Bad Porn

By | January 1, 2007

Note: You can find more stick figure porn at ““.

I was going to write about the fantastic sex we just had. But quite honestly I don’t know where to begin. It’s been one of those mind-altering couple of hours since lunch where an afternoon nap (nudge-nudge, wink-wink) turned into something quite amazing. When I’ve got my head around exactly what did take place I’ll recount it, perhaps later today, but for now you’ll have to make do with this review of one of the two DVDs we picked up on Friday.

As you’ll know if you read Suze’s post we were unable to view the DVD until yesterday as the neighbours were in the adjoining bedroom. Bastards. So we managed to squeeze it in yesterday afternoon before popping round to my parents to see in the New Year there.

We expected a pretty standard Porn Movie, what we got was something quite different. No, not at the parents, when we watched the DVD yesterday afternoon LOL.

There are lots of different types of porn, catering for different markets. There’s the slick, but mass-produced studio movies and the slightly less slick but even more prolific independent product from California. There’s Gonzo and there’s unusual European stuff. But the one thing they have in common is that they try to maintain a certain level of quality and deliver to the market a reasonable bang for the buck. Be that by sexually arousing cast members, clothing, storyline (yes some do have stories) or explicit depiction of the sexual act, they all have something.

Then there’s “Young Whores, Beginner’s Luck #2“.

First of all the title. We didn’t pick it for the title, it just looked different and the young lady on the cover looked hot. We’ve long since given up reading sleeve notes. They rarely describe what the DVD is actually like. So what is wrong with the movie?

Pretty much everything.

I’ve tried to find positives, but don’t hold your breath.

Video quality: We have an 8mm Sony camcorder, not Super8, just bog standard 8mm. The quality on that ancient analogue device is far superior to the images on this DVD. It looks like they were recorded on a worn-out VHS VCR on a cheap tape. This could have made the scenes atmospheric and added the impression that the viewer is a voyeur stumbling across someone else’s home fuck-tape. It doesn’t, the graininess and black speckles that appear every few seconds just piss you off.

Camera  work and lighting: Either the camera operator was given a hand-cranked second-hand camcorder to use or he didn’t know how to use a camera. Maybe both. A lot of the shots appear to take from fixed positions, (possibly his chair, lol) the wrong positions too. The lighting is flat and just wrong. Either the recording got buggered buy the camera/tape/postproduction, or, and this seems more likely, the operator had the white balance set incorrectly and/or used low temperature tungsten lighting. Amateur doesn’t quite describe it.

Scenarios/locations: What scenarios? … 2 or more porno actors go to a hotel room/mates bedroom (delete as applicable) and try to screw for the camera. That’s it. No attempt at eroticism, not hardcore fuck-fest even, certainly no script (apparently).  And don’t even hope for a good closeup of the action!

Editing: Abrupt cuts, occasional use of inappropriate fades which just added to the uncomfortable feeling watching the DVD gave me.  On more than one occasion you can hear the shuffle of feet as he approaches the set.

Scene by scene:

Scene 1: f-m-f, looks unplanned, unrehearsed and is appallingly shot. The male performer doesn’t. He has difficult, er rising to the occasion so many of the shots see him in the background yanking his cock while the girls amuse themselves or try to help him. Not a promising start.

Scene 2: f-f. Two girls lez it up with a couple of dildos. You notice that already I can’t be bothered to describe the scene in any more detail. I love to see a couple of women get it on, in person or on film but this left me cold because they were just going through the motions. You know, let’s do all the positions, A, B, C, D, all boxes ticked. “Can we have our money now?”

Scene 3: f-m. He can’t get it past the bouncy rubber stage. No rock hard cock for this enthusiastic young girl. She’s not stunning, but eager and with nice curves and medium sized natural boobs. She deserved better. Oh, here’s a funny bit, at one point Mr Floppy displays a bit of foot fetishism kissing her hiking boots and her naked feet when he’s removed them. No patent leather high-heeled boots – hiking boots.  This attracts the attention of the cameraman who seems to delight in filming just the boots on the floor for a few minutes (bugger what the actors are up to!).

Scene 4: f-m. Erection? What erection?

Scene 5: f-m. Wow an erection, but she looks so bored. Another amusing moment (you have to find something to keep you going) despite all indications to the contrary they are using two cameras. How do we know, because both camera operators appear in shot at various points throughout the scene, not just momentary glimpses but for 10s of seconds at a time. And still there are no good angles, you could have stuck a camcorder on a tripod and got better results.

Scene 6: f-m. OK he maintained an erection but porn actors should not try comb-overs. Have it cut short, but don’t try and cover the bald spot. She’s nice though, curvy with natural boobs. I think she looses interest towards the end of the scene … about the time he starts to apparently run out of breath.

Then there’s the extras, or more accurately extra – a slide show. It’s a slide show of the grainiest images that it’s ever been my misfortune to see on a DVD. They’re captured from the appalling quality video of the main feature. The shots are therefore as uninspiring, un-erotic and un-arousing as the rest of the DVD.


In case you haven’t guessed, I wouldn’t touch this DVD if it were the only disk in the shop.

A couple of the girls are OK, real looking and not just in the boob department. No silicone in this movie at all. But this movie doesn’t work on any level for me.

The only consistently positive thing about the six scenes is that the female performers do try to look turned on and help out their male colleagues. But even they start to lose interest after a time.

If all the performers are amateur (this is implied but not made clear on the sleeve notes) then most of the criticisms I’ve levelled should be balanced against this. Let’s face it how many of us would droop in front of a camera? Even the pros have off-days. But the production quality is unforgivable and pressure on the guys may have been made worse because these scenes look like they were shot in one take with no second chances, or “relax for half an hour and try again then”.