On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:37:28 GMT, CountChockula <nobody@home.com>
wrote:
>
>
>i like to think all sleaze welcome here, hard or soft. if hard not your
>liking, dont download. ample screen shots have been posted here, Post
>away gentlemen!!
>im happy
>jk
We seem to go through this cycle every couple of years where some
people presume that their defintion of sleaze is somehow specific and
the only true form whereas in reality sleaze is not just one type of
media but a combination of films both from the past and the present.
To understand sleaze you have to understand its roots and that those
origins evolved into something different that may still be sleaze or
may not.
For example one of the origins would be the 1950's women in prison,
teenage hooligans, biker films etc. that were drive in fare. Cheap
films, usually black and white to keep costs down, with no talent and
no budget that were centered around a 'dangerous theme'. If you
consider Rebel Without A Cause you have the mainstream variant that
was mimicked in an exploitative manner. Whereas James Deen portrayed
a character that was struggling and questioning the world the knock
offs were about the affects of that story; the bad boy, motorcycles,
good girls being attracted to the wrong side of the tracks etc. There
was no interest in questioning why Sally was wearing a poodle skirt
and riding on the back of Snake's motorcyle but simply set up the
scenario as if these actions and the potential danger was all that was
needed. Thus you get this crazy cover art for the film depicting poor
Sally in the clutches of a group of tough looking teens in a situation
that suggests she is facing sexual peril. Of course when you watch
the film you realize that the scene depicted on the poster in front of
the theatre never happens. Many of these films were able to shown at
drives-ins on the basis that they were sending out a message to the
kids that this type of life was both bad and more importantly
dangerous.
The next logical step was to put some meat into those films and thus a
depiction of Sally with her blouse torn open or the like was the basis
for the next level of sleaze/exploitation where there still was no
real story but merely the use of the theme. Thus the leap to the
biker films like The Damned, The Born Losers etc. where again the
theme is wild bikers who fight and rape their way across the country
even though the films depict very little of either. Then in the mid
60's early to 70's America is caught off guard when these types of
theme films suddenly turn into softcore and then hardcore films.
Censorship is none existant but at first the film makers still attempt
to justify the actions of the film; ie: you will note that in many of
the 1960's films the women must have been extremely dirty because they
take an inordinate number of baths and showers. The though at the
time was that as a 'film' the director had the right to depict a woman
undressing and being (semi)-nude if there was a valid reason such as
she was going to bathe. Ultimatley this turned into full frontal
softcore, (men usually still had to hide their dicks or wore their
shorts), and then simulated and unsimulated sex flicks.
Without digressing too much there are a few pinacle films like Billy
Jack which borders on softcore rape, Ilsa She Wolf of the SS which is
probably the first mainstream released torture film. Is there a story
in any of thiese films other than an excuse to depict scenes? Just
how often do we need to see a tribe of cannibals capture the team of
white europeans, kill an animal on screen, strip the women and
disembowel the men. If there is it is a story in any of these films
it is marginal at best and in fact about the theme which in my mind is
the basis of sleaze.
At the same time you see a number of other variants of sleaze rise up
in different genres and in different countries. We get a classier
form of Euro-sleaze contrasting mainstream American porn primarily
because it is possible to be part of that scene without being
consdiered a pariah, ie: Brigette Lahie moved to mainstream media and
eventually became a member of a French political party, (think of
Ginger Lynn trying to make that transition). In time from all these
styles of sleaze come specific genres; the slasher film, the video
nasty, etc.
So when it comes to sleaze I think it is important to first consider
the origins and whether or not the material fits within that
construct. So while La Rabbateuse is sleaze anything from Marc Dorcel
is not. Confessions of a Psycho Cat is sleaze whereas anything
emulating the Dangerous Game is not. Caged Heat is sleaze and the
Czech knock-offs are not. Bizarre Styles is sleaze and 50 Shades of
Grey is not.
Now one can argue that over time the 'vintage'/'classic' material
became the foundation for what is now mainstream porn but thanks to
the sudden censorship laws there is at least a buffer zone to say this
is where it ended, (early 1980s btw).
Benny Hill? Essentially tickle T&A? Seems more like British bawdy
hall theatre than particularly sleazy mostly because children were
welcome at those shows. It strikes me that one of cornerstones of
sleaze is that it is a film that every boy 13 years of age and up is
desperate to view but is thwarted at every turn. Kind of ruined by
this Internet thingy now.
T.
That said consider that 42nd Street or San Fran porn, aka
"Vingtage/Classic" porn is certainly sleaze since it reflects the next
logical step for the exploitation films of the 1950s, such as the
'bad girls in prison' 'teenage hooligans' 'original biker films' etc.
that all just skirted around any nudity. These films
|
|
 Hate to open old/sore wounds but.... - File 1 of 1 - Benny Hill -nooil3Xz241rx4ivwo1_400.gif (1/6)')){kind=link}