WHY IS THERE NO GOOD PORN?

window In an episode of Aaron Sorkin’s comedy Sports Night, Natalie, who is trying to prevent Jeremy from breaking up with her, suggests they get together and rent some porn. When he’s not persuaded, she promises “I’m talkin’ about really good porn”.

That’s charming, but hard to believe. If there’s a media monopoly anywhere, it’s in sex films, and they’re uniformly awful.

This is because, to a nauseating degree, commercialism has trumped art in all of the Western media, to art’s great detriment. In film and music both the quality and quantity of new works coming from the major producers have declined inexorably and steadily for decades. This is a market-driven phenomenon: Shareholders of mega-media companies demand steady earnings growth and high ROI, which requires these companies to be risk-averse, and to use advertising, big names, and tried-and-true success formulas, and to issue less, and a less courageous, product. The void this creates is filled by independent producers, to whom the artistic community and the discriminating listener/viewer are totally indebted.

A similar phenomenon seems to exist in the so-called ‘adult film’ industry, where a small group of companies dominate production, distribution, and adult film channel ownership. The difference is that the independent producers of this genre are invisible. Why is this? As viewers of Sundance and other independent film festivals can attest, it’s not lack of courage. or willingness to push the envelope. So where is the astounding, creative, disturbing erotic art?

I believe there are three reasons it either doesn’t exist or we can’t find it. First, unlike other aspects of film, TV and literature, there are no great models to follow. Last Tango in Paris received mixed reviews, and its reputation has declined with age. Emmanuelle was fluffy and uneven and in places ridiculous. Red Shoe Diaries (both the film and the series) is possibly the best US model, despite its dubious pedigree. There are a few good European models, such as the work of David Hamilton (Bilitis) and the latter works of the esteemed Alain Robbe-Grillet (Glissements Progressifs du Plaisir).

On the other hand, big-studio erotica (exemplified by Eyes Wide Shut ) suffers from the same flaws as the major studios’ other attempts at artistry: ponderous and distracting story lines, talent-less big name actors, and cute, excessive cinematography. Independent producers understand that in erotica as in some other genres it is important not to mean too much, not to weigh the film down with self-importance and pretentious of profundity. Porn should be fun, much in the same way that horror films are, evoking visceral response in clever, creative, and, yes, thoughtful ways. Erotica needs a Hitchcock to give it credibility and leadership.

The second reason there’s no good porn discernible is that it lacks an incubating constituency, a home that will nurture and define and refine the genre. An obvious constituency would be women’s independent film, since women’s interests have been most egregiously neglected by the slapdash mainstream porn producers. Women however have many other battles to fight these days in film, where, as in other media, they have been outrageously ignored and underrated by mostly-male critics and under-used by mostly-male producers. Taking on erotica would give misogynists another vehicle with which to attack feminism, which women don’t need.

On the other hand, the gay and lesbian community have been excellent producers of witty and brooding erotica. The makers of heterotica should study their techniques, but ideally keep it lighter — watching the current crop of porn is depressing enough as it is.

The third reason is the pervasive influence of America’s puritan culture. This psychologically damaged culture glorifies violence and abhors sex. It makes the public viewing of vulgar and gratuitous violence trendy, macho and socially acceptable, and the viewing of erotica, regardless of quality, as shameful. This has a huge impact on the commercial opportunity for, and the success of, adult films. Blockbuster stores feature gore-splashed billboards in their front windows, but relegates even tame erotica to the back room behind the curtain. With that double standard, it’s not surprising that audiences are not clamouring (at least overtly) for more and better porn, and hence not surprising that producers are reluctant to fill the need.

A future breakthrough will come, as it has in popular music, when women take the initiative to demand Natalie’s “really good porn”, and when independent women filmmakers, studying the European and gay-lesbian methods and approaches to the genre, respond.

This entry was posted in Our Culture / Ourselves. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to WHY IS THERE NO GOOD PORN?

  1. Michael says:

    Have you rad Business 2.0’s article on Vivid Entertainment? – Prime-Time Porn – that’s at the heart of the matter you’re discussing.

  2. Bill Seitz says:

    This reminds me of the Barney Miller episodes (#133-134) where Harris makes a porn movie for a sting operation…<http://www.jumptheshark.com/b/barneymiller.htm>

  3. Dave Pollard says:

    Mike: Hadn’t seen this, but it fits with what I’m saying. I’ve seen some Vivid ‘films’, and they’re dreadful.

  4. Charly Z says:

    Ah, finally! Dave tackles “How to Save Porn!”At the risk of prematurely forming an opinion, the main reason none of the major porn producers are interested in changing the quality of their movies is, as you put, “market oriented:” the people who regularly consum porn just want something to whack off to, not well-told stories they have to fast forward through.Still, if someone would bother to do something that would improve on the current canon (Deep Throat, Behind the Green Door), hey, more power to them.

  5. doug powell says:

    I posted a note on the division of art from entertainment last week. I think TV has had a profound effect on this separation. Porn was always right on the edge, but the explosive adoption of VCRs has totally relegated it to unsinspired masturbation media.http://www.creativecontent.org/ccontentblog-archives/000047.html

  6. O RLY YA RLY says:

    What, no mention of L’histoire d’O?Anyway, the present seems to be variations on the reality idea, like 7livesxposed.There are certainly some people claiming to make “better” films, like Andrew Blake or Tinto Brass. But, since I have only seen fragments of their work, I don’t know if it’s any good.

  7. Dave Pollard says:

    Charly & Harald: I confess I’ve seen all the films & directors you mention, and although they’re a bit better than the average, they’re still less than 2 stars on a 5 star scale. There’s supposed to be a new erotic series out made ‘for’ women called Bliss (can’t recall which premium network, but I get ’em all), which I’ll try to catch and report on as a sequel to this post. Harald, during the late ’80s some of the French mainstream producers were supposedly trying their hand at erotica — any knowledge or evaluation of their work?

  8. Charly Z says:

    You know, Dave, I think the issue I’m having here is whether you are talking about actual porn or if you’re trying to help us think of erotic movies as an alternative to that.To me, porn must be bottom-feeder stuff, just on-screen copulations for the purpose of estimulating arousal on the viewer. It’s like fast food for the libido: it’s bad for you, and oh-so-delicious.Erotic movies, on the other hand, are more than just sex scenes: they’re stories, characters, and mood. If you were asking why erotic movies aren’t accepted as much as the next Summer blockbuster, then now I understand what this post was all about.But you’ll only improve the quality of my porn when you yank it from my cold, dead fingers.

  9. Rob Paterson says:

    Maybe as we get older we just get jaded? As a teenager in boarding school I recall the thrill of buying Magazines by Harrison Marks in Soho London for half term. My friend Esme and I ran a small business back at school in renting out these magazines which were then considered the hottest of the hot.All the girls were on their own and were posed in Greek Classic poses next to columns or gateways. They stared off into the distance as if contemplating some mystery. The pictures were full colour (this was the early 1960’s) We could see their breats which were large (before the age of implants) But all the models had their entire pubic areas air brushed out. There was this weird blank area where there should have been foliage. Never having seen a real adult woman (our sisters were maybe 10 at the time and did not count) in the flesh, as it were, I found the entire perspective a bit confusing BUT even so it was SO Exciting. It was an innocent age where the smallest thing was thrilling. Today we are indundated with images and anything is available – have we just become too jaded to be excited any more?

  10. Dave Pollard says:

    Charly: I’m not that snobbish. Even raw porn with no story line can still sustain a certain level of quality. For a start, it should be believable, and a lot of the stuff you see now is completely unbelievable, either because the simulation is totally fake, or the acting is so bad it’s clear the actors are just going through the motions and are, in fact, really bored. In addition, it should be imaginatively and/or beautifully set, which most porn isn’t. Even the raw stuff is much better if it’s set in a forest, a waterfall or a beautiful room. And finally, the actors should be attractive. Even absent plot, porn can be very good, where currently it is ghastly.

  11. Dave Pollard says:

    Rob, I don’t know about you, but I’m not too jaded to get excited by good erotica, and it needn’t be that raunchy. There was a movie made in 1971 called Road to Salina that I believe is now rated PG that merely by setting and insinuation managed to be unbelievably erotic (at least by the standards of those days)and hence far more impactful than more explicit fare. But I confess I can see value in both in-your-face (pardon the double entendre) and subtle erotica, provided it is well done, which alas, it rarely is.

  12. Dave Pollard says:

    I find it noteworthy that after writing that women need to come to the rescue of the porn genre, all the comments to date (and all the e-mails too) have been from males.

  13. O RLY YA RLY says:

    Dave: (a bit late to get back to this) No, I’m sorry. I guess I need to watch more porn…Maybe you need to give some criteria of what you consider good porn. In this piece you even used the word ‘witty’. Witty?

  14. O RLY YA RLY says:

    O, wait. I see you’d already started. Is a beautiful setting that important to make a good porn movie? And don’t the criteria you mentioned above bring you right back to people like Andrew Blake again?

  15. Julia Grey says:

    Even raw porn with no story line can still sustain a certain level of quality. For a start, it should be believable, and a lot of the stuff you see now is completely unbelievable, either because the simulation is totally fake, or the acting is so bad it’s clear the actors are just going through the motions and are, in fact, really bored.Woman speaks up: A-men, brother. I mean, good gaud, that everlasting, monotonous BRAYING those women do! Isn’t there any man in the world who can whack off to the images and sounds of a woman having a REAL orgasm? Oh, wait…do men know what an orgasm looks like in the real world, or has their consumption of execrabe porn made real female orgasm unrecognizable? Would the woody in your hand wilt if she didn’t scream that she wanted it HARDER! DEEPER! (“Ohhhhh yeah, push my cervix right up into my liver, oooo babybee, yeah!”)Hilarious.

  16. O RLY YA RLY says:

    Julia: You must have seen that 7livesxposed show. Incredible.

  17. Brad says:

    “So where is the astounding, creative, disturbing erotic art?”Do you know of habibi and artvamp? I think what they’re doing would qualify…

  18. Dave Pollard says:

    Harald: Don’t get me wrong about Blake — his stuff is better than par of the genre, it’s just no better than 1.5 stars out of 5. As for settings, they don’t need to be beautiful, just imaginative, since the main sex organ is the brain and aesthetics play an important part in its stimulation. And yes, I think porn can be witty and is better if it is, for the same reason that it stirs the brain and the imagination and makes the good stuff better.

  19. Dave Pollard says:

    Julia: Right on: It’s not even over-the-top enough to be funny. Any guy who thinks this is what a woman’s orgasm is really like has probably not ever witnessed one. BTW Your comment above is hilarious: you should consider doing more humorous writing on your blog.

Comments are closed.