https://nitter.net/KateIswell/status/1516795389017427969?t=S8b6ae6XX6u_sXXAHFQeKw&s=19

    • Quimby [any, any]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      idk. I think it's useful to see how racial fetishes/stereotypes come into play if you're discussing that (negative) part of the industry, for example. seeing a white actress scream the n-word in a mainstream porn video probably has a different impact than reading what I just wrote, for example. or seeing how emotions and relationships are portrayed on screen. or even just seeing what acting actually looks like in a multi billion dollar industry. seeing what aspects are faked and how.

    • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Took a cinema class once about 10 yrs ago. Most of it was "highbrow exploitation" as the prof put it - stuff like "Demonlover" from france or "Bad Education" from GOAT Almodovar.

      However, we did two weeks where we basically did 70's porn - watched Deepthroat and then also an arty film where a guy jerks it to some gay porn from the 80's maybe? I think it might have been called k-y-p or something like that? I can't remember, sadly.

      Granted, we also had some total bangers early on - "Man with a Movie Camera," "Germany Year 0," "Breathless." and "Peeping Tom." For a class on "Spectatorship", though, you eventually have to deal with porn.

      If you're analyzing the viewer (rather than the text) then sometimes porn can be an object of analysis.

    • HumanBehaviorByBjork [any, undecided]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      just reading synopses is fine if your goal is moral indignation, but serious criticism requires engagement with the text. whether it's "artsy" or "nuanced" is irrelevant.