Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyran0
As for the content of porn, the repetition thing is a problem. Like with any style of movie, you just have to find some that don't suck. The best ones I find employ a variety of angles to avoid that problem. That being said, guys have always and will always want to see penetration. We are visual creatures and we want to see every part of a woman but especially the *****. I happen to be a bi male so I can add that I feel the same way about cock in videos.
Even though this post probably makes me sound like some sort of porn aficionado, I am not an authority on porn or even a huge consumer of it. I just happened to spend some time awhile back solving the problems you brought up for my own consumption. Like most guys I know, I need just enough porn around for "maintenance", if you get my meaning.
|
I do what your meaning, thanks.
I guess it is either my not being a guy or something else, but...
...on my most recent plane ride, we got free movies as a compensation for the delay, and I started to watch
Last Tango in Paris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia...
...I got a headache (I am prone to them - not because of the movie, no
) so I stopped soon, but I did watch the beginning...
...there is an erotic scene there that was done superbly, in my humble opinion. Superbly. My hat's off to all the creative talent involved in the production.
In the scene, Marlon Brando, clothed in a very long thin fabric coat, ****s a young woman. The fabric of his coat is so thin and soft that it drapes around his body and moves with each of his forceful thrusts. With each thrust, the fabric's wrinkles and folds change (that creates an incredible interplay of shading and light). At the end, the camera very quickly focuses on the woman - the woman is sitting on a raised surface (a table perhaps?) with her legs spread just a bit so that you can see her pubic hair (a normal, perfect triangle of dark pubic hair - the movie was done in France/Italy in 1972, so nobody knew of waxing back then and there).
Powerful? Very powerful. Creative? Very creative. Original? Original.
I need to see the rest of the movie.
Just scanning the wikipedia article, I see one critic's response with which I fully agree just based on that one short scene:
"thrusting, jabbing eroticism"
So, my question is, how can close-ups of mechanical penetration ever compare with that? Why are they necessary? If instead of showing his whole clothed body, and, via the whole body (and, obviously, all the intricate lighting work that must have been planned and executed with sheer professionalism), depicting the paroxysm of the orgasm, they'd show Marlon Brando's PENIS, I very much doubt that it'd be interesting. Then again, maybe the high quality paid porn you describe does give the ability to actually feel the pulsating action in close-ups, and not just see the (boring) in-and-out movements.
Or, perhaps it is just my not being a man.