utilize una de las pocas escenas sexuales que pude encontrar para representar en mi pieza como es que la victima o el abusador se sienten durante la situacion en la que se ven envueltos, y de paso hacer que el publico agarre la independencia de que es lo que se trata mi pieza


(no relacionado con el video solo usado para proyecto )

Strange underthings , pointy bras, tethers, high heels and two black candles on an altar dominate this stylized fanny paddle occult ritual.

She gets them in the end.

soundtrack by LARMO


http://www.archive.org/details/Larmo-BreathingPatterndriftingDown

What fun that was, boys! (I think we can agree that it wasn't made for girls)

I grew up in this era and there's a bit more to say about this delightful bit of fluff. First, it's not really about lesbian sex; it's mainly an excuse to see scantily-clad women. (although the by-line for the straight male watchers was that some girls are so horny that they will sex-play with each other if there aren't enough men around! Wow!!! Wow!!!) In those days we were DEPRIVED man! There were a few girlie magazines available, if you knew someone whose parents were less strict, but in my case I didn't see a decent quality photo of a naked girl until I was (gulp) nineteen, much less the real thing! I saw a pinup on the wall in a maintenance shed and nearly exploded with excitement. It was just a pretty smiling naked girl with a few soap suds on but to me it was indescribably, overpoweringly beautiful and exciting. I'm not joking; the only images I had been able to see up to that point were torn B&W magazine pages I had found in the park. And I was only a bit more deprived than most. So if I had been able to see something like this as a lad I would have gone half mad with erotic desire to dive into the screen and um approach any one of those playful excitable girls.

I think that an element of stag film watching was the instinctive social aspect: a group of unattached young males watch the film together. The content is both funny and (in its time) highly provocative sexually, and they all get erections. The unspoken rule here is that you must act as if you are in control of yourself and are not too too too impressed with what you have just seen. Ideally you showed appreciation for the fun, but were now calm and able to joke about it. (Actually, in many cases you were fighting to disguise the fact that your heart was still pounding, you were breathless, your mouth was dry and you had an uncontrollable erection) It is very difficult for young males to contain and control their excitement but arguably necessary for their maturation. And they themselves set up the conditions to facilitate it instinctively!

Obviously, the girls in this film are strictly amateurs, the acting is negligible, the directing is negligible and it is mostly a single take. But the viewers imagination takes over. These are real girls play-acting so ineptly but with such a sense of fun. AND daring to go on camera half-naked! They are not unlike the Sue Smiths and Jean Jones that the viewer knows. Smiles and naughtiness and playfulness. This is a powerful point which is completely lost on Hollywood; if you make it all slick and perfect and spectacular, you actually disengage the viewers imagination and hence their sense of involvement.

By the way, perhaps it was too obvious to comment on, but the briefly shown sorority letters near the end subliminally spell SEX.

This film needs to be mashed-up somehow, or maybe just a voice-over. It's good raw material for something.

I guess in those days 'stag films' didn't have nearly the budget to hire good-looking women...

...but still, might be fun to use this footage somehow.

Maybe even the cheesy soundtrack.

Girls wearing stockings,spanking, and a fantastic soundtrack! What more could you want?

Did you just got fired when reading coffeebot his comments, and therefor missing out on the firmly shaped irony.
I think he laughed as hard whilst writing it, as I did whilst reading :D


Reviewer: Da'Judge - - March 12, 2006
Subject: Hard To Believe

it sure is hard to believe that coffeebot actually thinks that this film is real. C'mon now, this whole film was staged and only a blind person can't tell that from the various winks and giggles.

I'm not sure whose stag party this action packed epic was shown at ... perhaps Mister Rogers. The surprise ending reminded me of a similar ending to one of the favorite films of my youth ... "The Bad Seed".

Truly an excellent example of the type of good natured stag films that were being made back in the day. No nudity but worth it anyway.

thnx

This little vignette (a sorority initiation?) must stem from the 1940's or possibly the 50's. I can't help but think that this whole film watches instead like an instructional film on how to (or how not to) deal with grand mal seizures, because there is so much thrashing around going on. The spanking isn't even remotely convincing and I can't believe it would be taken at all seriously at the time either.

Also, it is not silent. Instead, it has quite a peppy little jazznumber without any vocals. The opening titles are sans any credits and the title appears to be spelled out of some children's alphabet block play set.

film porno

it sure is hard to believe that coffeebot actually thinks that this film is real. C'mon now, this whole film was staged and only a blind person can't tell that from the various winks and giggles.

Porn is supposed to seed the imagination, create a fantasy, an idea of thought that the viewer remembers and takes with him. These old films are great for that, because the viewer, if possessed of the ability, gets to take the idea and generate his own fantasy. The new modern porn is bound up in presenting the fantasy itself. That degrades the fantasy, drains it of its strength and beauty, not to mention steals it from the fantisizer. The "feeling" is gone.
If I can watch a film, and some time later come up with wood from simply thinking about the film, then that film has got value to me. Only very small portions of today's films give opportunity to this.

There isn't a thing wrong with this film. You can tell these women are all willing participants. You can tell these women know they are doing it for the camp value. The blonde winks/nods knowingly to the camera at the end. Geez, this is 2005, not 1955 - Stop being so repressed. BTW, The insignia on the paddles is that of the sorority, what they are doing is called a hazing ritual.

I only liked the paddles, they have the frat cult inscribed on the paddles, like some occult fraternity nonsense.
I liked what one of the previous reviewers said about Freud, women and the relevance of stag movies. However, I am not one of those people that will say "for the time" it was good, cause when all is said and done, the year that something came out won't matter, art, flicks, etc. are either o.k., mediocre, good, great, legendary or sucky. This was far from o.k. I think it sucked, not even the girl's solid ass jiggled from the paddle. It seemed like some insider joke frat boy student movie, for late night frat parties. If you want a real flick, with real nudity and some real black and white stuff, try "AM" on the archives.

Oh, Prunella! They are a caution.

This is, if nothing else, the live actor version of a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Only, it's so bad, it's barely funny. Slapstick is always better when they're going for the laugh.

To understand this semi-comic stag film, it is helpful to consider stereotypes of the era it was made in. (1) Women are masochistic in nature (part of Freud's generally specious body of thought). (2) Women are either whores or saints, either normal or deviant, and a little deviance doesn't really exist more than being a little bit pregnant. (3) Women are known (on a hush-hush basis, but widely known none the less) to be convertible to lesbians by being left alone to the company of already "recruited" lesbians without a dominate male on the scene to be the focus of attention - and in prisons, girl's schools, sororities and the like, the horrible practices that might sometimes occur there would be life scaring if left unchecked by reintroduction of male dominance and sexual prowess PROMPTLY upon tasting forbidden fruit. (4) The most fundamental thing women need, as Freud again told the world, is to have a penis inserted in them once daily, and they'll be all out of sorts if they don't get it.

So the film opens with something designed to evoke a basic instinct in males: protection of weak females. Them lesbians is prowling in her hills and might snag her forever if some off-screen male don't come to the rescue. This continues along with a silly portrayal of dominance and submission that can only be explained as the product of masochistic consent to ineffectual and negligable bondage and patting on the po-po. But wait - what happens next but Miss Wispy putting two husky women over her knee which they can't overcome. Aha! Recall - all women are masochists - so why should they overcome it? But then the real kicker comes. Miss Wispy has had "revenge" on her attackers, but portrays by a wicked grin that she enjoyed doing it! She's at risk - she's a little deviant and unless some male full of basic instinct comes along and nails her thoroughly, and soon, she'll be scared for life as deviant. The horror of her living her life as a nonmasochist who has tasted lesbian hijinks demands that all red blooded American males rush to her side and bang her back into submission and bliss.

Stag films are about coarsening sentiments about women so that they can be seen as deserving to be forced into providing sex to sexually unskilled and unsatisfying males, and to convince men that it is good for them to be subjected to overpowering sexual demand. The pretext that they are for educating young men about husbandly skills is silly. For ages young men, at around 15 or so, had been taken to easy ladies and "salted", a vastly superior educational resource than this kind of disposable nonsense, and there was no such need for these films. (Or if there was, it was a sign of a crueller society than had existed just decades before with sponsored teenage trips to brothels.) The use of these films was to rev up the engines of older men by playing to their protective or other basic instincts while at the same time showing the women in them as sufficiently deserving of sexual servitude because they had a deviant aspect.

Therefore, as a stag film, this was an EXCELLENT example.

Two mature, sleazily dressed seniors overpower an innocent and modestly dressed girl and mercilessly spank her. I find this apalling! Where were this girl's sorority sisters? Her fraternity big brothers? When THEY have had enough, they begin to tickle her with aloe vera leaves. How cruel. I could barely stand the violence, the invasion of her personal space. This shocking movie symbolized America's struggle against Japan and Germany in WWII, and like our wonderful country, the innocent victim turns table on the feminine thugs and gives them a sound whacking! This film has been approved for Boy Scout 'America at War' presentations.

I couldn't finish watching the film, I was laughing too hard. I mean, the girl was barely even touching the other one with the paddle, yet the paddlee is thrashing about! I thought acting in porno today was cheesy! I don't think this will get my boyfriend in the mood if I showed it to him!

Two women in their underwear "tie up" a third woman in her underwear and "spank" her with a sorority paddle. I use the quotes to indicate the extrememly unconvincing acting. Then they "tie" her to a bed, using plenty of rope but no noticeable knots and "tickle" her with "feathers" (or at least feather-like objects), making her undulate her body, only said undulation starts well before the tickling begins. After she gets a big grin on her face, they "untie" her, and hand her the paddle, allowing her to "turn the tables" and get her revenge by giving them an extremely light "spanking". All this to a sprightly, yet cheesy music soundtrack. My husband declared this to be "too classy" for himÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂof course, he regularly watches the likes of The Magic Land of Mother Goose, so what does he know?
Ratings: Camp/Humor Value: ***. Weirdness: ***. Historical Interest: ***. Overall Rating: **.

I would guess this is from the 1940's, and while the porn industry has improved it's products (or so I'm told ;) ) it hasn't changed it's deceptive titles - this was not "co-ed": no males and no classrooms. And how "secret" could a film be if it survived 60 years to be archived here while I can't even rent "Hot Rods To Hell" at the video store? No this is false advertising.

Well (blush) I don't know what to say! This 'obviously young girl' (as Charles Putnam would say) who is scantily clad in lingerie gets tied up by these two women, coincidentally, also clad in lingerie, and gets paddled (very unconvincingly) and then, uh, tickled! After they untie her, the obviously young girl gets her revenge by overpowering the two women (very unconvincingly again) and paddling them! (ditto). So if you're into paddling/scantly clad women/bondage/tickling/revenge movies.. then this is for you!