View Single Post
Old 05.31.2012, 12:19 PM   #16087
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars
Posts: 29,114
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by demonrail666
Well I do think everyone should watch Danger Diabolik at least once.


i'll check it out, thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by demonrail666
That used to be far truer than it is now. Once you get into the more mainstream end, the competition is so high that while some of that 70s wooden thing is still there, it's by no means 'industry standard' anymore, and definitely not with the the bigger companies. I'm not saying any of them are gonna worry Judi Dench or Helen Mirren come oscar time but I definitely don't see much of a leap in acting skills between say Megan Fox and a girl signed to Vivid.

i don't know. when you look at old marylin chambers movies (behind the green door or that one on the pool table, i forget the name) she looked like she was really enjoying the sex-- really, that happy fucky face had a delicious expression, she's wonderful and you can *relate* to her as a character. she was less wooden than anything you'll see today.

on the other hand when you watch a sasha grey with her dead eyes or a bobbi starr porn video, their screams are so contrived it's painful to listen-- best to watch them with the volume turned off. jenna jameson has a studio now, yes? and her porns try to have a storyline-- but they are just so bad it's a waste of footage. someone should please put just jaeckin back to work ("just' is his name, not an english word); those 70s soft porns were superior to most "erotic" shit made today, though i'm open to changing my mind if there's evidence in favor of that.

anyway so i checked out ariel rebel after reading your post, and while i'll agree the lady has a tight hot little body (really, yummy, and thank fuck no fake tits), i also noticed that all ther photos had the same facial expression-- which in the acting department puts her below fashion models. i haven't seen her "act" in pornos but perhaps she's not as terrible as the others i mentioned. megan fox is on movies mainly for good looks but at least she has 3 or 4 possible faces-- same thing w/ the lady with the gorgeous butt, what's her name, jessica biel.

but the stereotyped expression of ariel's photos doesn't really bode well unless you're casting her in something that specifically calls for that fake girlie look (just like the girlfriend experience called for grey's flat affect).
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|