Comments on: Beautiful Agony

Beautiful Agony

travis — Tue, 11 May 2004 10:03:01 -0800

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.

By: nasim

nasim — Tue, 11 May 2004 10:38:14 -0800

Wow, what an erotic concept. For those without plugins you can get the three previews directly here: 1 33 45

By: jonmc

jonmc — Tue, 11 May 2004 10:47:47 -0800

Buncha jerkoffs.

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Tue, 11 May 2004 10:50:56 -0800

This agony brings a tear to my Jap's eye.

By: WolfDaddy

WolfDaddy — Tue, 11 May 2004 11:10:11 -0800

I love the O-Face.

By: zoogleplex

zoogleplex — Tue, 11 May 2004 12:02:20 -0800

This rocks! Completely erotic yet not vulgar or even overt. Boffo! Good one. :)

By: scarabic

scarabic — Tue, 11 May 2004 12:06:26 -0800

How very nice. thanks!

By: ashbury

ashbury — Tue, 11 May 2004 12:41:10 -0800

I'm sure I've seen this linked here before . . . Either way, it's still cool.

By: 111

111 — Tue, 11 May 2004 13:47:31 -0800

They're faking it.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Tue, 11 May 2004 14:02:43 -0800

Only yours, 111.

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Tue, 11 May 2004 14:17:07 -0800

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.

By: RakDaddy

RakDaddy — Tue, 11 May 2004 15:07:20 -0800

Anyone got a cigarette?

By: 111

111 — Tue, 11 May 2004 15:43:05 -0800

Only yours, 111. Drats! Say it isn't so!

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Tue, 11 May 2004 20:31:40 -0800

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.

By: hippugeek

hippugeek — Tue, 11 May 2004 21:33:48 -0800

Love this, but it sure would be nice if the free samples included a man.

By: anastasiav

anastasiav — Tue, 11 May 2004 21:41:19 -0800

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.

By: madman

madman — Tue, 11 May 2004 23:09:15 -0800

Some of those people seem to be in pain.

By: mindless progress

mindless progress — Tue, 11 May 2004 23:39:39 -0800

Love this, but it sure would be nice if the free samples included a man. Good news, you can find one here.

By: hippugeek

hippugeek — Wed, 12 May 2004 01:13:30 -0800

How silly of me. I saw nasim's comment and looked no further. Much obliged, mindless progress.