They shot on film. Film was expensive. So I think they had a very tight script. Why they used fluffers. And why old porn sucked ass. Now they can shoot whatever happens and edit it the same day -- no cutting film, no loops to fool us it's longer than is, no dumb wood-killing cuts to the guys' face just before coming... Thank god for the digital era of porn. And that the girls stepped their game up. Hot girls didn't do anal back then. Now there's hardly any girl not at least considering trying...
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Sep 7 2013 : 9:44AM
Yeah, in today's porn we hardly ever even see the guy at all. It's as if he doesn't even exist. The girl could be fucking a dildo, and we wouldn't know the difference. Obviously, today's porn also leaves much to be desired. Yes, the girls now are much hotter, and down for doing dirtier acts. But the sex itself is lacking in today's porn. The sex in older porn was much more realistic. It looked like the performers actually liked each other while they were fucking, as opposed to just a series of mechanical changes in position that we see today in which the performers barely even look at each other. We've apparently gotten away from porn sex having any resemblance at all to real sex. My ideal porn would be combining the hot girls and dirty acts of today with the passionate and realistic-style sex of porn from back in the day. That would be perfect.
^ I think it's just harder to find scenes with chemistry today, because there's so much of it, but when you do find it... it's way better because of technology not ruining it. Not having to watch the male performers cum-face is a total blessing... I can tell from watching the girl if he was better than most porn-dudes. Maybe a bummer for girls though, but hey they got gay porn or can phone in anyone anytime to fuck them...
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Sep 7 2013 : 1:05PM
Right, because any porn that treats the man as an integral participant in the sex act, rather than just some invisible mechanical prop, must therefore be "gay." Apparently, in the minds of some people, any porn scene that shows a man and a woman actually having real sex on camera is no different than watching two dudes fuck each other. Where do people get this shit from?
My theory is that since most of the older porn tried to shoot sex scenes that were more realistic then it makes sense for the guy to ejaculate the moment his penis comes out of the vagina or asshole.
A lot has changed since the old days. Part of it is that they used to pay people for a day's work instead of paying them by the scene. As a result, the older titles generally had a large number of shorter scenes. Now they pay the talent for each scene, and they don't want to pay for more than 5 or so scenes per movie, and each scene needs to last longer. This in turn may drive another issue. In the old days, to make it as a stud, you needed to be able to get wood while people watch. Now you need to be able to go for a really long time without cumming. Any stud who would cum after five minutes of sex wouldn't make it in today's industry.
I agree 100%. The anxiety surrounding this for some people is ridiculous. It says more about the hand-wringing viewer than it does about anything else.
You're right. Also keep in mind that most of the porn movies back and the one given as an example here then were features. It looks like back then the features tried to be movies with some sex and the actual story mattered to the directors back then just as much as the sex (and I'd argue that with some directors the sex wasn't as imporant and a necessary evil). They used to make "Loops" back then and the sex in those lasted a bit longer but still not nearly as long as today's scenes last. There are a few girls from that era I like but it's frustrating how short their scenes were and how they were shot. With the sex scenes back then much of the sex was shot where you didn't see actual penetration.
Yeah, it seems like back then they were shooting people having sex. Today they shoot people putting on performances. Personally I prefer watching today's sex scenes because it's just more exciting and entertaining but the old stuff had it's charm too.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Sep 8 2013 : 6:17PM
Sorry. I think I just need a Snickers... Or some pussy.In the immortal words of Shakespeare, they do protest too much, methinks. I have also had this same conversation with a couple of directors in the industry. Suffice it to say that they are convinced that no one wants to see real sex in porn, and that it's "not how it's supposed to be shot." I don't know if there's some porn director guidebook somewhere that says this, or if they're just too resistant to break away from the standard formula in which everyone has grown accustomed to shooting. I'm pretty sure it's the latter.This is true. And I've gotten to the point now where I'd much rather see sex than a performance for the camera.
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Sep 8 2013 : 8:19PM
Real sex in porn works in features. Otherwise, I want to see hot sex scenes. My favorite genre would be hot sex scenes with great set-ups. Kind of like a short-story as opposed to a book, if you will.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Sep 8 2013 : 9:26PM
You say that as if they're mutually exclusive. Sex in porn can be realistic and hardcore at the same time. Just because it's rare doesn't mean it can't be done. We just need directors in the industry who are willing to break away from the mold, and think outside the box. But unfortunately, most of them aren't willing to do that. I can't count the number of times I've been watching a scene in which the action between the performers finally starts to look good, only to have it quickly interrupted by the director who has them return to mechanical fucking. I hate that. It's like there's a law in porn against the performers actually enjoying themselves.
I think I know what you're talking about and I agree. In features the sex scenes are not only shorter but there's less acrobatics and over the top pounding. Most people (myself included) often refer to feature porn sex as "vanilla" but it's actually more subduded and realistic type sex. Gonzo tends to be more over the top and often "harder".I tend to think most features send too much time on the story and it's usually a story I don't care about. Set-ups give me just enough story/reason for the sex to happen that's quick and to the point without the long backstory. Plus, set-ups usually happen in Gonzo and the actual type of sex is more to my liking.
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Sep 9 2013 : 9:36AM
They are mutually exclusive. When you have a feature movie, you don't halt the narrative for a 20-30 minute sex scene. By definition, the narrative and the sex have to work together. I was expressing that I prefer "scenes" to "feature movies," not passing judgement on the relative hotness/hardcore of either.
Predatory Woman 3, The - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Sep 6 2013 : 11:40PM
