In a follow up to the review of Pirates, the Digital Playground film by Joone, I would like to bring to attention the teaser trailer to Pirates II. While the computer graphics don't compare with it's Hollywood inspiration, the quality is top notch for any straight to video release, let alone for a porn. There is no nudity or any flesh at all in the trailer; however, it's getting me excited for the next installment in what I personally hope will be a trilogy.
You can check out the website at www.piratesxxx.com and it will be released in September of this year (in time for my birthday!) and there are rumors that a highly edited, R-rated version might hit some theatres.
Saturday 5 July 2008
Wednesday 4 June 2008
notes on dan savage
All men masturbate (most women do, all should), all men look at porn (many women do, more should), and all women need to get over the porn and masturbation thing. If you want a male in your life who you can order never to look at porn or masturbate—or if you want a male you can castrate—get a dog.
Speaking of all men look at porn, and my comments about The Blue Lagoon being one of the first "pornographic" images I was able to see, I'll talk about Playboy. My father has a subscription. Always has. Well as long as I can remember. They were also never extremely well hidden, allowing me (and the occasional friend) easy access for sneak peeks. My father never hid them, obviously, or I wouldn't have seen him reading it so many times. Also remember my mother handing me a picture of Rudolph Valentino to use in a 1920s project I was working on. It came from the magazine. It was part of an ad. She told me to use it, just don't mention where I got it at school. Sometimes she would even let me read interviews with celebrities I liked. I never looked at the photos in front of her but I did hold a copy and read it in front of my mother.
Maybe it's weird for people to think of their parents as owning porn, let alone allowing you to use it in middle school projects or lending it to you for an article, but honestly, I don't find it that weird. It's funny, every month my father's Playboy comes in the mail wrapped in black plastic hiding the cover. I'm pretty sure all my sisters knew what it was by the age of 10. I don't know if they've ever tried to look at it, but we've all seen him or my mother reading it (and yes they do actually read the articles).
Perhaps this is why I don't have any hangs up about porn. I have plenty of retro porn (usually novelty and not the kind that would get me off), I even bought some for my brother in law. I honestly do love watching strange porn and seeing what gets people off for I assume that every porn has at least one person who masturbates (or uses it later for fodder). I have no problem that male friends have porn and I find it hilarious when they go through the lengths to hide or deny it. All I can say is "dude, I know you masturbate. All sane men do, and men are visual. They need to look at something. Get over it."
You watch porn. You read porn. Video, magazine, book. Whatever. Just own up to it. Don't deny it.
Speaking of all men look at porn, and my comments about The Blue Lagoon being one of the first "pornographic" images I was able to see, I'll talk about Playboy. My father has a subscription. Always has. Well as long as I can remember. They were also never extremely well hidden, allowing me (and the occasional friend) easy access for sneak peeks. My father never hid them, obviously, or I wouldn't have seen him reading it so many times. Also remember my mother handing me a picture of Rudolph Valentino to use in a 1920s project I was working on. It came from the magazine. It was part of an ad. She told me to use it, just don't mention where I got it at school. Sometimes she would even let me read interviews with celebrities I liked. I never looked at the photos in front of her but I did hold a copy and read it in front of my mother.
Maybe it's weird for people to think of their parents as owning porn, let alone allowing you to use it in middle school projects or lending it to you for an article, but honestly, I don't find it that weird. It's funny, every month my father's Playboy comes in the mail wrapped in black plastic hiding the cover. I'm pretty sure all my sisters knew what it was by the age of 10. I don't know if they've ever tried to look at it, but we've all seen him or my mother reading it (and yes they do actually read the articles).
Perhaps this is why I don't have any hangs up about porn. I have plenty of retro porn (usually novelty and not the kind that would get me off), I even bought some for my brother in law. I honestly do love watching strange porn and seeing what gets people off for I assume that every porn has at least one person who masturbates (or uses it later for fodder). I have no problem that male friends have porn and I find it hilarious when they go through the lengths to hide or deny it. All I can say is "dude, I know you masturbate. All sane men do, and men are visual. They need to look at something. Get over it."
You watch porn. You read porn. Video, magazine, book. Whatever. Just own up to it. Don't deny it.
Friday 7 March 2008
a late night post that seems interesting...
I watched The Blue Lagoon again a few days ago. This time I was completely sober and was not participating or facilitating the drinking game for it. Perhaps its this clarity that made me realize a book devoted to The Blue Lagoon and it's shite sequel (Return to the Blue Lagoon) would be absolutely amazing! Seriously, the film contains some of the most amazing moments of gender play. It's also "porn" for pre-teens (those who find it on late and night and think "ooo penis"), such as myself. I remember watching it on TNT or TBS late at night when my parents let me sleep in front of the TV.
Anyway, the first point I want to make is the gender play with in the film. Richard (Christopher Atkins) is consistently found wearing articles of female Victorian clothing. This is, of course, set up in the film as the children and the short lived adult find a chest filled with women's clothing as they float along in the rescue boat.
However, one of the points of this film is to show how "natural" love and sex is. That children don't need outside forces to develop sexual feelings, that (especially today) the media or friends do not pressure teenagers into sex. That it is the "natural" process of growing up and that a man will inherently know that his penis is supposed to go into her vagina.
Well, when looking at the film from this point, I can't help but think of Richard's cross dressing. Both the child and adult actors are scene in articles of woman's clothings and I think this is a (perhaps a more unconcious) comment on how society forces us into stereotypical gender roles. With out adults and society telling Richard how to behave as a man he is stuck in the genderless stage of a child.
Children are not born knowing that pink is a color for girls and blue for boys. Many young boys will try to emulate their mother in various ways and only through societal pressure will they learn dresses are for girls pants for men. Since he has been on the island since he was about 9 (though the kid acts like he is mentally handicapped or only 5 years old) he doesn't have rules from society to obey. He is able to play on both sides.
I will expand on this later...
Anyway, the first point I want to make is the gender play with in the film. Richard (Christopher Atkins) is consistently found wearing articles of female Victorian clothing. This is, of course, set up in the film as the children and the short lived adult find a chest filled with women's clothing as they float along in the rescue boat.
However, one of the points of this film is to show how "natural" love and sex is. That children don't need outside forces to develop sexual feelings, that (especially today) the media or friends do not pressure teenagers into sex. That it is the "natural" process of growing up and that a man will inherently know that his penis is supposed to go into her vagina.
Well, when looking at the film from this point, I can't help but think of Richard's cross dressing. Both the child and adult actors are scene in articles of woman's clothings and I think this is a (perhaps a more unconcious) comment on how society forces us into stereotypical gender roles. With out adults and society telling Richard how to behave as a man he is stuck in the genderless stage of a child.
Children are not born knowing that pink is a color for girls and blue for boys. Many young boys will try to emulate their mother in various ways and only through societal pressure will they learn dresses are for girls pants for men. Since he has been on the island since he was about 9 (though the kid acts like he is mentally handicapped or only 5 years old) he doesn't have rules from society to obey. He is able to play on both sides.
I will expand on this later...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)