What to do while watching:
What to eat while watching:
Here is a generalization about one difference between men and women: men are sexually stimulated by visual representations of sex while women are sexually stimulated by thoughts and feelings associated with sex. Of course, people who are counter-examples exist by the millions, but in general, this is how it is. Though by no means an authority, I can make the generalization that the men within my circle of confidants who like porno like it down-and-dirty, with the camera shooting hot sex and just hot sex and lots of hot sex. And the women who like porno like it with a story, with the foreplay-like fantasy of plot and character development. To get into it, they need to know why she is having sex with him, and it should make some kind of sexual sense. The seduction, if plausible, is the biggest turn-on. Without that, the mechanics (that get many men going) is like a cold shower.
In the earlier days of porno, it seems that the men who dominated the industry also liked to have some explanation for sex. There was, I suppose, a novelty just in shooting sex on film, so it wasn't as though there was a rush to get to "the good stuff." Moreover, it was fun for them to have a part to play: porno wasn't so different from straight acting; it just involved copulation. And, I suspect, men really do want some emotion behind sex even if the get in/get off porno that is rampant today would suggest otherwise.
Autobiography of a Flea, from the early 70's is a slow-moving tale and not nearly as hot as much of what is currently in vogue. It's told from the point of view of a rather pompous flea who lives on a nubile young woman in olden days. The plot is, of course, lame, but at least they are trying.
Monique (we'll call her) tarries with a young man after church (her aunt is pious and makes her go). But Father John (we'll call him) catches them in the act and threatens to tell her uncle on her. Father John, we find out from the flea, is actually a terrible lecher and had set up the tryst only so he could catch her in the act. She goes to Father John as he commands and is there initiated into the fold: she is to satisfy the sexual needs of the clergy in exchange for aegis from her uncle. It's an old fantasy and not without some spice.
Sex with Father John is good: much better than with the youngster. But it has some hazards: the two other priests discover Monique and John en flagrante delicto and demand a piece of her holiness as well. One of these priests is the inimitable John Holmes, by the way. He has a creepy looking face and a spindly frame, but most of the time that's not where you're looking. I've heard what he has referred to a "no, thank you." It's nice but, uh, no, thank you.
So they all have sex with Monique on the cold rectory floor. Then what does Father John do? He tells Monique's uncle on her, for it turns out that her uncle, creepy only coot that he is, is also a sexual goer. The flea, shocked by his attempt to rape young Monique, bites him in a sensitive place and gains Monique a reprieve. But further in the story, the uncle becomes sexually active with everyone involved, except his wife, the pious one. She gets seduced, instead, by Holmes.
Monique, fully corrupted, is friends with another young lady; we'll call her Annie. Annie's father, played by John Leslie, is another lech, hot for young Monique. Father John conceives of a truly diabolical scheme whereby he can have Annie. He sets it up so that Leslie will pay Monique for sex, but Monique will insist that her face be hidden during the act. Meanwhile, studly Papa John seduces Annie and they go all but the last leg of the journey. He says he will come to her by night and make love to her, but she must hide her face.
So when Leslie makes love with Monique, it's really Annie, his own daughter! When the act is consumated, Monique appears and pretends that it was all a big mistake. But since Leslie has now potentially impregnated his daughter, the only way to be sure his incest cannot be discovered is to have Father John (and the creepy uncle and John Holmes, too) make love to her as well. In case she is pregnant, nobody can claim that her father is the father. (I don't think I'm correctly reconstructing the story right now, but it's confusing and my attention had been distracted.)
Everyone makes love to everyone. The actors look genuinely interested and turned on. Truth to tell, the men look like they're into having sex with sexy young women, and the sexy young women look like they're into being in movies. They tend to "act" as if they're really trying to act. As though that mattered.
So after the orgy starts to wind down, Leslie has a heart-attack from too much of everything. Over their grief, Annie and Monique have a tender, almost chaste scene by today's standards. And at this point, we turned the film off, so I don't know how it ends. The flea probably lives happily ever after.
Although I don't think a porno has been made with a 10-star story, there are things to like about these classics. There was a greater innocence to the stories and the people in them were more normal looking. They aren't anorexic, siliconed, or hyper-buffed. There is also a greater simplicity to the sex as well as a genuine desire to create a full-fledged fantasy, not just a sex scene. I respect that attempt a great deal. The recent "story" porno I've seen always seems to have given up on really trying to make a story. If it's done at all, it's self-conscious and self-effacing. The actors know they can't act, so they don't even try. In a way, I miss seeing porn actors labor under the illusion that they really can act. That gave them a certain charm.
Classic porno at least makes an attempt and the actors are delightfully innocent in that they don't seem to realize that acting and plot are beside the point. Autobiography, for example, is completely ridiculous. There is no telling what the writer had in mind in terms of protagonist or antagonist. Nobody gets their just deserts, except maybe the involuntarily incestuous father. Maybe that's why it's all told from the point of view of a pompous flea: with that kind of narrator it doesn't have to make any moral sense. It just has to tell enough of a story to precipitate sex.
Though not my first choice of viewing, it was effective on at least one level. Enjoy.
©1999 by Randy Shandis Enterprises. All rights happily reserved.