Mi Vida Chocha
August 30, 2004
15 Comments

I promise not to come in your handbag

The NY Times was vascillating between the paternal and the prurient this weekend. What *is* it with their porn obsession? This week, it's all about what women want in their porn:

For the next round of films they produced, Mr. Graff and Ms. Holland passed over stylists who worked exclusively in adult films and instead hired an art director who also works in theater, a wardrobe person who also designs hats and handbags. "Women were telling us they were really into lingerie, and it has to be at least Victoria's Secret, but better you have Prada. And they complained a lot about over-the-top jewelry, so we paid attention to that," Ms. Holland says. The results are "closer to where we're going, if not there yet," she adds.

Coincidentally, Jonno sent me some porn DVDs as repayment for a favor. (Thanks Jonno!) They were Repo Girls, Sex in the Valley, A Man's Tail (that was a personal request), and Jack's Playground, like, #345. I've sampled all but the Playground one, and I am here to tell you that this is what I want in my porn:


  • More Barrett Blade, preferably with dark hair.

  • No more Tyce Bune. I don't care what his rep is. He's ugly. Get rid of him.

  • Straight actors who look like Alex LeMonde. To simplify: Gay porn actors are ten times better looking than straight porn actors. I like gay porn. It's my favorite flavor. But if the porn industry wants to get straight women to watch movies with their hubbies, what we need is straight talent who's as goodlooking as the gay kind.

  • Less makeup.

  • NO MORE DOUBLE ANAL.

  • No more fake nails. I'm tired of those scenes where the women look like they're dialing rotary phones.

  • Less extended mechanical sex, quicker pop shots. Less is more.

  • Costume dramas! I want Weimar Berlin, Flappers, 40s bombshells, 50s housewives; I want Marlon Brando-circa-Wild-Ones; I want a young Debbie Harry shtupping a young Iggy Pop, dammit.

  • Stop spreading her goddamned butthole. WTF?

As you can see I had a productive weekend.

Posted by Dana at 11:40 AM

Comments

yeah, that butthole thing will really derail my momentum. total mood killer.

Posted by: patrick at August 30, 2004 03:57 PM

yeah, and another thing: why do these pornstars always leave their shoes on? could they secretly be self-conscious about stinkfoot?

Posted by: reeves at August 30, 2004 04:28 PM

I always thought they left their shoes on for traction. Can an expert weigh in here?

Posted by: dana at August 30, 2004 04:31 PM

Traction would make sense if they were wearing Keds or something, but not those hideous fruit-punch-tumbler things you see so often. I'd sooner see someone fuck in flip-flops, frankly.

Also, if your legs are scrunched up behind your back like an insect, the whole longer-leg-look thing is kind rendered moot.

Maybe it's the fact that those contraptions are so hard to get in & out of, you don't want to take them off until you absolutely have to.

Posted by: Chico at August 30, 2004 05:24 PM

shoes?!

y'all do realize there's are perfectly good vaginas and boobies and such to be looking at during these scenes, right?

Posted by: patrick at August 30, 2004 05:59 PM

Sex and the City - that show was nothing but a four-year long Manolo B. commercial, and now we continue to pay the consequences of that propaganda with useless shoe references in porn.

Posted by: krimur at August 30, 2004 08:02 PM

N. is much better looking than either of those two guys, and I'm not just sayin' that!

At least with his clothes on, anyway.

Posted by: tizzie at August 30, 2004 08:08 PM

I'm with you on the nails. yech.

Posted by: adam at August 31, 2004 12:06 AM

The shoes is a dirty feet thing. Porn stars tend to walk around the set barefoot. This tends to lead to a condition (I learned this term from a friend of a stripper) called "porn feet." Who wants the camera to see the dirty bottoms of feet when they are pointed at the ceiling.
No shit.

Posted by: kerry at August 31, 2004 01:11 AM

wow. and to think I was resigning myself to not learning anything new today.

Posted by: fishfucker at August 31, 2004 04:01 AM

around here, we always called that "7-11 foot."

Posted by: patrick at August 31, 2004 06:16 AM

Stop spreading her goddamned butthole. WTF?

Damn straight. If I want to look at goatse (heaven forbid), I know where to find it.

And with the nails, too. What's with the FloJo manicures?

Never knew that re: the shoes. Why don't they leave the shoes on off the set, and take them off on the set?

Posted by: Vidiot at August 31, 2004 06:55 AM

All these complaints point up why amateur porn of the voyeurweb variety is best.

The old-school pro stuff is OK once in a while, but the cheeseball "orgasm faces," bad implants, relentless blondeness and as everyone else mentioned, the shoe thing can be annoying.

The new school stuff is way too self conciously dark for my taste. Watching a bruised looking vampire wanna be cower naked in a corner is not a turn-on.

But in the amatuer stuff, you see an ordinary woman thrilled and excited with the idea of being desired, and the adventure of it all. You see playfulness, humor, gentleness, all the things missing from the pro stuff.

Although I do still have a place in my pantheon for Danni Ashe.

Posted by: jonmc at August 31, 2004 09:37 AM

Oh Tizzie, flattery will get you Manolos.

Posted by: N at August 31, 2004 11:31 AM

"7-11 foot." guh.

nothing beats a nekkid lady enjoying herself.
porn being what it is, that's a movie you usually got to shoot yourself.

Posted by: red clay at August 31, 2004 11:23 PM