|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Stop Looking at the Friggin Camera !!! |
| 1-18 of 18 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 10-26-08 08:08am - 5901 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
smoker00 (0)
Active User Posts: 14 Registered: May 11, '08 |
Stop Looking at the Friggin Camera !!! Has the whole porn world lost it's friggin mind? What is this bullshit were every chick in every porno now constantly looks at the camera? Am I the only person who finds this a ridiculous turnoff? I know pornographers are not the brightest folks in the world, but doesn't anyone know the most basic part of "acting" includes pretending the friggin camera isn't there? | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 08:53am - 5901 days | #2 | |
|
elonlybuster (0)
Active User Posts: 52 Registered: Aug 24, '08 Location: Georgia |
Yeah I hate that crap too. It's only acceptable if it's a Point of View (POV) Camera. But yeah I feel ya man. it is really annoying and the only time they don't as much is in the actual DVDs. | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 11:35am - 5901 days | #3 | |
|
badandy400 (0)
Active User  Posts: 869 Registered: Mar 02, '08 Location: ohio |
I think the point of her looking at the camera is to make the viewer feel like she is looking right at him. It is like she is imagining it is your dick she is sitting on and you are supposed to fantasize that she is thinking about you. The guy in the movie is just a tool. That is my take on why they do that. "For example, badandy400 has taken it upon himself to become the one man Library of Congress for porn with a collection that surely will be in Guinness Book of World Records some day." ~Toadsith~ PU Interview | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 12:24pm - 5901 days | #4 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I'm going to assume that we are talking about gonzo style porn, since I don't remeber seeing this in a feature. It's funny how taste vary. I actualy like it when they look at the camera. For the exact reasons that Badandy said. It's even better if she's talking dirty. This post has just given me an amazing idea for a new interactive line of dvds(Personalized audio). You could have your favorite actress using your name in various POV style scenes. I really don't like when the girls look to the side for directions from the producer or director. Now that breaks the illusion real fast. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 01:48pm - 5901 days | #5 | |
|
smoker00 (0)
Active User Posts: 14 Registered: May 11, '08 |
yes, I'm talking about "shorts", on web sites, DVDs, whatever, not features. badandy and pat- it may be true today's dopey porn makers think viewers want to see this crap, but many people don't. Today's shorts are hard enough to get off on as it is- pathetic "acting", no build up, tacky production values, skanky females (and males for that matter), etc. On top of that I'm supposed to imagine the broad is thinking of me when she turns to the camera during a BJ?! So, in other words, I'm supposed to be thinking about what the actors are thinking about? LOL. Give me a break! The kindest way I could describe this awful trend is POV nonsense run amok. Does anyone understand the main appeal of porn has always been the voyeuristic aspect of watching actors who are pretending they're getting it on in private? It's a very simple concept, and it's always worked. Looking at the camera ruins that basic appeal. Remember way back to the "classic" porn shorts series like Color Climax and Swedish Erotica? Did the actors ever look at the camera? Of course not! Are you actually saying the classic porn makers had it all wrong and today's porn makers figured out a better way to turn viewers on?! Wrong. Even most Russian web porn- which include the lamest shorts in the world- even THEY know better than to have actors looking at the camera! Maybe this is an age thing where folks like me who've seen a lot of classic porn can't understand how anyone could get off on actors looking at the camera. I guess in fairness I should say this new looking at the camera stuff isn't "crap", it's just "different", but frankly that's not how I feel about it. I think mainly today's pornographers don't have a clue about what they're doing, they have no appreciation for classic porn, and many of today's younger porn consumers don't know any better and don't know what they're missing, so they don't complain. So, if there's a segment of porn consumers who would prefer to see actors looking at the camera, what about the rest of us? Can't someone stick to making porn the way that's always worked? Who would have thought things would get so bad with shorts we'd need a new genre called "actors don't look at the camera"! | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 07:49pm - 5900 days | #6 | |
|
badandy400 (0)
Active User Posts: 869 Registered: Mar 02, '08 Location: ohio |
Exactly. If that is something you want than you need to find a group that stays within that niche. intentionally or not. I can agree that there are some scenes where it is not appropriate. Also, being 23, I can still agree that there are some very good scenes where the actors seem like no one else is around. I particularly like lesbians scenes where the girls seem like they are really getting into each other, and this would be ruined if they looked at the camera. On the other hand in many of the hardcore scenes they are taking up positions that many people would never think of if they had not seen it done and there is no attempt at the illusion that the actors are performing out of passion. The scenes I find it to be acceptable and sometimes appealing to have the woman seem like she is looking at me and desiring me (we only wish it were true). Something that must be considered by yourself, Smoker. If most people did not like a certain thing in porn the directors would mostly avoid it because it would not sell. And the opposite hold true for things that many people find appealing, they sell so they get produced. Disliking camera interaction is your preference, and apparently is not shared by everyone. I am sure you could find some porn where that is catered to. As you said it is voyeuristic, so start there. Also, are not the Russians usually a little behind us on trends? I believe a similar discussion was made about girls who shave or women having breast implants. Porn has not been so mainstream for all that long and perhaps like many other things it will follow trend cycles. So perhaps you will see porn going back to those methods again someday. "For example, badandy400 has taken it upon himself to become the one man Library of Congress for porn with a collection that surely will be in Guinness Book of World Records some day." ~Toadsith~ PU Interview | |
|
||
| 10-26-08 10:15pm - 5900 days | #7 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
Being a Porn User before the PC was invented (yep, been around a while) I've had the same question. Back in the day when the only porn available over the counter was a bare nipple or two and the "good stuff" was hard to come by and expensive, the majority of the photo shoots had the babes looking at the camera, but no pubic hair, let alone insertions of any kind, were ever shown. Then when the Immoral Mr. Teas came out in the early 1960's, we got bobbing boobies and silly plots, but still no pussy or ass. But also the action was like most all movies; there was no eye "contact" with the camera. Until the mid 1990's when specialty mail order outfits produced solo soft core stuff (Fiona Cooper and Private Performance come to mind) where almost all of their stuff had the babes making eye contact and, in some cases, actually talking to the camera. But hard core stuff that played at the local porn theatres in the 1980's, then showed up at video stores stayed with the legit movie biz and offered no eye contact. Now it's the exact opposite; virtually all porn now has eye contact. Dunno why, but it really doesn't matter much to me. So long as I can check out the PTA of the babes, I really am not bothered by the eye contact issue. But a friend did say he really was pissed about it. Why? Because he saw it as a put down of the poor schlemiel whose whole sex life was limited to wanking off at porn videos. He figured the babe was looking at the voyeur and thinking, "you sap. This guy is getting fucked by me and getting paid for it while you are the sad sack that buys this shit and makes it possible for both me and the dude to make a buck." | |
|
||
| 10-27-08 03:32pm - 5900 days | #8 | |
|
Colm4 (0)
Active User  Posts: 117 Registered: Sep 22, '07 Location: Holland |
I actually like it when they look at the camera. However only if it happens sporadically. There are scenes where the girls go into much trouble looking at the camera (most likely directed) and visually being discomfortable to them. Like when they are sitting backwards, looking back almost twists their neck around. Or forcefully smiling. Private is also known for this and many good movies of them have gone to waste because of it. It's distracting and removes realism to the story. | |
|
||
| 10-28-08 09:15am - 5899 days | #9 | |
|
WeeWillyWinky (0)
Active User  Posts: 243 Registered: Jun 03, '07 Location: Havasu City, AZ USA |
I noted being annoyed by this in my review of Little Lupe's site. She was always gawking at the camera. To me it's just one of many things I hate about modern porn, or Internet porn. It's too easy to do nowadays, and just about anyone can make porn. Crappy porn, that is. It' so bad that I don't even bother wasting my time on it. Modern porn has seemed to forget that the pleasure of sex, for most people, is niney precent mental. It's not WHAT you're doing, it's WHO you're doing, and to a very large extent, WHY. Basic, mechanical sex between two or more people? I'd rather watch paint dry. Look at the glory hole phenomenon. Now why in the world would you want to stick your dick through a hole and not know who is on the other end? It could be a guy for all you know, or some psychotic, drug-addled skank. The merely physical aspects of sex are secondary. As an example, a mouth is a mouth. We all like getting head, but by and large a mouth is a mouth. Given that, I would find no stimulation at all being sucked off by some mystery mouth. I wouldn't be able to keep it up. Looking down and seeing Salma Hayek doing it (impossible of course), or the woman I've been hopelessly in love with for ten years: NOW that would be something unbelievably stimulating, for me at least. A mouth is a mouth. The important thing is WHOSE mouth it is. Look at the language used to describe hardcore. A snippet taken at random from Rabbit's Reviews: "...Nasty chicks dig a rock hard dick or two coming at them every which way. Whores know throbbing solid rod feels so good up wet snatches and down hungry throats. Guys love to please these horny babes by pumping sweet pussies and plugging tight asses in wild hardcore sex, there's no limit to how much creamy cum they can shoot across expectant faces and into oscillating orifices. These lads deliver load after load until loose ladies are satisfied, these cunt-loving monsters don't stop broad banging until the job's done right..." It's just mechanical fucking, mutual masturbation, mass-produced crap. The sad thing is, this must be what most guys like, since the marketing is geared towards the market, afterall. The eye-contact issue is just another symptom of this trend towards depersonalization. It's a way for the girl to say that she doesn't really give a rat's ass for the guy underneath her or on top of her. It could be anybody, it doesn't matter. She's fucking for the audience. Back in the old days they knew how to make porn. I remember a flick with John Leslie who spends most of the movie at odds with this television personality, a beautiful woman, who seems uninterested in sex and is somewhat firigid. The last scene of the movie is when he finally gets this woman in bed. He seduces her and gets her interested, and the subsequent scene is incredibly hot. When this woman is in bed with Leslie, she is a million miles away from the camera, figuratively speaking. She is in her own little world, totally involved in Leslie and what he is doing. Even if it's just acting, it's good acting, and it's effective. I'm sure that some people are making high quality porn these days, but it's just too much trouble finding it. I'd rather just ignore it. You know what I hate the most about selfish people? It's that they don't think enough about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!! | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 09:12am - 5898 days | #10 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
It's interesting to see that 46% of PornUsers (who responded) thought that eye contact was very important in porn. How important is eye contact in porn? Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 04:49pm - 5897 days | #11 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Here, here! I'm in the "pro-eye-contact-with-the-camera" group, but there are important qualifying statements that need to be made. I HATE it when the camera stays on the girl's face and that's all you can see. I mean, that's really ridiculous. I wanna see the action, of course! I don't like it when the girl isn't being sexy, but just being fucked like a meat-market special. I don't like it when the girl's face gets all red and contorted. Some chicks just can't help it when they're having sex, I suppose, but I want a sweet face to look at. Really, it's not just eye contact, but a feeling of interaction. I have a nice video of Layla Rivera getting it belly down flat (my favorite!) and her face is nearest the camera at one point -- maybe 15 seconds? -- and she says stuff and coos and moans and it's a real turn on. So something like that I love, but it shouldn't be a long, drawn-out thing. You know, everything in moderation! ;) I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 10-29-08 10:55pm - 5897 days | #12 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
You nailed it, moderation. It seems like the camera men sometimes gets ahard on and can fricken move and all we get is a solid angle . If its pov I exspect it. But I like the eye contact stuff just not over done and Drool said moderation. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-30-08 08:47am - 5897 days | #13 | |
|
williamj (0)
Active User Posts: 102 Registered: Sep 29, '07 Location: usa |
I like a little eye contact. I agree there is so much porn on the internet and some sites seem to find a way to do it all wrong over and over. POV porn seems to be a big hit. For me it depends on what the site is trying to sell. Sometimes eye contact is part of the fantasy. Will | |
|
||
| 11-21-08 05:32pm - 5874 days | #14 | |
|
biker (0)
Active User  Posts: 632 Registered: May 03, '08 Location: milwaukee, wi |
I have brought this uo in another thread. Eye contact is fine if limited and the idea is to focus on the face, but I have been to site where the women are costantantly glaring at the camera. You can actually see their tongues straining to find their targets because they are not looking at what their doing. For me the fantasy of the scene is important and it is lost when the players are looking at the camera and not the person they are experiencing. If you were watching any other film with people acting certain roles in it would it not ruin fantasy by having them constantly looking at the camera. Warning Will Robinson | |
|
||
| 11-26-08 12:45am - 5870 days | #15 | |
|
jd1961 (0)
Active User  Posts: 296 Registered: Jun 07, '07 |
That's because back then in the '60s and '70s it was considered obscene to make a movie that aided the viewer in thinking he was a part of it, ie: POV porn. That's why there was "acting" in porno in the first place. To keep from being prosecuted. | |
|
||
| 12-31-08 04:18am - 5835 days | #16 | |
|
ramscrota (0)
Suspended  Posts: 54 Registered: Jul 04, '07 Location: Geelong Vic Australia |
I agree smoker00. Worst of all are the posed gg scenes (pics). But In a scene (BG or GG the two or 3 lovers should be totally engrossed in each other, not the, as you say, the 'friggen' camera. The only exceptions are the solo girl shoots. | |
|
||
| 12-31-08 07:14am - 5835 days | #17 | |
|
Jeffrey99 (0)
Active User  Posts: 106 Registered: Nov 04, '08 Location: Good Ole Midwest USA |
IF it's a solo or POV style movie, then I like the eye contact with some talking dirty or somthing. If it's a hardcore video where they've already shown all of guy away from the camera, then I think looking into the camera is useless. As that point and time, it's no longer POV and the viewer isn't part of the action. He's now just watching. | |
|
||
| 12-31-08 10:28am - 5835 days | #18 | |
|
Pornviewer (0)
Suspended Posts: 11 Registered: Apr 24, '08 Location: USA |
I REALLY like eye contact and that is what really turns me on. It is the sexiest part of the body. Love POV videos. Eyes as they say are the windows of the soul. They have the ability to express the feeling of the experience. Did you know that the brain is the biggest sex organ you have! What I dislike the most are videos where the porn star has the eyes closed most of the time. Probably the best videos give you a variety of views. I like it all, legs, eyes, face, lips, breasts, nipples, hair, ears, ass, feet, etc. What bores me most are videos that focus mostly on the endless grinding, in and out. I like facial expressions whether the girls is looking at the camera or not. I agree with others, by looking at the camera, you feel part of the action. | |
|
||
| 1-18 of 18 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
