Will there ever be a quality porn again? - Page 3

Alvin Lucifer · September 5th, 2010, 02:29 AM

If porn is going to have a storyline, it needs to do more than facilitate sex scenes. Precious few pornographic films even in the vaunted golden age did that. The disappearance of storylines was, in part, consumer-driven.

It was about 1988 when I started seeing compilations boasting "wall-to-wall sex," "no filler," and "90-minutes of nonstop reamin' and creamin'" Methinks once the stock of VHS footage got large enough, it was easy to start stitching comps together by actress, theme, fetish, or production company. Producers loved it because it was cheap, consumers loved it because they didn't have to fast forward through moronic dialogue to get to the screwing.

It was different before home video. You bought a box office ticket and if the movie sucked (or didn't suck enough), then YOU were screwed (or not).

Mr Lucas · March 17th, 2016, 11:27 PM

Thing is, the golden age was the golden age because the makers understood eroticism, even if it was pervy and filthy, they did it with style. When it's just wall to wall 'reamin and creamin' well then you miss out on the set-up, and the dialogue and the saucy looks and teasing that was all part of porn at its best. Sure you want the hardcore stuff in there, but sometimes the subtler things can be the most memorable.

Frankly I could just watch French output from the mid 70s to mid 80s and it covers a lot of what is best in porn, sometimes the fact that it's dubbed with over the top gasps and oohs is all part of the appeal. But also, when the Europeans made porn (and the Americans early on) they seemed to realise that the eroticism could be kept simmering throughout, between the hardcore scenes - a quick flash and a playful laugh, or just a sexually charged conversation. It helps that you're more likely to see real tits and pubic triangles too, which makes for a much more erotic tease. But at some stage someone decided to just make very dull stories with half a dozen hardcore scenes regularly slotted into a generic sexless plot. Cue, the audience desire to cut the rubbish and get to the good stuff.

Trouble with porn now is that it's got to cut to the deed asap (apparently), and it's such a relentless churning industry that all artistry is gone. It's only in retrospect that you realise that porn in its break-out period of the 1970s after the sexual revolution was still honest enough to try to actually turn people on and explore fantasies. Now it's so broad it attempts to cater to all fetishes under the sun without actually understanding anything but the superficial trappings involved. Example: like redheads? Back in the 70s they'd search for a pale skinned redhead that hit all the right buttons. Now? Just shove a fake looking red wig on a tattooed, sun-bronzed, pube-free porn 'star'. Porn now is like having sex with a bored prostitute who just performs the expected routine to get the job done.

September 5th, 2010, 02:29 AM	#21
Alvin Lucifer Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Pioneer Valley, Massachusetts Posts: 373 Thanks: 8,768 Thanked 3,055 Times in 364 Posts	If porn is going to have a storyline, it needs to do more than facilitate sex scenes. Precious few pornographic films even in the vaunted golden age did that. The disappearance of storylines was, in part, consumer-driven. It was about 1988 when I started seeing compilations boasting "wall-to-wall sex," "no filler," and "90-minutes of nonstop reamin' and creamin'" Methinks once the stock of VHS footage got large enough, it was easy to start stitching comps together by actress, theme, fetish, or production company. Producers loved it because it was cheap, consumers loved it because they didn't have to fast forward through moronic dialogue to get to the screwing. It was different before home video. You bought a box office ticket and if the movie sucked (or didn't suck enough), then YOU were screwed (or not). __________________ I'm not a gynecologist, but I'll have a look...

March 17th, 2016, 11:27 PM	#22
Mr Lucas Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 140 Thanks: 822 Thanked 2,548 Times in 131 Posts	Thing is, the golden age was the golden age because the makers understood eroticism, even if it was pervy and filthy, they did it with style. When it's just wall to wall 'reamin and creamin' well then you miss out on the set-up, and the dialogue and the saucy looks and teasing that was all part of porn at its best. Sure you want the hardcore stuff in there, but sometimes the subtler things can be the most memorable. Frankly I could just watch French output from the mid 70s to mid 80s and it covers a lot of what is best in porn, sometimes the fact that it's dubbed with over the top gasps and oohs is all part of the appeal. But also, when the Europeans made porn (and the Americans early on) they seemed to realise that the eroticism could be kept simmering throughout, between the hardcore scenes - a quick flash and a playful laugh, or just a sexually charged conversation. It helps that you're more likely to see real tits and pubic triangles too, which makes for a much more erotic tease. But at some stage someone decided to just make very dull stories with half a dozen hardcore scenes regularly slotted into a generic sexless plot. Cue, the audience desire to cut the rubbish and get to the good stuff. Trouble with porn now is that it's got to cut to the deed asap (apparently), and it's such a relentless churning industry that all artistry is gone. It's only in retrospect that you realise that porn in its break-out period of the 1970s after the sexual revolution was still honest enough to try to actually turn people on and explore fantasies. Now it's so broad it attempts to cater to all fetishes under the sun without actually understanding anything but the superficial trappings involved. Example: like redheads? Back in the 70s they'd search for a pale skinned redhead that hit all the right buttons. Now? Just shove a fake looking red wig on a tattooed, sun-bronzed, pube-free porn 'star'. Porn now is like having sex with a bored prostitute who just performs the expected routine to get the job done.