Manuel Ferrara and Kristina Rose, Sunny Lane or Mia Rose. Click to expand TOMBOne wrote: Mussy---Check out Nica Noelle's CHEATERS RETREAT. Once Nick Manning's relationship guru character leaves the scene, the other folks at this Couples Workshop swap partners; the build-up and sex scenes are at that more deliberate pace, which I found refreshing. Click to expand Thanks for the recommendations guys. We'll be checking out Sweet Sinner's stuff soon. I read up on them and they sound like they might be what we're after. Cheers also to Nameless1 for your recommendations. Thanks to all for nice intro to the forum. [Link]
Nameless1 Member 165 Posts 10/10	Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 2:39PM [/quote] Thanks for the recommendations guys. We'll be checking out Sweet Sinner's stuff soon. I read up on them and they sound like they might be what we're after. Cheers also to Nameless1 for your recommendations. Thanks to all for nice intro to the forum. [/quote] No problem, Muss... Here's a few movies to check out: New Sensations Romance Line: The Wedding Day The Engagement Party Almost Heaven Wicked "Passions" Line: It Starts With a Kiss You may also want to check out some Suze Randall productions. Just suggestions off the top of my head. Like I said before, there's a ton of stuff out there, so enjoy the search... Edited by - nameless1 on 1/5/2011 2:54:48 PM [Link]
Aplus Senior Member 1431 Posts 5/05	Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 3:06PM mussy wrote: ninja1 wrote: Because the sex was mechanically more authentic. It was pretty much the same kind of sex real people were having in real life. Same pace, same places (more beds), same positions, with slight allowances for open to camera. Today things are more athletic and high intensity and high speed, with the guys pounding away at 200 strokes per minute, and the girls feverishly trying to keep up. Lots of uncomfortable positions, especially the couch scenes. It's hard to look like you're having fun when you're working so hard, under uncomfortable conditions. Click to expand I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread. My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently. Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it. Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey..... Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff? Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM Click to expand Well that is what most modern porn has become IMO, aggression for the sake of it. Seems to be what most male viewers wants, whether the women (in the scene) is into it or not. Edgy and aggessive= hot! I find it quite interesting that it doesn't appear to do much for most female viewers, if not revealing....then again, porn is made mostly for men. I would agree with the Sweet Sinner comments, although I think their films are quite stripped-down from a story standpoint. Certainly not as elaborate as the current films from Wicked, or the films Adam & Eve or Vivid used to make. Would add that I think the main difference between then and now, is simply a matter of time and a changing of formats. Films from the 70's and 80's, from what I understand, took a little longer to films and produce. I've heard anywhere from a week or even 2 weeks. As film switched over to much cheaper video in the late 80's, films starting being filmed in literally one day. Most you get nowadays is 3 days, not including gonzo or all-sex films. Hardly enough time to create the right mood. Edited by - aplus on 1/5/2011 3:08:12 PM Edited by - aplus on 1/5/2011 3:21:02 PM [Link]
Peterman Member 627 Posts 12/10	Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 4:47PM Plot vs Gonzo - I'd have to pick Gonzo of today because I remember fast forwarding to the sex scenes and getting pissed when they over edited it (Deepthroat when Linda got Harry off). Always have wanted to see the unedited scene to be honest). But it's not like I "love" the Gonzo I see today either. In addition to some of the points made earlier, the most compelling pain are the directors and camera crew who have no clue how to direct or shoot with a steady hand. To hear a director talk over in a scene finds my hands reaching through the tube to choke them. Overall Gonzo leaves reality behind (at least the sex I have) for style and this particularly can be seen in a masturbation money shot or listening to a bellowing cow (or bull) throughout the movie. Meg Ryan gave a more convincing demo in "When Harry Met Sally" and she was totally faking it and Jonni Darkko gets it with girls that will let him cum in their mouths. It would be more pleasing and satisfying to watch when it gets more like what normal people would do and the time it takes them to do it than what is being released today. What I think is funny is looking at the way reviewers go through a scene where they can use abrev's for each position in a scene and they really don't change too much from scene to scene. "Give me 30 minutes and I'll give you 10 positions of 3 mins each" Sad... [Link]
Tug3005 Senior Member 1152 Posts 12/10	Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 9:07PM *Why did 1970s and early 1980s porn look more comfortable?* In general, porn followed the same cinematographic course change that war drama films took a few years prior. Many of these movies evolved from the viewer watching, to becoming a participant. Good examples would be the difference between war movies like From Here to Eternity and In Harms Way to modern war movies like Saving Private Ryan and We Were Soldiers. In my mind the tipping point for that swing was Apocalypse Now in 1979. It was the earliest use of Dolby Sound to emerse you in the action and camera direction was often set to put you in the middle of the scene. You were in that helicopter looking down and it was your lap that Chef's head rolled into. The transformation took longer in porn and rightfully much credit is given to John Stagliano and the Gonzo style in the early 90's, but in my opinion it started in the mid 80's with the facial, and in particular the Ginger Lynn facials. In the facials, the focus was such that the viewer was an active participant at that moment of ejaculation and it was your pecker doing the shooting on that beautiful face. People were buying second copies of VHS movies that were worn out from being freezed framed and run in slow-mo in the facial portion of those movies. I can guarantee you males were not freezing that scene because they were going to the fridge for a beer, it was because they were participating and timing their cumshot to Peter North's and Tom Byron's to land on ginger Lynn's and Tracy Lord's face. It was the buyer who changed movies because those movies sold big and still do, because people want in the action. edit to add: On a valid suggestion, war drama films replaced action movies Edited by - tug3005 on 1/6/2011 6:53:21 AM [Link]
BigSwoleNuggah Member 16 Posts 1/11	Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 4:01AM Those old porn directors were notorious for 'zooming' the camera on the guy's face right when he was bout to cum..lol [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 4:05AM Interesting point regarding porn, although your categorizing of From Here to Eternity and Apocalypse Now as action films a little mystifying. Edited by - BlackSix on 1/6/2011 4:06:25 AM [Link]
Tug3005 Senior Member 1152 Posts 12/10	Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 9:22AM A valid and constructive point BlackSix, my post was edited to reflect it, thank you. The general point is intact that director innovation in cinema is key, but market forces dictate if the concept flourishes. If in the early movies where the viewer perspective was looking in through frosted glass at internal cumshots from actors with arched backs and quivering limbs, that's what we would have today. Just my own observations and off the wall ramblings, I'm certainly no expert. [Link]
mussy New Member 5 Posts 12/10	Posted - Jan 12 2011 : 4:11AM Nameless1 wrote: Here's a few movies to check out: New Sensations Romance Line: The Wedding Day The Engagement Party Almost Heaven Wicked "Passions" Line: It Starts With a Kiss You may also want to check out some Suze Randall productions. Just suggestions off the top of my head. Like I said before, there's a ton of stuff out there, so enjoy the search... Edited by - nameless1 on 1/5/2011 2:54:48 PM Click to expand Thanks again for the recommendations. The wife is happier indeed. :D Does anyone know if any of these lines (New Sensations, Sweet Sinner or similar 'romance/couples/women friendly etc) feature any anal or anything mildly different in their scenes/storylines or is it strictly vanilla? [Link]
Savoy All-Star Member Sucker for Sinners 1844 Posts 12/06	Posted - Jan 18 2011 : 3:36PM The first Sweet Sinner dvd I watched (The Deviant had anal in three out of four scenes. [Link]
Savoy All-Star Member Sucker for Sinners 1844 Posts 12/06	Posted - Jan 18 2011 : 3:41PM Love their sex scenes. Definite pass on their serial romance novel approach to features. [Link]
Aplus Senior Member 1431 Posts 5/05	Posted - Jan 20 2011 : 1:01PM Would you mind explaining a little more what you mean by 'their serial romance novel approach" Savoy. Edited by - aplus on 1/20/2011 1:02:24 PM [Link]
Savoy All-Star Member Sucker for Sinners 1844 Posts 12/06	Posted - Feb 2 2011 : 4:04AM Sure! Sweet Sinner movies do lack the hallmarks of Harlequin serials: virgins, brides, pregnancy, sheiks and cowboys. However, the simplicity of SS's storylines and the concepts hark back to those lurid monthly paperbacks. I mean it's even on the cover: "Tales of Victorian Lust"...if that ain't the stuff of romance novels (aka female smut), I don't know what is. :) [Link]

Author

Post

mrputitbackin
Member

51 Posts
12/09

Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 9:44AM

I prefer todays porn over the 70's and 80's porn. The girls look better. I remeber even when I was like 11 in the 80's and sneaking around and watching some porno tapes from my dad's collection, the girls were ugly to me especially the Black women in porn back then. There were very few stunners. The camera work and lighting also was worse back then than now. In fact I wouldn't even buy a porno movie that was made before 96. The quality of the girls back then, ofcourse there are a few exceptions, but in my opinion they pale in comparison. Also Porno is supposed to be fantasy. I don't want to see two average looking people in a missionary position. I want to see wild sluts doing ass to mouth, gargling cum etc.

[Link]

Mojo
Deactivated User

1223 Posts
9/03

Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 11:24AM

I hate mad tilted angles and fast non-stop camera movement. I also hate strange un-naturtural sex positions just so the camera can get a good view of the penetration, like doggy position where the guy holds off from going deep and penetrates at an angle. Lastly, whatever happened to kissing? For example, in cowgirl position the girl hardly ever kisses the bloke and more often than not twists her waist to one side to look at the camera, which is often behind her. Naah, I want hard bangin’ and heavy duty snoggin’, not all this “Look at the camera babe!” or “Hold back from the fucking so I can get a look!” bullshit!

[Link]

spitty
Member

730 Posts
12/04

Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 2:04PM

Nice post Mojo...and I agree 100 %.

[Link]

Lethena
Member

45 Posts
5/09

Posted - Feb 19 2010 : 3:15PM

I think it goes to that porn have grown into a big industry. I wouldn't say pornactors today don't enjoy it, but still there is a difference. In the older day you weren't shooting sex scenes, you shoot people who had sex. Sex how it could look like in the bedroom with a little twist of course..today's movies, how many go at it like that at home? I don't think they directed it very much in the older days either, or cut it. It was...in the lack of word..more genuine.
I like vintage porn as a complement to todays work :)

[Link]

Stalag
Deactivated User

476 Posts
1/10

Posted - Oct 23 2010 : 6:22AM

Could not handle the lack of variety back then.

[Link]

Karloff
Deactivated User

319 Posts
7/10

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 12:29PM

It was women's porn.

[Link]

elgringoviejo58
Senior Member

1460 Posts
1/07

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 2:20PM

Today's porn is more about sex as a series of stunts, porn has become sort of a can you top this thing.

[Link]

backdoorman
Senior Member

Shake for me girl... I wanna be your backdoorman !
2776 Posts
10/07

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 4:21PM

Circus act vs. an attempt to really make a movie. Most of todays porn does very little for me !

[Link]

Draxxx
Senior Member

3831 Posts
2/07

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 7:32PM

Today's porn offers a lot of variety that simply wasn't available back then. The wilder stuff is there for the people who enjoy it (and it's obvious that some people do) and there's still plenty of stuff that is done closer to the 80s style stuff. The VIVID and WICKED stuff was typical porn back then and both companies and other still put out that same type of porn today. With all the companies out their doing all types of porn there's really no excuse for anyone to watch stuff they don't like.

[Link]

JohnnyVelvet
Member

The Gothic South
40 Posts
2/05

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 7:51PM

There is something to be said for seeing a truly beautiful woman, and there are shockingly many in porn these days, getting fucked franticly in every hole by the stud, most of whom act like they're utterly insane. But I would take a scene out of New Wave Hookers 3 over anything shot today. Passion and emotion are what are missing these days. The mechanical act of sex is boring without it.

[Link]

Nameless1
Member

165 Posts
10/10

Posted - Dec 25 2010 : 10:43PM

Something I've noticed watching older videos is that the movies look more realistic and "mainstream". The sex is also a little more realistic. Seems like they put a lot more effort in blending movie and story. There seemed to be more of a balance.
With that said, there are companies that still follow this formula today. With great success.
Edited by - nameless1 on 12/25/2010 10:45:41 PM

[Link]

Endless Loop
Senior Member

Tomatometer
1129 Posts
8/04

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 4:41AM

Comfortable?
If you mean people fucking without a care in the world they were being filmed, thats one way to describe it.
From my perspective, unaware of what exactly everyone else was watching, other than for the review listings in the smut mags, I recall the blur of feature porn in the late 70's and 80's more like an incessant stream of bullshit that stretched across the decades.
I recall being at the complete mercy of an industry that filmed, boxed, and shoveled out garbage with absolute zero regard for consumer interest year after year. Its why I look upon the few pioneers who helped lift it from that quagmire of banal sex, of cheese scripts that eventually led to the banal sex, and rampant deception of just how banal that sex would be, with great appreciation.
Some things never change, but with the vast array of selections available today, filmed to meet specific interests and genre's, accurately labeled of their content, with what seems an endless pool of beautiful starlets to perform in them, I have no idea why anyone would want to return to those dogcrap days of porns defunct past.
Comfortable sex? Check under "Amateur"

Edited by - Endless Loop on 12/26/2010 5:12:53 AM

[Link]

Draxxx
Senior Member

3831 Posts
2/07

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 7:57AM

I think some of you are looking at that era through rose colored glasses. You're remembering the best of the best and thinking it was typical. You're remembering your fav performers and thinking they were the norm. The 70s and 80s had plenty of not so great movies and not so great performers. I still buy stuff from the 70s and 80s because I like the look of certain women and I don't see it as being superior overall compared to today's stuff.
Yeah, the 70s stuff had stories but in most cases the story overshadowed the sex. Sometimes the stories may have been interesting but if your into watching an interesting/great story why go to porn looking for one? I can understand people wanting a story in their porn but at the end of the day the main function of porn is to supply sex. Most of the 70s stuff failed at that because in most cases 70% of the movie is story. To me it's frustrating/annoying fastforwarding through a story that I don't care about (and isn't that good) to see the girl(s) I'm interested in have a 5-10 minute sex scene that often didn't even show that much actual sex. Most times I watch those old movies I'm wondering how much actual sex was going on and how much was simulated since about half the scene never shows actual penetration.
The 80s did a better job of balancing sex with story and the girls were overall much better looking but the stuff I see from that era has it's share of goodlooking women who don't seem to be that into the sex. From what I understand the pornstar Savannah(sp) who committed suicide was one of the most popular girls of that era and yet everything I've read about her says she wasn't into sex at all. There were lots of pretty women in the 80s but other than being eye candy were their performances really all that good?
Then some of you are comparing Gonzo to feature type sex and in my mind they're two different things. Features will often show (or try to) couples "making love" or try to be sensual. Gonzo for the most part is about sexual performace and harder/wilder sex. I think some or most of today's features (and even some Gonzo) still do "lovemaking" and "sensual" sex. But mostly that type of sex is considered "couples" porn because that what most women tend to like. Some Gonzo tends to go for the wild over the top stuff that doesn't typically happen in real life. Gonzo is hyper fantasy. Features are real life fantasy.

[Link]

john lyons
Senior Member

Co-founder of Vinegar Syndrome
1188 Posts
1/08

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:14AM

The three primary differences between how sex scenes were shot in the 70s/80s and how they're shot today are as follows:
1) The actors: The mentality of most of the actors in 70s/80s films was that they were making movies, yes, X rated movies but still, a form of cinema. They didn't treat fucking each other like some kind of mechanical performance that just needed to be repeated to order.
2) Film: unlike with video, where you can shoot for hours, when one is shooting film, there's no time for waste or excessive coverage. Sex scenes were planned and completely staged. The cinematographer and director would set up shots, as opposed to just letting them go at it and filming the process.
3) Story: Fucking in character is a lost art. Most good directors in the 70s/80s insisted that their actors not break character while having sex. Thus the sex scenes have an emotional and realistic resonance that's in keeping with the rest of the film.

[Link]

Stalag
Deactivated User

476 Posts
1/10

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:56AM

Most of the porn shot in the 70s were 15 minute loops for the peep market. I don't think the girls in these loops had a clue what they were doing, and it showed.
If you wanted to see Linda Lovelace in Deep Throat, you had to wait in line at a theatre.
If you wanted to see her getting it from a German Shepherd, you went to the peeps.
And made sure the door was locked.

[Link]

pat362
Senior Member

10083 Posts
3/10

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 11:36AM

I think John Lyon pretty much covered everything that I would have said. Some have said that porn made in the 70's and 80's wasn't very food and I tend to agree with them. It's for sure that all those loop mini films which were probably all shot on 8mm and/or 16mm don't compare to anything done today but I'd never use one of those as comparaison betwen porn made back then to the one done today. The only to be fair is to use only films made on 35mm. If you do that then I'd say that more than 30% of those made in the 70's and 80's is still better than 50% of what's made today. My main beef with Golden Day porn is usually the lighting which wasn't always the greatest.

[Link]

Draxxx
Senior Member

3831 Posts
2/07

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 8:28PM

I still think that today's performers shooting features feel like they're making movies. The girls and dircetors at WICKED, VIVID, SIN CITY, etc., seem to be into it and take it seriously. And the ones shooting Gonzo don't because....they aren't.

I actually prefer longer shoots with less strict staging. The sex is the most important component of the product. I think it's better to have more actual sex in a sex film. If the couple enjoy or are more comfortable in a certain position or are really into the sex of the moment, why break it up prematurely just to hit another position? Why the hurry?

Now this I totally agree with! It's the reason so many of the parodies they do fall flat. They go to all the trouble of trying to make the perfomers look like certain characters, try to re-create sets and write something that resembles that paricular show but when it comes to the sex performances they might as well be inserts from old/other scenes because the performers/directors end up doing their typical generic sex scenes.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 8:34PM

Once porn switched to video in the mid-to-late 80s is was unbelievably ugly for a decade at least.
Then in the 90s a lot of porn was reduced to absurdly sustained close-ups that seemed to never end. So boring, although there are obviously some who still love that stuff today. There were enough crappy sex scenes in the 70s and 80s where they shot the penetration where you could only see the penis, vagina and the guy's junk and asshole, but in the 90s some scenes were reduced to nothing but that for minutes on end. Rex Borsky, formerly the great comedic director Alex De Renzy, produced some of the worst of the worst during that period. The likes of male 'performers' like Ed Powers just sealed the deal. I didn't watch porn for another 10 years.

Edited by - BlackSix on 12/26/2010 8:35:00 PM

[Link]

mcewan

All-Star Member

1294 Posts
8/08

Posted - Dec 26 2010 : 10:19PM

BlackSix wrote:
Once porn switched to video in the mid-to-late 80s is was unbelievably ugly for a decade at least.
Then in the 90s a lot of porn was reduced to absurdly sustained close-ups that seemed to never end. So boring, although there are obviously some who still love that stuff today. There were enough crappy sex scenes in the 70s and 80s where they shot the penetration where you could only see the penis, vagina and the guy's junk and asshole, but in the 90s some scenes were reduced to nothing but that for minutes on end. Rex Borsky, formerly the great comedic director Alex De Renzy, produced some of the worst of the worst during that period. The likes of male 'performers' like Ed Powers just sealed the deal. I didn't watch porn for another 10 years.
Edited by - BlackSix on 12/26/2010 8:35:00 PM
Click to expand

BlackSix,excellent post here and I agree with everything.
That's why in late 1993 early 1994 I was extremely happy when John Stagliano started building his Evil Empire.During that time period late 80's early 90's John Leslie (R.I.P.),John Stagliano and Gregory Dark were the only ones putting decent material worth viewing.There were several others that would release a decent product once in a while and when they did it would truly stand out.It was extremely few and far between though.
The beginning of the shot video era it just became about quantity not quality.
It was all about making a quick buck and taking the viewer for an idiot with a compilations,putting a gorgeous girl on the cover sometimes she wouldn't be in the video itself,shooting on the cheapest quality video and you're right Ed Powers was like the icing on cake.
This all had me very worried and thinking will porn ever be descent again like it once was.I truly missed things like East Coast/West Coast rivalry,I absolutely hated it when Hustler Magazine had to change their format for their X-Rated Reviews because shot on film was a thing of the past,also the death of the X-Rated Theater.The X-Rated Theater could be sleazy,gross,etc that was appeal to it as well.What felt really weird and definitely not right was going into a theater and seeing a shot video product up on the screen.
Jerry Butler mentions in his 1990 book Raw Talent one of the people most effected by shot on video was Gerard Damiano (R.I.P.).Gerard Damiano did put out an excellent shot on video for a company by the Vidco called Candy's Little Sister Sugar,Ariel Knight (a.k.a. Tammy White)best known for her excellent performance in Alex DeRenzy's (R.I.P.)Pretty Peaches 2 and John Leslie was in this video too.
BlackSix,great avatar of Jack & Lenny (John Leslie & Richard Pacheco).

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11017 Posts
5/01

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 12:30PM

You do realize that much of what you see is staged. Real sex doesn't look good on camera, you can't see anything for the most part.

[Link]

Draxxx
Senior Member

3831 Posts
2/07

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 9:34PM

I know it's staged...That's why I said "less strict staging". And you're absolutely right, "real" sex doesn't look good on camera because you can't see anything...which is why the "real" sex of 70s porn doesn't do much for me.

[Link]

Gore Gore Girl

Doctor of the Erotic Arts

7238 Posts
1/09

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 10:30PM

...and...

This simply is not true. I am constantly on the look out for recent feature porn that replicates the formula/conventions/tone of 70s/80s porn. Some films have made noble efforts, but in the end it doesn't exist.
Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:32:29 PM
Edited by - Gore Gore Girl on 12/27/2010 10:33:38 PM

[Link]

ILVBUTT
Member

Nice & Juicy!
925 Posts
9/09

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 10:58PM

Lol! Wow, we must be on the same wave length! I did the same thing myself! Oh, and let's not forget the dreaded edited loops they put into those scenes as well, making them even longer. Serously, I had stopped watching porn from at least '93 to '02. Porn had no fascination for me then, because of how BAD I thought it was. ('course, back when I was younger, I didn't have much time to watch anyway).
I watched my first porn again in 2002 with the movie "The Uranus Experiment" with Silvia Saint. I remember saying to myself..."Man, they sure fuck different these days!"....hahaha, but that movie got me back into watching more porn again. And once the big butt craze hit...I was hooked. I was glad that FINALLY, big booty girls were starting to get their due.

[Link]

Nameless1
Member

165 Posts
10/10

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 11:26PM

I stand corrected.
When I said companies still follow this formula, I maybe should have elaborated more. I think I simply wanted to say that some companies nowadays try to focus more on film making, trying to make a movie with more meaningful plots and stories, better acting, production value, etc. Not just something that's thrown together plot or story be damned.

[Link]

backdoorman
Senior Member

Shake for me girl... I wanna be your backdoorman !
2776 Posts
10/07

Posted - Dec 27 2010 : 11:45PM

You know what's missing in todays features ? The rebellion and anarchy. The folks of the 60's and 70's and somewhat the 80's battled censorship and pioneered erotica for a new generation.

[Link]

Digmen1
Member

629 Posts
7/07

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:03AM

I tend to agree
I don't hate it, but it does look best with a nice small girl.
(
It really turn me on when they put their feet on the guys thighs!)

[Link]

Digmen1
Member

629 Posts
7/07

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:13AM

A great topic and some great intelligent comments.
I saw a few movies in the 70's and some in the 80's.
What I do remember was guys pounding away in the mish position and long close ups of the guys face that pissed me off.
Then they usually came on the girls stomach or tits.
There were hardly any facials, let alone swallows, and very little anal, and no ATM.
You young guys have got it much better than we did !
But I did like some of the stories.
Porn is just like any other "art" you have to keep pushing boundaries, and you can't keep doing the same old thing.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 1:53AM

The big butt phase helped draw me back in as well, the women look more natural and the sex is less mechanical these days (in the best gonzo titles).

[Link]

mcewan

All-Star Member

1294 Posts
8/08

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 5:39AM

Backdoorman,I think you hit on something right there.
There was a time when filming an X-Rated Movie if it was proved where the film was shot the whole cast and crew could be placed under arrest.A simple thing like a street sign could do the trick.Also a lot of the material shot in 70's early 80's on the West Coast was shot in Northern California to avoid being busted by vice which would happen frequently in Los Angeles.Also during that time period if you noticed a lot of the talent used many different aliases.

[Link]

mussy
New Member

5 Posts
12/10

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 7:50AM

I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread.
My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently.
Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it.
Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey.....
Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff?
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM

[Link]

T0MBOne
Senior Member

1200 Posts
5/08

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 9:54AM

Over the years, I've shown my SO quite a few features; she falls asleep watching anything that's gonzo or even features that are gonzo-like. (more sex than feature) She says she likes ROOMMATES and BABYFACE because "they pretend to have stories." That's my girl. LOL

[Link]

pat362
Senior Member

10083 Posts
3/10

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 9:07PM

Something that was common in older porn is that each actor had a specific personality that was representative of the character they played on screen the and that added an emotional response to them. This gave an extra dimension to the sex scenes. Today's performers are still playing a part but it's the part of a porn performer. It's made the sex scene technically more interesting but it's removed any emotional attachment to the characters.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Dec 28 2010 : 10:38PM

I've heard good things about Nica Noelle's videos for Sweet Sinner, mostly I find what you're describing more common in g/g videos for some reason.
There are examples in some Elegant Angel titles that would also fit, usually in scenes with Manuel Ferrara and Kristina Rose, Sunny Lane or Mia Rose.

[Link]

T0MBOne
Senior Member

1200 Posts
5/08

Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 10:39AM

Mussy---Check out Nica Noelle's CHEATERS RETREAT. Once Nick Manning's relationship guru character leaves the scene, the other folks at this Couples Workshop swap partners; the build-up and sex scenes are at that more deliberate pace, which I found refreshing.

[Link]

zambi
Senior Member

1451 Posts
3/10

Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 6:12PM

Today there is way too much emphasis on "opening up" to the camera.
Guys fuck a girl doggy style and instead of squaring up and grabbing
her hips like you would is real life they put a knee up on far side
and twist back on the near side to open up for the camera. Same thing
for mish .. they sit up or lean way back instead of laying on top of
the girl. Likewise the girl doesn't wrap her legs around the guy she
tries to keep them flat to open up for the camera. It all looks
un-natural.
But don't forget the 70s and 80s had problems also. Remember "monster shots"
where they would get the camera really close up on genitals. Stunt cocks
and looping the same clip over and over to extend time.

[Link]

Nameless1
Member

165 Posts
10/10

Posted - Dec 29 2010 : 10:53PM

I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread.
My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently.
Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it.
Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey.....
Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff?
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM
Click to expand

Nothin' wrong with some vanilla.
Sounds like your wife would like "feature" porn. Look at studios like Wicked, Vivid, Adam and Eve, New Sensations, and Digital Playground. Of course I'm leaving out a bunch of studios. Wicked is coming out with some new stuff that is supposed to be more on the romantic side. New Sensations has some more romantic titles as well.
As you probably know, there's so much out there.
Edited by - nameless1 on 12/29/2010 11:01:21 PM

[Link]

editorbb
Member

363 Posts
7/10

Posted - Dec 30 2010 : 4:24PM

classic sex wins anyway..especially the moaning..today i think the girl have their pussies and asses numbed...if today pounding was delivered back then..you would see girls breaking window glass with their screams.

[Link]

mussy
New Member

5 Posts
12/10

Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 7:09AM

Thanks for the recommendations guys. We'll be checking out Sweet Sinner's stuff soon. I read up on them and they sound like they might be what we're after.
Cheers also to Nameless1 for your recommendations.
Thanks to all for nice intro to the forum.

[Link]

Nameless1
Member

165 Posts
10/10

Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 2:39PM

[/quote]
Thanks for the recommendations guys. We'll be checking out Sweet Sinner's stuff soon. I read up on them and they sound like they might be what we're after.
Cheers also to Nameless1 for your recommendations.
Thanks to all for nice intro to the forum.
[/quote]
No problem, Muss...
Here's a few movies to check out:
New Sensations Romance Line:
The Wedding Day
The Engagement Party
Almost Heaven
Wicked "Passions" Line:
It Starts With a Kiss
You may also want to check out some Suze Randall productions. Just suggestions off the top of my head.
Like I said before, there's a ton of stuff out there, so enjoy the search...
Edited by - nameless1 on 1/5/2011 2:54:48 PM

[Link]

Aplus
Senior Member

1431 Posts
5/05

Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 3:06PM

mussy wrote:
ninja1 wrote:
Because the sex was mechanically more authentic. It was pretty much the same kind of sex real people were having in real life. Same pace, same places (more beds), same positions, with slight allowances for open to camera.
Today things are more athletic and high intensity and high speed, with the guys pounding away at 200 strokes per minute, and the girls feverishly trying to keep up. Lots of uncomfortable positions, especially the couch scenes. It's hard to look like you're having fun when you're working so hard, under uncomfortable conditions.
Click to expand
I would agree with this and several other comments made in this thread.
My wife is new to porn and she'd never seen a porn movie until very recently.
Her thoughts? She found today's porn to be overtly aggressive for the sake of aggression and quite boring. Every scene seems to be 10-15 minutes of guys with angry grimaces, banging at 100mph while the girls tended to want to gag, spit, drool and dribble saliva all the time. A lot of the girls seem very robotic and unnatural and aggressive for the sake of it.
Perhaps it may seem very naive (even as a porn newbie), but she was expecting some kind of build up, some kind of foreplay and gradual erotic ascention, building to beautiful, sensual sex with couples that appear to be naturally enjoying each other's bodies. A bit vanilla to most of you, I assume, but hey.....
Are there any good hetero movies currently out there that anyone could recommend that have this kinda stuff?
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 7:53:58 AM
Edited by - mussy on 12/28/2010 9:20:00 PM
Click to expand

Well that is what most modern porn has become IMO, aggression for the sake of it. Seems to be what most male viewers wants, whether the women (in the scene) is into it or not. Edgy and aggessive= hot! I find it quite interesting that it doesn't appear to do much for most female viewers, if not revealing....then again, porn is made mostly for men.
I would agree with the Sweet Sinner comments, although I think their films are quite stripped-down from a story standpoint. Certainly not as elaborate as the current films from Wicked, or the films Adam & Eve or Vivid used to make.
Would add that I think the main difference between then and now, is simply a matter of time and a changing of formats. Films from the 70's and 80's, from what I understand, took a little longer to films and produce. I've heard anywhere from a week or even 2 weeks. As film switched over to much cheaper video in the late 80's, films starting being filmed in literally one day. Most you get nowadays is 3 days, not including gonzo or all-sex films. Hardly enough time to create the right mood.
Edited by - aplus on 1/5/2011 3:08:12 PM
Edited by - aplus on 1/5/2011 3:21:02 PM

[Link]

Peterman
Member

627 Posts
12/10

Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 4:47PM

Plot vs Gonzo - I'd have to pick Gonzo of today because I remember fast forwarding to the sex scenes and getting pissed when they over edited it (Deepthroat when Linda got Harry off). Always have wanted to see the unedited scene to be honest).
But it's not like I "love" the Gonzo I see today either. In addition to some of the points made earlier, the most compelling pain are the directors and camera crew who have no clue how to direct or shoot with a steady hand. To hear a director talk over in a scene finds my hands reaching through the tube to choke them. Overall Gonzo leaves reality behind (at least the sex I have) for style and this particularly can be seen in a masturbation money shot or listening to a bellowing cow (or bull) throughout the movie. Meg Ryan gave a more convincing demo in "When Harry Met Sally" and she was totally faking it and Jonni Darkko gets it with girls that will let him cum in their mouths. It would be more pleasing and satisfying to watch when it gets more like what normal people would do and the time it takes them to do it than what is being released today.
What I think is funny is looking at the way reviewers go through a scene where they can use abrev's for each position in a scene and they really don't change too much from scene to scene. "Give me 30 minutes and I'll give you 10 positions of 3 mins each" Sad...

[Link]

Tug3005
Senior Member

1152 Posts
12/10

Posted - Jan 5 2011 : 9:07PM

Why did 1970s and early 1980s porn look more comfortable?
In general, porn followed the same cinematographic course change that war drama films took a few years prior. Many of these movies evolved from the viewer watching, to becoming a participant. Good examples would be the difference between war movies like From Here to Eternity and In Harms Way to modern war movies like Saving Private Ryan and We Were Soldiers.
In my mind the tipping point for that swing was Apocalypse Now in 1979. It was the earliest use of Dolby Sound to emerse you in the action and camera direction was often set to put you in the middle of the scene. You were in that helicopter looking down and it was your lap that Chef's head rolled into.
The transformation took longer in porn and rightfully much credit is given to John Stagliano and the Gonzo style in the early 90's, but in my opinion it started in the mid 80's with the facial, and in particular the Ginger Lynn facials. In the facials, the focus was such that the viewer was an active participant at that moment of ejaculation and it was your pecker doing the shooting on that beautiful face. People were buying second copies of VHS movies that were worn out from being freezed framed and run in slow-mo in the facial portion of those movies. I can guarantee you males were not freezing that scene because they were going to the fridge for a beer, it was because they were participating and timing their cumshot to Peter North's and Tom Byron's to land on ginger Lynn's and Tracy Lord's face.
It was the buyer who changed movies because those movies sold big and still do, because people want in the action.
edit to add: On a valid suggestion, war drama films replaced action movies

Edited by - tug3005 on 1/6/2011 6:53:21 AM

[Link]

BigSwoleNuggah
Member

16 Posts
1/11

Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 4:01AM

Those old porn directors were notorious for 'zooming' the camera on the guy's face right when he was bout to cum..lol

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 4:05AM

Interesting point regarding porn, although your categorizing of From Here to Eternity and Apocalypse Now as action films a little mystifying.

Edited by - BlackSix on 1/6/2011 4:06:25 AM

[Link]

Tug3005
Senior Member

1152 Posts
12/10

Posted - Jan 6 2011 : 9:22AM

A valid and constructive point BlackSix, my post was edited to reflect it, thank you.
The general point is intact that director innovation in cinema is key, but market forces dictate if the concept flourishes. If in the early movies where the viewer perspective was looking in through frosted glass at internal cumshots from actors with arched backs and quivering limbs, that's what we would have today. Just my own observations and off the wall ramblings, I'm certainly no expert.

[Link]

mussy
New Member

5 Posts
12/10

Posted - Jan 12 2011 : 4:11AM

Thanks again for the recommendations. The wife is happier indeed. :D
Does anyone know if any of these lines (New Sensations, Sweet Sinner or similar 'romance/couples/women friendly etc) feature any anal or anything mildly different in their scenes/storylines or is it strictly vanilla?

[Link]

Savoy

All-Star Member

Sucker for Sinners
1844 Posts
12/06

Posted - Jan 18 2011 : 3:36PM

The first Sweet Sinner dvd I watched (The Deviant had anal in three out of four scenes.

[Link]

Savoy

All-Star Member

Sucker for Sinners
1844 Posts
12/06

Posted - Jan 18 2011 : 3:41PM

Love their sex scenes. Definite pass on their serial romance novel approach to features.

[Link]

Aplus
Senior Member

1431 Posts
5/05

Posted - Jan 20 2011 : 1:01PM

Would you mind explaining a little more what you mean by 'their serial romance novel approach" Savoy.
Edited by - aplus on 1/20/2011 1:02:24 PM

[Link]

Savoy

All-Star Member

Sucker for Sinners
1844 Posts
12/06

Posted - Feb 2 2011 : 4:04AM

Sure!

Sweet Sinner movies do lack the hallmarks of Harlequin serials: virgins, brides, pregnancy, sheiks and cowboys. However, the simplicity of SS's storylines and the concepts hark back to those lurid monthly paperbacks.
I mean it's even on the cover: "Tales of Victorian Lust"...if that ain't the stuff of romance novels (aka female smut), I don't know what is. :)

[Link]