[plainsong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope, what I'm trying to say is men and women are wired differently. Most men prefer to watch the action where as women prefer to see the story & situation leading to the sex scenes.

No no, you're still missing the point entirely. My point is, the physical act itself in mainstream pr*0n is..umm... I mean, you must know this, but, It's obvious because they film so close, that the woman or women in the scenes aren't enjoying themselves so much, or rather at all. When you know that, when you know that the actors aren't into it, and when every single scene is so cookie-cutter it looses any appeal.

And the good stuff, where perhaps two (or more) people are filmed who are into it, well that's going to be miles away better, and it's not main stream, so Sony's not gong to care what format it's in.

 

[TheBigKahuna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 883dave /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I am not mistaken...this also lead to the dimise of Beta

No, you're exactly correct....beta lost out to VHS largely in part due to the **** industry choosing the cheaper format.

 

[BrookR1]

Artsy po rn can be found on regular old cable...Cinemax and the Playboy channel. I believe you can also get it on pay per view. But, there's a larger issue at stake...should a device manufacturer have complete control over what content is allowed on their devices even if the content is made by a third party? And...let's say that BR wins over HD...then that means that Sony has severely damaged HUGE industry ($10 billion in the US alone). If this happens, then don't think that the po rn makers will just roll over. They will either spend lots to influence customers to switch to HD (subsidies to HD manufacturers to make the players cheaper?) or perhaps back another maker's future media format. Or, invest in streaming media so consumers can access it easier. po rn will always be around. Sony is foolish for trying to control this.

 

[plainsong]

Wow, Playboy has well-filmed pr0*n?? That's a new one on me. When I say well, done, I don't mean automatically soft-core. That stuff is just as fake as fake is.

Nope, I guess most of those posting here just aren't aware of what really is supposed to be going on. A woman couldn't fake it anymore than a man could. Well, here's hoping life doesn't imitate art!

Point is, if there's anything good out there, no industry giants are going to care about it, because everyone's buying the fake stuff.

 

[uofmtiger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrookR1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif But, there's a larger issue at stake...should a device manufacturer have complete control over what content is allowed on their devices even if the content is made by a third party?

If you read any of the articles I posted, you would see that this is not the case. So you can debate this particular issue, but it is not relevant to Sony.

http://www.videobusiness.com/index.a...leid=CA6408423

[size=large]Vivid Entertainment will release the first adult title on both HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc on March 28. Debbie Does Dallas … Again will be priced at $39.95 on both formats[/size]

 

[apnk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...because everyone's buying the fake stuff.

So where can I get the good stuff.

j.k.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong /img/forum/go_quote.gif No no, you're still missing the point entirely. My point is, the physical act itself in mainstream pr*0n is..umm... I mean, you must know this, but, It's obvious because they film so close, that the woman or women in the scenes aren't enjoying themselves so much, or rather at all. When you know that, when you know that the actors aren't into it, and when every single scene is so cookie-cutter it looses any appeal. And the good stuff, where perhaps two (or more) people are filmed who are into it, well that's going to be miles away better, and it's not main stream, so Sony's not gong to care what format it's in.

I fully agree, and I'm male.

 

[BrookR1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow, Playboy has well-filmed pr0*n?? That's a new one on me. When I say well, done, I don't mean automatically soft-core. That stuff is just as fake as fake is. Nope, I guess most of those posting here just aren't aware of what really is supposed to be going on. A woman couldn't fake it anymore than a man could. Well, here's hoping life doesn't imitate art! Point is, if there's anything good out there, no industry giants are going to care about it, because everyone's buying the fake stuff.

I totally understand what you're saying. A couple of girls I dated brought over the high quality stuff. Of course, we had to actually sit through and watch the s e e m i n g l y e n d l e s s movie before......

There are different target audiences for each type. Each audience has its own "goal" and uses the "product" attain the desired "results".

Woo Hoo...100th post. Now I can go sell some slightly used DVDs. he he JK

 

[RYCeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrookR1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I totally understand what you're saying. A couple of girls I dated brought over the high quality stuff. Of course, we had to actually sit through and watch the s e e m i n g l y e n d l e s s movie before...... There are different target audiences for each type. Each audience has its own "goal" and uses the "product" attain the desired "results". Woo Hoo...100th post. Now I can go sell some slightly used DVDs. he he JK

Exactly, that's what Fast Forward button is for. I don't know about you guys, If I want to watch ****, I want to see the action, If I want to watch good love story, I rent romance movie.

 

[plainsong]

But what if you know the action is fake, and that no one is really into what they're doing, how can it still be good? You do know that the woman's voice never matches what's going on physically? I mean, it's there, on the film, for everyone to see, that she's saying she's having a good time when her body says otherwise... and yet you still think she's having a good time? I bet she's actually in pain.

Yeah, that's a real turn-on. Yikes.

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong But what if you know the action is fake,

Let's keep this thread focussed on the original topic .... Sony's decision .... not on the subtleties of p**n or personal feelings about p**n.

Thanks.

 

[plainsong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let's keep this thread focussed on the original topic .... Sony's decision .... not on the subtleties of p**n or personal feelings about p**n. Thanks.

For heaven's sakes. Out of all the posts, it's mine, the one that state's the bleeding obvious, that's so out of line. Typical. I'd offered once for him to email me if he needed the physical specifics of how it works, which, apparently... he does.

How can a discussion of such a thing not include this? It's not a personal feeling. It's there, on the film. Have a look for yourself, compare it to what you know is supposed to be happening. It's not an opinion, it's a fact. In industry pr0*n of the Vivid nature, it's all cookie-cutter, 3-position and end, and none of the women are enjoying themselves, as per what you don't see on the camera, and probably not the men either, now that recreational drugs are around to take the pressure off.

My personal feelings about that don't enter into it. I'm talking about a fact, captured on film, for all to see. Don't blame me for pointing out the obvious. Sorry for bursting the fairy-tale-lala-land myth for you, but truly from life experience you must know it's true? Please let's hope so.

That's not to say I have anything against sex on film, that includes hardcore, because if I did then I wouldn't even bother. I'm just trying to say that you can download the crappy stuff anytime you want, but the stuff that would be worth buying, no company is going to care about.

But then again, I should consider the source. You were so fond of attacking me for what someone else did through PM, of course out of everyone here, you'd have a go at me. So much for no moderator bias.

 

[mbriant]

Plainsong. Are you ever not angry at someone or about something? This thread managed to stay on topic ... you know, Sony, blu-ray, etc., until you started in on your critique of p ornography in post #54. Since then the discussion has gone off topic and you are the one continuing to take it off topic with comments such as the following:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plainsong My point is, the physical act itself in mainstream pr*0n is..umm... I mean, you must know this, but, It's obvious because they film so close, that the woman or women in the scenes aren't enjoying themselves so much, or rather at all. When you know that, when you know that the actors aren't into it, and when every single scene is so cookie-cutter it looses any appeal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong That's like saying men are sexual and women are not. No, not true at all. Like I said, I wouldn't be posting in this thread if there was anything wrong, in principle with sex on film. It's just this whole example of Vivid, the core of "the industry" that I don't understand the uproar about what they do or don't do. It's really really really fake. I can't describe in detail how I'd know that (unless you'd like to email me and I can describe the birds and the bees for you), it's just anyone with any life experience would know it as well. It's just not very good, and when I say it's exploitive, I don't just mean women, but men as well. The characters are exploited, the actors are exploited, and anyone thinking it's real is exploited. It's just not sensual, erotic, entertaining, or anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong Wow, Playboy has well-filmed pr0*n?? That's a new one on me. When I say well, done, I don't mean automatically soft-core. That stuff is just as fake as fake is. Nope, I guess most of those posting here just aren't aware of what really is supposed to be going on. A woman couldn't fake it anymore than a man could. Well, here's hoping life doesn't imitate art!

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong But what if you know the action is fake, and that no one is really into what they're doing, how can it still be good? You do know that the woman's voice never matches what's going on physically? I mean, it's there, on the film, for everyone to see, that she's saying she's having a good time when her body says otherwise... and yet you still think she's having a good time? I bet she's actually in pain. Yeah, that's a real turn-on. Yikes.

The above are from YOUR previous 4 posts in a thread that remains here only because it's about a current, relevant, AV hardware/software issue .... not an opinionated discussion about what's right or wrong with p ornography.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong of course out of everyone here, you'd have a go at me. So much for no moderator bias.

If the shoe fits, wear it. Don't blame it on moderator bias. And bringing up something that occurred 2 years ago, has nothing to do with this.

I simply asked, politely, after several off-topic posts, instigated by YOUR comments, that we get the thread back on topic before it winds up having to be locked. Please take your ongoing and never-ending rage out on your husband's headphones.

 

[plainsong]

I fail to see any anger in any of my posts. None whatsoever. I wasn't angry or attacking anyone. You can discuss and disagree without anger coming into it. They don't mean the same thing.

But as for you, yeah, I do consider the source. Go ahead, blame the horrible evil Plainsong. I know what you're like. This from the same guy who felt it was perfectly acceptable behavior to have a go at me, in private, mind you, not in public for everyone to see and possibly call you out for it, for what some other guy in another country on another site even, does. Like I'm this guy's keeper or can control what he does. Yeah, ok. If I'm going to take criticism I have to consider the source, sorry.

I know when it comes to me, it's personal. I don't know why, but there ya go. There's nothing attacking anyone in any of my posts. I don't think less of anyone in this thread. Why would I? I was attacking mainstream pr0*n, but if that's so personal to you, you have bigger issues than me.

You're not worth anymore of my time. Take your personal grudge elsewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif Plainsong. Are you ever not angry at someone or about something? This thread managed to stay on topic ... you know, Sony, blu-ray, etc., until you started in on your critique of p ornography in post #54. Since then the discussion has gone off topic and you are the one continuing to take it off topic with comments such as the following: The above are from YOUR previous 4 posts in a thread that remains here only because it's about a current, relevant, AV hardware/software issue .... not an opinionated discussion about what's right or wrong with p ornography. If the shoe fits, wear it. Don't blame it on moderator bias. And bringing up something that occurred 2 years ago, has nothing to do with this. I simply asked, politely, after several off-topic posts, instigated by YOUR comments, that we get the thread back on topic before it winds up having to be locked. Please take your ongoing and never-ending rage out on your husband's headphones.

 

[Genetic]

So.....what about blu-ray....

Amicalement