vanna bardot and gina gerson in “domination”
scene title: domination
performers: vanna bardot, gina gerson
site: als scan (metart)
production credits: none listed
trailer
the absolute low point in the metart empire, as far as my preferences are concerned, is alsscan. als stands for all ladies shaved, which was a dumb fucking selling point even at the site's height ten years ago; now it's just an exhausted trope, faux-teens with protruding pelvic bones using the same cheap plastic toys on each other in every scene, world without end.
there's a market for it, obviously, but i'm not part of that market demo. i don't talk here about what gets me hard or wet, but from a purely aesthetic point of view the "teen" niche doesn't interest me and from an ethical point of view really skeeves me out. further, in isolation i don't care whether performers sport pubic hair or not (it's their body), but making "shaved" a selling point trips my grossness radar. and then again, i don't officially have a position on whether toys are a good or bad thing (i tend to roll my eyes when girl/girl fans demand nothing but flesh-to-flesh contact), but when they're used in every scene it strikes me as grimly flattering to the consumer, reassuring them that these nubile young women only use toys because the penis they actually want (the viewer's, of course) is, at least for now, unavailable.
so that's my objection to alsscan in general. now let's talk about why i despised this scene in particular.
gina gerson is a russian performer who has spent the bulk of her career in europe, but seems to have shot this on one of her periodic trips to the us; vanna bardot is very obviously an american. i've seen both of them produce acceptable content, but the language barrier here (gina does hiss a few phrases in accented english) keeps them from communicating through means other than several slaps and a great deal of spitting. which, sure, fine, whatever they're into: but without a narrative justification or even just on-camera consent, that kind of aggression feels unbalanced and unearned. (i do not have a problem with rough sex; i have a bit of a problem with the assumption that all rough sex depicted in porn is necessarily consensual, or it wouldn't have been filmed. i certainly don't trust every producer or performer to be able to gauge that effectively. clear, ongoing and enthusiastic consent is my ideal, and i don't particularly care whether it kills the fantasy for viewers; but then it's never been my fantasy.) vanna certainly seems into it, but gina has no particular range as a domme (not that there's room for psychology in a fucking alsscan scene), and once the toys come out it's business as usual.
what i really loathed more than anything else was the shooting style. i got tired of faux-amateur camerawork well over a decade ago, and alsscan's continued insistence on ugly locations, harsh lighting, unflattering angles, and totally incompetent cinematography is hard for me to even look at. the bleed of sunlight from outside the patio where the action here took place would have been unacceptable in a home movie; for an allegedly professional production, it's unconscionable.
at least it was mercifully brief.
performances: 18
cinematography: 10
editing: 12
script: 0
sjw points: 0
total score:
performers: vanna bardot, gina gerson
site: als scan (metart)
production credits: none listed
trailer
 |
| l: vanna bardot, r: gina gerson |
the absolute low point in the metart empire, as far as my preferences are concerned, is alsscan. als stands for all ladies shaved, which was a dumb fucking selling point even at the site's height ten years ago; now it's just an exhausted trope, faux-teens with protruding pelvic bones using the same cheap plastic toys on each other in every scene, world without end.
there's a market for it, obviously, but i'm not part of that market demo. i don't talk here about what gets me hard or wet, but from a purely aesthetic point of view the "teen" niche doesn't interest me and from an ethical point of view really skeeves me out. further, in isolation i don't care whether performers sport pubic hair or not (it's their body), but making "shaved" a selling point trips my grossness radar. and then again, i don't officially have a position on whether toys are a good or bad thing (i tend to roll my eyes when girl/girl fans demand nothing but flesh-to-flesh contact), but when they're used in every scene it strikes me as grimly flattering to the consumer, reassuring them that these nubile young women only use toys because the penis they actually want (the viewer's, of course) is, at least for now, unavailable.
so that's my objection to alsscan in general. now let's talk about why i despised this scene in particular.
gina gerson is a russian performer who has spent the bulk of her career in europe, but seems to have shot this on one of her periodic trips to the us; vanna bardot is very obviously an american. i've seen both of them produce acceptable content, but the language barrier here (gina does hiss a few phrases in accented english) keeps them from communicating through means other than several slaps and a great deal of spitting. which, sure, fine, whatever they're into: but without a narrative justification or even just on-camera consent, that kind of aggression feels unbalanced and unearned. (i do not have a problem with rough sex; i have a bit of a problem with the assumption that all rough sex depicted in porn is necessarily consensual, or it wouldn't have been filmed. i certainly don't trust every producer or performer to be able to gauge that effectively. clear, ongoing and enthusiastic consent is my ideal, and i don't particularly care whether it kills the fantasy for viewers; but then it's never been my fantasy.) vanna certainly seems into it, but gina has no particular range as a domme (not that there's room for psychology in a fucking alsscan scene), and once the toys come out it's business as usual.
what i really loathed more than anything else was the shooting style. i got tired of faux-amateur camerawork well over a decade ago, and alsscan's continued insistence on ugly locations, harsh lighting, unflattering angles, and totally incompetent cinematography is hard for me to even look at. the bleed of sunlight from outside the patio where the action here took place would have been unacceptable in a home movie; for an allegedly professional production, it's unconscionable.
at least it was mercifully brief.
performances: 18
cinematography: 10
editing: 12
script: 0
sjw points: 0
total score:
Comments
Post a Comment