HEY FUCK YOU MANG

HEY FUCK YOU MANG

Attached: HDDVD.jpg (700x500, 138.88K)

>Why, yes! I did get this scar by eating pussy!

>HD DVD
God that's 2000s.

You wanna fuck with me? Okay. You wanna play rough? Okay. Say hello to my tight little pussy!

Kino

Is it kino?

>Shyla Stylez
I miss this whore like you wouldn't believe

First, you get the selfies, then the only and then comes the power.

I saw a video where a pornstar was explaining why pornos even bother to have any kind of plot at all. Apparently it’s because the only way it still counts as legal under the first amendment is if you can argue that it’s technically a form of “art” in a court of law if push comes to shove, and having a “plot”, even if it’s a horrendously bad one, helps in making that case. So technically any amateur porn or gonzo porn or just porn where there’s no characters or dialogue, could potentially be shut down by the government over obscenity laws if anybody ever felt like it, or if someone in particular pissed them off, and there’s not much anybody could do about it.

>Films need a plot to be considered "art"
This is exactly the mentality that demonstrates why normals drag the medium down.

"I HATE FUCKING COLOMBIAN MILFS"

>Carmen Luvana
*cracks open ice cold Oliet Bang's*

>...You want a rimjob, Ernie?

KINO

>why pornos even bother to have any kind of plot at all. Apparently it’s because the only way it still counts as legal under the first amendment
this doesnt sound true at all

Not what I said. I said it makes it easier to argue that it’s art in a court of law. It’s not impossible, but it’s just more difficult. If you take op’s pic which is a porn parody of Scarface, that’s an open and shut case that no one would ever actually seriously try to argue couldn’t be considered a type of art. But if it’s just a video where two people fuck and there’s no story and you sell it for money, somebody could make the case that what you’ve got is in no way art, and you’ve just performed prostitution and are profiting off selling evidence of your crimes.

She could take a dick in the ass like no other girl.

Sure it is- if you can’t argue that they’re actors in a film, then technically just prostitution

And I'm saying that two people filming themselves engaging in prostitution CAN be art if the director is talented enough. The idea that a film NEEDS a story to be "genuine art" is pure cancer that completely negates the value of surrealist works

>Let's get this straight, now. I never fucked anyone in my life who didn't have it coming to them.

It doesn’t NEED it, it just makes it easier for the companies involved if it ever comes up, and way less likely anybody would ever even attempt to take legal action in the first place.

You can still successfully argue that plotless pornography is art, but you better hope you don’t get the wrong judge. The plot acts as legal defense armor, because it’s hard to say a movie with a clear beginning, a middle, and an end isn’t telling a story and shouldn’t be protected as speech under the first amendment

I understand what you're saying, I just wanted to complain about nobody taking surrealism seriously

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 100.93K)