Anita Pearl

[lotus108]

To be honest, I never really noticed European moans or American dirty talk until the folks on this thread started mentioning it. I was sensitive to other things like shitty camera angles, obstructive placement of limbs, excessive guys in a scene (2 guys is one too many, quite frankly, but I tolerate it), outfits and hairstyles of the girls, location, etc. Here are my top porno peeves:

1) camera close-ups that stay focused on the genitals (or wherever) for more than five seconds. (Okay, they're bumping uglies. Now zoom out to give it context! I wanna see the girl's beautiful face and body!) If you focus on the genitals for so long, it really doesn't matter who the actors are, does it? It could be the ugliest girl in the world and it wouldn't matter, cuz all I'm seeing is a pussy and a dick.

2) "Uninviting" poses. Whether it's missionary or doggy, there are ways the girl can position herself that either seem inviting and fuck-me tantalizing, or very resistant and unwelcoming. Just compare these pics:

mish compare 001.jpg (56.1 KiB) Viewed 13387 times

Subtle difference to some of you, perhaps, but to me it makes all the difference in the world.

This segment of Anita Pearl (since this IS her thread, afterall) is PERFECT, in my opinion. Not only is her pose "inviting," but the camera is at a excellent distance to capture her long, beautiful legs and sexy high heels:

anita pearl sequence.jpg (38.24 KiB) Viewed 13382 times

3) Obstructive limbs. I hate when my view of the girl's beautiful face or the actual intercourse is obstructed. Of course, this is sometimes due to a retarded cameraman who's standing in the wrong fucking place...but sometimes it's because an actor/actress is too stupid to think about the viewer's pleasure. I really hate it when girls play with their pussy while getting fucked! In my personal sex life, I love it. It means my girl is excited and into the sex. But in porn, I hate it. The stupid girl is just obstructing my view of her pussy. I don't watch porn just to see a hand, and a penis appearing and disappearing somewhere under that hand. I wanna see that pussy get infiltrated! Check out Courtney "I-play-with-my-clit-and-obstruct-your-view-in-every-scene" Cummz:

courtney sucks.jpg (61.03 KiB) Viewed 13378 times

4) Pigtails. I just hate 'em. I can't rationalize why I hate them, but I just do. THE most unattractive way a girl could possibly style her hair. Even if Bambi or Anita Pearl wore pigtails, my dick would go flacid, and I couldn't even explain why.

5) Girls sucking dildos. Who the fuck is being pleasured here??? It looks so ridiculous, my dick gets soft from laughing out loud. I know I'm supposed to imagine that the dildo is MY dick, but my imagination just doesn't work that way. Same reason why I can never fuck a rubber doll, no matter how realistic it may look-- I would start laughing at myself as I hump away at a piece of rubber.

Until now, the actual words/noises that came out of these girls' mouths never mattered to me. But after several of the comments on this thread, I'm now constantly paying attention to what the girls say....and Jenna haze is now starting to annoy me. Thanks, you guys, for ruining a good thing. ( )

[priapos]

Interesting post Lotus. And i agree that porn video & porn and general is primarily a visual medium. Still, sound and dialogue/vocalizing are an important, if secondary element. I dont have the time to reply to your specific points now, nor is this the appropriate thread. I wont have much time online for the next few days, but maybe someone could arrange for a new thread for this type of discussion. In fact it's already spread all over the forum, but we gotta give this back to the lovely, long-legged Anita

[lotus108]

You are absolutely correct, priapos, and in the spirit of restoring this thread to its original topic, here are a couple of pics from her most recent sets at karupspc.com. Legs~!!!

anita7-6-1500-112 resize.jpg (226.57 KiB) Viewed 13334 times

anita7-6-1500-091 resize.jpg (228.54 KiB) Viewed 13318 times

anita7-6-1500-053 resize.jpg (246.99 KiB) Viewed 13310 times

[lotus108]

Mo' legs~!!!

[dap-addict]

I was sensitive to other things like shitty camera angles, obstructive placement of limbs, excessive guys in a scene (2 guys is one too many, quite frankly, but I tolerate it), outfits and hairstyles of the girls, location, etc. Here are my top porno peeves:

1) camera close-ups that stay focused on the genitals (or wherever) for more than five seconds. (Okay, they're bumping uglies. Now zoom out to give it context! (...)

2) "Uninviting" poses. (...)

mish compare 001.jpg

Subtle difference to some of you, perhaps, but to me it makes all the difference in the world.

This segment of Anita Pearl (since this IS her thread, afterall) is PERFECT, in my opinion. Not only is her pose "inviting," but the camera is at a excellent distance to capture her long, beautiful legs and sexy high heels:

anita pearl sequence.jpg

3) Obstructive limbs. I hate when my view of the girl's beautiful face or the actual intercourse is obstructed. Of course, this is sometimes due to a retarded cameraman who's standing in the wrong fucking place...but sometimes it's because an actor/actress is too stupid to think about the viewer's pleasure. I really hate it when girls play with their pussy while getting fucked!

Very good pointe here, Lotus!
You should repost them in the general Eurobabe forum as a general post!
It could instruct directors and girls lurking in here...

[camaban]

Same old gripes turned into a Europe vs America debate. In fact, sound, dialogue and vocalizing have been always been a weak point in most porn, from silent loops to ridiculous scripts, to wooden performances, to dubbing of feature productions, to American style gonzo over-the-top dirty talk & screaming, to the inarticulate "ooh-aah" moaning or memorized English phrases in Euro gonzo.

But let's not delude ourselves here: porn is a representation, an art form if you will. No performance is real once you put a camera on the performers. The best one might hope for is realistic, which depends on the viewers subjective reception as much as the performance/representation. Yes, some performers appear more artless, naive or natural, especially newbies or amateurs in low budget prods. But the positions & camera angles are so conventionalized now that one can usually predict the sequence more or less in a 21 sextury or Bang Bros prod. The dialogue and vocalizing, with rare exceptions, are likewise conventional and predictable for a given performer & director/studio.

Good performers in good productions are combining well-choreographed action with their personal spontaneity. (This just reminds me of Juliana Grandi's 3-way scene in Mente Criminale, where she plays a Russian escourt. Her dialogue, her accented English, sounds much more natural than Giogio's & the other dude's cause she can actually act!) Various types of prods achieve various levels of verisimilitude, from Russian reality gonzo/amateur to CC/Rocco style fuck-fests to the narrative of West European features, exemplified by Private. The US has analogous categories of production which differ only in style but not genre.

Moreover, i dont think most porn punters actually want realism. They want see hot lookers in nasty or extreme action with plenty of closeups etc etc. They dont want see a candid camera video of their neighbors getting it on. Our expectations are all conditioned by the porn we've already seen, more than by our personal sexual experiences. Of course, like any art form, their are innovations & new trends & new performers, usually for the best. Some porn aspires to be realistic, but is usually a failure as porn. But their is always plenty of room for constructive criticism and improvement, and dialogue/vocalization is an area that certainly could use improving on both sides of the Atlantic.

OK, i know, this thread is devoted to Anita Pearl. Should we start one about vocalizing, dialogue and sound in general (including music). I think there's a lot that can be said, especially if we get to discussing specific cases instead of making sweeping generalizations (like mine above

Ok, no bock anymore to say it in German. To each his own, and fore me no US productions

[camaban]

Same old gripes turned into a Europe vs America debate. In fact, sound, dialogue and vocalizing have been always been a weak point in most porn, from silent loops to ridiculous scripts, to wooden performances, to dubbing of feature productions, to American style gonzo over-the-top dirty talk & screaming, to the inarticulate "ooh-aah" moaning or memorized English phrases in Euro gonzo.

But let's not delude ourselves here: porn is a representation, an art form if you will. No performance is real once you put a camera on the performers. The best one might hope for is realistic, which depends on the viewers subjective reception as much as the performance/representation. Yes, some performers appear more artless, naive or natural, especially newbies or amateurs in low budget prods. But the positions & camera angles are so conventionalized now that one can usually predict the sequence more or less in a 21 sextury or Bang Bros prod. The dialogue and vocalizing, with rare exceptions, are likewise conventional and predictable for a given performer & director/studio.

Good performers in good productions are combining well-choreographed action with their personal spontaneity. (This just reminds me of Juliana Grandi's 3-way scene in Mente Criminale, where she plays a Russian escourt. Her dialogue, her accented English, sounds much more natural than Giogio's & the other dude's cause she can actually act!) Various types of prods achieve various levels of verisimilitude, from Russian reality gonzo/amateur to CC/Rocco style fuck-fests to the narrative of West European features, exemplified by Private. The US has analogous categories of production which differ only in style but not genre.

Moreover, i dont think most porn punters actually want realism. They want see hot lookers in nasty or extreme action with plenty of closeups etc etc. They dont want see a candid camera video of their neighbors getting it on. Our expectations are all conditioned by the porn we've already seen, more than by our personal sexual experiences. Of course, like any art form, their are innovations & new trends & new performers, usually for the best. Some porn aspires to be realistic, but is usually a failure as porn. But their is always plenty of room for constructive criticism and improvement, and dialogue/vocalization is an area that certainly could use improving on both sides of the Atlantic.

OK, i know, this thread is devoted to Anita Pearl. Should we start one about vocalizing, dialogue and sound in general (including music). I think there's a lot that can be said, especially if we get to discussing specific cases instead of making sweeping generalizations (like mine above

Ok, no bock anymore to say it in German. To each his own, and for me no US productions

[freakadelik]

she was on a Caribbean Trip with alsscan and unfortunately, she currently has blonde hair, but anyway she is really hot. Her current agent is Sandy, so I don't think she will do more boy/girl, but I hope I was wrong and perhaps Master CC knows more???

so here a few previews:


more find here: http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewPicture&friendID=6240740&albumId=2873800&page=1

[chris]

fantastic pictures!

[Redeye]

She is quite awful with that hair color, of course personal opinion/taste.

[priapos]

well frankly, the eye colour doesn't help either

[paroxysmia]

Rabbit eyes, blame the photographer and its camera!

[camaban]

She is quite awful with that hair color, of course personal opinion/taste.

The blonde hair doesn't fit, red was better, but she should go back to her natural black colour.

[just_me]

ALS preview pic

[freakadelik]

on 28/29. May new set & video @ clubsandy.com - http://member.clubsandy.com/preview/gallery