that’s what decades of prudish conservative culture has done to us, indeed… but no problem with movies where people get shot in the head, limbs severed, etc… I would rather live in a world where we don’t even have a word for porn because who ever came up with the idea of the world’s most natural thing being somehow the indecent thing…
You truly believe that, for instance, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly would be enhanced by a sequence of hardcore f#ck scenes? Really?
You’re conflating the act of having sex (a completely natural and wonderful act, not indecent at all) with the act of watching other people have sex in a porno movie. And I’m afraid that IS indecent. That’s why, when we enjoy them, we do so discreetly and in private (or maybe with our partners). It’s why I don’t stick a porno on while my mum has come over to visit her grandkids. It’s why television stations tend to air things like Britain’s Got Talent on Saturday prime time instead of Tit F#ckers 4 or somesuch. Would you be happy for your children to watch porn? What if porn aired on primetime television? Would you settle around the telly as a family to enjoy it? It’s only natural, and not indecent, after all.
And it’s not the world’s most natural thing, of course. It’s perfectly natural, yes, but a person could live without ever having sex, watching sex or even giving sex a second’s thought. A far more natural act, I would say, would be something you have to do. Like breathing, or eating, or drinking, or defecating.
So how about that? If your argument for porn as a regular act in films is because it’s “natural” and therefore shouldn’t be considered “indecent”, then perhaps we should enjoy watching people take a shit too? Let’s reimagine for a moment the dining scene in Cemetery Without Crosses. Everybody around the table is laughing at Robert Hossein and, in similar good humour, he climbs up on his chair, stands on the table, removes his jeans, squats over the table centrepiece and shits all over it. There’s a scene we needed, right? Or hey, maybe you could build a few all-natural, not-at-all-indecent toilet stops into your f#ck scenes with which you’ve already peppered TGtBatU. Clint, having f#cked Eli Wallach’s brains out and spunked in his eye, gives the scene the coup de grâce it was lacking up to that point by proceeding to shit in Lee Van Cleef’s hat. It’s not indecent, it’s the most natural thing in the world!
That’s a false equivalence. As a culture, western society has no tolerance whatsoever for movies in which people are shot in the head, limbs severed and such. I’ve never seen such a film and would be disgusted - and likely traumatised - if I did. Those things in films are not real. People f#cking in a porno IS real. (if you’re not talking about hardcore sex but instead are talking about simulated, softcore sex scenes, well, they’re even more redundant imho.)
It’s nothing whatsoever to do with prudish Conservative culture. I’m not a prude, or a Conservative - I’d sooner slash my own throat than vote Conservative! - and Ive enjoyed about forty billion hours of porn in my life. I understand the appeal of pornography perfectly. Pornography in and of itself is not the issue here for me, and indeed is not an issue for me at all. I don’t watch it anywhere near as much as I used to but I haven’t denounced my porn-loving past; I have LOVED porn in my life. If I gave you examples of exactly how much my wife and I have enjoyed porn (and still do from time to time), you simply wouldn’t believe me. I just don’t see how it enhances any movie which strives to be anything more than a porno. For me, personally, it doesn’t. Are any of these porno westerns actually any good, as westerns? Have any of them made anybody’s lists of favourite Westerns? Has anybody ever said, "Hey, Buck Bronco and his Magnificent Seven Inches isn’t quite as nuanced as Leone’s Dollars trilogy but it beats the crap out of Sollima’s Cuchillo films, doesn’t it?"
There are hundreds of themed pornos but they aren’t considered to be westerns, or sci-fi films, or period dramas or superhero movies or whatever genre they’re portraying. They’re considered to be parodies. Parody pornos. Because they’re not very good.
Merely IMHO, as ever.
I agree with you. Not to mention the fact that pornography caters to niche sexual interests that are certainly not “natural” and pornstars themselves are actors. For them, sex is just part of the act.
Cemetery Without Crosses - a brand new western that will bring you excitement and nausea from the legendary John Waters!
Oh, I like an unnatural “niche” sexual interest from time to time!
I just don’t like them diluted by being dressed up as a western (or whatever).
Rule 1: I must not drink and post.
I think that applies to a few, myself included…
Enjoy the day, amigo. Best to you.
Apparently what the people want, is this
Who can do quality control of this page?
Another page finished