facettes de la petite mort No nudity, but not safe for work. I love it when eroticism is found where you might not expect it. Like, simple facial expression, for example.
posted by travis (18 comments total)
Wow, what an erotic concept. For those without plugins you can get the three previews directly here: 1 33 45
How very nice. thanks! posted by scarabic at 12:06 PM on May 11, 2004
I'm sure I've seen this linked here before . . .
Either way, it's still cool. posted by ashbury at 12:41 PM on May 11, 2004
They're faking it. posted by 111 at 1:47 PM on May 11, 2004
Only yours, 111. posted by jonmc at 2:02 PM on May 11, 2004
Two points on this:
1. Why the edits? What's different during the outtakes?
2. If you consider she might have an itchy foot or tummy, it's far less interesting.
Seems like one of those investments you'd be kicking yourself for after the first 2 days of the month. posted by yerfatma at 2:17 PM on May 11, 2004
Anyone got a cigarette? posted by RakDaddy at 3:07 PM on May 11, 2004
Only yours, 111.
Drats! Say it isn't so! posted by 111 at 3:43 PM on May 11, 2004
If you consider she might have an itchy foot or tummy, it's far less interesting.
That was my first impression as well, like it was some kind of experiment and when they zoom out you see she's actually doing something perfectly innoncent. But the idea that there's some assumption of eroticism that makes it erotic without relying on any actual eroticism to work off of is ludicrous. Generally people only act like that when they're having sex or acting like they're having sex.
It's like they're saying, "Well, look it's just an innocent person breathing and moaning and scrunching up their eyes as they roll into the back of their head while they scream the Lord's name at the top of their lungs... perfectly innoncent... or is it?" [dum dum dum!!]
No. But as an exercise in "faces are erotic", it succeeds nicely. posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:31 PM on May 11, 2004
Love this, but it sure would be nice if the free samples included a man. posted by hippugeek at 9:33 PM on May 11, 2004
I'm reminded of a story about a very famous european actress from the 20's or 30's (whose name escapes me at the moment). She was starring in a film where, in one sequence, she was required sort of imply that she had reached orgasm (or at least sexual ecstasy), without actually showing any sex. The director achieved a very satisfactory effect by framing a close shot of her face while he squeezed her big toe as hard as he could. The end result was so realistic that the film was quite controversial -- banned or censored in several countries. (I wish I could recall the name of the actress, but alas, I cannot.)
Nice site. Good post. posted by anastasiav at 9:41 PM on May 11, 2004
Some of those people seem to be in pain. posted by madman at 11:09 PM on May 11, 2004
Love this, but it sure would be nice if the free samples included a man.
Subscribe
1
33
45
posted by nasim at 10:38 AM on May 11, 2004