“The Price of Pleasure”: I am skeptical of claims that this film is honest & nonjudgmental.

Firstly, I must preface this with I have not yet seen the film. I will be seeing the film relatively soon, but much like many on all sides of the pornography issue who are writing and talking about this film, at this point all I have to go on is the trailer, clips, and rather slick media package. And while I have my longstanding concerns about 2257 with this film (which yes, people will counter will fair use-although in the case of this film, profit is absolutely a concern), at this point I merely want to focus on the claims made by the makers and promoters of this film that it is an honest and nonjudgmental look at “the most rented”-as stated on Dr. Sun’s web page- pornographic films (of 2005) and the effects thereof.

And that is the claim: that the film “The Price of Pleasure” is an honest and nonjudgmental look at popular pornography- and it’s influence. That, merely from the trailer, clips, and media packaging seems to me to be blatantly false and untrue. Perhaps upon seeing the film in its entirety, I will change my mind, but I am skeptical. At this point, claims that “The Price of Pleasure” is either of those things seems at best laughable and at worst utterly manipulative and dishonest. Anything and everything I’ve seen about this film suggests that it is heavily, blatantly and completely anti-pornography. Which would be fine if that is what the film was promoted and marketed as, but that is not the way it is being promoted and marketed.

And what causes me to make such accusations? Let us examine...

From the media kit for “The Price of Pleasure” we have the following: "Honest and nonjudgmental, the film paints both a nuanced and complex portrait of how pleasure and pain, commerce and power, and liberty and responsibility are intertwined in the most intimate aspects of human relations." Which sounds promising I suppose if you are one of those people who think sex is the most intimate aspect of human relations. However, when one makes such claims about their work, they must be prepared to defend it, and if one digs deeper into the forces behind “The Price of Pleasure”, they will find just about everyone involved in its production and promotion is anti-pornography, in some cases, stridently so.

First we need to look at the filmmakers: Chyng Sun and Robert Wosnitzer. Both are involved in the Anti Pornography movement, have participated at Feminist Anti Pornography Events. Both have profited from anti pornography writings, publications, films, and public speaking engagements. Sun is often regarded as a leading academic voice in the Anti Pornography Movement. When one is already so solidly entrenched in the Anti Porn Movement, considered a leading voice of that movement, with a long list of Anti Porn credits associated with their name and academic career, I find it worth asking the following question: Can this person even be honest and nonjudgmental about the industry in theory, let alone in practice and on film? There is no indication that either of these filmmakers are coming at the topic from a neutral stance or view, in fact, quite the opposite. Every indication is that they are coming at it from an anti porn stance, thus making an anti porn film, and quite possibly incapable of making anything other than an anti porn film.

Next, we must look at those who are promoting this film, not only in the general sense, but as an honest and nonjudgmental work. The filmmakers themselves are promoting it, as are several of the anti pornography advocates who are featured in it; including Prof. Robert Jensen and Dr. Gail Dines- who cannot in any way be considered unbiased on the issue of pornography- which would be fine if this film was promoted and presented in it’s media package or in reality as an anti pornography film, but that is not the case. These people are hosting screenings and discussion forums of the films at universities and other such forums, and reviews of such events from various sources have indicated that these events are not, as advertised, honest and nonjudgmental.

Then, there is the trailer and the interview clips themselves. There is pornographic footage, interviews done in dark serious rooms and on the fly at an adult industry events, the occasional dramatic reenactment, which works for entertaining/shocking film making, but does it make for truth or honest and nonjudgmental? Does it represent the most rented pornographic movies of 2005? No, it doesn’t. Not by a long shot.

In fact, here is a verbal synopsis of the trailer, which can be seen here:

Men talking about porn and liking aggressive sex like they see in porn….(no trailer footage of any women speaking on the matter).

Clip of a Burning Angel film (gonzo) where a female performer in a little girl voice talks about her father molesting her, clip of her being slapped and having tape put over her mouth- no mention of if she is playing a role or speaking her truth…same actress off set saying she doesn’t feel objectified because she doesn’t think you can honestly make a human an object.

Annie Cruz discussing prices for various acts (dp, double anal, gangbangs) featured in Gonzo Porn, her specialty.

Cut to gangbang clip, then to a man saying the women look like they are having a good time, cut to Sarah Katherine Lewis asking “Are they seeing my humanity, no. I’m seeing a disgusting customer, they’re seeing a hot slut who wants it”. Flashback to the woman in the gangbang scene after she’s been ejaculated on by several men, she appears to be grinning and says “gross”, cut to Brandon Iron saying it’s a good scene, cut to a woman (not a performer) talking about how the dirtier, the better, how porn has taken a more extreme turn.

Cut to ERNEST! Putting a collar on a very content looking submissive in a BDSM scene, then Ernest saying that he doesn’t feel guilty or ashamed of what he does, nor does he think evil people need pictures to make them do evil things. While he’s talking clips from various Kink.com shoots and various rough gonzo/bondage clips are shown (choking, water bondage, caning), followed by Jeff Steward of JM Productions (nsfw!) discussing how some women like to be dominated- ending with a swirlie shot.

Roll credits.

Now, of course, my quibbles.

One- The biggest grossing porn film of all time, released in the year 2005? Pirates. A high budget, slick, script driven film with a plot and full of highly paid contract performers…somewhat like a slick, fun, campy Hollywood movie made for…adults! In fact, you can see a scene from Pirates, no sex or nudity, right here. Is it silly? Yes, it’s silly. Is it the highest selling, top grossing, most popular porn film of all time? Yes, it is. Is it wall-to-wall gonzo sex, or degrading language, or any other such thing? No, it is not. Is it in the trailer for “The Price of Pleasure”, an honest and nonjudgmental look at the most rented porn movies of 2005? No, it is not. Nor is Dark Angels 2: Bloodlines, a high grossing porn movie feature about Vampires, or Catherine, a lavishly costumed porn version of the story of Catherine The Great, which combined the story aspects of a feature and the sort of sex found in Gonzo films. Nor are any of the films put out by Adam & Eve, or Vivid, or Wicked- true giants of the industry, or films with performers like Tera Patrick or Jessie Jane. No, none of that. Apparently, none of these things are truly…honestly and what have you… representative of modern porn or top selling porn in 2005…even though Pirates was the undisputed king of pornographic movies released that year. (The sequel for Pirates is due out shortly, by the way, and it is the most pre-ordered porn film...ever.)

However online net footage from Kink.com apparently is, scenes from JM Productions “Swirlies” apparently are, Brandon Iron’s gangbang videos are. Were there rougher edged gonzo films that sold well in 2005? Of course there were. Did any of them even come close to rivaling Pirates? No. Not by the wildest stretch of any honest or nonjudgmental persons imagination. Within porn itself, BDSM is a specialty market, to the best of my knowledge (Ernest, feel free to correct me if I am wrong) no hardcore themed hard-edged BDSM movies were featured as Best Selling/Most Popular pornographic movies in 2005…or any other year? Yet this honest film would certainly, if its trailer is any indication, have you believing otherwise. This honest and nonjudgmental film’s trailer would have you believing that BDSM films, JM Productions, and hard edged gonzo were the only type of pornography out there…even if they do have Jenna Jameson (whose work is far more along the lines of “Pirates” than “Gangbang Girls”) plastered boldly on their web page…undoubtedly without Jameson’s consent.

In fact, a great deal of what is in “The Price of Pleasure” would appear to be BDSM and Gonzo film & Internet Content…passed off as “the most popular porn films”.

Two- On “The Price of Pleasure” website, there are clips of the people interviewed for the film. The first thing I noted was that the pornographers and pornographic actresses are called by their full/stage names, whereas some of the anti porn speakers included are referred to in a friendly fashion by merely their first names, sans creds or university affiliation. Secondly, it seems to me that any quote from any of the pornographers was one that was intentionally picked, out of how many hours of footage (Ernest Greene was interviewed- in depth- for three hours), to make them sound utterly callous. There are two female performers featured, one of whom does almost exclusively Gonzo content, the other whose knowledge of the workings of the hardcore porn industry is open to serious question. I’ll be going back to that in a moment…

However, there is not a single contract or feature performer included in this section. Nor a single director, producer or performer representing any one of the major feature producing porn companies. There is no Tera Patrick, no Jessie Jane, no Joone, not a single person like them to be found anywhere.

And now we are back to that. I would be remiss if I did not bring up amid the female performers featured in the clips (all two of them), we have Sarah Katherine Lewis. Now, there is no question about Lewis’s involvement in the sex industry. She is most certainly a former sex worker and 100% entitled to her own opinions and views on sex work and her experiences are not in question in any way. However, by Lewis’s own words in her books, she did a scant number of solo-girl pornographic scenes in either Seattle or Portland. Yet, in this honest and nonjudgmental film, Lewis is seemingly set up as an expert on/veteran of the porn industry- which is utterly misleading as Lewis has never performed in hardcore heterosexual boy/girl or girl/girl, gonzo, bdsm, or mainstream pornography films at all, ever. Using her to apparently offset Annie Cruz is not at all honest, in any way. Simply put, she has not done the same work nor have the same experience as Cruz, nor any other performer who has done any of that kind of pornography, yet she is presented as someone who has. Her experiences in sex work are not being questioned, her place as an authority on the type of pornography dicussed in this film is most certain subject to question and critique.

Now, as I have said, I’ve not yet seen the film in its entirety, and baring death or grievous bodily harm, I will be (after all, severe burns didn’t keep me out of Chicago!), and yes, I am looking forward to seeing and discussing the full thing. Perhaps it is, in truth, honest and nonjudgmental look at popular pornography, but I am going in skeptical. Very skeptical, because everything I’ve seen thus far suggests this film is anything but honest and nonjudgmental, that it is nothing more than an anti porn film misrepresenting itself as honest and nonjudgmental. At this point, I have no other reason to think otherwise.

After all, if people like…oh…say…pornographers, happy porn performers and enthusiastic viewers (of both sexes)…got together and made a movie which claimed to be an honest and nonjudgmental look at the anti porn movement*, would anyone believe it was or could be either of those things? I suspect not. That being the case, the same assumptions must be made by those considering a film made by Sun & Wosnitzer and promoted by other famous anti-porn activists. If one has any interest in being honest or academically unbiased, that is.

(*Hey Ernest, now there’s an idea…)