Always wondered....... !!
-
Keith
Re: o/t Re: Always wondered....... !!
You're assuming I haven't watched any. There are obviously some exceptions (usually French and German, some occasional American) but I'm afraid I don't share the enthusiasm for the so-called "Golden Age" of porn. Poor lighting, bad camera angles, even worse "acting". I watch porn to get my dick hard; if I want stories I'll watch TV, mainstream movies or go to the theatre.
As you say, it's all in the mind and eye of the beholder. But hey, I'm in the minority in this group - I like Rocco
As you say, it's all in the mind and eye of the beholder. But hey, I'm in the minority in this group - I like Rocco
-
jj
Re: Always wondered....... !!
But you can't force people to be culture-vultures.
As long as I can buy Dostoevsky and Mozart, I don't give a shit what anyone else does.
It's their loss.
As long as I can buy Dostoevsky and Mozart, I don't give a shit what anyone else does.
It's their loss.
-
alec
Re: o/t Re: Always wondered....... !!
I don't mind some aspects of Rocco either (he is one of the few modern directors with a sense of the erotic), but my point was that some people need a story in order to provide an erotic situation in order to get their dick hard. By a story I don't mean any old story (in fact I didn't use the word), like some of the American 'plots', but a story as you would find in an erotic novel, i.e. a story about sex in some way.
I agree about lighting and camera angles though. Partly this was due to the nature of the equipment, partly because some positions had to be faked as the actresses wouldn't do them, partly down to what would now be called poor direction/camera work. But camera angles is something you can't criticise John Lindsay for. He was very modern in that respect. In other words these are dangerous generalisations and we'd better agree to differ.
I agree about lighting and camera angles though. Partly this was due to the nature of the equipment, partly because some positions had to be faked as the actresses wouldn't do them, partly down to what would now be called poor direction/camera work. But camera angles is something you can't criticise John Lindsay for. He was very modern in that respect. In other words these are dangerous generalisations and we'd better agree to differ.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: Always wondered....... !!
I absolutely agree.
Unfortunately, dumbing down is an inevitable consequence of the free market (which in general I support) but gold standards need to be maintained somewhere, somehow. Someone has to point out to folks that there is much more depth, intellectual nourishment and ultimately satisfaction in what may at first appear to be 'difficult' movies, books, music, TV programs, etc. It was OK in the 60's and 70's folks had no choice but the watch all the quality stuff that the BBC, film directors and music labels were putting out. There was no other choice, no other TV channels, no Internet. But it did them good, it certainly did me good, and though I came from a lowly working class background I lapped all the intelligent TV programs up, the powerful cutting edge films, the music, the books. I was enthralled. But what if I had never been given the chance? What if in my formative years I had been fed a diet of 'Search for a Poptart, Will and Gareth records, S Club 7, Blind Date, All those crap movies with the same one page script and the same (looking) five 'twenty something?s' in that you see populating every shelf of your local 'Blockbuster?' All the bland, grey, turgid, lowest common denominator, trash.
I get most of my inspiration from books, films, and music. The very best art creates an emotional response in the observer, forces then to examine the world from a different perspective, and it's this that inspires me to go out and do stuff of my own. It's this that inspires lots of folks to go out and create, to give their interpretation of the world through the medium of their choice. But what emotional response do Will 'n' Gareth engender in anyone except to throw their Doc Martin at the telly?
Officer Dibble.
Unfortunately, dumbing down is an inevitable consequence of the free market (which in general I support) but gold standards need to be maintained somewhere, somehow. Someone has to point out to folks that there is much more depth, intellectual nourishment and ultimately satisfaction in what may at first appear to be 'difficult' movies, books, music, TV programs, etc. It was OK in the 60's and 70's folks had no choice but the watch all the quality stuff that the BBC, film directors and music labels were putting out. There was no other choice, no other TV channels, no Internet. But it did them good, it certainly did me good, and though I came from a lowly working class background I lapped all the intelligent TV programs up, the powerful cutting edge films, the music, the books. I was enthralled. But what if I had never been given the chance? What if in my formative years I had been fed a diet of 'Search for a Poptart, Will and Gareth records, S Club 7, Blind Date, All those crap movies with the same one page script and the same (looking) five 'twenty something?s' in that you see populating every shelf of your local 'Blockbuster?' All the bland, grey, turgid, lowest common denominator, trash.
I get most of my inspiration from books, films, and music. The very best art creates an emotional response in the observer, forces then to examine the world from a different perspective, and it's this that inspires me to go out and do stuff of my own. It's this that inspires lots of folks to go out and create, to give their interpretation of the world through the medium of their choice. But what emotional response do Will 'n' Gareth engender in anyone except to throw their Doc Martin at the telly?
Officer Dibble.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: Always wondered....... !!
"And my memory is that the general consciousness of society at large was even less informed then than it is now."
I disagree. Real challenging art created by real people used to be at the forefront of popular culture - The Beatles, The Stones, Hendrix, Dylan were the celebrities of the day. Barley a day went by without them appearing in the day's equivalent of The Current Bun or on the news and talk shows - much like renowned, controversial, cutting edge artists of today - Darius, Girls Aloud, Jordan, Ant & Dec - get my point?
Hard edged films and books were right in the forefront of the public consciousness - Taxi Driver, The French Connection, The Godfather likewise their stars and directors were hailed and celebrated. Today what the masses are fed are films made by accountants, films that even the most stupid amongst us can understand and not be bored by. Films that will not cause controversy or offend anyone. The lowest common denominator.
Yes, I'm sure there are some still some artists out there doing wonderful things - but as a general rule we don't get to hear about them, because those who run TV, magazines and Newspapers think that we will be bored by all that difficult stuff and we won't buy their product. Besides all that arty stuff is subversive and might change the status quo as it did in the 60?s. No one in the establishment wants that.
Of course I disagree about porn. I find modern porn getting more and more of a turn-off by the month. I find modern performers almost universally unappealing and their performances bland, perfunctory, pointless and totally lacking in any eroticism. Many buyers agree with me and are voting with their wallets. But if you dig it, that's fine, I'm happy for you.
Porn is legally available now - sort of, and although that has probably hastened its decline I welcome the freedom of choice for British citizens.
"You seem to be lost in the historical meanderings of your own imagination."
I?ve not imagined anything, it's all perfectly clear.
Officer Dib.
I disagree. Real challenging art created by real people used to be at the forefront of popular culture - The Beatles, The Stones, Hendrix, Dylan were the celebrities of the day. Barley a day went by without them appearing in the day's equivalent of The Current Bun or on the news and talk shows - much like renowned, controversial, cutting edge artists of today - Darius, Girls Aloud, Jordan, Ant & Dec - get my point?
Hard edged films and books were right in the forefront of the public consciousness - Taxi Driver, The French Connection, The Godfather likewise their stars and directors were hailed and celebrated. Today what the masses are fed are films made by accountants, films that even the most stupid amongst us can understand and not be bored by. Films that will not cause controversy or offend anyone. The lowest common denominator.
Yes, I'm sure there are some still some artists out there doing wonderful things - but as a general rule we don't get to hear about them, because those who run TV, magazines and Newspapers think that we will be bored by all that difficult stuff and we won't buy their product. Besides all that arty stuff is subversive and might change the status quo as it did in the 60?s. No one in the establishment wants that.
Of course I disagree about porn. I find modern porn getting more and more of a turn-off by the month. I find modern performers almost universally unappealing and their performances bland, perfunctory, pointless and totally lacking in any eroticism. Many buyers agree with me and are voting with their wallets. But if you dig it, that's fine, I'm happy for you.
Porn is legally available now - sort of, and although that has probably hastened its decline I welcome the freedom of choice for British citizens.
"You seem to be lost in the historical meanderings of your own imagination."
I?ve not imagined anything, it's all perfectly clear.
Officer Dib.
-
Officer Dibble
Re: o/t Re: Always wondered....... !!
I think want alec is getting at is that sex needs to be set in some kind of context. A scenario, implausible or otherwise it doesn?t matter, so long as there seems to be a reason for the performers to be doing it. If your opening shot is of a totally naked couple banging away in a bland hotel room the act is just reduced to a mechanical procedure and you have seen the whole movie in the first two minutes. So where do you go from there?
You have to build some kind of sexual tension up or the scene will have no power. It will be a pointless boring mechanical shagging exercise. The viewer will begin to feel that they are not doing it because they like it or it excites them, they are simply going through the motions. It then loses most of it's power to excite the viewer - which is the kiss of death for porn.
Dibble.
You have to build some kind of sexual tension up or the scene will have no power. It will be a pointless boring mechanical shagging exercise. The viewer will begin to feel that they are not doing it because they like it or it excites them, they are simply going through the motions. It then loses most of it's power to excite the viewer - which is the kiss of death for porn.
Dibble.
-
alec
Re: o/t Re: Always wondered....... !!
To expand on that a bit - the reason ideally needs to be not a routine one.
Husband has sex with wife - not erotic, for the viewer of a film anyway.
Pornstar arrives to meet porn stud in hotel room, they have sex on camera. Might be stimulating with certain performers/directors, but not erotic per se.
Wife has talking pussy and picks up two strangers in a porn cinema to have sex in the toilets (from one of the most famous porn films of all time, and unlike Deep Throat, a good one) ridiculous but erotic - or substitute various other scenarios that break conventional mores. But film them as Claude Mulot and Francis Leroi would have done, indeed did, so that even the censored version was a turn-on, not just tell the viewer about them and then have sex in the usual hotel room.
Husband has sex with wife - not erotic, for the viewer of a film anyway.
Pornstar arrives to meet porn stud in hotel room, they have sex on camera. Might be stimulating with certain performers/directors, but not erotic per se.
Wife has talking pussy and picks up two strangers in a porn cinema to have sex in the toilets (from one of the most famous porn films of all time, and unlike Deep Throat, a good one) ridiculous but erotic - or substitute various other scenarios that break conventional mores. But film them as Claude Mulot and Francis Leroi would have done, indeed did, so that even the censored version was a turn-on, not just tell the viewer about them and then have sex in the usual hotel room.