Lovelace, the movie

[driphoney]

This is a porn board. Let’s talk some porn ... industry.

Anyone see the Epstein film out now? Thoughts?

 

[Handley_Page]

This is a porn board. Let’s talk some porn ... industry.

Anyone see the Epstein film out now? Thoughts?

I look forward to seeing how much the Censor cut out of her work.
I foresee a Titanic struggle here!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Nope. Didn't see it, don't expect to. Lovelace was no Madonna, few of the porn gals were. Few women can really pull off Sex Goddess well: Jean Harlow and Marilyn were the best.

 

[driphoney]

I went with a friend and was dubious. It’s not a porno. It’s not a remake of her only “film”, but rather more of a biography. I thought it was going to be weird and somehow pornographically esoteric, but it wasn’t.

While it wasn’t the most multi-textured, nuanced film of the decade, I thought it was very good and worth my time. I could relate to the trashy 1970’s, could relate to her naivete and insecurity. Seeing her life through the telescope of time, it’s so obvious that she had all this power, yet didn’t see it. Like myself and my own life (minus the porno!) I can also relate to her parents who felt they were making good choices to raise good girls and thoroughly screw up. Eventually, they have to accept their own failures and face what we as parents sometimes lose sight of, which is that no matter what, the bottom line is we love our children.

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

Oh, thank you, James.

Howard H.

 

[myrionomos]

I thought that this thread was about the invention of machine based algorithms by Lovelace .

 

[Handley_Page]

I thought that this thread was about the invention of machine based algorithms by Lovelace .

No, it's not about ADA; Sorry.
It's more BASIC than that.
Nice try, though

 

[sr71plt]

I went with a friend and was dubious. It’s not a porno. It’s not a remake of her only “film”, but rather more of a biography. I thought it was going to be weird and somehow pornographically esoteric, but it wasn’t.

While it wasn’t the most multi-textured, nuanced film of the decade, I thought it was very good and worth my time. I could relate to the trashy 1970’s, could relate to her naivete and insecurity. Seeing her life through the telescope of time, it’s so obvious that she had all this power, yet didn’t see it. Like myself and my own life (minus the porno!) I can also relate to her parents who felt they were making good choices to raise good girls and thoroughly screw up. Eventually, they have to accept their own failures and face what we as parents sometimes lose sight of, which is that no matter what, the bottom line is we love our children.

Sharon Stone is being hyped in the movie (Lovelace's mother, I think). How do you think she did?

 

[SandraMustard]

Sharon Stone is being hyped in the movie (Lovelace's mother, I think). How do you think she did?

She sucked.



Sorry. That fastball just sat there begging me to swing at it.

 

[TxRad]

She sucked.



Sorry. That fastball just sat there begging me to swing at it.

Low and inside but it worked.

 

[sr71plt]

Would "she just flashed through," have worked as well?

 

[SandraMustard]

Would "she just flashed through," have worked as well?

Yes. Your basic instincts are sharp as usual.

 

[3113]

I haven't seen it yet, but I want to. It's getting a lot of attention not just because of it's subject matter, but of the way the bio is told. Lovelace told two different stories in of what she went through making Deep Throat. Originally what she said about her experience was relatively positive or at least neutral. But later in life she related the experience as horrific--a nightmare of abuse.

The movie makers relate both stories, what she said originally, and what she said later. No one was ever sure exactly which version was true. Was she, as an abused woman, offering the party line when she was younger, and the truth when she was older and more free to see and tell it clearly? Or had she been honest at first, but, regretting her past, created lies in later life to excuse her actions? Or did her story change with the times and with what people wanted to hear? Or just with her feelings about it?

Maybe bits of both are true/false?

No evidence either way and most witnesses unreliable. So the filmmakers offers both versions. I find that interesting.

 

[driphoney]

Sharon Stone is being hyped in the movie (Lovelace's mother, I think). How do you think she did?

Wow. I didn’t even recognize her! Stone has been picked on over the years, but I thought she did great.

She sucked.

Sorry. That fastball just sat there begging me to swing at it.

Umm. Actually, her claim to fame is having a man between her thighs.

 

[driphoney]

I haven't seen it yet, but I want to. It's getting a lot of attention not just because of it's subject matter, but of the way the bio is told. Lovelace told two different stories in of what she went through making Deep Throat. Originally what she said about her experience was relatively positive or at least neutral. But later in life she related the experience as horrific--a nightmare of abuse.

The movie makers relate both stories, what she said originally, and what she said later. No one was ever sure exactly which version was true. Was she, as an abused woman, offering the party line when she was younger, and the truth when she was older and more free to see and tell it clearly? Or had she been honest at first, but, regretting her past, created lies in later life to excuse her actions? Or did her story change with the times and with what people wanted to hear? Or just with her feelings about it?

Maybe bits of both are true/false?

No evidence either way and most witnesses unreliable. So the filmmakers offers both versions. I find that interesting.

You’ll have to see it. They do a good job of showing the first story, then bringing in the second. I was left with the impression the second version was believed by the creators.

 

[sr71plt]

Umm. Actually, her claim to fame is having a man between her thighs.

Sharon Stone's? I thought it was in just opening her thighs.

 

[SandraMustard]

She sucked.

Sorry. That fastball just sat there begging me to swing at it.

Umm. Actually, her claim to fame is having a man between her thighs.

I know. You misunderstood my joke. How did the mother of Linda Lovelace do? I should have said "She sucked more than Linda" maybe?

 

[3113]

Saw it!

You’ll have to see it. They do a good job of showing the first story, then bringing in the second. I was left with the impression the second version was believed by the creators.

I did see it, and I agree. And to be fair, her husband is a sleaze in both versions. And her story of abuse is, tragically, totally believable.

Movie-wise...I can see why they're selling it on-demand. It's no Boogie Nights. It's very much a TV movie, which just tells the straightforward story--a bit slowly and without much drama at that. There's no larger context, no unifying theme. The filming style doesn't even alter between the two versions.

Which is to say, it doesn't make you want to discuss it afterwards as a movie. Discuss Lovelace, yes, but the movie itself, no. And that's not successful storytelling. Believing Lovelace's bio isn't quite the same as giving the film a larger context and point of view.

Edited to add: But I do see why everyone's talking about Sharon Stone. She has a small role, but she's really brilliant in it.

 

[slyc_willie]

Having only seen a few trailers -- yes, I admit, I was hoping for one that might show a little skin -- there are parts in those few scenes that remind me of Boogie Nights, which I thought was a brilliant film. They seem to have done their homework on every nuance of seventies culture, at least those parts of the culture which modern viewers would expect to see.

At one point, I knew a guy who had all of Linda Lovelace's porn films, not just the two Deep Throat movies she was in, but the more obscure ones. I believe I recall a scene in one of the later ones in which she was giving a blowjob while playing the piano, with the guy she was servicing sitting where the sheet music would be. Interesting scene.

While Lovelace's life could be best described as tragic all around, she did have a certain charisma, and at least for a moment here and there it seemed she enjoyed the limelight, the notoriety. The seventies era for porn was a very strange one that borrowed -- or cannibalized -- elements of mainstream theater, but with very low budgets and casts that appeared to be in it mainly for the chance to boink on screen.

It was a time of experimental adult entertainment. Anyone ever see the 1976 Alice In Wonderland: An X-rated Musical Fantasy? Has the adult film industry ever produced anything like that since?

Lovelace's fame and influence could not have happened at any other time, I think. Sure, she's been followed by a list of era-specific "sex goddesses" such as Seka, Ginger Lynn, Nina Hartley, Jenna Jameson and Sasha Grey, but I believe it could be argued that Linda Lovelace was the first bona fie "porn queen," for good or bad.

Judging by the film, the books, and interviews with her, it was mostly bad. She may not have enjoyed her fame in later years, but you can't say that the woman wasn't a pioneer.

 

[3113]

Lovelace's fame and influence could not have happened at any other time...

Very true. Which I think is why Boogie Nights is so good. It offers the larger conversation of why the 70's was porn's golden age. Porn became popular entertainment during that decade--and wildly successful--and with it the previously unknown actors.

And you're right that (1) Lovelace's success really couldn't have happened at any other time (earlier, and porn was watched in basements and back rooms, not theaters and not discussed on television, as Deep Throat was. Later and it was on video watched in people's homes). (2) That Lovelace paved the way for other actresses in creating a new type of porn actress (which is discussed, all too briefly, in the movie). One that was more natural and playful and innocent.

 

[slyc_willie]

Very true. Which I think is why Boogie Nights is so successful. It offers the larger conversation of why the 70's was porn's golden age. Porn became popular entertainment during that decade--and wildly successful--and with it the previously unknown actors.

70s porn was very much experimental. It was even on the verge of being taken seriously, thanks in part to films like Deep Throat, The Devil in Miss Jones, Behind The Green Door, and others. They actually placed emphasis on plot. The real allure was watching people fuck, of course, but many of the most notable films of the era didn't jump into the sack right away. In Behind The Green Door, for instance, there's no sex nor even nudity for about the first half hour (if memory serves -- it's been a while since I've seen it).

And you're right that (1) Lovelace's success really couldn't have happened at any other time (earlier, and porn was watched in basements and back rooms, not theaters and not discussed on television, as Deep Throat was. Later and it was on video watched in people's homes). (2) That Lovelace paved the way for other actresses in creating a new type of porn actress (which is discussed, all too briefly, in the movie). One that was more natural and playful and innocent.

Yeah, the seventies saw the biggest rise and fall of the adult film industry, with the transition into "the porn industry" of the eighties when direct-to-video recording made it easier and cheaper to mass-produce it. I think Boogie Nights did an excellent job of depicting that transition. Sure, a lot of the stuff produced in the seventies was crap, but there were true gems that shone and still continue to shine. With the porn video market of the eighties, it was once again relegated to being a dirty little secret.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Porn had always been around as stag films, and the better ones were rented from private lending libraries.

Lovelace's significance rested on her appeal and embrace by American females. Every woman I knew back then wanted to see DEEP THROAT. Lovelace wasn't pretty or glamorous. Her ordinary looks probably helped a lot.

 

[horrorotica]

It's an interesting flick, don't expect to see any porn though. Her mother was a cold hearted bitch and her husband Charlie Traynor was an abusive man who bullied and beat her into prostitution first and then doing the infamous Deep Throat movie. Although Linda Lovelace regretted doing that movie in the end, she did enjoy the limelight at its peak that much was obvious.

Her husband naturally became jealous of her success which meant the abuse was ramped up until she had enough and left him with the help of the goons who financed Deep Throat.

Lovelace was ripped off big time by the movie producers with the movie grossing $600 million worldwide while Linda was paid only $1250 for her part. For a sequel they generously offered to double her pay to $2500.

I still find it strange that porn actresses of the era never deep throated a penis though. The fact the producers were so surprised to see her do that was weird to me.

The other strange fact from the film was that Linda's abusive ex-husband went onto marry Marilyn Chambers the other famous porn star of that era.

It's worth a look and while it has some good moments I found the acting & directing to be a little sub-par throughout which meant the characters lacked real depth.

 

[glynndah]

Having only seen a few trailers -- yes, I admit, I was hoping for one that might show a little skin -- there are parts in those few scenes that remind me of Boogie Nights, which I thought was a brilliant film. They seem to have done their homework on every nuance of seventies culture, at least those parts of the culture which modern viewers would expect to see.

At one point, I knew a guy who had all of Linda Lovelace's porn films, not just the two Deep Throat movies she was in, but the more obscure ones. I believe I recall a scene in one of the later ones in which she was giving a blowjob while playing the piano, with the guy she was servicing sitting where the sheet music would be. Interesting scene.

While Lovelace's life could be best described as tragic all around, she did have a certain charisma, and at least for a moment here and there it seemed she enjoyed the limelight, the notoriety. The seventies era for porn was a very strange one that borrowed -- or cannibalized -- elements of mainstream theater, but with very low budgets and casts that appeared to be in it mainly for the chance to boink on screen.

It was a time of experimental adult entertainment. Anyone ever see the 1976 Alice In Wonderland: An X-rated Musical Fantasy? Has the adult film industry ever produced anything like that since?

Lovelace's fame and influence could not have happened at any other time, I think. Sure, she's been followed by a list of era-specific "sex goddesses" such as Seka, Ginger Lynn, Nina Hartley, Jenna Jameson and Sasha Grey, but I believe it could be argued that Linda Lovelace was the first bona fie "porn queen," for good or bad.

Judging by the film, the books, and interviews with her, it was mostly bad. She may not have enjoyed her fame in later years, but you can't say that the woman wasn't a pioneer.

I saw Alice in a movie theatre. My BIL, usually a very taciturn country guy, took his wife {my sister who was about eight months pregnant at the time} and me.

 

[SandraMustard]

I saw Alice in a movie theatre. My BIL, usually a very taciturn country guy, took his wife {my sister who was about eight months pregnant at the time} and me.

If you engage in kinky threesomes like that, you will lose your good-witch-status.