Page 8 of 8

Re: O/T Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 12:55 pm
by jj
...DEATH, I would have thought ;-)

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 12:58 pm
by jj
...and at least for me, predominantly Continental talent.

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:20 pm
by steve56
hayley mills naked for a few secs in the family way.

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:43 pm
by Officer Dibble
Indeed. But Hollywood isn't about gorgeous girls nowadays. It's more about takin' 'wimmin' seriously. So what we are fed now is a slew of bland androgynous types who can (supposedly) do everything the lads can do. But fuck that - in the real world if you're going to climb the Matterhorn or storm a Taliban stronghold with Uzi?s blazing you want 'the guys' along with you, not your fucking girlfriends.

When Cameron Diaz came along in 'The Mask' I was blown away - what an incredible stunner! However, then she seemed to get the idea into her head that she wanted to be taken seriously (a serious actress luvie) and the beautiful hair was shorn off and the wonderful womanly curves slimed into oblivion. And that's how she has remained up to press - what a diabolical waste.

And what about that Julia Roberts sort? You got all these Hollywood entertainment programs and magazines telling you that you should think that she's oh so tasty and gorgeous, the only thing is, she ain't! You wouldn't give her a second glance if she passed you in the High St, so why are all these magazines giving it some "Julia Roberts" this and "Wow, Julia Roberts" that. It's all bollocks! They're just trying to lead you away from the gorgeous girl stereotype (Monroe?) and suggest that 'ordinary' wimmin are just as attractive and valid. Well, yes, of course in a political sense. But, sadly not in a biological, sexual sense. Guys know what they fancy, it's already programmed into them and no amount of centre-left propaganda or social engineering can change that.

Dibble.

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:53 pm
by paul
there was a scene in a film called frightmare where the girl
dances with the guy who plays the vampire very erotic

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:59 pm
by steve56
who was in it?

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 5:02 pm
by jj
, and search.

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:15 pm
by buttsie
So i take it the current crop of twenty somentings like

Sarah Michelle Gellar,Jennifer Lover Hewitt etc don't do a lot for your pulse rate

Till theres always Jennifer Connolly or that brit babe that starred in the erotic thriller Porkys...Kim Cattrall...nice eyes...could use a bit of meat on her bones but

Those Poison Ivy films were screaming out for a Twenty something Goddess and we got Drew Barrymore and Alyssa Milano...really scraping the bottom of the barrel is hollywood

cheers
B...OZ

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 10:48 pm
by lattara
Yes, it's erotic... but it was Victoria Abril, not Isabella Adjani!

Re: o/t 'Erotic' images not pornographic

Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2003 10:05 am
by Crimpo
Salma Hayek in Dusk Till Dawn - now theres a bit of talent!