|
It was the easiest lifebyte house task to date. The latest-addition Liverpool
house knew they were onto a good thing. Even the Derby lads completed
it before the deadline. All they had to do was get all the house members together,
get plonked on the sofa and feast their eyes on our trio of porntastic vids.
The three films were intentionally in stark contrast with each other: one was
an educational sex guide Lovers' guide – The secrets of sensational sex;
the second was a by-women-for women piece of erotica called Romance and
the third a bogstandard blokes' blue movie, imaginitively titled Hot couples
volume 2: They don't cum better. Something for everyone, you'd think. But
was there?
The system
We chose seven categories and asked our reviewers to give marks out of ten in each. Then they had to write a review of all three films in no more than 100 words. Here's what they said:
 Lovers'
guide – The secrets of sensational sex
What the sleeve says: 'Reveals a wealth of new sexual techniques and sensual
skills to drive you and your partner to new heights of passion and intimacy...
its main goal is to give you everything you need to know you're good in bed. Secrets
of... is the ultimate guide to complete sexual satisfaction.'
What our critics say:
| |
Derby lads |
Liverpool lasses |
| Arousal power |
1 |
4 |
| Offensiveness |
0 'You just can't be offended by these' |
2 |
| Storyline |
0 'Far too much talking, not enough squelching' |
N/A |
| Plausibility |
10 |
10 |
| Amusing? |
2 |
6 |
| Style (clothes,
hairdos etc) |
2 |
4 |
| Total score |
15 |
26 |
| Overall review |
See below |
'It was educational and easy to follow, although
unrealistic at times, but not crude' |
 Romance
What the sleeve says: ' '"A hardcore sexual odyssey" – Elle. "A feminist
update of Emmanuelle" – The Sunday Times. "In one word... manifique" –
Jonathan Ross, Film'99.'
What our critics say:
| |
Derby lads |
Liverpool lasses |
| Arousal power |
1 'Not particularly hardcore' |
1 |
| Offensiveness |
1 |
1 |
| Storyline |
2 |
5 |
| Plausibility |
10 |
6 |
| Amusing? |
0 'Probably one of the most depressing
romance films
ever made' |
0 |
| Style (clothes,
hairdos etc) |
5 |
1 |
| Total score |
19 |
14 |
| Overall review |
See below |
'Slow, boring – lack of sex, considering it was a sex film. It was also
a bit weird'
|
 Hot
couples volume 2: They don't cum better
What the sleeve says: 'Two beautiful young girls get to see 12 inches of HARD
MEAT for the first time – and don't they LOVE IT!! They almost SUCK IT DRY.'
What our critics say:
| |
Derby lads |
Liverpool lasses |
| Arousal power |
4 |
10 |
| Offensiveness |
0 |
10 |
| Storyline |
0 |
0 |
| Plausibility |
10 |
0 |
| Amusing? |
0 |
10 |
| Style (clothes,
hairdos etc) |
10 'The blonde slag has a lovely
white
T-shirt and that brunette bird has a nice ring collection' |
5 'The girls need their
roots doing' |
| Total score |
24 |
35 |
| Overall review |
See below |
'Crude, ugly "actors"; the male was after a cheap shag and the women looked in pain – but then he was a big boy!' |
The girls – overall review:
'We wouldn't watch any of them again – not our cup of tea.'
The lads – overall review:
The Derby lot took it upon themselves to write an combined ' review' of the three
movies. This what they wrote (verbatum): 'Apart from the foot f***ing in the third
vid, these are some of the lamest porn films I've ever seen; there was no black
women, no Thai pieces, no ladyboys, no big jugs, no gobbles, no fisting, no animals,
no pissing, no shitting, no Gary-Glitter action and nowhere near enough lesbian
action with large vegetables. Please send us
some filth!'
Well sorry to disappoint you, boys.
final analysis
A very interesting exercise which totally threw all our expectations out of the window. The Lovers' Guide got a high score from the girls (26 out of a possible 60), who called it 'educational and easy to follow' (doing the actions, were we, girls?); and a pretty low one with the with the guys (15); no particular surprise there then.
However, when it came to the second, arty, by-women-for-women vid, it got a paltry 14 from the females who complained about a 'lack of sex' – so much for the myth of women wanting a good storyline and love/emotional involvement in a movie. These girls want action and they want it now. The guys were more generous with Romance, awarding it a total of 19 points, although they did call it 'one of the most depressing films ever made'.
When we got down to discussing movie no 3, the hardcore,
by-geezers-for-geezers one, it, predictably, got the highest vote from the boys
(24). The surprising result though, was the stonking 35 it received from our girlie
reviewers, who we expected to slate it. OK, they did say that the actors were
ugly, the girls needed their roots doing [appreciate that observation, girls]
and condemned all three movies as 'not their cup of tea' but they still gave Hot
couples a stonking 35, including a full 10 points in the all-important
Arousal category.
Can we conclude that all that stuff about girls only wanting romance and relationships in their soft porn is an outdated load of old bollocks? Certainly looks that way. However, can't say we really exploded any myths about what guys want from their blueys (as they call 'em on Brookie) – all this lot could complain about is the lack of rudeness, offensiveness and perversion. We think they might have been taking the piss just a teensy bit with their ranting review but we reckon there was still plenty of truth in it; you dirty gits, Derby.
– Finula Cairns 30.11.00 |
