egafd.com

Michael Ninn wastes some of the finest women in his films, fancy camera work, rock video effects, too many changes in angle and too edgy for my tastes. His films are totally unerotic. A real waste of the big budgets.

I can sort of see where Ninn's going (Blake I prefer as porn because he has a 'grittier' approach), and I can see its appeal to the Cable/Playboy market.
But it's not really porn, and, while 'arty', it sure ain't art with a capital 'A', unless your definition of it is so catholic as to render the term meaningless.
To somewhat strangle a metaphor, is it possible to fall between more than two stools? He seems to have managed it, at any rate........I think Ninn has more in common conceptually with the likes of Helmut Newton, say, then John Leslie.
As a lingerie fan I watched Blake's Decadence recently and while I could mostly ignore all the soft-focus and pretensions (I'll tolerate much, for the sight of Ms Blonde, in nylons....), I was infuriated by the unnecessary and excessive use of jump-cuts, like a film-student-directed MTV vid.

Ok, but what you think about L?a Martini? Cold eyes? Well maybe i didn't see that because of her hot body and steamy action