What I hate about porn
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 9:08 am
A lazy morning browsing through some of my recent tug movie purchases led me to muse on the things I like about porn, and the things that really piss me off about it. Now, I?m a simple man, with simple tastes. To me, the perfect pornograph consists of 2 1/2 ? 3 hours of beautiful girls pleasuring themselves with the aid of other women, men, electrical appliances and assorted root and salad vegetables. Like I said, simple. But it astonishes me how easy it is to bollock up a perfectly achieveable premise beyond all chance of recovery.
Here are my top three things in porn that are guaranteed to annoy me to flaccidity. In no particular order:
1. GYNO: She?s a lovely girl, so why exactly are we focussing almost exclusively on the six square inches between her legs? Pull out, man! Let?s see her arch her back. Let?s see her face. Let?s see the other girl on the other side of the room wanking herself into a frenzy at a scene of such erotic abandonment! Too much wide-angle meat banging, and I feel like I?m missing out. (To keep this on topic, Phil Barry?s ?Cathula? suffered from this a bit, I felt. Not enough Jane Whitehouse giving her dildo an enthusiastic workout, too much closeup work on Cathy?s genital piercings for my taste. Cathy?s gorgeous. Let?s see more of her!)
2. SHAKYCAM: or the nausea-inducing way the camera is flung around the scene in your average gonzo flick. It?s as if the camera operator can?t decide what to shoot, and in an agony of indecision tries to capture everything in one swinging, zooming constantly focus-hunting shot that misses everything. Oh, and the camera?s set to auto-exposure so the scene switches between stygian gloom and eye-searing brightness every five seconds. Gives me a headache. Ben Dover, the Gonzo Pope, gets it right, of course. Two cameras. One locked off master wide shot, then he?s free to use his handheld for closeups or whatever. And he lights his sets properly. My hero.
3. THE ORGASM: this one really is a personal bugbear of mine. I don?t see the female orgasm anything like as much as I?d like. (There are those of us that would argue that as in porn, so in life, but guys, please, this is supposed to be fantasy, surely?)The popshot?s the conventional way of ending a scene, but does it really have to be that way? It seems downright ungentlemanly to come, then walk away and deny the lady her pleasure. My fondest porn memory is of a Private clip sometime in the mid-Eighties. A two-guy, one girl scene, pretty standard up to the ending. After the pop-shots the girl, still besmeared with come, stepped up to the camera and proceeded to masturbate to a shuddering climax, eye-contact with the audience all the time. That, my friends, is an ending. More like that, please. Give the girl a chance to shine.
Here endeth the rant. I?m fully aware that this subject has been the start of many threads on the forum over the years, so I?ll beg your indulgence, ladies and gents. Feel free to use this post as the catalyst to further discussion, or alternatively ignore it as the ravings of a man with FAR too much time on his hands.
ttfn
RX
PS On re-reading before I posted this (now there?s an idea!) I thought I?d better just point out that although ?Cathula? didn?t really do it for me, plenty of the pornographs coming from Pumpkin Films take pride of place in my collection. I?m not having a go at Phil or Cathy. It was just an example that came immediately to mind.
Here are my top three things in porn that are guaranteed to annoy me to flaccidity. In no particular order:
1. GYNO: She?s a lovely girl, so why exactly are we focussing almost exclusively on the six square inches between her legs? Pull out, man! Let?s see her arch her back. Let?s see her face. Let?s see the other girl on the other side of the room wanking herself into a frenzy at a scene of such erotic abandonment! Too much wide-angle meat banging, and I feel like I?m missing out. (To keep this on topic, Phil Barry?s ?Cathula? suffered from this a bit, I felt. Not enough Jane Whitehouse giving her dildo an enthusiastic workout, too much closeup work on Cathy?s genital piercings for my taste. Cathy?s gorgeous. Let?s see more of her!)
2. SHAKYCAM: or the nausea-inducing way the camera is flung around the scene in your average gonzo flick. It?s as if the camera operator can?t decide what to shoot, and in an agony of indecision tries to capture everything in one swinging, zooming constantly focus-hunting shot that misses everything. Oh, and the camera?s set to auto-exposure so the scene switches between stygian gloom and eye-searing brightness every five seconds. Gives me a headache. Ben Dover, the Gonzo Pope, gets it right, of course. Two cameras. One locked off master wide shot, then he?s free to use his handheld for closeups or whatever. And he lights his sets properly. My hero.
3. THE ORGASM: this one really is a personal bugbear of mine. I don?t see the female orgasm anything like as much as I?d like. (There are those of us that would argue that as in porn, so in life, but guys, please, this is supposed to be fantasy, surely?)The popshot?s the conventional way of ending a scene, but does it really have to be that way? It seems downright ungentlemanly to come, then walk away and deny the lady her pleasure. My fondest porn memory is of a Private clip sometime in the mid-Eighties. A two-guy, one girl scene, pretty standard up to the ending. After the pop-shots the girl, still besmeared with come, stepped up to the camera and proceeded to masturbate to a shuddering climax, eye-contact with the audience all the time. That, my friends, is an ending. More like that, please. Give the girl a chance to shine.
Here endeth the rant. I?m fully aware that this subject has been the start of many threads on the forum over the years, so I?ll beg your indulgence, ladies and gents. Feel free to use this post as the catalyst to further discussion, or alternatively ignore it as the ravings of a man with FAR too much time on his hands.
ttfn
RX
PS On re-reading before I posted this (now there?s an idea!) I thought I?d better just point out that although ?Cathula? didn?t really do it for me, plenty of the pornographs coming from Pumpkin Films take pride of place in my collection. I?m not having a go at Phil or Cathy. It was just an example that came immediately to mind.
