This topic involves the performers, sexual acts, clothing, the set, camera work.
All of my feedback is going to aim at improving things that I like.
But I'll start by briefly mentioning everything Angelo Godshack Studio do, that I don't like.
Pissing, Bisexual content (like lesbian stuff and DAP, including all the sexual acts that require two or three dicks rubbing together) and NO interracial content.
Another major downside for me, is that the clothes that women wear, are usually unremarkable, and in almost all the scenes
the women high heels are removed early on. I would prefer if the high heels were kept on the whole runtime of the scene.
So far, this Lucy Mendez scene, is the one I have liked the most.
- 001.jpg (26.13 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
However, there are sexual positions that are fairly common in your movies that I dislike.
These positions, the thing they have in common, is that the two male genitals are touching each other TOO MUCH.
This is the thing that makes these movies appear as bisexual, in a way that is not appealing to a heterosexual fan like me.
- 002.jpg (26.94 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
- 003.jpg (28.21 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
Other things I dislike that are fairly common in some type of movies,
is manhandling the women so much that it makes them look ugly and go down in sexual attraction.
and worse still, often they look like they can't wait for the scene to be over
and the scene just keeps going, because they are professional, but it shouldn't continue.
To illustrate the ugly, this is a pretty sexy and beautiful lady
that you guys managed to make her look awful.
- 004.jpg (27.6 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
That's 9 minutes into the movie
And as you see the movie progress, it gets worse and worse,
don't go this far for money. Those movies are terrible.
I think you need to rename them, to something that
implies is going to be rougher than usual, but not all the time, with better pacing.
Currently, the intensity of THOSE movies, looks like this:
- 007.jpg (24.11 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
It would be a sexier, more satisfying movie, if the INTENSITY, had peaks and valleys.
You can still have extreme content like FISTING,
but you need to compensate with something more pleasant and calmed.
- 008.jpg (24.47 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
Eagle eye readers might notice that the second half of the movie's intensity,
is slightly higher than the first half.
As a low intensity moment, you can picture something sexy and hot.
- 0207t.gif (10.41 MiB) Viewed 1888 times
Low intensity doesn't mean boring.
You need to see the woman, and if she starts to look miserable,
change pace immediately, lowering intensity by half.
You need to chill for a solid 10-15 mins.
You can also, change the way you make movies,
I imagine, you arrange a scene with a model,
before filming has started, you already decided is going to be a 100% hell or whatever else.
What if, instead of doing that, agree to spike intensity of the sex,
to the level of a 100% hell movie, and if the woman, can gracefully
do 45 mins of it, call it 100% hell, but if she needs varied pacing,
you call the movie something different.
or agree to lower the intensity of scenes, as it seems necessary.
Ok, moving on to more pleasant topics, camera work.
This gif, represents how I wish, the movies looked, 40 to 50 percent of the time:
- 550.gif (930.99 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
At this camera distance from the action, you can easily see everything, nice and clear.
You can see the woman's head, her butt, the torso, the feet, hands, the penetration, all the men around her.
Everything is correct, it looks beautiful. The model body proportions look well,
Body proportions looking "correct" is critical to maintain her status as beautiful.
the aspect ratio of the video is flattering to the woman silhouette. Everything is as good as it gets.
However, close-ups, also exists. And are desirable, the other half of the runtime of the movie, should be close-ups.
I think close-ups, are the weakness of this studio.
This is the thing that messes up with the quality of the movie, visually.
First of all, close-ups, are usually not close enough.
If you want to highlight the model's face, her face, from eyebrows to chin,
should take almost to the whole screen from top to bottom.
Like this:
- 537.gif (1.87 MiB) Viewed 1888 times
I had to edit this, to make it close enough.
But usually, close-ups to the face, are still far away enough,
to see her shoulders, upper arms and torso.
And depending on the situation, messes up with the model body proportions.
This makes her look disproportionate, that makes her look ugly.
Is the same problem with selfies taken with smartphones.
If you take a selfie, with the front facing camera of your phone,
and you don't put enough space, between your phone and your face,
your facial features would look incorrect, you would look "ugly".
People who are good with selfies know, that the arm that is holding the phone,
has to be extended as far away as they can from their face.
Because the camera lens used to film movies is much bigger than a phone,
is much easier to make people look correct in movies, but,
for best results, you want to isolate the model face, as close as possible,
for maximum satisfaction.
- 518.gif (25.42 MiB) Viewed 1888 times
Trust me when I say that, seeing a beautiful face, with full 4K quality, when is just the face,
and nothing else, the experience, is unquantifiable much better, than, if you can also see
her upper half.
I think, the director gets a bit too greedy, and when highlighting the face,
he still wants to show the ass, the penetration.
So, what ends up happening, is that we get a view, that is half-way to a close-up,
and half-way too far for a wide nice view.
But it doesn't satisfy either one, it looks low quality camera work.
- 009.jpg (27.12 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
I think, you have three options that are excellent.
You show the FACE, real close, you show the penetration, pretty close too,
OR you step all the way back so we can see the whole thing nice.
Examples of highlights that don't compromise.
- 515.gif (19.78 MiB) Viewed 1888 times
When you are filming a blowbang, if the cocks are not covering,
about half the screen form side to side, you are filming it wrong.
- 517.gif (8.01 MiB) Viewed 1888 times
This was the secret sauce of the late Gonzo studio, if you ask me.
Just to make myself extra clear,
If you are close enough to the girl, that her arm takes half the screen.
You are too close, for a wide view, and you are to far for a close-up.
and the men are too far away from her, ask them to move in a bit closer.
- 010.jpg (34.89 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
SO, move a step back, maybe a few steps back, and make it look like this:
- 011.jpg (33.51 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
This is the airplane position, looking 100% awesome:
- 012.jpg (26.92 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
And this is exactly the same idea but executed 100% incorrectly.
- 013.jpg (23.65 KiB) Viewed 1888 times
I think, good camera work is all difference needed for sales.
Thats just my opinion.
If I continue to post, I'll add gifs that IMO feature, 100% correct camera work.
TY and Peace.
