High production porn - what's the point?

[planeterotica]

I think its a case of balancing fantasy with reality, a lot of the time i think most people like to watch a second rate porno with the girl next door type that they can associate with, but there are times when people of both sexes like to let their fantasies run wild and prefer a film with top of the range models fucking, as for HD quality well content always comes before that !wink!

[jj]

The opener of this post highlights a particularly heinous pair
of examples of rampant self-indulgence and misguided ambition.

[paul markham]

The main problem with a lot of high end production movies is the director has little idea how to motivate the stars into fucking properly. Also the countless times they stop and start during the shooting of the sex, to get the different formats of softcore to hardcore, does not help the models work either.

The reason is simple, they're trying to produce a movie that will sell on all levels. A lot of the less glamorous stuff is shot for one level, hardcore, and is easier to make convincing sex scenes.

[pj]

I'm there to watch the girl do what they do, ok, wear sexy costumes maybe, but my God, stop with the big sets and high production values etc, it's distracting and we only SKIP past all that crap to get to the main action. BAT FUCKS is the most recent example i can think of.

Pj

[Len801]

Funny that you should mention humor in a sex film.
Sex comedies (the soft-core and even mainstream kind) of course relied on humour, misadventures of the hero or heroine, and double entendres.
Golden age porn contains a lot of humor (as well as drama).
Even if you go back to the stag movies of the 1920's, 1930's and subsequent years, it was practically all humor (intertitles included).
It seems to have been the engine and driving force of a lot of sexual situations in a porn production.

[frankthring]

As someone who has directed more than 450 scenes for Private perhaps
I can add a few general comments to the debate:
1. Paul Markham hits the nail on the head. In Private`s case the formula
of balancing a "story" or plot along with the need to shoot hard and
soft versions and realise that however much effort you put into the
sex, the editors in Spain will chop it all down to 15-18 mins to
accomodate 4 more scenes and more story etc into an exact 90 mins
- all makes the job of trying to create a really hot scene harder.
2. Women definitely prefer glossy high end porn to men; this has been
shown in market research.
3. There is nothing wrong with production value providing it enhances
the sex. Too often it is the other way around. I remember - with shock -
watching Stuart Canterbury in Hollywood 10 years ago actually leaving
the set when it was time to shoot sex - he was only interested in
directing the story part. Sex he left to his camerman !!!!!
4. Antonio Adamo in his Roman epics for Private has shown the usual
Italian obsession with superb lighting and costume and ignored the
need for the sex to be dick-hot !!
5. In some of his movies Woodman - and I - have done our best to make
a hot feature but its not easy.
6. By and large Bluebird`s stuff is not high end. They are a long way from
French or Italian production values !
7. On the other hand....and lets be fair....most low end porn is grim. Fat
ugly white-skinned slags on sofas or dogging Ughh !
8. What I want to see - ideally - is the best looking crumpet in the world
doing red-hot nasty fucking stuff !!! Where or how is not important !
But if its in a gorgeous villa in Greece and she is dressed like a million
dollars in stilettos.....its a plus !

[jj]

Pretty much leaning toward the apparent majority opinion- if
I may so presume- that it's generally more trouble than it's
worth, both to shoot and to watch.

To take issue with a couple of your points....
2) what percentage of the market do women comprise?

7) let's not just single out the females. Ugly males, males
keeping their socks on on, males who can't get- or keep- it
up, males whose careers have lasted five- to ten years too
long [or twenty inches too much round the waist]..... these
for me have no place in low-end stuff either, barring the odd
'speciality' vid.

[one eyed jack]

I can tell you why straight away why a lot of high budget stuff falls flat on its face bwhen it comes to the sex.

The producers usually comes from a pro broadcast/ mainstream/ feature background and spend too much time on trying to tell the story in an arty way that it is lost on the wankability factor of the intended audience.

The reason why some people get all hoity toity for being in such productions is because they are fooled into thinking being in a top notch movie is classy when all it is is a posher version of the same thing: You still see sucking and fucking but in more sterile albeit, creative environs.

This kind of porn is for more imaginative audiences and is a lot harder make than regular porn so it deserves respect if got right.

I think there are high end companies who have got the mix right....Harmony and Relish come to mind though I can speak for Blue Bird but they insist there is sex all over the place in their videos but like to hold it back to tease you.

Well I think a lot of their teasing is back firing where posters here on the BGAFD are concerned.

I'm sure it will mean a lot more to the outside world where the real commercial potential for your product lies as I know it would appeal to the couples market where the bloke wants to get the missus in the mood with something that isnt overly porno ie gagging, a2m, screaming, gaping anals you could climb into etc that seems to be the staple of most porn these days.

Theres room for us all in this game

[Masie]

I like watching high production stuff, I think this might be sort of a male female thing. All most men need to have a wank are tits and rude bits with something sliding in and out, where as most women need a reason for the sex (or at least I do) before we can let rip. Now that's a very general statement and there are certain kinky things that for me are enough, but I digress.

Plus not all porn is watched alone for wanking. When I was at uni my group of friends and I spent a lot of time watching porn and we loved watching the bigger more unusual stuff - Lord of the G string was a firm favourte and yep we did skip most of the porn bits because the script was so funny, but we still bought it and got alot of pleasure out of watching it (im also quite sure alot of the boys also had a wank - but probably not together)

Finaly wheres the harm in doing something high budget and having some people think thats more classy? I had the usual difficult visit from my parents this weekends where my job came up and the usual head in hands wasting your life scene repeated itself - apparently im 'feeding perverts'. As per usual I pointed out that to ban porn because of its content would be fine if she also intended on banning most cinema films, computer games and even some episodes of corinationstreet. If i was in hollywood getting my tits out i bet she'd be bragging to all her friends. So maybe if enough high budget porn is made it will start a new category of exceptance and merge into almost 'normal' cinema and future middle class porn stars can have a job and keep hold of there family. - maybe. x

[max_tranmere]

Lots of interesting comments there. I think that high budget porn is ok so long as the movie is littered with sex scenes, but if it's a 2 and a half hour film with just, say, 4 scenes in it and each scene lasts 10 minutes then it is hardly a porn film at all - more of a mainstream film with some sex thrown in.

Also these movies that are set in a certain period in time, like this Bonnie & Clyde flick which stars Natasha Marley, probably has the stars in character during the srewing scenes as well. It would seem weird to watch Natasha Marley being shagged and she is talking to the guy in a Dolly Parton accent whilst banging him. Natasha is from England not the deep-south of the US! That kind of thing also confirms the star is acting rather than letting go and really getting into the sex.