R18 version of Dirty anal kelly in rome...(from bbfc)
.
DIRTY ANAL KELLY IN ROME 2
.
This work was classified "R18" on 26 January, 2001.
.
When classified the work had an approved running time of 119m 11s.
.
The work had a submitted running time of 126m 27s.
.
To obtain this category cuts of 7m 17s were required.
Some or all of these cuts were substitutions.
The cuts were Compulsory
Cuts required to explicit sex scenes in which women and men are hit, spat at, appear to be in pain, or have their head forced into a toilet bowl. Cuts are in accordance with BBFC guidelines on R18 material
Fuck you!
-
alec
Re: Fuck you!
The European version is longer than the American one - an extra scene deatailed at
regardless of R18. Having said that there is a lot of spitting and slapping in a Rocco video and the fact that it was cut doesn't suprise me at all.
regardless of R18. Having said that there is a lot of spitting and slapping in a Rocco video and the fact that it was cut doesn't suprise me at all.
-
Pasta
Re: Fuck you!
Like a few of you guys I have seen a few Rocco movies inc. Dirty Anal Kelly In Rome part 1 (available in the US version uncut from Your Choice). Naturally it's excellent. Kelly is super nasty in it!
Back to the point. What I find laughable about this is that a lot of the sex is just as rough and apparently forceful as a blatant slap to the face. Turning rectums into black holes is OK ( no doubt becaues this is par for the course for the ex-public school chaps at the BBFC), but a bit of spit is an abomination that will deprave and corrupt!
To cut the slapping and spitting in volume 1 would mean huge swathes of the sex scenes being chopped out.
BTW are you familiar with the company Harmony that's releasing this here? I am in a way amazed that they had a Rocco film passed here, even with cuts! I never thought I would see the day.
Guess they deserve a round of applause. Until I see the price, no doubt!
Back to the point. What I find laughable about this is that a lot of the sex is just as rough and apparently forceful as a blatant slap to the face. Turning rectums into black holes is OK ( no doubt becaues this is par for the course for the ex-public school chaps at the BBFC), but a bit of spit is an abomination that will deprave and corrupt!
To cut the slapping and spitting in volume 1 would mean huge swathes of the sex scenes being chopped out.
BTW are you familiar with the company Harmony that's releasing this here? I am in a way amazed that they had a Rocco film passed here, even with cuts! I never thought I would see the day.
Guess they deserve a round of applause. Until I see the price, no doubt!
-
alec
Re: Fuck you!
Price usually seems to be at the whim of 'salesmen' at Private shops and the like.
Are Hamony anyhting to do with the magazine of that name?
Are Hamony anyhting to do with the magazine of that name?
-
cheekymonkey
Re: Fuck you!
Does anybody know what film this scene is from and where you can get it?
thanx
thanx
-
alec
Re: Fuck you!
If Hannah Coleman objected to what went on it seems unlikely that she would have singed a model release for the scene. It follows that it would noty have been released. Of course I may be wrong, but I've never seen the scene she describes.
-
woodgnome
Re: Fuck you!
i don't think she would have been content just to singe it alec, i think she would have out right set fire to it. 
i'd be amazed if it has been released without finding a mention in this forum or aft by now.
i'd be amazed if it has been released without finding a mention in this forum or aft by now.
-
Pasta
Re: Fuck you!
woodgnome wrote:
>
> pasta: read my initial post in this thread.
Yeah, I read it - that's why I was talking about the web page you mentioned.
> hannah coleman is not some whiney chick who's going to stamp
> her little foot because the dressing room doesn't have an ice
> cooler!
>
> she gives a credible account of a guy who, at least on this
> occasion, displayed a gross lack of respect for other peoples
> limitations, just because they weren't his own.
>
> i'm a big fan of his output generally, so i've nothing
> against him in principle, but ultimately the whole adult
> entertainment business is founded upon the consenting
> involvement of the female performers.
>
> they consent because they like sex, they like to do it in the
> public eye and they like to earn a living doing it. sex
> though, is not the same as someone pissing in your mouth -
> not for most of us, anyway.
[snipped comments on other subject]
Totally agree with you. But it begs the question a) why did she agree to do the gig with Rocco in the first place?
b) (and this is probably why) why did her agency not make her aware of exactly what Rocco likes to do in his movies?
Ms Halbourg not only supplied girls for Rocco, but appeared in his productions too. She of all people should have advised this girl on what was likely to be expected.
It is interesting to note that Rocco did several films in a fairly short period of time here, then has not made a UK based feature since, if I am right.
In the case mentioned, I think there was fault on all sides.
As to the reasons for the girls being in the business, I don't think it is as clear cut as you say. Plus sadly some are under naive illusions about the nature of the business.
>
> pasta: read my initial post in this thread.
Yeah, I read it - that's why I was talking about the web page you mentioned.
> hannah coleman is not some whiney chick who's going to stamp
> her little foot because the dressing room doesn't have an ice
> cooler!
>
> she gives a credible account of a guy who, at least on this
> occasion, displayed a gross lack of respect for other peoples
> limitations, just because they weren't his own.
>
> i'm a big fan of his output generally, so i've nothing
> against him in principle, but ultimately the whole adult
> entertainment business is founded upon the consenting
> involvement of the female performers.
>
> they consent because they like sex, they like to do it in the
> public eye and they like to earn a living doing it. sex
> though, is not the same as someone pissing in your mouth -
> not for most of us, anyway.
[snipped comments on other subject]
Totally agree with you. But it begs the question a) why did she agree to do the gig with Rocco in the first place?
b) (and this is probably why) why did her agency not make her aware of exactly what Rocco likes to do in his movies?
Ms Halbourg not only supplied girls for Rocco, but appeared in his productions too. She of all people should have advised this girl on what was likely to be expected.
It is interesting to note that Rocco did several films in a fairly short period of time here, then has not made a UK based feature since, if I am right.
In the case mentioned, I think there was fault on all sides.
As to the reasons for the girls being in the business, I don't think it is as clear cut as you say. Plus sadly some are under naive illusions about the nature of the business.
-
Ned
Re: Fuck you!
No, Rocco doesn't seem to have much respect for the girls. I saw one site article (where exactly escapes me) which said that some girls had vowed never to work for, or with, him again. They reckoned that his treatment of them stank and that on occasions when they were expecting facials, they got pissed on - not something that was agreed to.
-
woodgnome
Re: Fuck you!
go to this url to hear it straight from the horses mouth:- http://str8malepornstars.com/rocco/biography.htm
there's an interview with hannah coleman near the bottom of the page. alternatively, just hit control+f and put hannah in the dialogue box.
seems like he really is a bit of a scumbag and not just brlliant at acting the part.
still, i found hannah's remarks about how girls in her line of work are treated in blighty quite heartening, considering what a lousy reputation we have.
her remarks about british girls being more reserved are fairly hilarious coming from someone who made their tv debut doing a full strip on caesar the geezer.
there's an interview with hannah coleman near the bottom of the page. alternatively, just hit control+f and put hannah in the dialogue box.
seems like he really is a bit of a scumbag and not just brlliant at acting the part.
still, i found hannah's remarks about how girls in her line of work are treated in blighty quite heartening, considering what a lousy reputation we have.
her remarks about british girls being more reserved are fairly hilarious coming from someone who made their tv debut doing a full strip on caesar the geezer.