.. at any rate, it's mainly the studios [rather than the actors] driving it.
At root it may be nothing more than the basic human desire to claim originality
[whether spurious or no].
But as Len says, it is at times BLOODY annoying.
clarification requested of a scene in PULP
Re: clarification requested of a scene in PULP
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: clarification requested of a scene in PULP
Well, I'm not sure what kind of "originality" is being sought on the part of producer/director/distributor, if they slap a fictitious name on the box cover (and/or on-screen movie credits) that no one knows who it refers to, or whatever silly name some other distrubutor uses for a male or female performer.
Just to give an example I was trying to track down the identity of an american petite slim actress with a silly first name, just new to the business. I first caught a glimpse of her in a lesbo film for a big company, then all of a sudden I notice she shot around the same time two scenes for a web site with a totally different name (name and surname). She has just started out and already she has two diferent names.
It used to be the practice of a large american porn company to take on a female performer with a few titles under her belt, give her a physical make-over and a brand new name which was exclusive to them. To some extent that may indicate a certain "originality" of sorts, but what does it do for the girl's long (or short) term career (or for the other previous distributors who paid for her services and they knew her and her fans under some other name)? It short changes the fans who are confused and the other porn companies as to how market her previous work. I can understand the "exclusivity" factor, meaning THAT particular actress will only act in OUR movies, but does changing their name really solidify that "originality"?
To what extent do performers really play this silly game, or do they really have no control over the names changes?
Just to give an example I was trying to track down the identity of an american petite slim actress with a silly first name, just new to the business. I first caught a glimpse of her in a lesbo film for a big company, then all of a sudden I notice she shot around the same time two scenes for a web site with a totally different name (name and surname). She has just started out and already she has two diferent names.
It used to be the practice of a large american porn company to take on a female performer with a few titles under her belt, give her a physical make-over and a brand new name which was exclusive to them. To some extent that may indicate a certain "originality" of sorts, but what does it do for the girl's long (or short) term career (or for the other previous distributors who paid for her services and they knew her and her fans under some other name)? It short changes the fans who are confused and the other porn companies as to how market her previous work. I can understand the "exclusivity" factor, meaning THAT particular actress will only act in OUR movies, but does changing their name really solidify that "originality"?
To what extent do performers really play this silly game, or do they really have no control over the names changes?
Re: clarification requested of a scene in PULP
When I said 'root' I was alluding to the tendency in all of us to self-deception,
usually as an ego-stroke.Some of these guys need to convince themselves that
their product is somehow unique and personal to them, to 'proprietorialize' it...
of course, I'm not implying that this is the sole factor or even the main one.
At its most cynical it is, as you say, basically dishonest.
I don't think the 'talent' generally has very much influence- but as always, there
are exceptions.
usually as an ego-stroke.Some of these guys need to convince themselves that
their product is somehow unique and personal to them, to 'proprietorialize' it...
of course, I'm not implying that this is the sole factor or even the main one.
At its most cynical it is, as you say, basically dishonest.
I don't think the 'talent' generally has very much influence- but as always, there
are exceptions.
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."