#1 09-06-06 12:12:55

Warmtouch

Member

From: Southern England

Registered: 29-03-06

Posts: 326

The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

I respectfully disagree.

I find no association to the Guy. For me, He is a selfish man. Who care's only for his own pleasure. And the woman is but a product for his satisfaction.

The female may as well as be a blow up doll.

To me conventional Porn is degrading. It focus is on the "penis" not the "Clit". On his desires, not her desires. And to me it degrades the woman as a "object" and not a real "human".

For me, Real "porn" is Amatuer porn. It's not a "act". It's real. And both partners desire's are met. He takes care of her Needs, and she takes care of his. And there is mutual love and respect for the other.

There's an awful lot of porn out there, and personally I'm reluctant to condemn it all out of hand. The films of Andrew Blake don't treat the women as blow-up dolls.

Remember that porn is fiction. It isn't supposed to be "real." It's a fantasy -- a male fantasy, for the most part; but there are female porn filmmakers who have tried to aim their films (with mixed success) at a female market, or at least at a couple's market. Candida Royale and her Femme Productions is one such.

The sex in mainstream Hollywood movies is faked, but efforts are made to make it look real because apparent realism is a goal of moviemaking. But we all know it's faked, and in any case it's fiction.

The sex in porn movies IS real, in the sense that you actually see penetration; but it's still fiction. It's acting. Very bad acting, for the most part, but acting.

A lot of amateur porn contains an element of acting too. Even though the participants are enthusiastic and apparently not coerced, they're still performing in some of it. It turns them on to be porn stars: to be vampy and slutty and macho and so on. But again, it's risky to pass judgment on the reality of the situation. You don't know what happens when the camera stops rolling. Do they really love each other? Is their relationship really mutually respectful? How can you tell?

I believe that mainstream porn is in fact a genre defined by a number of conventions, not unlike Japanese Noh plays or Commedia dell'Arte or passion plays or grand opera or any other rather peculiar and unrealistic form of entertainment. The disregard for the women that you see is one of those conventions -- but it's a fictional convention. When the cameras stop rolling, it's the women who are treated like princesses. They get paid ten times as much as the men. They're the ones whose images sell the product.

What you want, and what we're all here for, is a different form of filmmaking: the fly-on-the-wall documentary. Even wildlife documentary-making contains deceits -- footage shot on completely different days is cut together to make it look as if it were part of the same activity. But what you get here on IFM is as close as you're going to get to the real thing. So, too, I think, is what's on Abbywinters. The camera almost never stops rolling and the camerapeople never direct, they just watch. Which is very cool.

Knowing that the female porn stars are the ones who get the big money, I don't have a problem with conventional porn as long as it's well-shot, well-acted, and even marginally credible. Such movies are few and far between, but they DO exist.

Burlesque

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 04-05-06

Posts: 1,368

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Morals and ethics aside, the purely practical problem for a consumer of mainstream porn is that it's so insufferably boring. As Warmtouch implies, it's as ritualised and bound by rules as Noh theatre while having none of the latter's cultural significance and fine tuned grace. In 90% of the porn movies I've seen it's 1. A bit of cheesy dialogue. 2. Half-hearted cunnilingus. 3. Extended fallatio. 4. A succession of sexual positions. 5. A cum shot to the face. 6. NEXT! It's like an assembly line mechanically producing a product, and I can't seem to keep myself awake watching it anymore. There's rarely any imagination at work, least of all any attempt at sensuality. Having said that, I have on occasion been pleasantly surprised. A film that I assumed would be typical actually featured the first real female orgasm I've ever seen in mainstream porn. That movie had the disitinction of being improvised by the participants, who are the usual assortment of porn stars having the luxury of actually being able to do what they do free of any script or direction. And that, I think, is a major difference, one that reminds me of IFM and BA: if you have a camera and natural, non-regulated sex, you are bound to get far sexier results than you would with a director and pre-planned sexual activities. Under such free circumstances, even a porn star can be sexy .

Burlesque.

---

Maintain a sense of humour about it, whatever "it" is.

"Max Fan Club" Head of Security and In-house Sycophant. (Who says evil can't be a full-time occupation?)

aven frey

Video editor

Registered: 24-02-06

Posts: 2,577

Website

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

When the cameras stop rolling, it's the women who are treated like princesses. They get paid ten times as much as the men. They're the ones whose images sell the product.

Just to be a pain I'm going to argue that this is not so the case unless the women is a major Jemma Jamison type porn star. Martin Amis wrote a really cool foward type thing in a photographers (Stefano De Luigi) book Pornoland. I'm just going to type verbatim some of his text - this is an interview with male porn director.
"The girls could be graded like A, B and C. The A is the chick on the boxcover. She has the power. For a double anal you'd usually expect a B or a C. They have to do the dirty stuff or they won't get a phone call. You've had a kid, you've got some stretchmarks - you're up there doing double anal.
Some girls are used in nine months or a year. An 18 year old, sweet young thing, signs with an agency, ..... A hundred movies in four months. She's not a fresh face any more. Her price slips and she stops getting phone calls. Then it's "Okay will you do anal? Will you do gangbangs?" Then they're used up."

Theres also a film called something like the Annabelle Chong story, which is a very sensitive but sad documentary about Annabelle Chong who is a Porn star famous because she held the record for doing so many men in a row (or something like that)- at least for a couple of days before some up and coming chick did more.

I think theres lots of evidence that in reality porn treats its actresses in the same manner as the women are portrayed in a porno film.

greycat

Member

Registered: 04-06-06

Posts: 94

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

interesting, and i have not read any of the several books that discuss the realities as you note, max. well, wait, one book: Violet Blue's The Ultimate Guide to Adult Videos, from goodvibrations.com. fascinating book, violet blue likes porn, reviews dozens and dozens of films, discusses a range of actors and actresses, very open and unbiased book i thought. but i tend to agree with you max. there are 'behind-the-scenes' web sites which dont mean to be exposes, but do deglamorize a lot. for example http://www.lukeford.com/ which is ed by a porn actress, but includes not-so-supportive comments about the industry, e.g. which companies dont do proper health testing, dont use condoms (which are commonly used in us porn now), which stars arent sober, etc. others gripe about who gets the box cover, who is the new 'contract girl' at which studio ( which I think means actually has a contract to be starred in some agreed number of films by that studio, not be hired by each film.  the site above links to modeling agencies which rep porn actresses. it is just a bit strange (understatement), all have the same stock shots, list what they will do (and by omission what they will not, about 90% at one agency look alike.  I cannot get over a certain aversion to most traditional porn, because although no one makes a person be a porn actress/actor, i have a sense that you are right on, max, in the used-up aspect.  for a short while i subscribed to a site called 'older women', it claimed to be amateur women over 30. some were amateurs without a doubt, but i stopped counting at about ten 'retired' porn actresses of the b and c categories as you note it, still working beyond or way beyond 40 (which is a younger woman for me), mostly using part of one of their stage names, but not saying a word in the 'bios' about that.  a very odd site, turned out to be as much a delusion as nearly all porn sites. really, only the gmbill family of sites dont produce that aversion for me, i just do not suspect any sort of pressure or 'using up' here. since everyone uses noms-de-internet, and do not discuss how the sites relate, i have no idea who to credit, probably 'abby' on AW, but beyond that no idea. maybe you run it all, max. i do hope the upfront portrayal that women run the sites is totally true.  each site has its 'enforcer, vid dude at aw, richard here, maybe they are the same person (i guess not, their grumpinesses are distinct), no matter. these windows are small, i write too much without seeing it all. -gc

---

(allegedly) amusing signature deleted until further notice.

Warmtouch

Member

From: Southern England

Registered: 29-03-06

Posts: 326

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Thanks for the posts, greycat and Max. I suspect that the truth, as with so many things, is not simple. No industry -- not even charities -- can claim to be completely free of dodgy dealings and abusive practices, and I imagine given porn's somewhat sub rosa nature more of it happens there than in most.

My real point wasn't that no woman is abused in making porn, which is obviously false, but that you can't tar it all with the same brush; and that it's fiction -- not intended to be real. I honestly don't believe that you can count on what you see in front of the camera reflecting reality any more than you can in any other form of fiction filmmaking.

By the way, the Good Vibrations people are REALLY cool -- one of the first sex-positive, female-friendly, non-sleazy shops, founded in (of course!) San Francisco.

richard

Administrator

Registered: 14-03-06

Posts: 3,282

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

really, only the gmbill family of sites dont produce that aversion for me, i just do not suspect any sort of pressure or 'using up' here. since everyone uses noms-de-internet, and do not discuss how the sites relate, i have no idea who to credit, probably 'abby' on AW, but beyond that no idea. maybe you run it all, max. i do hope the upfront portrayal that women run the sites is totally true.  each site has its 'enforcer, vid dude at aw, richard here, maybe they are the same person (i guess not, their grumpinesses are distinct), no matter. these windows are small, i write too much without seeing it all. -gc

Ok here are some facts. 

None of the people involved in AW are also involved in BA, ISM or IFM.  Not even in ownership, despite whatever you might read.
I am grumpier than Vid Dude.
There are currently 12 full time and 5 part time staff here.  Apart from myself and a part time sound ediitor, they are all female.

aven frey

Video editor

Registered: 24-02-06

Posts: 2,577

Website

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

; and that it's fiction -- not intended to be real. I honestly don't believe that you can count on what you see in front of the camera reflecting reality any more than you can in any other form of fiction filmmaking.

Oh I totally agree Warmtouch and I would go as far to say that we can't trust documentary film/photographer as truth either. Anything filtered though camera, editor, producer is never going to be truley objective. So within that context I would argue that porn even though fictional is conveying a sort of (although maybe not literal) version of reality. I think all media texts are influenced and reflective of the cultural conventions of the time. Culture and media are forever feeding off each other regardless of being fictional, surreal, documentary etc.

blissed

Member

From: The bus station of the future

Registered: 17-03-06

Posts: 5,622

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

and a part time sound ediitor,

I want that job

---

(Self made tycoon and independant financial advisor to the stars)

Burlesque

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 04-05-06

Posts: 1,368

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Ok here are some facts. 

None of the people involved in AW are also involved in BA, ISM or IFM.  Not even in ownership, despite whatever you might read.
I am grumpier than Vid Dude.
There are currently 12 full time and 5 part time staff here.  Apart from myself and a part time sound ediitor, they are all female.

Thank you for the information, Richard. I have been quite curious about these things, but worried that it might be rude to ask.

Yes, I would agree that you are grumpier than Vid Dude, but in such a fair, splendidly eloquent and Solomenesquely wise manner that all bow before you. (Now I'll wait and see if all this grovelling pays off.)

Burlesque.

---

Maintain a sense of humour about it, whatever "it" is.

"Max Fan Club" Head of Security and In-house Sycophant. (Who says evil can't be a full-time occupation?)

Warmtouch

Member

From: Southern England

Registered: 29-03-06

Posts: 326

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

and a part time sound ediitor,

I want that job

I'll arm-wrestle you for it. Actually, I would just be happy to sit in the office and watch Max work and change tapes for her every now and then.

Richard, thanks for the info about AW versus the ISM/IFM/BA cluster. I really did think they were all part of the same large project, especially given the amount of crossover among the contributors.

Warmtouch

Member

From: Southern England

Registered: 29-03-06

Posts: 326

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

...conventional porn as long as it's well-shot, well-acted, and even marginally credible. Such movies are few and far between, but they DO exist.

Do you recommend any in particular?

Yes, the films of Andrew Blake. They often don't have much talking -- I think he's aware of the limitations of his actors -- but they're shot on real film with high production values. They also tend to be quite stylish visually, and to make good use of music. They're not all great by any means, but some are well above the mainstream. Night Trips and Dark Angel are among the best. The former consists of a whole lot of dream sequences, so it doesn't need much of a plot.

Burlesque

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 04-05-06

Posts: 1,368

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

I've seen one of Andrew Blake's films. I don't recall its title, but the first thing that struck me was the quality of the cinamatography: saturated colours and good use of shadow, completely the opposite of any porn film I'd seen. And yes, very hot, too, not least thanks to a healthy dose of imagination, something that's usually as lacking as good cinematography in most porn.

Burlesque.

---

Maintain a sense of humour about it, whatever "it" is.

"Max Fan Club" Head of Security and In-house Sycophant. (Who says evil can't be a full-time occupation?)

greycat

Member

Registered: 04-06-06

Posts: 94

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Ok here are some facts.  None of the people involved in AW are also involved in BA, ISM or IFM.  Not even in ownership, despite whatever you might read. I am grumpier than Vid Dude.  There are currently 12 full time and 5 part time staff here.  Apart from myself and a part time sound ediitor, they are all female.

thank you, Rickard. yes you are (grumpier than vid dude, at least in posts), and I am sooooo glad I was (i hope) less rude than the average subscriber who contacts "the help desk", i did say thanks. and admit my error, undestanding-the-software-wise.  i am glad about the female staff ratio, and I am supremely glad that Li is your hostess-with-the-mostess. i joined this site when I learned that she was very much involved. and if no staff cross over between these all excellent sites, or owners, at least (!!!) quite a few of the models do, so very much a good thing.  thank you. -gc

---

(allegedly) amusing signature deleted until further notice.

blissed

Member

From: The bus station of the future

Registered: 17-03-06

Posts: 5,622

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

and a part time sound ediitor,

I want that job

I'll arm-wrestle you for it. Actually, I would just be happy to sit in the office and watch Max work and change tapes for her every now and then.

Actually I'm serious, I'm a sound engineer. if it fell vacant I'd apply for it with the intent to go there and do it. but I'm not sure if Richard would want me working there. I think he thinks I'm too silly. Still, everyone else here knows thats not true If I ever got the job you can still change the tapes over, and when your not doing that you can fix Richards desk, so we can get to see max's submission

.

Last edited by blissed (13-06-06 03:44:09)

---

(Self made tycoon and independant financial advisor to the stars)

Burlesque

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 04-05-06

Posts: 1,368

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

You're not silly, Blissed. Not very.

Besides, I like the idea of you and Warmtouch working at IFM headquarters, and I like even more the thought that one of you could hold that infamous desk up while the other extracts Max's video ("Mission Impossible" theme playing in the background).

Burlesque.

---

Maintain a sense of humour about it, whatever "it" is.

"Max Fan Club" Head of Security and In-house Sycophant. (Who says evil can't be a full-time occupation?)

Elfman

Member

From: Yorkshire

Registered: 17-03-06

Posts: 700

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Right.  Now that we have all trashed the conventional porn industry and are all feeling smug and superior about what excelent taste we all have and how we are all enlightened, sensitive people in subscribing to IFM/ISM/BA/AW who is going to be honest and tell us what trashy, manipulative, debasing porn sites they subscribe to, have subscribed to in the past or are tempted to subscribe to.

I only subscribe to the Ausie 4 at the moment but in the past have subscribed to:

Saphic Erotica (Not bad as conventional porn goes I think)

Paul Markham.

TeenFuns, magic porn, AngelFuns. (Ok I like them young. So shoot me.  I stopped subscribing to Russian sites because I became concerned that a lot of the girls were in fact too young.)

Solo Girls.  (This is awful.  About as erotic as a plate of cold fish and chips).

One I have sometimes been tempted to join (gulp. Dare I admit to this?) is Ivanafukalot.com.  I know I know I know but she is so damn gorgeous!!!

Right.  Now I have humiliated myself in public.  Anyone care to join me? 

Elfman

Last edited by Elfman (14-06-06 20:40:03)

Warmtouch

Member

From: Southern England

Registered: 29-03-06

Posts: 326

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Currently, the only other ones are Abbywinters, which I may or may not let lapse, and WatchersWeb. What I like about WW is that it's almost all user-contributed, homemade porn. The lighting is terrible; the image quality is dicey; the poses are unimaginative... but the people are your neighbors: fat, thin, pretty, ugly, old, young, and sometimes downright weird. I love the incredible humanness and democracy of it all.

Apart from those the only other one I can remember subscribing to was called Land of Venus, and was a very early home cam put up by a stripper. I was so shocked and amazed by the whole Jennicam phenomenon at the time that I really wanted to see this. But I let it lapse after maybe a month or so.

Oh, and I subscribed to AdultFriendFinder very briefly during an abortive attempt to find sex partners that way. The problem is that the male-to-female or male-to-couple contention ratio is about 10 zillion to 1, and there's always the potential for complications that you don't really want. Ladies of the evening are expensive but easily available and, with a little precautionary screening, hassle-free.

aven frey

Video editor

Registered: 24-02-06

Posts: 2,577

Website

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Okay I havn't subscribed to anything on the web but I have seen 'Flashpoint'.  The best sceene is when the firemen have to rescue a chick and her gigantic breasts who has got her toe stuck up a tap whilst in the bath!

aven frey

Video editor

Registered: 24-02-06

Posts: 2,577

Website

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Ivanafukalot actually looks quite appealing, I'll be back later!

Burlesque

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 04-05-06

Posts: 1,368

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Only the Aussie 4 for me, as far as paying for the privilege goes, but there is a site called Myfreepaysite which is actually completely free and has loads of material. The uninteresting part of it is that it's all conventional porn with a slight slant towards (to me) rather unappetising fetishes. It does have a few rather interesting celebrity porn videos for those interested in that sort of thing (no, not Paris Hilton ).

Any old port in a storm ...

Burlesque.

Last edited by Burlesque (15-06-06 03:26:44)

---

Maintain a sense of humour about it, whatever "it" is.

"Max Fan Club" Head of Security and In-house Sycophant. (Who says evil can't be a full-time occupation?)

Jakeview

Member

Registered: 17-03-06

Posts: 132

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

I really like this site and AW. There are others I subscribe to but it's possible I'll let them lapse. The one non-Aussie I'll probably keep is Homeclips. It's very inexpensive($25/yr) and is mostly all amateur and shot by the participants.

The Aussies are certainly in a league by themselves.

PeteUK

Member

From: South London, UK

Registered: 11-06-06

Posts: 60

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

I'll admit to being terribly dull here: apart from IFM I don't subscribe to any adult sites. Not for any particular reason, except for poverty and the fact that most of them just don't raise my flag, as it were.

I used to go to Bubblegirls a lot. That was relentlessly gynaecological, but there was a kind of honesty to it I liked. There wasn't much doubt that those were real orgasms I was watching. After a while, though, the mercilessly focussed camerawork and lack of variety just wore me down.

Anyway, IFM has me hooked like a fish right now.

---

Those who do not learn from History are doomed to repeatedly fail their History exams.

Nowaysis

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 22-03-06

Posts: 497

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

As it stands, I've only ever payed for BA (subscription terminated) and IFM, but economy permitting I probably would try out, or already have tried out a number of other sites. MET Art comes to mind immediately, and also a few other of the so called erotic art sites, which strictly photographically have a lot more to offer than the regular "strip for the camera, spread you legs, and fake an O-face"-stuff, Michelle 7 (which really works the artistic angle sometimes), MC Nudes (maybe), DOMAI (although at my last visit I dismissed it as blantantly and insultingly hypocritical in it's "manifesto").

I used to have huge crushes on Tiffany Teen and Kate of Kate's Playground (not both at the same time), but given the enormous amount of free material floating around, I don't think I ever considered joining, and I hardly even visited their actual sites. The monotony of the photography and the fact that they focused on one single object turned me off them rather quickly though. When an actual object is all you have (i.e. there is no two way-interaction, or as here, intangible added value) it's all the more important for the seller in the transaction to offer some variety -- amateur (and rather crappy) photographers working with a single model simply can't do that.

-------

Not to rain on anyone's paradade, but Ivanafukalot, I actually lump in with the sites that go too hard for the Lolita image. There's obviously nothing wrong with ther looks, but I have a sometimes very strong aversion towards imagery that intentionally, and in a fashion I perceive as lacking of taste plays on that aspect of our sexuality. But, shouldn't I be a bit too young (23) to feel like a dirty old man already?

Last edited by Nowaysis (15-06-06 23:31:15)

---

Let us scatter our clothes to the wind

Nowaysis

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 22-03-06

Posts: 497

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

Not to rain on anyone's paradade, but Ivanafukalot I actually lump in with the sites that go too hard for the Lolita image. There's obviously nothing wrong with their looks, but I have a very strong aversion towards imagery that is intentionally, and in a fashion I perceive as lacking of taste plays on that aspect of our sexuality. But, aren't I a bit too young (23) to feel like a dirty old man already?

Edit: here were typos.

Last edited by Nowaysis (16-06-06 22:40:04)

---

Let us scatter our clothes to the wind

Will

Member

From: Scotland

Registered: 06-04-06

Posts: 216

Re: The conventions of porn filmmaking - moved topic.

I'm sorry, but there's no way I could sign up for a site called Ivanafukalot.

The shame would just be too much.......