|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » What U See aint What U Get |
| 1-5 of 5 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 01-13-10 11:51am - 5457 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
markymark (0)
Suspended Posts: 28 Registered: Jan 04, '10 Location: Fleming Island, FL USA |
What U See aint What U Get Ok, it's time to rant about something else that bothers me about the adult entertainment industry. (See my previous thread re: The Sorry State of Porn Today) Why do so many pornographers use what amounts to bait and switch tactics? Take a look at most adult DVD's. They grab your attention with the cover art. Example; the cover art for the video: "Naughty College Girls 2010" features the models/actresses all dressed in full schoolgirl and cheerleader uniforms, looking naughty, and posing in a sexy and very enticing manner. You think: "Wow, this looks good. I think I'll download/purchase it. So you do; and this is where the disappointment begins. You scan the entire 2hrs + of video, and you cannot find a single moment where the actresses are fully dressed in their uniforms or even partially dressed. No striptease, no sexy poses or girls frolicking in their uniforms. Instead, everyone is butt naked and f**cking like rabbits the entire video. The whole "Naughty College Girl" theme is barely an afterthought, and just another excuse for more gonzo f**cking. Now, here is what I find interesting. Careful thought goes into the packaging of any product. The design, colors, image composition and content are carefully crafted to appeal to a target audience, It's clear to me that the porn makers know this too. The proof can be found in what they choose to feature on their DVD cover art. What I do not understand is, why do they refuse to deliver it. Is it too expensive? I dont think so. If they took the time and expense to shoot the actresses in full makeup and wardrobe for the cover art; they should be willing and able to do the same for the actual video. After all, the cover art is supposed to be a representation of the video they are trying sell. Is it too much to ask of the actresses? The answer is an obvious; no. Their willingness to pose for the cover art indicates they would be willing to appear in full wardrobe for the video too. Also, were talking about porn actresses who are literally slapped, choked and spit upon while f**cking boneheaded, knuckle dragging, steroidal maniacs. So, I cant see any reason why these women would object to shooting any scenes that involve just sexy posing in their costumes or striptease. The audience does not want to see it? Really!!? If the audience is not interested in certain themes, wardrobes/costumes, stiptease, sexy posing, then why are the pornmakers using these very things to market their videos? The same "bait and switch" tactics can be found on many websites. I cant tell you how many times I've clicked on a thumbnail representing a video clip (because it featured an actress in a sexy pose), only to discover that pose, or anything similar to it is no where to be found in the video clip. WTF!!! It's like I what I said earlier, they know what we want but they refuse to deliver it.Maybe, just maybe, there is someone out there who is able to discern what some people want to see and is willing to provide it. Peace. MarkyMark | |
|
||
| 01-13-10 07:31pm - 5457 days | #2 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
My suggestion is that you take a look at other dvd's the studio is responsible for and see if their is a trend. I suspect that you will find one. That means you should never buy anything from this studio since you are more likely to be disapointed. Now if you want material involving girls wearing school uniforms then avoid most modern porn movies. Although the actresses in them are all legal since they have 2257 records. The schoolgril uniform is now associated with child pornography or at least is used by the Government in inciting that the actresses are playing underage teen characters. You should look for older stuff that was made prior to the mid 90's. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 01-14-10 09:58am - 5456 days | #3 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
I agree completely with what you are saying. Thank God that previews of the scenes are available at most sites like VideoBox and Videosz to save unnecessary downloads. I've always marveled at the same thing, the cover promises one thing the content is the usual mind numbing twenty minutes of uninterrupted sex. Even in my favorite niche, lingerie, the models usually start out almost naked, with a thong being the "lingerie" part. :-) Keep ranting, you're right on target with your remarks. | |
|
||
| 01-14-10 06:18pm - 5456 days | #4 | |
|
markymark (0)
Suspended Posts: 28 Registered: Jan 04, '10 Location: Fleming Island, FL USA |
messmer, Thanks for responding. I appreciate your comment. MarkyMark | |
|
||
| 01-14-10 06:21pm - 5456 days | #5 | |
|
markymark (0)
Suspended Posts: 28 Registered: Jan 04, '10 Location: Fleming Island, FL USA |
pat362, Thanks for adding to the discussion. Your point is well taken. However, I'm not looking for porn in that particular niche, I just used the fetish of uniforms and the ficticious title "Naughty College Girls" to illustrate a point. The point being: cover art on DVD's and thumbnails on websites often misrepresent the actual content. The pornmakers seem to know what we want to see and use it in their marketing, but they refuse to deliver it in the actual product. I want to know why? MarkyMark Edited on Jan 14, 2010, 06:29pm | |
|
||
| 1-5 of 5 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
