Sorry about missing the past couple of days. I was having trouble logging into the GIMP forum. I'll post a couple of covers to catch up.

Man's Adventure Mar 1966

Man's Adventure Mar 1967

Another snake cover. Indiana Jones would have hated this magazine.

Today's MAM cover is from Man's Adventure May 1961.

MadBob: Dig the new artwork; you've just gotta love bad guys who keep leopards around for use in interrogation.

-----------------------------------------

For those who saw it when it originally aired and for those who didn't, here's an encore look at the all-time best torture scene that the TV show "24" ever gave us. "24", of course, is the show that popularized torture on the small screen, but for the most part, the victims were all men. Oh, women would get tied up plenty on the show over the years, but it wasn't until this season that they gave us what we really wanted to see.

This is, of course, the strappado/electric shock treatment that actress Yvonne Strahovski endures during this season's sixth episode. I swear, I don't see how they could have faked this; they likely used a stunt woman, but that's clearly Strahovski hanging with her arms hoisted off the ground behind her in some shots. At any rate, take a look and let us know your opinions. My cut is much more compact than the one that aired on TV, now with all the extraneous bits edited out, with just the good stuff left.

Was going through some old flicks yesterday and I ran into Don't Go in the House. I just watched the burning scene for the hell of it, although the scene itself was a little distressing. Not very pleasant to watch towards the end of it, I have to say the woman chained looked really really good naked, very sexy woman. I loved her body. If I had her chained up naked, I don't think I would burn her! Far more useful alive ;)

Today's MAM cover is from Man's Adventure May 1962. This is the same artwork as Jan 1959.

Thanks for editing the Yvonne Strahovski scene, Ralphus. I agree that she did a lot of the stunts the scene. It made up a little bit for the 3 AOH scenes she had in Chuck where she was never tortured, even one where she was AOH next to some dude that got whipped.

Ralphus wrote:

Thanks for posting those links again for those 2 books. Yowch, they're not cheap...73 bucks for a used copy of "It's a Man's World"? Too rich for my blood. If someone wants to buy me a Christmas gift...

Well, you just never know what might show up in your mailbox someday. Unfortunately, I think both these books are out of print, so new ones will be pricey. Used paperback copies are going for between $20 and $35 on e-Bay, but that's still a lot. As both titles have hundreds of illustrations, it would be great to see them as e-books, but I can't find any digital editions.

BTW… I didn't feel slighted; I only wanted to note that the MAM story restorations are a team effort. Thanks for clarifying.


Arcas: Lovely image featuring Alexa. Tell me… doesn't it become difficult finding muses once word about the job description gets out? Given the cosmetic alterations Cowboy Hank is about to perform, it's no surprise you have to do some subsequent “form fiddlin'” on the poor girl. It's a wonder you can keep her alive, let alone restore her former beauty. I guess the product placement helps cover her medical bills.

MadBob: Wow… another winner from you as well. Unlike Alexa, your heroine probably won't be starring in any sequels if she's destined to become leopard lunch. But what did she do to deserve such a fate? And what's with the victim's outfit? Let me guess… she performs in a wild animal act and the circus ran out of Purina Big Cat Chow. The lackey on the right got the fun job of ternderizing the replacement food. Of course, that's got absolutely nothing to do with an interrogation, so I guess I'm not even remotely close.

El Wananchi: Thanks for the story. I always thought Jacqueline Bisset has an appallingly sparse portfolio of GIMP scenes…

Today's MAM cover is from Man's Adventure May 1963.

Poll: Whispers in the Dark. Deborah Kara Unger likes to have sex while tied AOH. Beautiful scene of her so tied while a guy takes her from behind. Dark and dreamy lighting. Jesus God! Going from memory on this one, but it was the hottest thing I have ever seen in a mainstream movie.

Today's picture at the top, the redhead being scourged, is fantastic. I believe it is by Steve Cordero-anyone know where more by him can be located?

If it shows a Roman scourging, I believe they were limited to 39 lashes, since more than that risked killing the victim before they could be crucified, shich was a big no-no. Thus, since it looks like she has gotten 2 or 3 lashes so far, she has 36 or 37 left, rather than 75. Not that she's counting.

I noticed that Klingsor (#3927) is offering to post the complete Snidely Whiplash. I would love if that could be done, either on this site or on a pic-hosting site with a link here. Many thinks to whoever does this.

3972 this is indeed a Steve Cordero epic. I do have a few of his and the one I am posting which even now, years on from when I first saw it has remained one of my all time favorites. The pic of the day is a rework of this original. The scourging of Nynia, flogged before being horribly crucified.

A point on Roman scourgings. There was in fact no limit to the number of lashes delivered. The 39 lashes red herring was a Jewish edit, not a Roman one. Romans appointed a lictor, a specialist in observing floggings and it was his job to limit the flogging to avoid death but to sufficiently debilitate the victim so that she did not last too long once hung up. A job they were particularly good at and a reason why such scourgings were often referred to as the little death. They were almost certainly fatal even if the victim had been nursed after.

Greg posted (3973) "...it was his job to limit the flogging to avoid death but to sufficiently debilitate the victim so that she did not last too long once hung up."

You mean the crucified women just bled out, went into shock and died?

What's the fun in that? Surely like Damian's artwork shows there had to be more torturing of them on the cross besides just watching them die.

Maybe they were a sideshow for gladiator battles or lions eating Christians main event? Bill K.

TRG wrote:

Whispers in the Dark. Deborah Kara Unger likes to have sex while tied AOH. Beautiful scene of her so tied while a guy takes her from behind. Dark and dreamy lighting. Jesus God! Going from memory on this one, but it was the hottest thing I have ever seen in a mainstream movie.

It was a hot scene, yeah. What's interesting is that it's basically just Kara giving a first-hand account of the dangerous sex games she was playing with her lover, and there's only tiny snippets of actual footage shown. But it's her description that really makes the scene so effective.

Man's Adventure May 1964

3974 Bill K said...You mean the crucified women just bled out, went into shock and died?

Well I guess BIll that is pretty much how it worked out, only sometimes, due to clotting and congealment around the nail wounds, that dying bit could sometimes run into 18-24 hours. Surely that's a good time in which to grab a few screenshots Huh?

On the Snidely jive...listen guys, we've been waiting years...Please please lets have the gear. He was just too good to left lying fallow and in bits on various geezers' hard drive.

I just uploaded a fumetto called "Dans Les Spirales Du Temps" on [bdtrash.net]

Don't know how reliable is the host (motherless) so if that's your thing, go get it.







It contains a decent GIMP scene.

FRITZ: Regarding my muses... it helps that I offer an awesome health package!

RALPHUS: I know totally what you mean about the power of potential. I've found all I often need to do is front load an image with it and the viewers' imaginations does the rest. It's kinda interactive that way!

That said, this one goes a step further... mostly because I wanted to show that she'd gone through an ordeal already via his copper rod (not a euphemism for anything but the thing in his right hand...). And that while it clearly sucked, things are about to get much worse. Poor Alexa.... (*evil snicker*) I call this piece "Artists' Block".... though what she's really up against are some very PO'd drug cartel honchos.

James Deen is a well known male porn star who has developed himself into a brand by also producing and directing porn movies.

He has been producing a series of porn titled "7 Sins" which goes the way of art porn.

The only gimp worthy one is 7 Sins: Wrath. There's no plot, dialogue or even sound. The only sound is a looping musical score which adds to the dark mood of the movie which is almost 2 hours long.

It starts out with 8 attractive nude porn starlets in a dark cement room. Deen walks in wearing jeans and no shirt. He starts slapping and manhandling the girls one a time. 30 minutes in and he loses his pants and the action starts. The action in this case is roughly fucking from behind and shoving his cock in all the starlet's mouths. One after another, over and over again.

The Gimp factor here is how he just roughly grabs them and sticks his dick inside them very forcefully. The girls are quite attractive and are of slender build. Their performance is they appear brainwashed or drugged, neither enjoying nor resisting Deen as he takes them one after another. This lets you the viewer create your own narrative or storyline using your imagination.

There's not much more to say about this movie. The sex could have been better if he threw them down on the floor and banged them missionary. As it is he bangs them all from behind.

The other films in the "7 Sins" series have no gimp scenes in them. Yes, Deen fucks the actresses roughly but its nothing you don't usually see in mainstream porn.

Hiccup's grade B-

Hiccup: Thanks for the review of James Deen's 7 Sins: Wrath.

I can confidently predict the film is of no interest to me. That said, if this James Deen fellow (Jimmy Deen?) is starting to wade into GIMP waters, perhaps he's someone to keep an eye on.

MAM cover of the day is from Man's Adventure May 1965

You know after watching Wrath a few more times and more thought on it (couldn't get it out of my head at work) I give this one a B+.

I'm curious what everyone else thinks about this one. Here is a link to the preview page which has a trailer.

[jamesdeen.com]

The trailer is just a 3 minute version of the movie. If it works for you then the full movie is just a 2 hour extended version of the trailer.

Canadian: Y'know we watch JAV porn even though we don't even know what the fuck the plot is or even what they're saying and we love it. This movie though...it's whatever you want it to be.

8 beautiful babes kept naked in a basement for months and now it's graduation time when you let them go but first they've gotta give their best performance. Or...whatever your imagination wants to make it, etc, etc.

I don't give a fuck about James Deen and if he caught "PenisEbola" which caused his dick to fall off I would laugh my ass off as he's having too much fun. He did make a good Gimp flick though.

Years ago I went to Thailand when I was in my late 30's and did the sex tour thing. Nothing Gimp, just rented bar girls for all night fuck/suck sessions which were straight vanilla. I came a lot faster though in their mouths than I would with a steady girlfriend because I was "using them". Hell, I never came in a girlfriends mouth. It was only within the last year that I first came in my wifes mouth and we've been together since 1997.

When I was in Thailand I could have done what Deen did in his movie though and maybe I still will someday. Then I can die a happy man.

Rent a bunch of hookers, show them the Deen video, offer them a bonus for performance, pop a 100mg Viagra and do 2 hours of "hate fucking". Maybe I'll even pay one of the girls to hold a camera and record it.

Canadian, if that doesn't work for you then you need to get out more. Of course if it doesn't work for you then who gives a flip anyway.

8 thai hookers x $70.00
1 hotel room = $150.00
8 performance bonuses x $70.00
roundtrip airfare $1600.00
Aaaaaahhh someday....

Hiccup wrote:

Rent a bunch of hookers, show them the Deen video, offer them a bonus for performance, pop a 100mg Viagra and do 2 hours of "hate fucking". Maybe I'll even pay one of the girls to hold a camera and record it.

Canadian, if that doesn't work for you then you need to get out more. Of course if it doesn't work for you then who gives a flip anyway.

8 thai hookers x $70.00
1 hotel room = $150.00
8 performance bonuses x $70.00
roundtrip airfare $1600.00
Aaaaaahhh someday....

Since Obama's G-Men may still be monitoring this website, I think I'll decline to comment on whether or not that works for me (the assertion that I need to get out more goes without saying).

In the event that I am tempted, I do appreciate the layout of the budget. Now, let's hope I can figure out the answer to today's Anti Bot Test.

Arcas: Wow, Alexa looks like she's really in bind this time. Lots of nice little details in this one, such as the barbed wire crotch rope and the wire-bound tits, which are inches away from being popped by the force of those nasty spikes. Another superb effort, thanks.

-----------------------------

Hiccup: Thanks for letting us know about James Deen's 7 Sins: Wrath. I have to admit I had never heard of James Deen, at least not the porn star with that moniker. You asked for what we think based on the publicity trailer. Well, here's my take: some very nice women, I like the sock stuffed in the mouth, lots of rough sex, but...I don't really get it. Where's the force? They all look like they're standing around waiting in line to be manhandled by this guy. What's missing is the non-consensual aspect (not to mention the ropes). You can get as rough as you want, but if the women are into it, I'm not interested.

Of course, you may not give a flip about my opinion, but since you asked...

Anyway, am I and Canadian the only ones who are missing the appeal of James Deen's opus? The site says he continues to push boundaries and redefine erotica in his "vision". To me, it looks pretty close to what Max Hardcore has been doing for the past 20 years, minus the cowboy hat, and apparently minus the plot, the dialogue and the sound, along with the no bondage. I guess that's what makes it different. Anybody else have an opinion about this one, based on the trailer and Hiccup's review?

Here's the direct link for your latest review: http://ralphus.net/reviews/other/7sinswrath.html

There was a great scene (for TV) tonight on The 100. Paige Turco was tied AOH and "given 10 lashes". They used some type of electric cattle prod whip. But her reactions were exceptional. She was wearing a shirt, but her back was torn open (exposed). All in all a VERY GOOD scene for network TV. In fact the only scenes I've seen that were even close was Minka Kelly's scene in Charlie's Angels and Yvonne's scene in 24. And this one was continuous. If anyone recorded it, PLEASE download.

@elkcreek-tx for the AOH heads up. Just hit record on the west coast. She may be a little up there in age but we'll see!

The "7 Sins: Wrath": Where is the merciless peril or any kind of peril for that matter? For me any rape scene has to have merciless peril. At least terror and forced bondage is a must for me to care about the gimp being raped. Non consensual rape is an oxymoron to me.

Posted picture, now that is merciless rape. Or maybe beyond merciless sexual assault. Bill K.

Re: The 100 scene with Paige Turco

To be clear, this was an upper spreadeagle scene, NOT AOH (I am of course a stickler on this). Also, this was more of a mild electro scene, not whipping as the lady torturing Paige just pressed the device to her skin, she didn't wind up.

With that said, it wasnt too bad of a GIMP scene but I wouldn't put it to the levels of Minka Kelly getting AOH facepunched and tasered or Yvonne Strahovski getting strappado knife-sliced and electro-tortured. Just my 2c

Dear GIMPers,

Some of you may remember that in August I have been busy with shooting the second episode of the History of Pain series.

Many of you helped me with ideas and opinions. I especially appreciative the help of Thomas Chaser, who always has a good idea, but thanks for everybody, who contributed to this film.

The film is ready, and we will release it tomorrow (Friday, 7th Nov 2014).

Please see its trailer below.
None of the actresses suffered any permanent damage during the shooting of this movie.

Re: 7 Sins: Wrath ~ Must agree with Ralphus and A Canadian, this is garbage. The thought struck me though, is it possible that Hiccup (the one that recommended the film) is in reality James Deen? I find not only the subject matter of the messages suspicious but the tone as well.

elkcreek said: There was a great scene (for TV) tonight on The 100. Paige Turco was tied AOH and "given 10 lashes". They used some type of electric cattle prod whip. But her reactions were exceptional. She was wearing a shirt, but her back was torn open (exposed). All in all a VERY GOOD scene for network TV. In fact the only scenes I've seen that were even close was Minka Kelly's scene in Charlie's Angels and Yvonne's scene in 24. And this one was continuous. If anyone recorded it, PLEASE download.

You're welcome.

esso wrote:

The thought struck me though, is it possible that Hiccup (the one that recommended the film) is in reality James Deen? I find not only the subject matter of the messages suspicious but the tone as well.

Highly unlikely. Hiccup has been around for years and is a well-known aficionado of Japanese porn.

In fact, many moons ago, he gave a surprisingly high A+ grade to a JAV film about a raped TV reporter that starred Maria Ozawa ([ralphus.net]).

Other Japanese titles that he has reviewed have included Slave Island 5.

The James Deen film seems to be a bit of a departure for him (at least, a departure from the types of films he has reviewed here). But unless someone has stolen his handle, the review is legit.

Thank you A Canadian. I stand corrected and offer my apologies to Hiccup.

Man's Adventure May 1967 V8 #7 (Same art as All Man Aug 1964)

Pedro: Good God! That trailer for History of Pain: Inquisition was intense! I had high hopes for this movie but based on the trailer, this looks like it might have exceeded even my expectations.

I am shocked...seriously shocked that after you posted that trailer this morning that no one has commented about it yet. Geez guys, what are you waiting for? This movie appears to have nearly everything one could ask for in a medieval torture movie...brandings, the rack, strappado, whipping, water torture, even breast piercing. If that doesn't get you excited, I'm not sure what else to say. This looks like a must-have in my book.

Ralphus said: This movie appears to have nearly everything one could ask for in a medieval torture movie...brandings, the rack, strappado, whipping, water torture, even breast piercing. If that doesn't get you excited, I'm not sure what else to say. This looks like a must-have in my book.

I'm a serial ranter and a certified bitch so allow me to be an accuracy whore here. The rack in the aforementioned scene is a feeble contraption as bad as the one in Maleficarum (read cheap plywood and cloth ropes in lieu of a solid historically accurate hemp rope and oak 8x8s. The whole scenery screams low budget, sorry to say it. In their defence, I gotta say that the only rack scene in the BDSM scenery that looks even remotely close to the ones in London tower or across Europe's castles is the one I found on shadowplayers website (see attached pic). So I'm a choosy bitch here.

There are some good segments in the preview, like the branding, which is a solid reason I'd go buy it but overall it's an uneven effort. My 3 c.

JD

JD wrote:

The rack in the aforementioned scene is a feeble contraption as bad as the one in Maleficarum (read cheap plywood and cloth ropes in lieu of a solid historically accurate hemp rope and oak 8x8s. The whole scenery screams low budget, sorry to say it.

I'm not sure the picture I linked in my post is supposed to be a rack, at least not a rack in the traditional sense. You don't get a real good look in the trailer, but here's a few production stills that I acquired.




It appears to be more akin to the scene in Akelarre (more in the Torture Rack Database, including a clip) where the victim is centered on a small perch and her 4 limbs are pulled tight from both sides. I've never seen another movie attempt this position, so this will be something new.

The rack that JD posted in 3997 looks too elaborate and modern carpentry perfect to actually be used back then. The cost of that rack would have cost a King's ransom back then for sure so Pedro's rack would make more sense.

In any case I will buy DVD soon as it's available. Looks really erotic to me. Bill K.

RALPHUS wrote: "I am shocked...seriously shocked that after you posted that trailer this morning that no one has commented about it yet."


Ditto, man. These days it's pretty hard to wow me, but the torture effects in that trailer were AMAZING! Quite possibly the best I remember seeing in any genre or mainstream film. Seriously! The puncture, the burning, the whipping, and the branding all had an uncommon level of brutal realism. My hat's off to Pedro and crew for setting a new bar!

The rack that JD posted in 3997 looks too elaborate and modern carpentry perfect to actually be used back then. The cost of that rack would have cost a King's ransom back then for sure so Pedro's rack would make more sense.

Let's speculate less and stick to historical facts, available in a plethora of descriptive materials. I dig the cost argument for contemporary reenactors but AFAIK there were never 'racks' the kind Akelarre showed in documented history. One of the reasons being that the torture rooms were small spaces and the people servicing them were two in number at most (the headsman and an apprentice). Four torturers, required to operate the hypotethical contraptions would have had an union, even them. And union is bad for business, every king knows.

I'm usually on top of these things but I've had off-the-field distractions to deal with and haven't gotten to doing my usual movie review. Rest assured, dear readers, that a thorough in-depth review of "History of Pain 2: Inquisition" is coming. I've made my vidcaps so now I just need to do the text, get it to Ralphus for hosting, and I'm set. Until then, here's a thumbnail review.

This movie is a worthy installment in the "History of Pain" series. The first film, "History of Pain: Military Interrogation", was their best seller and I predict that this one will exceed the sales figures for the first film.

There are four victims, all of which were in "Milgram Experiment 2". There's popular innocent-eyed Nancy, who found the filming of this movie so physically demanding that she disappeared during the shooting. Then there's Giuletta, who normally is the dom in these films but bravely stood in for the whipping scene that makes for the grand finale. We also get my new favorite Mood girl Roxanne, who was sick during much of the filming but still managed to take the full brunt of her punishments. Finally, there's a new girl who was so difficult to work with that I won't even bother to name her because she'll never work for Pedro again.

Did I say there were four girls? I was wrong. There is also the lovely Dr. Sandra Aziz, who serves as the "medical expert" to explain the various tortures. I fell in love with her. You will too, watching her describe the instruments while flashing her Mona Lisa smile.

The first torture is stretching. This serves as the base position for many of the other tortures: hot iron to the leg, branding (three!), breast whipping, pussy whipping, water torture, bare back whipping until the victim passes out, then revival with water followed by an ass whipping, another branding, and there's even a clitoral piercing that's very well done.

The scenes that will stun you are Roxy's breast and pussy whippings and Giuletta's bareback and ass whippings. Both of these scenes are crazy-intense. Nancy's hot iron scene is also intense and serves as a great prelude for what is to come for the others.

The brandings, hot iron scenes, and breast-piercing are done using special effects (something new for a Mood film). The whippings are real and, like I said, crazy-intense. My jaw hit the floor.

This shit is hot. Spend the money. You won't be disappointed.

Full review and screenshots to follow.

Thomas

Now about this whole rack debate thing. I see where JD is coming from. His perception is of the classic medieval rack with a large frame and drums used in so many films and preserved in so many museums, much like the one from Naschy's "Inquisicion" above. That's great and I love that design and that scene, but there's something else to consider here, and that's the physical duress placed on the victim.

In the design used in "Akelarre" and "History of Pain 2", all of the victim's weight is centered on the torso while the limbs are placed under constant strain. This actually causes continuous duress on the body (particularly the spine and shoulders) and is more painful than the larger classic frame design. In HOP2, this design also allows more tortures to be done in a smaller space by allowing the victim to be stretched across the upper windlass and whipped. Any form of forced stretching causes pain on the victim and the design used in HOP2 is just one way of doing it. There was also the "drawn and quartered" technique if you really think about it, as well as various suspensions.

If you're disappointed that the rack used in HOP2 isn't the classic design you envisioned, rest assured that the design used in HOP2 makes sense given the techniques that the film will demonstrate. In my opinion, the design HOP2 uses makes the scenes that much hotter because the women are definitely being stretched and are "bouncing" with the blows. You can fake the classic rack fairly easily, which is why that design is used in films so often, but not the one used in HOP2. The actresses arms and legs are definitely being stretched.

Oh, one more thing. In the interest of full disclosure, my involvement was (a) prodding Pedro to do an Inquisition film for the next installment in the HOP series (I'm pushing him to do Roman next); (b) checking his English translation; and (c) criticizing his decision to use the rack design he did instead of the classic rack I wanted (see JD, I was on your side early in the design). I also got some of the early rushes, like Nancy's leg branding before the effects were added. I posted about it on this forum some time ago.

Here, have another vidcap. This is Giuleta passed out cold from her bareback whipping, about to suffer an ass whipping.

Man's Adventure Nov 1959

I take it History of Pain Part One was not to be released until part two was finished. Back in August maybe I missed it but I thought Part One was to be released first.
Pedro, are there two movies, Part One and Two or just the one combined part one and two? Bill K.

Is it me or did something change on the group? I had to scroll through 8 pages to get to the month of November?

BP wrote:

Is it me or did something change on the group? I had to scroll through 8 pages to get to the month of November?

Yeah, sorry about that. Once a month for about 5 minutes, Amy and I have to realign the site so I can update the past posts for the Guestbook Archives. Necessary maintenance, but we put things back as quickly as we can.

The rack in the aforementioned scene is a feeble contraption as bad as the one in Maleficarum (read cheap plywood and cloth ropes in lieu of a solid historically accurate hemp rope and oak 8x8s.

As the person who built the rack in Maleficarum, I can tell you that it's made from solid hardwood, with a heavy metal stretcher barrel, modeled after the rack in the Inquisition museum in Cartagena, as well as the one in Lima, Peru. We needed 4 people just to move it from one end of the set to the other.

Here's a pic of the original in the museum in Cartagena:



The ropes on our rack were not soft, or made of cloth, they were stiff, did not stretch, and cut into my wrists to the point that my hands were numb and I had bruises after the days of shooting those scenes.

Just sayin'.

Not all racks look(ed) like the one in the Tower of London.

But shouldn't the ropes come from the lower side of the cylinder insted from the upper? The way how it is made in Maleficarum the ropes arch the body and make it lift from the table, I don't think it was supposed to work that way and is less "erotic" in my opinion.

Amy, my luminous angel, FAR from me the idea of criticizing the ardour and investment of the acting crew in Maleficarum. It made me buy the whole line-up of movies from VermeerWorks, after all.

Now, the image you posted doesn't work in my browser so I can't say much but as a rule of thumbs, most racks in present day expos are replicas made more or less acurately after documents. The reason is simple, untreated wood doesn't last for many hundreds of years in damp enviroments as the dungeons tend to be. The one in the Tower of London has the dubious distinction to be one of the few originals, being meticulosly preserved (was varnished actually many a time by history obsessed Brits).

By googling 'Cartagena muuseum rack' I ended with the image from above, hope it's the same thing you mentioned. In my view it's most likely a replica of later date, one of the reasons being the aparent frailty of the frame (the sheer mechanical tension when used for real was something reaching close to a ton (it was a documentary made by National Geographic about this grisly topic) when the bone itself was starting to fracture. Because of limits in the technology available at the time, the only available engineering solution was thick wood frame, metal banding (very important, mostly for rollers) and structural reinforcements between the legs of the structure.

Simply put, the rack in the picture, when used to its full, would end up with broken wooden poles that hold the rollers. Or broken rollers. Or both. Hope it's within 30 days so it can be returned along with the original receipt.

Another inacurate replica I saw in Lima, very dissapointed (Cuzco was great, though). With the level of tension in the ropes and keeping in mind that the ropes of the day were not the modern machine twisted fibers but manually braided threads, hairy and rough, there's no way they could be used over a narrow edge like in the picture without a roller in between.



But again, don't mind me, I'm a chronical complainer. Love your work, can't wait to see the new one!

JD

PS If I knew you'd read my post I wouldn't have said it. Damn.

PPS Another huge complaint I have for the genre is the undersized racks. So often, you see people put to the question with their hands almost touching the roller. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. Real racks were at least 3 meters long (read 10') to account for the stretching of the victim (sometimes historians describe some 20 cm=8") plus the need to be able to rack people of higher stature if need be. I chuckle at the idea of a rack that comes with warning label on the side ("FOR 5'1" OR LESS ONLY!")

JD - No worries, all is forgiven. But I can't speak for Margot, she may decide to voice her opinion.

That first picture is the rack in Cartagena. It may be a replica, or not. I know that here in this altitude wood is preserved very well, for hundreds of years, if treated properly for termites. I saw a spiked chair leftover from the Inquisition here that looked pretty usable. Although, they would not let me borrow it, alas.

So glad you're looking forward to Olalla! I'll have news very soon about it.

The rack used in Maleficarum was also used in Le Marquis de La Croix.

When Jac stretched Mila, she felt the initial pain of being racked. Jac had to control himself a bit. If he had pressed on, who knows what would've happened to the poor unfortunate girl.

The fact is, that the rack worked well, maybe it was never used to its full potential, but it worked. So, the wood, the built, etc, was good enough to be a real rack worthy of the inquisition in Lima, Cartagena and even La Paz.

My two centavos.

Bill K. wrote: I take it History of Pain Part One was not to be released until part two was finished.


There seems to be some confusion here.
This Inquisition themed film was never meant to be released in two parts. (It was shot in two parts though)

History of Pain - Spy Interrogation (sometimes referred as Military Interrogation) used to be also referred as HOP1 (History of Pain 1). This first part was released at the beginning of this year, and has contemporary settings.




The current part is titled History of Pain - Inquisition, sometimes referred as HOP2 (History of Pain 2)




Hope this clears up this thing, Bill.

Cloth rope ;)

Rack talk always makes me happy: keep it up!

Does History of torture, part 2, The Inquisition, come in DVD or only as a download? Website doesn't make that clear.

mstrmagician: Does History of torture, part 2, The Inquisition, come in DVD or only as a download?

We will make it soon available on DVD also. But please don't forget that DVD is SD quaility while our downloads are HD (720p) quality.

Wow,

These Elite videos are TRULY amazing. well done Ralphus for attracting our attention to them!

Lee

RALPHUS: Thanks for the comments on the previous image. Our gal Alexa sure heals quickly!!!


And with that, here's my more recent one... and maybe my last for a week or so since I have some demanding commercial work suckin' up my time.

WOW, I see a LOT of amazing new stuff on the site.

I only mention two of them, but the quality and quantity of the posts is exceptional: the sequence from "24", the new Elitepain movie trailer (looks like it's one of the best ever shot on the topic of torture/inquisition.)

Thanks Ralphus and Fritz for the comments: much appreciated.

And now my humble contribution, entitled "When you mess with the Yakuza"

Nancy from Elitepain is the hottest BDSM model ever.

Pedro wrote:

"We have at least one unreleased movie with Nancy in case she never comes back. It may sound a little rigid but her comeback may happen only in a movie produced by Max, because I never cast in again someone who lets a production down."

When you plan to publish it?

I hope she makes much more movies like Life in the Elite Club part 15. The best one ever!!!

There is still one open question: Who is the number one in the elite club Nancy or Anette? In my opinion Nancy had won the first fight. But I'm biased. It's time for a 2nd fight Nancy vs Anette. Is it planned?

Thomas Chaser wrote:
"To be honest, I think Roxanne is a better actress and better performer for you."

I have to disagree with you. Nancy is much hotter and their performance is better. She has a talent for acting. You can see it in their films. She cried when she should it. And she it is strong (in the fight, without one tear), if the script demands it.

Sorry for this late answer of older posts. I have found this forum today.

PS: I have Nancy forgiven for her tattoo mistake. She is young and makes mistakes.

@Petro

There are movies with Candy (EP-Casting from 19.06.2014)?

There are more movies with Darvulia (EP-Casting from 03.07.2014)?

I would also like to watching new movies with Holly.

It's also pity that Nika (EP-Casting from 18.10.2012) and Vanessa EP-Casting from 19.07.2012) have never make a movie

Man's Adventure Nov 1961

@Ralphus That was unexpected, but thank you!

Arcas, Ralphus and Lee - Thanks for the nice comments!

NancyFan- I can absolutely understand your admiration of Nancy. She is cute, and has a unique character.

Short answers to your questions:

- That particular video of Nancy which is already released since then: Wheel of Pain 5

-As I told, I don't have any more plans with her, which doesn't necessary means that Max Lomp doesn't have either.

-Not sure whether the rest of the board is interested in these talents you query about. I answer it quickly, and if you still have questions, please feel free to contact us via our support email, and we will answer your other questions.

CANDY: NO
DARVIULA: There's a chance.
HOLLY: NO

Damn, that trailer for "History of Pain 2" does make it look like a pretty awesome film. Did a solid job with the trailer, that's for sure. I look foward to reading reviews for it.

Pedro said "But please don't forget that DVD is SD quality while our downloads are HD (720p) quality."
Why is the DVD not in HD (720p) Pedro?

It will not change my mind for I'll buy the DVD when it's available. Just curious for if the download is HD why wouldn't the DVD be HD too?

Also, when I bought the Maleficarum download it provided a convertor program so I could download to disk as a DVD to play on my TV or on my computer. I didn't have to save the movie in my hard drive.

Again just curious why and it will not make any difference in my buying your DVD movie.
Thank You, Bill K.

Bill K. asked: Just curious for if the download is HD why wouldn't the DVD be HD too?

Because Dvd CANNOT be HD. The Dvd Video specification was created in 1997 when HD was not existing yet. That's why BluRay way created a few years ago.

Remember:

Dvd : SD
BluRay: HD

So easy.

But I have a solution for you if you want to watch our and others' HD videos on your big screen:

You need these:
- HD television (maybe you already have it
- An HD media player (examples: Roku, WD TV HD, Boxee, etc. typically
- HDMI cable - IMPORTANT!! This cable is capable of transmitting HD signal.

If you connect these three, you only need to copy the HD download file to a USB memory stick, and play it on the media player.

Hope this helps.

Thank you for your quick answer.

Your opinion to Nancy sounds not good But I can understand you. But she earns a 2nd chance. She had make 8 movies and everybody have sometimes a bad day. Especially women.

I hope Max has another opinion and make more movies with her. For example a 2nd hard 1 hour punishment for not coming to the film location for HoP 2.

I have bought Wheel of Pain 5 immediately, without watching the trailer (the same like Life in Eliteclub part 15). Both ones are very good. I think she has much more fans, which like see her in more movies.

Your answer to Candy and Holly is pity.

I waiting of new updates with Darviula. (What for a difficult to remember name)

PS: There are new EP-castings in the next time?

@Bill K

I play the the HD movies on my computer and watching it on my HD TV. The HD TV is thhrough 2nd screen from my computer over HMDI. It works fine and I don't need and have a DVD player.

Thanks for getting back to me about the dvd availability. $50 is is alot for this type of thing...but if good, well worth it..Has anybody seen it yet who can give a critique....unfortunately some sm videos look good in packaging, but when seen, are amatuerishly made, brutal and bloody in stead of slow pain building to her screaming for mercy during the interrogation....I respect most opinions on here and would love a critique in depth.

Amy on the cover of the Sunday supplement of a newspaper. That is today, November 9th. The heading says Horror, according to Jac Avila. . A very long interview inside.
More to come later.

My new render "Humans and Beasts"

Today's MAM cover fits the current discussion nicely. From Man's Adventure Nov 1962.

@Pedro

And what about publish Bluray or files in 1080p?
Is it too expensive or too heavy maybe?

By the way, instead of the crying little Nancy, I found more attractive other actress like:

-Anette. I love her muscular body, she will come back? We need her. :)

-Roxanne. Not a slim body, but her reactions to the pain and her lovely face and eyes are wonderful, is she a real masochist? I think I understand it in Milgram Experiment 2.

-Mia Welford. I miss her since "Four Vicious Bitches", a wonderful torso.

Thank you.

@Ralphus

Hi Ralphus, there will be the Snidely Whiplash section soon or later?

Darkedo asked - And what about publish Bluray or files in 1080p?
Is it too expensive or too heavy maybe?

Bluray - If there were a real demand for it, we could sell Bluray - Is there anybody here who would purchase Bluray rather than download?

1080p - We could do that too. I personally don't see any visual difference between 720p and 1080p. But we could provide 1080p without problem. The master material is in 1080p. We provided 1080p download in the past. (Fear at Mood Pictures for example)

By the way, instead of the crying little Nancy, I found more attractive other actress like:

Anette - She appeared in a lot of movies. She may return in the future.

Roxanne - Yes. I like her too. She is not just cute, but one of the nicest models I have met. (Contrary to Nancy who is quite the opposite.) Roxanne is not very good at acting, but she does her best always without any argument or being a drama queen.

Mia Welford - Oh... Four Vicious Bitches was shot 5 years ago. That's a lot in the life of these models. She has a baby since then. Generally most girls quit shooting this genre after a year or so. Usually they find a boy who doesn't want them to do this. Sometimes they return after breaking up ... but rarely.

@Pedro

Thank you for answering so good.

Differences between 720 and 1080 are big, it depends where you are watching the file, there are not differences if you are watching it on a small monitor, but try to watch it on a 60" HD TV and you will notice it for sure.
When I find 1080p files I often carry them on the TV in my living room instead watching them on my PC, it's just better and it's the real HD, in some year people will be ready for the 4K and HD will be like SD is now.
And yes I would buy Bluray, but I understand the download is more useful and versatile.

Ahaha you absolutely right, I understand some year it's a lot for this kind of models, the life always change, so goodbye to Mia.
But please, say hallo by me to Roxanne and Anette, if you like, when you will meet them, I'm a big fan of them ;)

As always, thank you to Ralphus for hosting my pics and fixing my HTML coding. I know a number of readers have been waiting on my review of the most recent "History of Pain: Inquisition" film, so, without further delay, here it is!

History of Pain 2: The Inquisition By ElitePain

Review by: Thomas Chaser

In the first installment of ElitePain's “History of Pain” documentary-style film series, we were introduced to the techniques of military interrogation, which included sleep deprivation, waterboarding, electric shock, bareback whipping, and psychological trauma. That initial chapter proved to be ElitePain's best seller for the year, motivating them to do a follow-on sequel, this time focusing on the Inquisition. Much like that first film, we are told of the various torture techniques by two sources: the omniscient narrator and a medical expert, Dr. Sandra Aziz. The narrator guides us along the history of the Inquisition while Dr. Aziz provides us with the gory details.

We start out, much like the victims of the Inquisition, with the introduction to the principle instrument of medieval pain, the rack.



As Dr. Aziz explains, the rack was designed to stretch the victim’s body until the joints popped loose from the sockets, rupturing tendons. Such a technique was slow, excruciatingly painful, and could be controlled by the Inquisitor. If a person was reluctant to confess, the rack made a nice platform for the introduction of additional tortures, such as burning with a hot iron and piercing the body with needles and spikes, often in the victim’s most sensitive areas.



When it comes to demonstrating the tortures, “History of Pain” doesn't hold back. We see it all, often very intensely. In fact, “intense” is a word I would use to describe this entire film. Burning a hand with hot coals, burning a leg with a hot iron, branding a witches’ left tit… we see it all. For a picture on a budget, the special effects are very well done.



One of the more intense scenes is the breast and pussy whipping of Roxanne. This comes about mid-way through the film and lasts a good ten or so minutes as she’s stretched across the rack and whipped first across her tits and then across her hips. With each blow, she bounces and cries and tugs at the ropes holding her fast to the windlass of the rack. Each strike is clearly seen as the whip carries away the grime of her captivity and soon replaces it with an angry red welt. This shot is early in her whipping. It gets worse.



After she’s been broken, her spirit crushed, she confesses her sins and is stretched across the axle of the rack’s windlass for her final punishment. She’s forced to watch as the branding iron is heated red-hot, in preparation for marking her soft skin.



Next up is Giuletta, whom you may remember as the executioner in “The Milgram Experiment 2”. Here she takes a turn as a submissive victim of the Inquisition. She’s stretched facing the windlass, exposing her back for a whipping. She cries and pulls at the ropes holding her fast as the whip lashes her skin, until her body can't handle the agony anymore and she succumbs to the soft darkness of unconsciousness.



But it is only a brief respite from her pain. Her limp body is stretched higher across the windlass, raising her hips and presenting her ass to the Inquisitor. A bucket of water revives her and she receives a thorough ass whipping. This shot is early in her abuse, and you can tell by the welts that her whipping is very much real. This is the grand finale of the film, and certainly does a good job of closing out the action of the movie.

But there’s more.

As a treat for GIMP fans, there are two interviews at the end of the film, taken right after the actresses were released from the rack. The first is Giuletta, who is almost crying hysterically from her mistreatment. The second interview is with Roxanne, who has handled her scenes like a real professional. Listening to her answers to the fans’ questions almost makes you feel sorry for the cruelties exacted upon her body. Almost. When she makes the mistake of telling us what hurts the most, the interviewer says that he'll be sure to include that in the next film. The look on her face is priceless. I won't show it here because I believe you should get a surprise in a film to make it worth your money, and this can be it.



So did I like the film? Heck ya! In terms of what we know about medieval tortures, this hits the spot. Sure, there were more instruments available to the well-heeled Inquisitor – the Iron Maiden, the brank, chastity belts, the Pear to name a few – but that would escalate costs to the point that a film like this probably wouldn't be made without outside financing, which would require big-name stars, which would guarantee that most of what is in this film wouldn't survive the MPAA censors. With that in mind, don't worry about what’s not in here, just enjoy what is, and what this film does well is capture the ambiance of dread and doom nicely and give us what we want in the way of stretching, burning, piercing, and whipping. Oh yes, lots of whipping.

It also gives us Dr. Aziz, who manages to describe painful tortures while flashing her Mona Lisa smile. What is she thinking behind that facade? Does she wish to have it done to her? Does she wish to do it to someone else? Watch the movie and decide for yourself.

My grade: A+

Thank you Pedro. I must confess I thought all DVDs were HD because all new TVs are HD and have been for 6 or 7 years now.
My bad but I will still wait to buy the DVD for when the blue ray players came out I watched and compared DVD to blue ray next to each other on same type TV at the Best Buy store to see the difference.

Love your great review post, Thomas Chaser.
You mention the Iron Maiden has a medieval dungeon device for it was my understanding they were a very slow painful death executioner device and not meant for torture for the victim when in they never came out alive.
So not sure they were ever used in witch dungeon confession torture methods or if they were used on witches at all. Bill K.

A long time ago we had a discussion here about handcuffing - front or back. And a point that was made (and argued about) was that a physically fit woman (otherwise unrestrained and given a little time) can slip her handcuffed wrists from the back to the front.

So, remembering that discussion, here is a link you might enjoy reading:
[www.nbcsandiego.com]

I realized I hadn't included too many pics of the other girls, besides Roxy and one of Giuleta, so here's a picture of Giuleta chained in the cell and forced to watch Roxy endure her whipping.

Man's Adventure Nov 1964

Does anyone know the name of the movie with the serial killer who drowned women in bathtubs by holding them down by their feet?

@Lynn: That's entirely true; the secret's in the chain, because it gives you too much to work with, as opposed to a tight wrist-on-wrist rope binding.

re: handcuffs behind back. There is a scene in the movie FX where the hero Bryan Brown has handcuffed an assailant with his hands behind his back and the latter jumps backward through his bound arms to bring them to the front. Very cool move in a good non-GIMP movie.

Handcuffs: As far as I know it depends on body scales. Steve Holmes porn star showed me once that he is able to put his back cuffed hands forward simply pulling his arms forward below his feet. I can't do it, and most people can't do it. Relatively long arms are needed for this trick I think.

Ralphus: Your text below the upper photos are so funny! I like them!

Thomas Chaser: Thanks for the review!

Thomas Chaser: Great job on the review of History of Pain 2: The Inquisition. After the discussion earlier this year about the A+ grades, it's interesting to see another film get top marks.

I loved the caps (I would have enjoyed seeing more of 'em, in fact). It looks like I may have to check out my first-ever Elite Pain film.

Thanks for putting the review together.

The 31st arrived and the limited release of Olalla began that day, but only for the DVDs, which now you can order at VermeerWorks and at our Red Feline store. It will take a few days to upload all the materials and versions to our online store for the downloads. But, we're getting there!

A series of small set backs delayed our plans for the full release of this magnificent film. It was last week in October, when a well known and ancient cinema in La Paz was running 6 of Pachamama Films movies, that Jac learned that there was a delay in the sound mix. In the meantime Amy was having her own issues with the color correction of the movie. She was working late, working hard, working under pressure and finally she got sick. It happens. But those were not the only problems. While Jac sat to watch our films at the theater, he noticed that the projection was kind of dark. He was told that the projector needed to be replaced. All those issues together were a clear sign that the anticipated premiere and the theatrical release of the film were not forthcoming on the announced date.

So, it will take, still, a few days before Olalla is ready for downloads. The theatrical release in Bolivia, however, has been pushed a bit farther. The theaters involved, five of them so far, suggested to have the theatrical premiere in the middle of January. So, that's where Olalla is now. The interview that was published this past Sunday in a national newspaper, hints about the January release.

The discussions on this very esteemed forum, turned a bit to our work in general and to different aspects of it, which I find interesting, challenging, and in need of a response... it may be lengthy and graphic, very graphic.


Ralphus A Canadian wrote (regarding my Maleficarum review not being included on the Pachamama Films website): Perhaps, although there may be other explanations...

Not everything we have is in our Pachamama Films website. It was revamped at one point, when we changed servers, and there hasn't been enough time to put everything in there. So, a great review of Maleficarum by none other than Ralphus, is not there, but neither is a fantastic review of Krik Krak published in the most important film magazine in the world, Cahiers du Cinema, and neither is the letter Graham Green wrote to Jac praising his film. So, one day soon, we'll put the time and effort into putting everything we have as far as reviews, interviews, articles, like one excellent one in Aperture magazine, up in our sites and blogs.

We're constantly updating our site with the most recent reviews, news and awards because we're promoting the new films more than the older ones. Maleficarum can use some promotion but it is, still, our best seller and it appears that people learn about it without us putting a lot of effort into promoting it.

Ralphus I don't want to belabor the whole issue about my review being left off their site. I just thought it was interesting that it was not included, but I was not surprised at all. Number one, even though it was a mostly a very positive review, I came down on them pretty hard on a few issues. While I'm sure they appreciate reading honest criticism, they sure as heck don't want to promote it on their own website.

We actually quote not very positive and even negative reviews, like the one about Amy that she "inhabits the ninth circle of hell", concerning her film Sirwiñakuy. Of course we love good reviews, but sometimes bad reviews help the cause as well because they do make people think about our work. Our website is not visited as frequently as this one is, in fact, we depend on what other sites and blogs say about us more than on the visits we get in our site. We do translate and link the reviews for our Bolivian audience because most of those reviews are in English or in French, so we have to have an Spanish translation for the people here in Bolivia, along with the original version and the links to where they can be found. The site we need to promote the most is VermeerWorks, that's where we sell our productions, and of course we also promote Red Feline.

Ralphus Secondly, the review was written from the perspective of a GIMPer (in other words, a filthy pervert) and they would prefer to present their films as arthouse fair, those watched by sophisticated audiences and reviewed by established critics and celebrated authors.

One visit to the very mainstream page IMDB and you'll find reviews of all of our films, from audiences, critics, and even Ralphus. There are reviews there that we should put in our website, but... no time, yet. The fact remains, that in order to keep on doing what we do, we need to appeal to our fan base. I cannot deny that it's very nice to have a film in an art house. It may happen once in a great while, that a film of ours is presented at an art house and it's a good thing to have a chat with the audience of course. Jac and Amy love the interaction, it is a direct connection to an audience, but that doesn't pay the bills it only helps our egos and maybe to promote our work. Selling downloads and DVDs does pay the bills and the buyers are the people who like our films enough to pay for them.

Ralphus The fact that the principle players behind Pachamama Films got their start making bondage films is completely absent on their bio page, and that's perfectly fine.

Our bio pages are incomplete, I think Jac's ends with his work with National Geographic 9 years ago. No mention of most of the films he did after that. Again, the issue of time. However, when he's asked about how many films he has made so far, he does count all his Red Feline work as well. (He has worked in almost 40 productions, so far). We're very much into promoting the present and eventually we'll update our sites with all the information from the past, including our Red Feline work, which is very well known in a place like this forum which is normal. There are art sites in Poland and elsewhere that know Jac more for his experimental work than anything else, ah, and his connection to Vermeer, the painter.

Ralphus They likely want to distance themselves from the fact that their films, especially Maleficarum, have aspects that appeal to both mainstream audiences and guys like us who watch movies to get our dicks hard lol

Amy frequently quotes something one of her art professors told her once. "if it's not sexy, it's not art." While in this forum people are very much clear about what turns them on, or what they like in our films, like Maleficarum, most people see our films with a wider criteria. So, when we show to a large, mixed audience, a film like Maleficarum, there's a lot more to discuss than just the BATS scene or how much screen time the tortures take. But the people who are attracted to our films, are people that are attracted to the subject in our films and that's just the way it is.

Daniel Just wanted to comment Jac and Amy's films. Starting with RF on the Cross and continuing thru the Via Crucis series and including Perils of Jane, these were great silent films Being led into 'talkies' and away from what they did best may not pan out for them! I hope they reach their goals!!!

It's an interesting comparison, the before and after, the silent films era and the talkies. Well, for us it's not like that. Long before the Red Feline period, there were two periods for Jac, his lefty, radical, period that culminated with his acclaimed film Krik? Krak! Tales of a Nightmare. This period started in the late 70s, when he was finishing university and was working on documentaries covering the conflicts in Central America.

Sneaking a crucifixion in a docudrama.

Jac sharing space with Almodovar and Les Blank in the 80's

Then came the time when he was trying to raise funds for some projects. Only one came through, the miniseries El Hombre de la Luna (The Man of the Moon), as well as at least three environmental documentaries.

All the while there was the Dream project. The Passion of Maricelli, the script is there, waiting and it's been waiting for a very long time to be made. The actresses who were going to play Maricelli outgrew the project. There was me and then there was Carmen aka Camille.

The dream turned into a project which included a series of rehearsals, training sessions, very much like what a painter does before his masterpiece. A painter sketches, studies the form of the subject, and so on. That's what Jac did with me and Carmen. Sketches for a movie, one movie, The Passion of Maricelli, but the money wasn't there, the technology was out of his reach and so on, so, what was left was the dream and the hard work that turned all that labor of love into a mini industry.

Out of those sketches came the idea for Red Feline on the Cross. But before that groundbreaking movie was released, El hombre de la luna was on television, including a cable station in New York. By the time Red Feline on the Cross was out, Jac had worked on many projects in Haiti, Cuba, France and Hungary. So, his beginnings were not bondage films. That was an afterthought.

Jac on the cover of a TV guide.

Daniel Chapter 2 I did forget to mention CAMILLE! Also, I know that RF on the Cross was not Amy, I was just trying to make the point that from the beginning they had 'meaty' films with no 'fluff'! Today I would say that the films are more 'fluff' and less 'meaty'! The thoughts I put down here are generated in my own little head and are not put here for arguments sake! Thank you!

The meaty projects, like Red Feline on the Cross and later, have an audience, but sadly, limited. It goes like this. If you have a few hundred people willing to pay for a film, then you can't spend too much in making it, right? If your audience can be counted in the thousands or more, then it's a different story. In two years Maleficarum did better than Red Feline on the Cross in 15 years. That tells us something, doesn't it? People that want "meaty" stuff in their films, prefer the fluffy in them too. That's our experience.

Take Jac, for instance, he would go and watch a film for the meaty stuff, but enjoy the fluffily as well. One case in point is the Angelique film series in the 60s, the equivalent of which in our days could be Xena. Long stories with some good meaty stuff (GIMP) in them. Am I right?

Jac was a teenager when he saw this poster, he had to see this movie, he had to go to great lengths to get the ticket money.

So, we now wait to see how Olalla will do, meanwhile, we prepare for the next few productions, not just one, many... many productions already growing in Jac's and Amy's brains. I will be talking about the new works as they begin their pre-production, but I will be promoting Olalla first.

The press is paying attention to our work with bigger publications, this time around, and early TV coverage like the most recent interview with Jac and Amy about horror films in general and Olalla in particular:

But that's not all. I recently came across a new GREAT review of Barbazul, it was published in IMDB. It says and I quote: Art Horror: The film crew at Pachamama Films have made a series of historically based horror films, each being unapologetic about graphically killing naked women. Yet they aim to keep rooted in history or classic literary works, and they take their craft seriously. Somehow they present loads of erotic horror in a beautiful way; that is a stunning balancing act. I look forward to their film currently in production called "Olalla," which is based off of Robert Louis Stevenson's story (Treasure Island, and Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.) That tale originally featured an English soldier recovering from battle wounds when he falls in love with a woman who belongs to a mysterious vampiric family. Can't wait to see the Pachamama adaptation.

And so, that's that for now folks! Visit our sites and get one, two or all of our films.

Thanks Miss Margot for sharing and good luck with your work.

I found this website called frogwomen. It features scuba diving women from different media. It has underwater fights, women in peril, and art from a comic.

You can find it at [frogwomen.wordpress.com]

Today's MAM cover is from Man's Adventure Nov 1965

Margot - I ordered Olalla on the 31st. Can you advise when the DVD's will be shipped?

This might be worth keeping an eye on:
[theparrotsperch.com]

It is a novel about a torture of a female prisoner in Brazil, and it seem to be a movie in the works. I hope the parrot's perch scene is gimp worthy

DarknessMonger said: it seem to be a movie in the works. I hope the parrot's perch scene is gimp worthy

Thomas Chaser: Congratulations, great review on History of Pain: Inquisition. I've now seen the movie and I agree, it's a fine piece of work. I would not have gone nearly as high as an A+ like you did, however. The reason...and it's unfortunately what I was afraid of when this whole Nancy business happened...is casting. To recap what happened, Nancy, the angelically cute star of the first History of Pain movie, bailed on the producers halfway through filming, screwing everyone involved in the production. With no actress to film the climactic final whipping scene (100 strokes!), they had to call on Giuletta, who only played dominant roles and had never been cast as a victim before. The reason is...well, she's really not that attractive, sorry to say. She excels playing the stern dom who dishes out the punishment, but she wasn't exactly the ideal replacement for Nancy, looks-wise.

Now, this is not to say she didn't do a great job in HOP-2, because she really did. She suffered as well as anyone else in the movie, not only in the whipping, but she also sold the branding illusion better than the other girls. But her scenes are really the most important ones in the movie...they close out the film and take up the most screen time by far, and the actress simply isn't pretty. I know it's not fair to blame someone for being genetically challenged, and the producers of the film were left in an impossibly difficult position, but one's enjoyment of a bondage film is mostly based on whether the actresses up there on screen make his dick hard. She doesn't do it for me. All throughout her scenes, I was thinking how much better this would be if it were Nancy up there receiving the treatment instead of her.

I don't want to come across as a Debbie Downer, though. This movie works really well in a number of scenes, the best of which was Nancy's leg branding. I love how they chose the leg with the nasty tattoo as their target, first covering it up with makeup and then decorating it the RIGHT WAY, as if to punish her for getting the tat in the first place. I also thought Roxanne was very appealing, quite attractive and suffered quite well in her spread-eagle whipping scene. And the behind the scenes interviews where as dramatic as anything else in the film, particularly Giuletta's hysterical crying and saying how angry she was at Nancy after she was forced to take the 100 lashes instead of her, and that if she saw her again, she would whip her. I'll tell you, if Nancy ever comes back, she's gonna be in big trouble. I'll bet there's a lot of people who would gladly dish out as much abuse as possible toward her after what she did to this production.

Bottom line, this is a flawed movie that could have been a great one, but there's enough good stuff here that it's worth a purchase. Most of the women are very attractive and the special effects are as impressive as any I've seen in a movie like this. I'd give it a B.

The direct link for your review is here: http://ralphus.net/reviews/other/historyofpain2.htm

----------------------------

Arcas, MadBob and Covers: We've been seeing a wealth of excellent artwork lately, really great stuff, guys. Thank you so much for your contributions.

----------------------------

Margot: Love that one-sheet poster for Angelique and the Sultan. Never seen that one before. Another example of using GIMP imagery to sell the movie, and I notice she has on considerably less clothing in the poster than in the actual scene. Nonetheless, I consider the whipping scene to be one of the best of all time.

re: 4056 - Angelique and the Sultan

They used the same thing on the poster as they do for the 'Men's Adventure Magazine Covers 'MAMC'. Can't place the language but it's amazing how they always scream in English.

I have a vision...

One day, maybe within years... Ralphus gives me an 'A' grade. And that will be the day when I feel there's no more room for improvement...

That day I will stop making films....

I was considering buying the Mood Pictures film instead of waiting for the release of Olalla, since one is here now for download and the other isn't...except I can't justify several things myself.

One is as stated before...the casting issue. Guess it's already been discussed to the ground though. But the one scene that looks the most interesting...the whipping across the back...is filled by an actress that makes me unable to justify the steep price tag of the film, sorry to say.

But all that aside...I'm really impressed by the production value present in the trailer I saw. Though some of it was a bit rough for my tastes it looks like Mood Pictures has undergone some serious improvements since I last visited the site years ago...and are definitely worth consideration now and in the future.

Pedro wrote:

One day, maybe within years... Ralphus gives me an 'A' grade. And that will be the day when I feel there's no more room for improvement...

Ha! Am I really such a hard grader? I haven't seen all of your movies, but of the ones I did see...Inmates, The Milgram Experiment 2, History of Pain 1 and this new one, I liked and would give a positive grade to them, at least a B each time. Unlike someone who tosses out A-pluses so often that you expect them on every new release, eventually you may come to realize that the power of the highest grade is diminished when you seem to be getting them all the time. I've said it before, I'm not an easy grader but I am fair. I don't kiss anyone's butt and if I don't like a movie, I'll say so and I'll say why. On the other hand, I won't give out an A+ just because a certain scene gave me a boner. If you get an A grade from me, trust me, you'll have earned it.

That being said, if the movie you released had been completed with the girls you originally cast, you were well on your way to an A grade. Your intentions were good, your aspirations were high. You had designed the film's centerpiece to feature a massive whipping scene with its cutest girl, and if you had managed to capture that on film, this film could have been a masterpiece. So what can I say? Blame Nancy.

And looking back on it, I can totally see why she bailed on you. This is not to excuse her actions, but if I were in her place, I would have misgivings, too. She knew that morning what you had planned for her. 100 whip strokes, Jesus Christ. I saw what they did to Giuletta, they tore her up. The poor woman was wailing and crying uncontrollably afterward. So if I'm Nancy, and I know I'm going to be tortured, and tortured badly, on the set, I might just say, "Fuck it, I'm outta here!" There's gotta be an easier way to make money. BTW, I hope you pay these girls big time bucks for what you put them through.

Anyway, my question to you is...why Giuletta? Between ElitePain and Mood Pictures, you've had lots of cute girls working for you (and lots of tatted chicks, too, but we won't go into that). But was she the only one you had available? She did a great job, but she was not a proper substitute, looks-wise, for Nancy. You compromised the quality of your film by allowing Giuletta to replace her. Ultimately, you ended up making a good movie, but the film wasn't as good as it should have been after that unfortunate decision.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot and make you defend your work. You're the producer and you have the tough job. I'm only a grunt who watches your movies and I'm not there behind the scenes trying to create art like you do. But what other options did you have? Could you have put things on hold and waited to find a more suitable replacement, or was it a situation where we're on a budget, we have to get something in the can NOW?

Me, I would have waited, but that's just me as a fan talking. The most important thing in my mind would be putting the best girls and the best footage up there on the screen, but like I say, I'm not the one making the thing.

Ralphus siad: I saw what they did to Giuletta, they tore her up. The poor woman was wailing and crying uncontrollably afterward. So if I'm Nancy, and I know I'm going to be tortured, and tortured badly, on the set, I might just say, "Fuck it, I'm outta here!" There's gotta be an easier way to make money.

I admit I am a little sad when I read things like what you wrote. You seem to be cleverer like that.

Like if the only solution for Nancy was not coming to save herself. Because Giulietta received 100 strokes which 'tore her up'.
Roxanna actually received 120 strokes, did it tore her up too? I don't think so. What happens on a shooting is what we negotiate with the models. And EVEN THAT can be changed during the scene!
Nancy agreed to this 100 strokes, and she was planning a break from shooting with us after this last film. And this is a backstage clue: The severity of the strokes depend on what the certain model can take. Just compare Roxanne's welts with Giulietta's.

And the answer to your question. We didn't have any more alternatives at that time. We did cast in all available models, PLUS one who didn't do nudity because we didn't have anyone else.

So that's the reason. We have new models time to time, now we have a new hope and we'll see how she succeeds. Max is making a spin off of this Inquisition movie tomorrow in the same set with the new model. We'll see.
A talent like Nancy - 1 in every year or two... Unfortunately that's the case.

Still wondering with what did I provoke those explanations about your grading, which - sorry to say - seems to be a little rude for me. Maybe it's the language barrier again, but in my last post I tried to depict you as a reference of perfection. And if perfection reached there no more room for improvement.

Pedro: Apologies if you felt I was rude in my last post. I really wasn't trying to be at all; rather I was just trying to give a frank answer as to why I graded the way I did. Basically I would only give it a "B" because I felt Giulietta wasn't attractive. You or anyone else could load up any given movie with the harshest content you can muster, but if I don't like the girls, I probably won't like the movie. That's as simple as it gets. It's why casting is so very important. If you start with the right talent, you're more than halfway there. From then on, it's just a matter of what you do with them.

In the case of History of Pain: Inquisition, I liked 3 of the 4 girls you cast. And I liked the footage you shot with them. But for the all-important big finish, which took up nearly a third of the film, I was let down because of who was playing the role. I don't know, apparently how a person looks doesn't bother Thomas Chaser, who praised the film to the heavens. But it bothers me.

As far as using the phrase "tore her up", that's just an expression, but Giulietta seemed to be very much in pain, and she couldn't stop sobbing even after the whipping when she was being interviewed. This may not seem like much to the jaded who see these movies all the time, but here's a look at her backside after her session in the movie:



Is that "tearing her up"? Those welts are real and it was her first time experiencing getting whipped. She apparently found out it's not as much fun being on the receiving end.

At any rate, I do apologize. I tend to be fairly open with my opinions and might come across as a bit rude at times. It's not on purpose.

Ralphus wrote:

It's why casting is so very important. If you start with the right talent, you're more than halfway there.

I am in complete agreement.

I can just repeat: I didn't question your grading 'policy' - contrary, I set reaching an 'A' to be my final goal. No need to explain again and again. I totally accept your grading. Other statements of yours were problematic for me.

Man's Adventure Oct 1967 Inside details

Wow, didn't think I'd stir up a shit-storm with an A+, but I did, so here goes my justification for it.

First, had Pedro been able to perfect his vision, he was well on his way to what I consider the ultimate Inquisition film - better than Naschy's "Inquisicion", better than "Pit and the Pendulum" with Rona de Ricci, better than "The Name of the Rose" with Sean Connery; all of which have good nude scenes but certainly aren't pornographic - because of the storytelling behind it. Then, the unfortunate happened thrice over: (a) one actress declined to do nudity, (b) the one good star was ill for most of the production, and (c) a fan-favorite backed out at the last minute. Problem (a) resolved itself with the actress never working for Pedro ever again. Problem (b) was a just a matter of time to recover, which she didn't have, but she trooped through production anyway. Problem (c) was fixed with the understudy (of sorts). So, basic question, is Giuletta as attractive as Nancy as a victim? Nancy does project a youthful innocence which was used so well in HOP1, but by the time HOP2 rolled around, I'd seen enough of Nancy and her tats to be over her. Giuletta may be older, but in the positions she was tied, the form was flattering for her body. I've accepted that I'm well into my middle years, so older models don't bother me. Even some 21-year-olds look like children to me (Ariana Grande is a good example) and that disturbs me far more than a woman in her 40's.

Second, I've also accepted that filmmakers deal with limitations in budget and time, both of which drive what's put on film. When you look at what Mood Pictures has done in the past year and compare it to what they've done in HOP2, you can see the linear progression, particularly with HOP1, FEAR, and HOP2. Is their studio up to Hollywood standards? No. It is very small. But - they do well with what they have and the end product hits the targets they were aiming for.

But what about the merits of the film itself? How does it compare to other films, like what ZFX, Teraz, and Pachmana Films releases? ZFX and Teraz fall by the wayside in terms of technological skill (though I do praise Teraz's creativity). Pachmana hasn't released a new film for download in over a year while Mood has come out with four (HOP1, Fear, Milgram2, and this one). Is Pedro's studio on the scale of a major Hollywood studio? No, and it probably never will as long as it focuses on films oriented towards our crowd, and by our crowd I mean those that look for specific plots and themes and scenes that rock our world. Disney will never make a full-nude Inquisition film. Neither will Universal, MGM, or Ted Turner. The rate of return just isn't there for them. They might sneak a scene or two in from time to time (think Slave Leia in "Star Wars") but the rest of it is mainstream only. So what's left? Small studios on a shoestring budget operating in the underbelly of the motion picture art world, pushing their version of art like any other indie studio would try to do.

Third, if you're watching HOP2 simply to get your rocks off, then just focus on Roxy's scenes because one girl doesn't get naked at all, Nancy only gets naked once, and Giuletta is over 30. If, however, you're looking to see how well a story is told given the factors that went into the production, then watch the movie on a lazy Friday night and you might just be entertained as well as aroused. I found the movie to operate well on a number of levels that way, which is why I gave it an "A+", as opposed to most pure-porn films with no storyline and nudity from start to finish. I like a good storyline with my porn almost as much as I like a hot female body stretched out and whipped by an evil adversary. The historical depictions of what Dr. Aziz is teaching us makes this a very unique property; certainly something that's not been done before. If only we could get college credit for it...

I know that fifty bucks is fifty bucks and a large part of what justifies spending fifty bucks on porn is the re-watchability. I watched the film twice before I reviewed it and I enjoyed it each time. Could the film be better? Certainly. Nancy could've done the climax instead of Giuletta. The clothed girl could've done nudity. Roxy could've been subjected to the Pear. But none of that happened. Does that make it a bad film? No. It might disappoint those who were hoping for those three things to happen, but if you weren't expecting it, then you won't miss it. If you watch the film for what it is rather than what it isn't, you'll appreciate it a lot more.

But what do I know? I thought [www.whipping-films.com] videos were amateurish as shit and way overpriced, but I still keep going back to watch Amanda, Sadie, and Sarah suffer their 100 whip strokes because sometimes porn is what I want rather than an ambitious indie film that blends history with nudity. For that reason, I can't even resolve a rating within myself. So, ignore my final grade and just focus on the pictures and the paragraphs that describe the plot. Critics never agree with theater-goers anyway.

Is it worth $50? Whipping Films is asking $25 a pop for their 20-minute films and they don't have half the technology and studio skill that Pedro does in his hour-long movie. Max wants $12 for his ten-minutes clips with paper-thin plot and tatted-up models. If you're looking for a value, wait for the movie to be bundled with HOP1, or hope that a HOP3 is made and you can get the boxed set of all three with signed autograph picture of Roxy (there's a marketing idea for you, Pedro). In the meantime, I'll keep watching Roxy get breast-whipped and hope that Dr. Aziz undoes that third button in the next film.

Thomas Chaser wrote:

If, however, you're looking to see how well a story is told given the factors that went into the production, then watch the movie on a lazy Friday night and you might just be entertained as well as aroused. I found the movie to operate well on a number of levels that way, which is why I gave it an "A+"....

I worry that we've been spending too much time with Pachamama Films' art-house crowd.

Look, if I want to see inspired acting and a compelling story, I'll re-rent Trailer Park Boys: Don't Legalize It. I watch GIMP films for the erotic content, and that's it.

And how well a film or clip works as erotica is the only thing I care about when it comes to titles recommended by others.

Call me a philistine if you like. But my standards are clear.

I'm the bird who pulled Ralphus' coat to the latest addition to his "Torture Rack Database". And I should comment on his idea about having a bloke share the Merciless Peril with a girl.

I think that we can agree to disagree here. After all "GIMP" can also stand for "Guys In Merciless Peril". Even with my impaired vision, I do not see anything wrong in that.

I have always been more interested in the ingenuity of the peril than in the physiognomy of the gal or guy ensconced therein. This may stem from the fact that I have always and ever endured a visual impairment that prevents me from full enjoyment of some things.

For example: a recent post by Arcas has me wondering. Do these cartelistas plan to lower the spiked block onto the reclining form of the sweet young thing bound underneath? Or do they intend to hoist it up and then drop it from a height? And why is there what appears to be a control box with obvious "up" and "down' buttons resting upon her thing?

Netrap: Good to see you here on the board. Netrap and I usually have interesting conversations via e-mail, but he's been a bit shy to post in the past. He's the one who gave me the addition for Disciple of Death, which, as he noted, was recently added to the Torture Rack Database. Go check out the video; this is a really good scene that I'll bet you guys have never heard of before. At least I had been unfamiliar with it up until now.

In my description for the scene, I noted how it could have an all-time classic had there not been a guy alongside the damsel during her ordeal. And I still feel that way. Pervs like us are different from the rest of society in that mere nudity doesn't do it for a lot of us. When your average Joe Beercan sees a woman he finds attractive, he wants to see her naked. Whereas your average GIMPer, given a choice, would probably rather see her tied up and/or tortured. It's just in how we're wired.

So, in simplest terms, if you equate nudity on one side with bondage on the other, ask yourself a question. Would you enjoy a nude picture of a woman just as much if she were naked alongside a naked guy? How many say no? Probably a majority, I'd bet.

So given that comparison, if you have a woman tied up alongside another guy who's tied up, would that bother you the same way? It would me. Without making this an official poll question, let's put it to a quick vote.

Any opinions?

MAM cover of the day is from Man's Adventure Oct 1967 V9 #2 Stanley, Crair art

Text under burn mark -No more short skirts this summer - hilarious!!

Pedro: Thank you. And the pop-up caption for that picture (which some people can't see, depending on what browser they use) reads "Still looks better than the tattoo".

To answer your question, Ralphus, seeing a naked dude is always a turnoff for me. Some people like rape scenes and stuff like that but I don't, mainly because seeing a big flopping dick puts me off.

Ralphus said (which some people can't see, depending on what browser they use)

That some people is me, but I right click on the picture, then click on
"view source" then scroll down to see the hidden wrong browser message. Bill K.

re: opinion. Just the girls, please.

Not understanding this (guys in merciless peril) sudden issue at all. I say Don't let dicks into GIMP, Ralphus.

I get a guy raping a girl can be erotic peril but it's not merciless peril to me.

Merciless is like this Bmovie peril picture which makes me hungry for Thanksgiving turkey breasts. Bill K.

Pedro

Well, I guess 1 week before shooting time is not enough to grow pubes. But nice try anyway. I am sure back then all of the women had full fur pies.

Mr Bush, Pedro and Gimpers maybe we are wrong about women not removing their pubic bushes as this : [jezebel.com] says as far back as 400 years ago some women did indeed do just that. Food for thought. Bill K.

Bill K - Very good point. I've been wondering since my childhood, why Renaissance artworks depict women with no or very little pubic hair?

Thanks, Netrap.

An edited clip.

Disciple of Death from Christina Lindberg on Vimeo.

Lucy Liu in Rise: Blood Hunter (2007)

[imgur.com]
-------------
[www.dailymotion.com]
-------------
[www.metacafe.com]
-------------

JD wrote:

An edited clip.

You should have edited the guy out while you were at it.

"The Break In"

Remember kids, lock your doors at night!

Love today's art, Arcas. Hope it's the makings of a series!

Man's Adventure Sept 19xx

Good Evening, Ladies and Gentlemen.

I have wished to make a number of comments on the productions of Mood Pictures and Elitepain for several months but the flurry of comment on the latest Ep film suggests that this is a relevant time to add my contribution.

I feel that the negative criticisms of Ms. Giulietta are unfair and unchivalrous.

Had I access to the totality of those women who have acted in MP/Ep films, I would not have cast any of them in the actual film, (not even the sainted/reviled Ms. Nancy!).

Ms. G. has a body that any number of 30+, (40+?), women would die for.

What for me is important is that she genuinely suffers considerable pain and has a tight, athletic body.. I am a sadist and wish to see 'victims' in films such as these genuinely suffer.

Such comments, largely by our esteemed Moderator, are hardly likely to encourage other women to put themselves through such an ordeal for our delectation.

As a sadist of more than fifty years standing, I would be more than delighted to have Ms. G. surrender her body to me.

Galahad: As far as Ralphus being unchivalrous, although I can see your sensitivity to this issue in the handle you have chosen, anyone who appears before the public must recognize the right of that public to criticize. If every negative review of an actress were to be judged on this basis there would be no negative reviews, and all reviews would be suspect. I happen to agree with Ralphus and others - she is not to my taste and as athletic as she might appear to you, she appears too tough and masculine to me and does nothing to excite my interesst, sadistic or otherwise. Our opinion of her appearance might differ from yours but it is not unfair. Some men find fat, older or pregnant women exciting. I don't. That does not make them or me unfair, only different in our tastes.

Pedro: I was going to suggest perhaps at some time shooting the same scene with another model and making that available to those like me who thought the potential for the scene was great but who found the victim off-putting. Perhaps that is what you have planned with Max.

Ralphus: I find men being tortured disturbing and when it happens next to a woman being tortured will usually ruin the scene for me. On the other hand a man watching helplessly as his woman is being tortured is usually not a problem.

Further thoughts.

I would like to preface this text with two observations.

As I have stated before, I am a real sadist so, obviously, my response to all GIMP scenarios is intimately concerned with the degree of real suffering involved.

Secondly, I have between 50 and 60 Mood Pictures and Elitepain DVDs.

I state this not to prod Pedro into offering me a lifelong, specially reduced rate on further DVDs, (although I shall be happy to consider such an offer!), but to establish that I know of what I speak.

Nakedness. I prefer 'nakedness' to 'nudity'. It expresses better the sense of exposure and embarrassment/humiliation.

One of the delights of MP/Ep films was/is that they get the 'victims' naked without delay. (Although there are a distressingly large number of films in which the women are allowed to wear shoes!).

In History of Pain: Inquisition there are too many scenes in which the victim is clothed. I now understand that one of the actors would not do naked scenes but those scenes involving a clothed Ms.Nancy seem inexplicable. She has shown no reticence about being naked in all her previous roles and in HoP:I, during the branding scene, her genitals figure prominently. An indication that she is not overcome with modesty!

Further, in Ep's own film 'History of Pain Spy Interrogation' it as rightly pointed out that having a victim strip or be stripped was in itself a minor torture of embarrassment, humiliation and degradation. An effective preliminary to further, more intense experiences.

I can and do take a delight in seeing the body of a fine looking woman in an entirely non-GIMP manner. If that is combined with an element of GIMPery, one has a double delight. There are a number of scenes in HoP:I where there could have been greater nakedness.


As a sadist I wish to see my 'victims' suffer for real. This is what MP/Ep has genuinely, uniquely offered. I am not interested in 'special effects' and whips being soaked in red paint to suggest, most unconvincingly, the effect of a thrashing.

I do hope that MP/Ep will not further pursue this deceit.

I have already commented on how unconvincing electric shock tortures are.

(Although, if one seeks out the videos of, for example, Mei Mara on Insex/Infernal Restraints one can see in her expressions what the reality of electric shock is like. And, even more, the expression on her face when she is threatened with further shocks).

Although a number of Ep films make use of 'electric shock' there is nothing as convincing.

For the moment, a final comment on Ms. Nancy. Life in the Elite Club 15 purports to be a record of her punishment for acquiring her 'notorious' tattoo! Her 'punishment' seemed to me to be relatively modest. Given the whippings and canings that she has received in a number of previous films, her suffering was unimpressive. The film was mostly interesting for the distress that Ms. Giulietta seemed genuinely to feel for Ms.N's pain. (Which adds an extra resonance to Ms.G's suffering in HoP:I!).

It would be good to see Ms.N.properly punished, although, of course, one would know that it is all (properly) by consent. Although it should not be beyond the wit of those as experienced (apparently) as those involved in MP/Ep to create a film with real edge.

Ralphus said: You should have edited the guy out while you were at it.

I disagree. Unlike the most of the voices here, I tend to appreciate a mixture of sexes if it serves the plot right and add to the veracity. While I wouldn't enjoy porn or a sausagefest, I can accept some scenes that involved both sexes, as long as there's at least one feminine presence as the case with the scene aforementioned (thanks again to the spotter). Certainly I don't have your visceral homophobic reaction. But we are all different in the end and that's great.

Now, as for the whole Nancy-anyone else debate, isn't Nancy the one with a Cthulhu tat on the leg? Sorry mate but that atrocity was MUCH worse to me than any other consideration. Therefore, I can only enjoy the Nancy-less final release. A cute face can't compensate for a hideous tat. An easy A grade in on my scale of values and congrats to Pedro for a job well done.

Mis dos centavos.

Galahad: Well here is something we agree on - shoes. Why would anyone strip a woman naked for torture and leave her shoes on? I can't think of a quicker mood killer for me (even men being tortured) than a woman stretched out naked on a rack wearing five inch heels.

My Dear Esso.

I understand entirly your point about needing to take responsibility for one's performance if one places oneself before the public.

My professional career was as a public lecturer and I needed to answer to my audience. (Although not for my exquisite body!)

However, if you are enthusiastic about the type of films that MP/Ep make, one needs to acknowledge that there is probably a limited number of individuals who will submit themselves to the rigours of their scenarios.

So, regardless of one's own preferences for bodily appearance, I think it would be good to emphasise support and encouragement.

@Arcas: That picture's more likely to make me leave them unlocked.

Yet further, but (for the time being) final thoughts.

In all of the MP/Ep films that I have seen, there is always a make-up artist and hairdresser credited.

Now, many scenarios of these films are compatible with such expertise.

However, a number of the films are set in prisons, prison camps and, even, concentration camps.

The idea that the women involved in such settings have access to make up and hair dressing facilities is improbable, to say the least.

Further, armpit hair and pubic hair is absent. Did/do inmates of such institutions have access to razors?!

And, further, in addition to being well coiffed and made up, they are clean.

Not the least value of HoP:I is that the victims are dirty and sweaty, for the first time that I know of in MP/Ep history.

Congratulations!

Although, still no (or little) body hair is in evidence.

It was pointed out on this site some time ago that in the choice between those who like their women hairless and those who favour a more natural state, (at least from time to time), the former are overwhelmingly catered for.

Given that MP/Ep produce a number of films each year, would it not be possible/desirable to produce at least one film in which women are presented naturally and to see how such a film is received.

In answer to the posts about women's body hair, I suspect that the principal reason now for the (male) preference for hairless women is that men wish to infantalise women.

Galahad go to my 4078 post and click on Jezebel.com and the issue of women's appearances and hair removal was about same as it is now, at least in European countries.
It's interesting that men 400 years ago viewed women with a lot of body hair negatively too.

There was a mix of general feet hygiene back then too. Having clean normal non-smelly feet may have been problematic too. I've seen today's women that you want to keep their shoes on as much as not seeing bad tattoo.

Just saying do we really want to see a women that is unclean and raggedy hairy looking being tortured?
Bill K.

Bill K, as usual, you let your strong personal beliefs get in the way of historical facts.

While it's true that most of the artistic representations of the nude females from the Renaissance era doesn't show the pubes that's merely because Renaissance was a rediscovery of the Greek art, which was not showing pubes. Which doesn't mean that the pre-Victorian women were shaving down there. To believe so would be to have the same shocking experience of John Ruskin, an eminent art critic back then who had never seen a REAL pussy before marriage and when he saw his wife in the wedding night was so grossed out by her hairy bush that he annuled the marriage. Poor moron thought that all women were like a Giorgione's Sleeping Venus.

Historians of the epoch tend to describe the shaving of the pubic hair as a way to control pubic lice infestations and a freshly shaven prostitute was considered a questionable one (according to 'Art of Shaving' that marginally touch the feminine grooming in history).

Don't get me wrong, there are so many good books written on virtually EVERY IMAGINABLE topic that you shouldn't take Internet pages as references when supporting your arguments.



I'm a certified ranter, don't get mad at me. I scream at everyone.

Interesting discussion seems to develop!

Galahad wrote: In all of the MP/Ep films that I have seen, there is always a make-up artist and hairdresser credited. The idea that the women involved in such settings have access to make up and hair dressing facilities is improbable, to say the least.

It may sound strange but a hair dresser may make 'wear-down hair do'. Actually when the girls arrive to the studio they have an average hair. To HOP-Inquisition we made nice ponytails for the girls, which seemed to work for this period. But that's not all. During their time in the chamber of Inquisition their hair necessary got messy. While this seems to be a job without the need of an expert, we wanted a messy hear which in the meantime still looking sexy. See the picture below:



Also, as you mention, the girls got sweaty and dirty. And that was the job of the make-up artist. And the girls had make-up too. If they didn't have make-up they would have looked much less sexy. Her special task was to create make-ups which look like there were no make-ups. I think she made this job quite successful this time. And of course the burn mark was created by a make-up specialist too.

So if a film's setting is a place or time where/when people don't wear make-up, and don't go to hair saloons, the production most naturally still needs those artists.

And just an interesting fact: As I heard in prison males must shave every day if they entered the prison shaven. (at least in my country) So if a male must shave, I guess it is not impossible for females to shave too. But this is just a side-note.

Galahad wrote: Given that MP/Ep produce a number of films each year, would it not be possible/desirable to produce at least one film in which women are presented naturally and to see how such a film is received.

That is EXACTLY what was in my mind when I asked the girl not to shave before the shooting. Unfortunately I gave them too little time to produce something 'big'.

Oh, and Galahad, Thanks for defending Giulietta. She did a really hard job for your satisfaction.

JD wrote: : An easy A grade in on my scale of values and congrats to Pedro for a job well done.

Wow, thanks! I have bad news for you. Someone else may be using your nick too... or...uhm ...

Esso wrote: I was going to suggest perhaps at some time shooting the same scene with another model

You mean like a corrected edition? Well, Max is going to shoot in the same setting less elaborate movie(s) which will surely include whippings.

What is now working in my mind on full speed is a History of Pain - Crucifixion edition. I have plenty of ideas and I want something which looks more realistic than anything I have seen in this genre. ..hm... not as realistic as Mel Gibson's Passion (see scourging), and of course not the real thing either. What do you think?

Pedro said: Wow, thanks! I have bad news for you. Someone else may be using your nick too... or...uhm ... wink

I only use this nick for a couple of months, as a shortcut for John Doe. I understood (later) that there was another JD before that, but when I asked about appropriateness of using the JD no one (Ralphus included) said anything.

So if that helps, consider it a JD v2.0, only active since the middle of 2014, with no connection to any previous JD. I understood he was quite a famous fellow. Sorry about that.

Actually I meant the JD of post 3997.

And this notice of mine was meant to be rather funny than actual.

(Pointing out that your former post about cheap settings, clothes ropes etc... is opposing your latest post with a congratulation for me)

Again, I was just joking, no hard feelings.

Pedro as far as crucifixion I go ask Amy of Red Feline for advice. Not sure if crucifying was done much after the Roman era and my understanding it was a very slow death and the pre nailing tortures endured by the gimp was what?

It's also not clear if after the gimp is crucified what then was done to them. Sometimes a fire was set at the base of the cross and the gimp was burnt at the ( hint) cross.

I say go for it Pedro. Even if it's just the process of nailing one or more gimps to the cross it should be welcomed. Bill K.

Arcas: "The Break In" - Another nice one, thanks. I don't know how many bad guys break into women's house armed with a cattle prod, but it's best to always be prepared with anything you'll need for giving your victim the worst possible time.

------------------------------------

Sir Galahad wrote:

I feel that the negative criticisms of Ms. Giulietta are unfair and unchivalrous...Such comments, largely by our esteemed Moderator, are hardly likely to encourage other women to put themselves through such an ordeal for our delectation.

What can I say? You're certainly entitled to your (wrongheaded) opinion. What did I write about Giulietta that was so unfair and offensive? I said she did a really good job in the movie, but I don't find her attractive and thought she was miscast in the role as a victim. Even on the remote chance that an actress living in Hungary would happen to read on this board that a poster in the United States thought she wasn't pretty, I seriously doubt she would then be so disheartened that she would want to give up the business. That whole concept is patently absurd.

In History of Pain: Inquisition there are too many scenes in which the victim is clothed. I now understand that one of the actors would not do naked scenes but those scenes involving a clothed Ms.Nancy seem inexplicable. She has shown no reticence about being naked in all her previous roles and in HoP:I, during the branding scene, her genitals figure prominently. An indication that she is not overcome with modesty!

The reason she wore a slip during her scenes in HOP-2 was to cover up another tattoo, a smaller one above her left breast. It's not as large and garish as the monstrosity on her left leg, but it's obviously out of place in a film set during the days of the Inquisition. It was a little curious that since they went to all the effort to cover up the large one on her leg, why they couldn't have swatched on a little makeup over the one over her boob so she could have appeared naked in the movie. It wouldn't have been that difficult to cover up.




------------------------------------

JD wrote:

While I wouldn't enjoy porn or a sausagefest, I can accept some scenes that involved both sexes, as long as there's at least one feminine presence as the case with the scene aforementioned (thanks again to the spotter). Certainly I don't have your visceral homophobic reaction. But we are all different in the end and that's great.

Excuse me? Since when does not wanting to see men tied up alongside women make me a homophobe? So does that make Dmon, Bill K, cmf and Esso homophobes, too, because we don't want male interference in our GIMP scenes? I have nothing against gay people, although I have no interest in watching gay porno movies (like most of us here, I imagine). I don't even mind seeing men tied up and dominated by a sexy woman, but that's NOT what we talk about on this board, which I why I made a stink about all the "men in bondage" posts we were having not long ago. I'm pretty sure that doesn't put me, or any of us, in the gay-hating category, does it?

I understood (later) that there was another JD before that, but when I asked about appropriateness of using the JD no one (Ralphus included) said anything.

I think we had another JD a while back on this board, but whoever that person was, I think he must have moved on. In my mind you're the only JD we have here, so go ahead and keep your handle.

Oh, I forgot to address this one:

Sir Galahad wrote: In History of Pain: Inquisition there are too many scenes in which the victim is clothed. I now understand that one of the actors would not do naked scenes but those scenes involving a clothed Ms.Nancy seem inexplicable. She has shown no reticence about being naked in all her previous roles and in HoP:I, during the branding scene, her genitals figure prominently. An indication that she is not overcome with modesty!

Ralphus tried to answer like this:
The reason she wore a slip during her scenes in HOP-2 was to cover up another tattoo, a smaller one above her left breast. It's not as large and garish as the monstrosity on her left leg, but it's obviously out of place in a film set during the days of the Inquisition. It was a little curious that since they went to all the effort to cover up the large one on her leg, why they couldn't have swatched on a little makeup over the one over her boob so she could have appeared naked in the movie. It wouldn't have been that difficult to cover up.

Of course Ralphus is wrong again.
That tattoo was perfectly covered by the make-up artist that was a much easier job, than the ugly large one, which needed further treatment by the special effects team.
The answer is quite simple I think, but I admit it needs a little brain-work :)

Nudity is humiliating, which can be depicted even more effectively if we show the person non-nude first. So Nancy -as well as Roxy- was in clothes first, and during the sequence of different tortures she would have lost all of her clothes. (For example she lost her skirt after her first torture, and Roxy lost her shirt because she offered it to cover Nancy's burn-wounds) Soon Nancy was meant to lose her shirt too, originally Nancy was getting the tit piercing. After that, she should have been totally naked, especially for her grand final.

So the simple answer to this question, is that Nancy was not bare naked, because she was not there any more. Giulietta and Roxy are naked instead.

Pedro said: Actually I meant the JD of post 3997.
And this notice of mine was meant to be rather funny than actual.

Ack so. Well, on one hand I realise the limitations of a niche production house but in the same time I feel free to bitch about them limitations. That's schizo, I know. I feel like I need to bring historical accuracy to people who already populated historical past with their own phantasies and most of the time they are very belligerant when contradicted about what they believe it was REAL history.

Bill K said: Sometimes a fire was set at the base of the cross and the gimp was burnt at the ( winkhint) cross.

I frankly doubt it. The cruxfiction was intended to last for days and to have a 'pacifying' effect on the local population. Setting a fire would just go against the whole principle involved, killing the prisoner quickly and burning down the cross. No-no.

Ralphus said: "Excuse me? Since when does not wanting to see men tied up alongside women make me a homophobe? So does that make Dmon, Bill K, cmf and Esso homophobes, too, because we don't want male interference in our GIMP scenes? "

I stand corrected. As a non-native English speaker I used the old Greek direct translation (homo=male and phobia=fear). Unfortunately George Weinberg branded this term as a gay hater, leaving no proper words to describe the adversity to male presence. My bad.

Bill K wrote: It's also not clear if after the gimp is crucified what then was done to them.

What I have in my head is the PASSION OF CHRISTina (if it tells what I mean)

So the crucifixion itself would be the last stage.

I would depict with one single actress the whole process of the Passion.

- humiliating, tearing of clothes
- whipping
- crown of thorns
- carrying the cross
- nailing to the cross

And Dr. Aziz would comment what is going on in the body and soul of the victim.

I am thinking in something like this. In quite a realistic way, but this time not in a historical setting.

That's all I have in my mind at this stage.

Pedro: Thanks for the clarification on the Nancy tattoo thing. It did seem odd that she would show lower nudity but still wear a slip over the upper tattoo.

But regarding this statement: Of course Ralphus is wrong again...

Maybe it's that English barrier again, but I'm pretty sure you meant to write "Ralphus is wrong...for the first time."

No, I meant just as I wrote, because you were wrong the second time regarding Nancy, and I am quite sure you exactly know what I mean!

LOL

Pedro said: "but this time not in a historical setting."

If it's a copy of the same event of J.C.'s crucifixion it may not matter that it's not in an historical setting to a lot of Catholics and maybe other religions too.

Romans crucified many a gimp I am sure but by different methods that didn't follow J.C.'s method at all. The crown of thorns I'd leave out for sure.

I'm just saying there are a lot of religious zealous out there surfing the web and besides I would think a Gimp crucifixion that didn't follow J.C. at all would be more acceptable to crucifixion fans. More sales. Bill K.

Pedro wrote:
So that's the reason. We have new models time to time, now we have a new hope and we'll see how she succeeds. Max is making a spin off of this Inquisition movie tomorrow in the same set with the new model. We'll see.
A talent like Nancy - 1 in every year or two... Unfortunately that's the case.

Was this shooting successful? There are same preview pictures or is it top secret?

I would like to applaud the Mood team coming up with this novel twist to their extensive repertoire. I have a good number of Mood, ElitePain and castings DVDs and generally, damn good they are too.

However. I feel too little is being said of some of their back catalogue stuff. For me, a seasoned veteran of these offerings. One that stands head and shoulders above the others for sheer, unrivalled brutality has to be Judicial punishments.

I did do a review on this many moons ago, but the last victim, herself a well versed campaigner and one who has taken some beatings in the past, surpassed even her own prior offerings this time. 130 lashes. Count 'em guys, 130, full on, all giving, bare backed lashes and the way that bint goes at her after 90 is enough to make your eyes water. Bloody hell, she raises Caine on that poor bitches back and shoulders. You can almost feel those welts just looking at them.

Sadly it was only shortly after this that Mood had all that fuss and ballyhoo and seemed to tone things down a bit. That was sad, but perhaps this last offering will bolster a new era in the incredible Mood saga. Truly a site that transcends all others.

Can I be a bit of a self-deluded sounding board here on a couple of issues?

Firstly, regarding crucifixion. Now it is not exactly my bag, but alas, live and let live and each to his own. I personally would need to see the depiction of a long, hard and bloody scourging to precede the event to generate any interest for me. What I do not understand is why the crown of thorns seems to feature so frequently in these things. That event was a purely unique and individual thing. Only Jesus was thus crowned. It was not a Roman thing, just a one off twist of humiliation for an individual and should really be sidestepped. I have to add here, that I am no raving religious zealot. I am a Pagan anyway.

Now onto one thing I had to say. Thanks to Ralphus for posting the Angelique whipping scene. Yeah, it's better than watching reruns of Friends I agree, but really, as a gimp whipping scene, come on guys, it sucks really!

The sound is phoney beyond belief and the victim should have been stripped to the waist. I accept that mores and morals when the film was made may have precluded breasts, but editing can do that job, that babe should have been stripped.

Moreover, she was burned with hot pincers, but then wasn't. Like it was a trick played on the Sultan or something and after, we see Angelique lying on a bed, back bared with a few tacky scratches on her back, like she had an upset with her pet cat.

Nah, sorry, you really have to do better than that to get my gander flapping.

Just wanted to have a rant. Sorry guys.

Greg said: Sadly it was only shortly after this that Mood had all that fuss and ballyhoo and seemed to tone things down a bit.

Really? What happened? I wasn't following the board back then so I missed that. Sounds familiar though, like the fright that made pd put a stop to Insex in 2005.

Man's Adventure Sept 1959 V2 #9

Scrolling through the databases, I noticed that you don't have yet the video for Patrick Still Lives.

Here it is, for the sake of completion.

JD: Thanks for the video clip; added to the Electro-Shock Database. It's too bad that beautiful naked blonde girl wasn't the victim in the film; in fact, this was her one and only movie, can you believe it?

Ralphus, I haven't been on your site for a while and I wanted to find out if there has been any progress in regards to the Snidely Whiplash site? Were you able to get a hold of your friend so you can download the pictures to set up the site? I hope you will be able to contact him to get this running.

Snidely update: I did hear from my friend, and he was able to give me quite a few more than what were in Darkedo's supposedly complete collection, but the search goes on. There still appears to be some panels I don't have...and maybe even some series, too.

I'm sending out the Help Signal. I want to do this right. Anyone who wants to see the COMPLETE Snidely Whiplash collection archived at this site and would like to help out, send me your Snidelys! If I've already got what you send me, that's okay. But everyone who's contacted me seems to have different ones than the next guy.

And if anyone out there knows to get in touch with Oslo Netfetter, please have him contact me.

Greg: Sadly it was only shortly after this that Mood had all that fuss and ballyhoo and seemed to tone things down a bit.

Sorry, not quite sure what ballyhoo and fuss means so together. Search for Ballyhoo gives a strange looking fish. Fuss means some kind of noise... Or you mean the police raid?

Credit card companies are much stricter regarding wounds for about 2-3 years. They are even picky on some words. Our latest series were originally 'History of Torture' which would have been more appropriate. But 'torture' is a red flag for companies, so we changed torture to pain. (History of Pain). Though we will never deal with Migraine or sore throats, only tortures.

Pedro said: Or you mean the police raid?

Was there a police raid?

So nice

JD. Yes, about 5 years ago.

Masamune, the full-length clip is available for free at the promotional page of Spanking Server. [www.disenomedia.net]

Pedro said: JD. Yes, about 5 years ago.

Oy, that's enough to have a chilling effect on future productions. I mean pd bailed out when they only started squizing the payment processors, after a police search he would have probably jumped the fence to Canada. 5 years you said? Weird, I'd rather expect Orban and his social conservative values to spring into action, and not those lame socialists of Giurcsani. But what do I know?

Ralphus, another correction, if I may. The entry called Destroy My Soul - Japanese nun film has several whipping scenes. In one, a nun flogs her own naked back at night. In another, two nuns fight it out with whips until they are too weak to hit each other again. Finally, a woman is tied with rose thorns and then brutally whipped with more thorns. seems to be the same one identified by IMDB as School of the Holy Beast (1974) at [www.imdb.com]

I made a short edit so you can link it if you please.

Pedro:

Regarding your crucifixion scenario, personally I love it. Like another commentator my preferences lean heavily towards flogging, particularly of the back of the female, thus a severe flogging before the cross is a must, and I'm sure your team and your model will deliver to the max. But crucifixion does have its own appeal. Hanging by her outstretched arms, her breasts thrust out, her ribs acting like an accordion as she gasps for breath, her stomach sucked in almost to her spine, would be a very hot position to see a woman in.

I know you have your own ideas, and I'm sure they are great, but let me share some thoughts. There are crucifixion sites on the net who bind the feet of their models in what I will call the standard position: in front of the main support beam directly under her body. Since her feet are not nailed to the cross she can straighten her knees and take a lot of the pressure off her arms. For the models this is a good thing. Unlike other sites, you and your team lean heavily towards inflicting real pain, thus a non-standard (but historically accurate) position might work well for your movie.

The suggested position, which would set you apart from other sites, is to bind the model's feet either side of the support beam, with some bend in her knees (her wrists would be bound to the front of the cross beam, as is standard in most website crucifixion enactments). The model will initially hang by her wrists and arms but eventually will have to seek relief by engaging the muscles in her legs to push and the muscles in her arms and abdominals to pull, all in an effort straighten her knees and get her in a position to support herself mainly with her stronger leg muscles. Because all of her body is in front of the support beams but her feet, straightening her legs will necessitate her torso falls forward against her bound wrists as her legs push and her arms pull, her arms pulled back as her torso moves forward and her breasts will thrust out even more than the hanging position (she physically cannot lean back to counter-balance due to the 2 beams). Thus the stress of hanging directly by her wrists will eventually be replaced by the stress of her pulled back arms and straining muscles. Again she will seek relief, so she goes back to directly hanging vertically, a position she was trying to avoid by bringing her legs into play in the first place. She will shortly become quite distressed, which may work well given the time constraints of your film.

Observing this distress is the appeal of crucifixion, . She'll hang vertically for awhile, straighten her legs in a futile attempt to completely support herself, straining most of her muscles mightily (not just her legs), before falling back to hang by her wrists again, gasping for breath from her efforts. This will go on and on, over and over again, allowing us to gauge the depth of her struggle and suffering as time goes on.

This position may prove too stressful, I don't know, but it might be worth playing with.

Pedro:

Never mind. I didn't think to actually try the crucifixion position I described in a doorway until AFTER I posted. It does not have the desired affect.

A lot of work for nothing. I hate that.

Anyway, I do like the idea of a crucifixion film. I hope you do it.

A cruxifiction themed movie would need either a leap of faith or a serious F/X effort. What some people don't realise is that Roman cruxifiction was done by driving nails not through the palms, as seen in so many cheap Jesus-centric movies but between the ulna and radius bones of the forearm. That provided a lot of support, much better than the feeble construct of the human hand.



Otherwise the victim wouldn't survive for days.

Secondly, the legs were also nailed to provide support for another simple reason. If you suspend a human only by their hands they would die of mechanical asphyxiation within an hour or two when the muscles operating the rib cage get too stressed.

Keep in mind that this punishment was intended to frighten the local population and was performed in very public spaces and the victims were left alongside the main avenues of the local city up to three days (according to Tacitus, a contemporary observer).

I really doubt it's possible to make an accurate cruxifiction movie without heavily investing in F/X.

Gimpers, I think Pedro's "History of Pain" Crucifixion movie is not an elaborate large cast production. I believe Pedro wants to recreate J.C.'s crucifixion using a woman instead from beginning to end so maybe we can ask him what he has in mind.

I created this Roman gimp crucifixion manip a while back of Roman soldiers marching an English gimp to be crucified in front of her home village for crimes againt the Roman local fort. My version ended with burning her at the cross but you can use your storyline with a much smaller cast and background. Just a suggestion. Bill K.

After having seen previews of the new EP/MD HOP2:Inquisition, I have to ask why on Earth does a GIMP film have a substantial portion of its early sequences involve a woman wearing clothes? This gives the impression that the production was certainly miscast and definitely rushed. The main attraction was, as in all EP/MD pictures, whipping - here the 100 lashes. I have no real argument with the performer because the main feature was her back and ass. I'm not into whipping so I don't appreciate much after 50 lashes. I can appreciate why Nancy bailed out.

As for the breast and pussy whippings, perhaps it was the makeup, but there are more visceral markings in the Dr. Lomp series. Hope that the next installment, if again Inquisition, will include some convincing strappado, use of the horse [where special effects might be of great use], and, if hot irons, perhaps in more strategic, erotic areas than on the leg. It's also nice to see forced stripping with a look of fear, terror and shame in the victims eyes in the setting of a dungeon, prison or torture chamber. Also, the girls in the jail did not seem terribly frightened by what they were witnessing.

I very much like the idea of Pedro's crucifixion film. I agree with others who've said that the scourging must be savage. You may know of it, Pedro, but if not, the [www.cruxforums.com] site may offer some inspiration (as might this - [ralphus.net] - a story I write about a crucifixion a while ago.

A recurring theme is resistance to the crown of thorns. I don't really understand that. There's some evidence that Roman soldiers played a game called 'king' with condemned prisoners but even if the crown was unique to Christ, why not apply it to your fantasy victim? It's humiliating and painful and can actually be quite sexy.

Or if in a modern setting, isn't it likely those doing the crucifying would refer to Christ's crucifixion? Perhaps the victim is a Christian who's being mocked - a nurse or a teacher in a foreign land; or maybe the victim is Jewish and those crucifying her want to 'punish' her for the role of the pharisees in Christ's death. The crown could then be, say, a coil of barbed wire or something easier to come by than a crown of thorns. The scourge could then be explained by a deliberate attempt to replicate the Roman model.

To everyone who took his time to discuss about the crucifixion stuff:

I am thinking about the reenactment of Christ's crucifixion but with a female subject in a lab like setting. For the sake of the History of Pain series a girl would sacrifice herself to show through what was happening with Christ.
Of course most things were heavily faked, but I would do it only if we can do it ultra realistic. So no joke looking things would be accepted.

Hope this makes it clear.

I'm still unsure, it's rather thinking loud.

Man's Adventure Sept 1961 V3 #8

Zeke wrote:

After having seen previews of the new EP/MD HOP2:Inquisition, I have to ask why on Earth does a GIMP film have a substantial portion of its early sequences involve a woman wearing clothes? This gives the impression that the production was certainly miscast and definitely rushed.

No, if you read Pedro's recent post (4102), it was done intentionally because stripping the girls throughout the film added to the humiliation factor and most would have been completely naked by the end. The one exception was Jessica, who was probably cast for her innocent looks but didn't want to do nudity. She honestly wasn't that convincing an actress in the movie and will likely not ever be back in front of the camera in the future.

Let me go on record as saying I didn't mind the sheer slips a few of the girls were wearing. I'm not a stickler for nudity like many around here. The key thing for me is distress, not skin.

The main attraction was, as in all EP/MD pictures, whipping - here the 100 lashes. I have no real argument with the performer because the main feature was her back and ass. I'm not into whipping so I don't appreciate much after 50 lashes. I can appreciate why Nancy bailed out.

First off, nobody knows why Nancy bailed out. No one has heard from her since that morning. Officially she is still on her way to the studio. Obviously, she never showed, by my theory that she didn't want to come because of the 100 strokes, while it might sound plausible, was strictly conjecture on my part and has no basis in fact. Honestly, it was irresponsible of me to say that on a public forum, possibly insinuating that the ElitePain people were monsters and forcing her to do a scene against her will. Obviously, that was not my intention, and apologies to Pedro if he felt otherwise.

--------------------------------

JD wrote:

The entry called Destroy My Soul...seems to be the same one identified by IMDB as School of the Holy Beast (1974)

Yeah, you're right, thanks for that. Probably 90% of the entries in the Whipping Scenes Database were written by Oslo Netfetter and his gang of contributors back in the late 1990s and early 2000s and there's lots of incomplete or sometimes erroneous information in there. I always cross-reference any new additions through the IMDB before I add them to the various databases. I'll see if I can get the correction added soon.

My Dear Pedro and Ralphus.
My thanks to Pedro for responding to my comments about the excessive/unwanted (by me, and it seems others!) clothing in HoP:I. And my thanks to Ralphus for attempting to answer my query.

My Dear Ralphus.
Knowing you to be a man dedicated to accuracy, I should point out that I did not accuse you of being offensive. Of being unfair and unchivalrous, yes. The latter charge can hardly be denied!
I was also surprised to read this part of your post: 'Even on the remote chance that an actress living in Hungary would happen to read on this board....' etc.. I had thought that one of the wonders of the internet is that anybody with access is as capable as you and I of finding any post, (if not blocked by their government!).
Given that we are discussing a film in which Ms. G. stars, and that her 'boss' posts here, I would have thought it is a near certainty that she knows what is being written. There may be a problem of language but certainly her friends will have kept her informed. Friends are always the first bearers of bad news!

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum, but I hope to be able to contribute to it and also receive some help.

Over forty years ago I bought a book called "Sadism in the Movies" by George de Coulteray, published by the Medical Press in 1965, but being an English translation of his 1964 French book "Le sadisme au cinéma," which according to the text on the dust jacket was "banned in the country in which it was written." The book is long out of print, but copies may still be found in used book shops or on eBay.

The first 188 pages of the book is mostly text, but this is followed by a gallery of "documentary verification" consisting 254 pages of publicity stills from various films depicting scenes of violence. The preface to the gallery says that the American edition doubles the number of pictures by adding to those from the original edition. The photos are grouped into categories such as "Beating," "Slaps," and "Whips." (There are an additional 9 pages of stills scattered throughout the text section.) There is only one photo per page, so each still is fairly large. This is good because the quality of the printing is only on par with what you'd find in a newspaper and the photos are all in black and white. For unknown reasons, some of the stills were printed reversed. The pictures depict violence to both men and women and despite the title, a few of the stills are actually from TV shows. Unfortunately there is no index, none of the photos are identified on the pages on which they appear, and the pages in the gallery are not even numbered.

Soon after I bought the book, I attempted to label the stills as best as I could and I also added page numbers to the gallery by continuing from where they left off. A few of the pictures I was able to identify from descriptions in the text, and others were familiar to me from having seen the actual films or from stills published in other books. However, most of the photos I could not identify at the time. Over the years, I was able to identify more and more pictures; I was especially helped with the arrival of the internet. I currently have identified all but 72 stills which I have scanned into my computer. I would like to share some of these pictures both in the hope that viewers may find them interesting and also that someone will be able to identify them.

Here is a picture from page 437. The woman doing the whipping may be left-handed or the still was reversed.

SIM Researcher wrote:

Over forty years ago I bought a book called "Sadism in the Movies" by George de Coulteray, published by the Medical Press in 1965, but being an English translation of his 1964 French book "Le sadisme au cinéma," which according to the text on the dust jacket was "banned in the country in which it was written." The book is long out of print, but copies may still be found in used book shops or on eBay.

What a great book. Finding that book in the public library when I was a kid was a seminal moment for me. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, none of the photo stills are captioned, and many of the movies are long out of print and never made it to the digital format. In the section titled "Chained" there is a still of a blond white woman being stretched on a vertical x-shaped rack. I'd cite a page number, but my edition of the book has no page numbers in the movie stills section. Any idea what this movie might be?

My Dear Pedro.
May I add my support and encouragement to the idea of a film about the crucifixion of a woman. With the right actor and the appropriate amount of nakedness, (that is from start to finish!), it could be a most effective and intense experience.
With reference to including a 'Crown of Thorns' I would think that some caution is advisable. In addition to the desirability of wishing to avoid gratuitous offence to certain groups, if such offence were caused it obviously has commercial implications. It should be possible to devise some torture involving the head that makes witty(!) allusion to the the Christian story without pastiching it.

I have been disappointed that nobody, particularly yourself, has responded to my comments on the undesirability of special effects. If you are thinking of representing a crucifixion, this may seem a suitable/necessary candidate for the use of such technology. This assumes that you are not intending to sacrifice one of your actors, not even Ms. Nancy! Now that would be a punishment!

Red Feline have demonstrated in a number of films that effective and intense crucifixions can be represented without the aid of trick photography. I would particularly draw to your attention to the last scene of Agent X where the eponymous heroine is most memorably (although somewhat mysteriously) killed this way.
The scene is all the more memorable in that it involves our own delight, Ms.H., in the most splendid form!

Galahad wrote:

Knowing you to be a man dedicated to accuracy, I should point out that I did not accuse you of being offensive. Of being unfair and unchivalrous, yes. The latter charge can hardly be denied!

Uh yeah, I do deny it. I gave my opinion that I didn't find her attractive, and I stand by that. There's nothing unfair about it, unless you're living in a fantasy land filled with fairies and unicorns and negative thoughts and statements are against the law. We're talking about bondage films, and certain casting choices that are good or bad for the movie's success. That's what this website is about.

-----------------------------

SIM Researcher: Your best bet would be to find a free picture hosting site where you can upload your collection so we can see what you've got. If they are of an adult nature, you could maybe try PimpAndHost.com, which gives you annoying adult ads and the occasional pop-up, but there's no restrictions as far as content.

Galahad

I don't see why any caution should be given to crown of thorns. Catholic fundamentals don't seem to be as dangerous as some other fundamentals.

I have two good examples of something similar I have in my mind.

1) SNUFF MOVIE (2005) has a great female crucifixion scene. Really worth taking a look.



2) MARTYR (2008 - Pachamama Films !!!)/Death of St Eulalia is a Masterpiece in my opinion in this genre. It has a VERY strong female crucifixion scene. VERY STRONG!



And now that I see both photos, neither of the movies feature the crown of thorns. Maybe I miss something?

Why would be that piece of object is so important? Or they just forgot it? Both scenes include the whipping before the crucifixion.

Regarding Special Effects- Hard questions. About a year ago, some readers noted that they liked hard material only if that was not real. They didn't want real suffering, only acted suffering. Then there are people whom are interested only in real suffering.
So my best bet is to go after my own head... (we say it so in Hungarian)

I won't shy away of using special effects as long as they seem realistic.
We won't pierce anyone's hand (or wrist) with a huge nail. That's for sure.

Special effects - In this case special effect is needed - no question, I think.
Special effect can be computer generated, or non-computer generated. If we do this thing, we'll have plenty of time to find out which works the best.
For example the burning scene in HOP2 is NOT entirely a computer generated effect. So it's not that a photoshop artist drew a burn mark, a little trickier than that, but I wouldn't tell more at this stage yet.

Ralphus wrote:

We're talking about bondage films, and certain casting choices that are good or bad for the movie's success. That's what this website is about.

Exactly.

Knowing what a mean place the Internet can be, I can sympathize with someone whose image was posted somewhere -- without authorization -- and then subjected to venomous attacks by anonymous trolls who have nothing better to do.

However, some people make career choices where their appearance is an important part of their job, and where they should expect people to comment on their appearance.

That applies to male models, Hooters Girls, and many others. And it applies to actresses who are paid to appear in BDSM films that are sold for money.

There have been actresses that didn't strike my fancy who have appeared in ZFX films and in some of Pachamama's art-house movies. I have had no reservations about commenting on their appearance, even though I know the people who make those films read this forum and its possible the actresses read it, too.

Readers are looking for honest assessments of a movie's strengths or weaknesses, not chivalry. While one should certainly avoid being nasty, providing an honest opinion about whether an actress in a film is appealing to the reviewer is certainly fair game.

I would regret the day that reviews became untrustworthy because the writers are pandering to the producers and talent.

Ok Pedro, if you're just going to do a same torture look of J.C.'s crucifixion but in a total different setting then no problem. Go for it. Bill K.

SIM Researcher:

I'm looking at my copy of "Sadism in the Movies" by George de Coulteray, and I can see the challenge in identifying the sources. For a theoretically scholarly work, the disorganization and lack of references is pathetic.

You could simply post a few of your scans on the GIMP site per day, or I would be happy to offer hosting on BCOTD.com. The photos in question show a few bare breasts, but the content is pretty mild by Internet standards. Could you also post scans of the photos that you have already identified?

Like to see electro torture

Yeah having clothed prisoners in a GIMP-oriented Inquisition scene makes no sense to me. They should all be shackled naked in the cell, on this point I don't even know why there would be disagreement LOL.

All of the actresses in the History of Pain film look passable in how attractive they are, in my opinion. While looks definitely are important in BDSM films, I'm actually willing to overlook a good deal as long as the action on-screen is good...honestly most women who act in BDSM films, even mainstream ones like the stuff Kink produces, wouldn't get a second glance from me on the street. That's not to say that I have high standards or that they're unattractive or anything like that, it's just that most of the women seem to be either professional porn stars or lifestyle BDSMers, neither of which I find particularly attractive for the most part.

If a woman has a nice body and an athletic build, that's honestly most of it for me.

Man's Adventure Sept 1962 Inside Page A

I'm not one to criticize the fantasies of others, but seeing a 70-year-old dude strung up in a movie clip isn't what the GIMP forum used to be about.

Tony:
Alas, that is one of the photos that still has me stumped.

My edition of the book only has page numbers up to page 191, but I penciled in my own page numbers, continuing from where the book left off. So that picture would be on page 258.

Ralphus:
Only a few of the pictures in the book have any nudity (just T&A and no depictions of sex acts). I am considering Cover's offer to host them on BCOTD.com. Thank you.

Covers :
Thank you for your offer to host them on your interesting site. Yes, I could scan all of the pictures in and include identifying information when known.

I know I'm a little late, but I just want to thank the person who created the female Rambo video....Great stuff!

I've often dreamt about that scene with a female soldier. Rambo's daughter lol!

Wouldn't it have been amazing to see someone like Rachel McLish (Iron Eagle 3), stripped to the waist, writhing in sweating agony as the electricity tore through her body?

Ahh, when will film makers get the message? Women want equality nowadays, so why are film makers whimping out? Show us the torture, make it hard and make it believable or don't bother.

Well there's a subject; torture scenes with guys are fairly acceptable in mainstream media it seems, but women undergoing torture is viewed as gratuitous by many. Double standards or am I just reading too much into it?

BTW, I'm a girl and I'm still waiting for that perfect no holds barred female torture scene. So not all women frown at torture. I want to see blood, sweat and suffering; make 'em scream till their throats are raw....goodness, I'm a sadistic little cow

Greetings all.

Criticism has for centuries been a valued part of literary endeavour.
Although I expect that the critiquing of GIMP/BDSM films has never been and never will be seen as one of the higher manifestations of the genre.

It is no part of the critics role to indulge their own preferences and prejudices.

An exemplary critique, of HoP:In as it happens, is that by Mr. Thomas Chaser. There is no discussion of the physique of any of the actors. And with modern technology there is no reason why there should be.
His review is accompanied by a number of images. Further, at the Elitepain website, there are a large number of stills from the film and a trailer. Each can thus make up their own mind on the physical attributes of the actors.

I entirely agree with Greg's comments regarding earlier films by MP/Ep being delightfully more severe, brutal even, than current offerings.
Gaby (Gabriella) Boutal's whipping in Judicial Punishment is formidable.

I have a number of favourites but will, of course, not divulge what they are as I wish not to press my own preferences/prejudices on the followers of this site.
If any of you beg me sufficiently abjectly, I may relent!

Critique is never personalised.
Critic is personal assessment or opinion.

Kasey: So you mean a really explicit torture-scene in a high-budget mainstream movie? B-movies do have lots and lots of torture-scenes with women, of course.

And, yes, that scene with Rachel McLish drove me wild back then: Dungeon, sadistic drug-lord, proud, feisty woman in chains before him...and nothing happening. Rats.

Pedro,

In order to set your crucifixion scene apart from others the suffering on the cross needs to be part of the girl's experience. She needs to engage her muscles and physically strain to gain relief from hanging vertically, there needs to be some strain required to hold the new position, and she'll be subsequently forced to hang again in exhaustion to recover for the next cycle.

Maybe if her feet are bound behind the support beam to a certain degree, so she can't get a lot of leverage? Just far enough back so she can pull/push herself up to a point of some relief but can't hold it for long and is forced to hang again?

I just don't know.

Galahad wrote:

(Thomas Chaser's) review is accompanied by a number of images. Further, at the Elitepain website, there are a large number of stills from the film and a trailer. Each can thus make up their own mind on the physical attributes of the actors.

That's an excellent point.

And yet, as I was reading it, I was reminded of Samuel L. Jackson's line from Pulp Fiction about how a dog has personality, and personality goes a long way.

Some attractive actresses are only so-so performers (eg., Candi Licks from some of the old ZFX movies). At the same time, some average or below-average women are strong actresses, which can sometimes make a difference (depending on the strength of their acting skills).

Furthermore, not every movie has a trailer that gives you sufficient information.

Last year, my favorite GIMP movie of the year was The Ground of a Foreign Country - Group Assault.

As I noted in my review, none of the stars of that film would ever pass for runway models. But their performances were very strong and the movie was surprisingly effective.

And -- it should be noted -- there is no trailer for that movie.

I don't have an issue with a reviewer of GIMP movies commenting on the appearance of a film's stars. I'm a tightwad -- when it comes to decisions about where to spend my hard-earned dollars, I want the straight goods, with no sugar coating.

Arrakur wrote: So you mean a really explicit torture-scene in a high-budget mainstream movie? B-movies do have lots and lots of torture-scenes with women, of course.

Yes, a high budget mainstream movie. If it was up to me, I'd cast a strong woman, not huge muscles but lean and wiry with hard muscular definition....six pack abs are a must, and someone who could scream like Natalie Portman.

Tortured with electricity. Spread eagled, chained by her wrists and ankles. I want to see her straining so hard her veins stand out all over her body and every muscle is locked in agonizing contraction, pulling so hard against her chains that they cut her. The sweat would oil her body, sliding off her in rivers of liquid heat and soak her hair as she writhed, screaming her unimaginable anguish. No teasing here, just extremely hard, merciless brutality. Her pain is the torturer's prize and he wants lots of it and for as long as he can make it last.

If it's a whipping scene I want to see her body drawn out, ribs outstretched and on tiptoes. Drenched with sweat and bleeding from every lash. After all, it is about torture, not BDSM.

Too many times we've all witnessed scenes with limp wristed whipping,unrealistic electro scenes with the girl not screaming but going Ooh or Uhh. Shaking from electro torture? I know what it feels like to have electro therapy on my muscles due to a back injury a few years ago, and after the feeling of being stabbed with hundreds of hot needles, those muscles seize up rigid in maximum contraction; none of this shaking business. I'm rambling...Anyway, I need to see something that I can believe is really happening in a torture scene to make it work for me...if you know what I mean? :-P

I really liked the Rachel McLish scene too; again a wasted opportunity by the director, although he got the sweat right, and the cuts on her wrists were something special. Torn jeans, crop top and straining muscles all a plus for me.

Darkroom wrote:

I'm not one to criticize the fantasies of others, but seeing a 70-year-old dude strung up in a movie clip isn't what the GIMP forum used to be about.

I'm still scratching my head over that one. What movie clip are you referring to? I went back 200 posts and I still can't find what you're talking about.

------------------------------------

Galahad wrote:

Criticism has for centuries been a valued part of literary endeavour.
Although I expect that the critiquing of GIMP/BDSM films has never been and never will be seen as one of the higher manifestations of the genre.

I dunno, I think we've set the bar pretty high with all the excellent reviews we've had posted over the years. Why shouldn't bondage-related movies be recognized for the art form that they are? Many people might dismiss porn as simply something to get their rocks off with, but many of these filmmakers pour their hearts, not to mentions tons of money, into making sure they put out a product that is both entertaining and erotic. And the people on this board who review them often take hours choosing the right words and making caps to properly give the filmmakers their just due. Not only that, receiving criticism and praise of their work not only gives the producers much needed feedback, it might even give them ideas on how to improve their next projects. Lastly, it helps to separate the good and the great erotica away from the lesser ones for those on a budget and looking for a suggestion. We're a small niche market, but we're important and we deserve the same type of consideration that other forms of media receive.

It is no part of the critics role to indulge their own preferences and prejudices.

Well, that's where you're wrong. Again. You seem to make a habit of it with every post, don't you? The people who review these movies are, first and foremost, fans of the genre. We are the customers, the ones who spend our hard-earned money on these movies. If you don't give your opinion that you don't like, say, a performer covered with tattoos, how is the filmmaker going to know that he goofed up in his casting choice? If you blindly dismiss mentioning that a scene would have been better with a wholesome-looking girl instead of some tattoo freak, you're doing the review, and the filmmaker and fans reading it, a grave disservice.

I've mentioned before how hugely important casting is. No other single element of a bondage film will make or break a production more than who you chose to put up there on the screen. Of course, looks are subjective because people have all different tastes, but as long as you're fair and say you're grading a movie higher or lower depending on the attractiveness of the performers, people can make up their own minds and decide if the movie is worthwhile for them. Like Canadian, I don't have an issue when a reviewer mentions the appearance of a film's stars; in fact, I feel it's helpful. Not every movie review has vidcaps or a trailer, so it's the opinions of the reviewer than can often be the deciding factor.

Hello two thoughts here. Just wondering if anyone has the English version of Island of 1,000 Delights ? Second, I really didn't remember much of the scene with Scarlett from back in the day but I've gotta say it's pretty hot. Of course I rarely lasted past the "light bulb" scene. heh heh

It's definitely a good point regarding acting ability and attractiveness. I'd much rather watch a so-so looking woman with great acting abilities than a really good looking woman who's tied up but looking like she's wondering what shoes she going to buy later or something.

That's why I never really liked some of ZFX's stuff. Lisa Kinkaid, for example. She was pretty hot but she couldn't act. For an example on the other side, Kink once did a shoot with Savannah Stern in which she was just a prisoner who got shackled and fucked in a dusty cage, but the varying looks of fear, humiliation and just general discomfort really made that shoot, despite the fact that it was basically a porn shoot with very little plot.

A good BDSM shoot doesn't need a convoluted storyline or a huge plot or anything like that. My favorite BDSM films just involve sadistic men or women (mostly men but there are some decent femdom films) inflicting misery upon some poor woman who sells the tension and drama with her reactions. That's the great thing with BDSM, is watching this awesome human drama unfold between people, so that's why acting is very important to me.

And that's why I hate watching some hot chick moan half-heartedly "oh, no. don't do that" while rolling her eyes, LOL, or even worse saying "yes! yes! yes!" I can kind of find some value in consensual bondage scenes but they are kind of lame, and there's not really any psychodrama in them that some of the edgier productions have. If the performers have particularly good chemistry it can work kind of but...

Sharon Montgomery...good ol' days..hotter than Georgia asphalt on a midsummer's day...

[fap.to]

[fap.to]

[fap.to]

[fap.to]

@ju man: [wipfilms.net]

There's been some interesting discussions happening here lately. I've got a question for anyone who wants to answer: what's your preference as far as antagonists in BDSM films go, "good guys" (ie Inquisition films, films involving corrupt law enforcement/spy interrogation films, etc) or "bad guys" (kidnappers, serial rapists/killers etc)? I prefer the "bad guy" antagonists personally. Traditionally my BDSM scenarios have revolved around daddy's little girl being abducted and held for ransom some well...and well, her captors have some time to kill, right? and they can just say they never got the pay off anyway...I think people who want a happy ending for the damsel in this type of scenario are in the minority.



BDSM in which women are tortured by state-sanctioned officials has a certain something going for it, though...I especially like the prison cell aspect. But I've seen "damsel in distress" type scenarios which feature women who've been kidnapped and confined, like many Japanese adult videos, or some of the stuff PKF does. It's important to provide proper lodging for your guests, after all.



Thoughts?

Here's the "light bulb" scene from Island of 1000 Delights; starring Euro babe (and Franco girl) Olivia Pascal as the victim here. This has always been one of my favorites. Back in the good old days before the Internet, I remember I found out about this one by studying "The Bare Facts Video Guide" from cover to cover and coming across the words "tied up while being tortured by two guys". Cha-ching!

Then it was a matter of seeking out the VHS tape, which had been renamed for video under the generic title "Savage Inmates". This is the only time I'd ever seen a light bulb used as a torture device in a mainstream film, although ZFX did it later in Scene of the Crime with Sierra Stuart.

Apologies for the quality; even the DVD uses the same crappy print. This is one of those VHS classics that's badly in need of a restoration.

To ed nov 17 check out infernal restraints curious Elise its the ultimate electro video.

Man's Adventure Sept 1962

To MM's point in Post 4150 regarding how to suspend an actress for a crucifixion, I offer Max Coxxx's wonderful crux of Allie James in "Allie James 5" aka "Allie James Crux'd".

What I like about this position is that it allows the actress to move up and down to adjust the strain on her body while not quite providing any relief at all. Her feet take some load, and her arms take some load, but neither take a full load. To relieve the strain on her arms, she has to raise herself up. But, her feet aren't completely flat and her legs are bent, so her legs get tired and she slumps down to hang from her arms again. This up-down, up-down is known as "the dance" and can be very erotic. Muscles straining, sweat flowing, she's almost in a state of perpetual motion as she tries to find relief from the torture. And in this particular clip, Allie James is shit-hot wow! I've posted this before, I know, but with the current discussion about crucifixions it deserves to be shown again. You can find it at: [clips4sale.com] and I've also linked it above.

I'd also like to thank Ralphus for posting up the clip of the light-bulb torture. I have the full movie but I'd forgotten about that scene. Thanks!

Ralphus:

A thousand thank-yous for your recent nostalgic post.

I remember seeing "Island of 1000 Delights" on cable (probably Cinemax) some 30 years ago or so, and the brief "lightbulb scene" was indeed the Star of the Show. Somewhere buried in my basement I still have a VHS copy of the flick if ever I can locate a VCR that still runs!

Thanks again for the mammaries, er, I mean memories!

Authorities, or the "good guys" are easily the better choice when compared against criminals who are committing their acts under the table.

The key here is how dire their status makes the predicament. If it's law officials or soldiers that's sort of it for the victim...in theory at least. The "cops" aren't going to bust down the door any second because they're already inside having their way with her, metaphorically speaking. Criminals who are just trying to "get away with it" OTOH are still subject to a higher power and aren't really in 100% control.

The best villains though I've always thought to be a mix...evil empires, Nazis etc...those who still have the force of law, just that their regime has twisted law so bad that criminal acts ARE the new "ok thing to do". Of course, I think this really still falls under the "good guys" category...if I'm looking at the question that was really being asked.

Ralphus, my bad. Today's picture makes it clear. It's a woman with shorn hair in baggy rags. Yeserday, it looked like a 70 year old man in baggy rags. Just a different angle. The face helps depict what the rags conceal.

Renzo Novatore: To try to divert attention away from your line about Lisa Kinkaid being a bad actress (expect an angry Canadian reply soon), I do really like your question about GIMP villains. In fact, I don't think we've ever had a poll about that one here, so let's make it official and bring the people out.

GIMP POLL:
What's your preference as far as antagonists in BDSM films go?
A) "Good guys" (ie Inquisition films, films involving corrupt law enforcement/spy interrogation films, etc) or
B) "Bad guys" (kidnappers, serial rapists/killers etc)

I'll tell you, this one is a tough one for me, because both sides have positive attributes. It really comes down to motivation; state-sponsored police or religious interrogators feel they have an appointed job to do, and they're obligated by the will of the people (or the will of God) in carrying out their deed. They can be as relentless as possible and still feel justified that they're doing the "right thing".

On the other hand, the "bad guys" do it because they really are bad guys. They know it's wrong and they don't care. They rape and torture strictly for the fun of it, and because they're in charge and can get away with it. That's pretty scary, too.

I don't know if the female victim would necessarily feel any more or less hopeless being held by either camp. Maybe she can hope that she can survive by somehow being able to appeal to the bad guy's human side, but even that's a long shot. And I don't see any way she can get out of Choice A unless she "confesses", and her fate will likely be ultimately worse if she does that.

It's a close call, but I would opt for Choice B, the "bad guys", simply because that choice appeals to me more personally. To be able to just go out and "take" someone and have my way with her, simply because it's fun, well, that's the secret fantasy of a lot of people around here.

Okay guys, your turn. Step up and cast your vote.

Gimpers:

I noted the discussion about the book "Sadism in the Movies". I had what may have been a companion book, "Sadism in the Comics". Sadly the book is long gone, but I remember it fondly and wish I still had it. anyone else ever seen this anywhere?

DISTRIBUTOR WANTED

I still have much video content never released on DVD. I may be in the market for a new distributor soon, based on some indications. Please contact me at the above email address if interested.

Physical Product Fire Sale

I have a lot of physical product in storage, from DH57 through DHP and DHM titles. Would like to work out a package deal on product. Possibly with distributor or someone who owns several retail stores. Once again, contact me at the above address.

~Dan

I am afraid that my whimsical (perverse?) English sense of humour has obscured what I wanted to say.
The criticism (perhaps that should have been 'Criticism') to which I initially referred is that practised by weighty academics and taught as part of an English Literature degree at a prestigious university. I expressed the view, somewhat playfully (but also truthfully!) that I doubt that they often discuss the criticism originating from sites such as this and I suspect that such is not on the students' reading list.
I did not wish to imply that our criticism is not worthwhile and meritorious. Far from it.

I see it as a proper part of the critic's task to discuss those aspects of a film, say, that are of interest to those who access this site. That would be; among other topics; narrative, presentation, acting ability, severity of abuse and, as it seems to be of interest to many here, the extent of the nakedness. A description, not a declaration of personal preference, of the physiques of the actors is appropriate if there are no stills or trailers available.
I would remind all that this discussion started with a film for which there are both stills and a trailer available on line.

When I first engaged with BDSM activities I was, of course, aware of the lack of tolerance that was/is shown to those of our disposition. Knowing that we are largely pleasant people and pillars of the community, this seemed rather unfair. Rather naively I thought that, this intolerance being the case, our clan would show rather greater restraint.
Unfortunately this seems not to be the case.
Ralphus, I am not wrong or wrong-headed. I just have different views to yours.

The Expression of individual preference/prejudice is of no interest to me. It would only be so if I were thinking of sending a DVD as a Christmas present. An unlikely circumstance!

The only person/s to whom it might be of relevance are Pedro and his colleagues. I would suggest a poll on the preferred physiques for our victims, but, of course, there is a poll already underway.

Anyway, I suspect that, with all their experience and knowing how well particular films sell, all at MP/Ep know all our secret desires about bodies!

POLL QUESTION: I choose B. "B" for Bad Guys! Mainly because they aren't constrained by any laws or rules and therefore can do pretty much whatever they want to their poor victim. It's anything goes!

Good vs bad in this context is misleading cuz it's appealing to the axiological base in each of us. And from this point of view, any 'sane' person would cast the sadists in their fantasies as unequivocally BAD. If one can't make the distinction, then we have a psycho among us.

A more accurate choice would be 'lawful' vs. 'unlawful'.

Mes deux centimes.

One of my favorite rack scenes, from "The Vampire Happening" ('71).

Renzo Novatore wrote:

That's why I never really liked some of ZFX's stuff. Lisa Kinkaid, for example. She was pretty hot but she couldn't act.

Renzo, Renzo, Renzo ... what are we going to do with you?

Lisa was very hot. And her reactions to whippings and other tortures were as close to perfection as we will likely ever see.

POLL ANSWER: "Bad Guys" They pull out the stops and give us what we really crave. The good guys? Bah - Nancy Boys. Who needs 'em

Beats the shit how I didn't remember this one when Pedro and all the others were banging on about this...see, it has been done, but as discussed, the crown of thorns makes an appearence. Despite this, she makes a pretty good model, don't you think?

The problem with the good guys (A) bad guys (B) poll is the good guys are never merciless and the bad guys are always merciless which is why they are bad guys.

Also since when are Inquisitors good guys? Save us from those evil witches and non believers from doing what?

There are no good guys in GIMP.
So that's why I vote B bad guys by default. Bill K.

Re: The Vampire Happening rack loop. That has to be one of the earliest breast implants ever shown on film. The scars are visible and the breasts don't even look natural. In 1971, audiences probably wouldn't have even known and would have been amazed at how firm her breasts were. Nice rack scene, but the modern implants are something of a distraction, both in a good way and bad way.

Oh yeah, choice B. Bad guys. Always more fun in a movie. It's much more fun to watch a villain chewing the scenery.

Re: Poll Q: Personally, I prefer (A) as my first preference, given my preference for the POW theme; but I enjoy ZFX's stuff, which have burglars, kidnappers, etc. as the story line.

I would vote for option (C) if available: both.

I think the story from Nancy not coming to the film location is planned from EP a long time ago. It's for the storyline of the relationship between Nancy and Giuletta.

This relationship is growing over all movies with Nancy. In every movie Giuletta punished Nancy. Both will be friends in Life in Elite Club part 15. And their friendship ending with a big bang back stage by HOP2. The next step is Giuletta's revenge in a new movie in which Nancy will punished hard from her - now - ex-friend Giuletta.

It's possible that is only wishful thinking from me. But I don't believe that anybody from EP/Mood called back Nancy in the last two and a half months. She is the best model from this site in the longest time. The customer's favourite and a really big eye catcher of the EP and Mood sites. I can't believe that the owners of this site will do nothing for her comeback. That's a really big cinema.

Poll

Definitely "Bad Guys."

My ideal torturers are Mexican corrupt cops working for drug cartels, or private militia soldiers, go figure.. ;)

Man's Adventure Sept 1965

So then my choice for my real favorite villain type, evil empires/ruling bodies either fictional or historically based...where do people think that falls? I choose A: Good guys because overall I felt that the question was truly lawful vs unlawful and my preferred villain falls in the latter.

I don't think these types of villains really need to show restraint either. More, I think that thinking is missing the value they bring to the table. As opposed to thugs playing around with toys who are just doing whatever they want and may kill/incapacitate a victim too quickly due to lack of knowledge, an empire or ruling body would have established proper torture techniques to make it last longer. I could argue that the suffering one needs to endure when lawfully sentenced can be made much worse than anything a couple of thugs might dish out...but that really comes down to the Filmaker in the end I guess.

Greg!

Those photos about the female Christ are gorgeous! Wow, These are all new to me!

I was wondering how I haven't found this footage earlier? Then I had to discover that it is not a poster of a movie, but of a theatrical play in Lima/Peru. That explains most of my questions. First I was shocked, how it was possible in Spain (Spanish texts), of course I forgot that half of the world speaks Spanish. (well almost).

Anyway, the play itself was some kind of experimental theater, and the footage I could find on YouTube shows no actualy nudity or anything GIMP interest in the play. I saw a symbolized whipping scene where the actress was not even half naked, she was standing on a stool, and guys were walking around her, whipping the floor. So everything was quite symbolic, and no nudity at all.

This was kind of a disappointment for me after the very promising posters. I wish somebody did this scene like poster seems to promise.

If you are really interested:



Nice find though Greg! If you have something like this hidden below your pillows, don't hesitate to show!

Hi, all,

Regarding the new poll, I stress the receiving side, in that I think that the "ideal" is not the "innocent victim" but the "purposeful one", i.e., one that because of her activities was pretty well aware of the risks of being taken and tortured, and has a reason to withstand it and defy the torturers. But I understand many among the readership will prefer the usual "innocent victim at the hands of perverts", which is all well for them.

That said, going back to the specific question, my preference correspondingly goes with the "purposeful adversaries", that is, people that have a good reason to perform their hideous act on the "victim". Not that they cannot be a perverted lot, and usually that type of character brings a lot of... colour, to the situation, but the "antagonist" I prefer is the rational, almost reluctant interrogator/torturer.

So my answer would be "1) Good Guys" (the qualification of "good" corresponding to what I said before)

Note that the figure of the "Inquisition-type" interrogator/torturer has been put under this category, though almost universally the characters you see represent the "perverted/sadistic-type", with the sole exception, probably, of the character impersonated by Paul Naschy (the "tortured torturer", a masterly conceived character) at "Inquisition". Most probably, most of them were not, and, much to the chagrin of BDSM-oriented people, they would most probably reject any carnal access to their victims, out of superstition alone.

Regards to all,
El Wananchi

Definitely "A".

The psychology of that is definitely more interesting. The interrogator(s) know that what they are doing is right and so they can do whatever is 'necessary' to make the subject talk without guilt feelings. The subject, being on the 'other side' knows that it is her right and duty to endure whatever is necessary not to talk.

Most police/security interrogation is based on triggering latent guilt feelings in the subject being interrogated. Since (virtually) everyone is taught right and wrong. Done right this works very well.
But in the case of an 'enemy agent', far from feeling guilty for what she has done, she considers it to be the real 'right'.
That is why historically it has been understood that a spy will be physically tortured when she is captured.

So, the irresistible force meets the immovable object.

And to resolve it could take a LONG time.

For those interested in female Christ style Crucifixion.

Goddess from Paul Hatcher on Vimeo.

There is also:

PassionofaGoddess.com



But it is a pay site.

Good poll so far, lots of well thought-out replies. Here's where the voting stands at this point.

GIMP POLL:
What's your preference as far as antagonists in BDSM films go?
A) "Good guys" (ie Inquisition films, films involving corrupt law enforcement/spy interrogation films, etc) 4 votes
B) "Bad guys" (kidnappers, serial rapists/killers etc) 7 votes

A little closer than I expected so far. Keep on casting your votes.

---------------------------------

Pedro: Man, what a tease those promotional pics that Greg posted were to compared to actual play! If I had paid to see that production, I'd be demanding my money back. A girl standing on stool while actors walk around her swatting at the floor? Others might call it expressionistic; I call it crap.

---------------------------------

Tosoadn: Now THAT's a crucifixion video! You know, the Christ story works SO much better with women.

I vote A (though I'm not sure I would call inquisitors or state torturers "Good guys")

The psychological aspects are more interesting to me. From the torturer's perspective, in B, they know are violating the laws and codes of their society, even if they make up some rationale that entitles them to do so. In A, the state/church officials are acting according to the law, however corrupt that law may be, and will likely believe they are doing right.

From the victim's perspective, in B they can hope that the real good guys will arrive and save them, while in A, they know that won't happen, because the law is on the side of their torturers. Also, in A, they likely did something-joined a rebel group, broke some law-that got them into their position, whereas in B, they may be innocent of any wrongdoing.

PS-Did anyone see that some reasonably attractive young woman is marrying Charles Manson? I think that's sicker and more incomprehensible than anything in the movies on this site.

I prefer an honest bad guy who has no bones about doing it because he likes it. I have a disgust for the ones who do it and hide behind legality.

I am going to vote A although I do think the categories are misnamed. I am interpreting them as being A. tortured for a reason (interrogation, confession) that will yield a benefit to the torturer and B. tortured for the "enjoyment" of the torturer. To me the whole process of bondage and torture comes down to asserting control, and the more difficult the victim makes it for the tormentor to break her, the better. Not that I can't appreciate a pretty young woman being whipped for no good reason, it is just that the battle of will against pain adds immeasurably to it for me. Punishment falls somewhere inbetween I think.

While Covers and I are setting up a gallery in BCOTD.com, here is another unidentified still from page 433 of "Sadism in the Movies."

another vote for option A.
in fact I often skip stories mainly in option B entirely, random victims for a sadist with no further motivation don't leave much room for a plot.

In option A also it is reasonable to think that there are a lot of resources to ensure the continuation of the merciless peril: security devices, full furnished torture rooms, 24/7 staff including medical aid for when things go too far

My vote for A
For all the reasons already explained, and because the torture and suffering must be under control , progressive and for a long time ....like an Art, not to satisfy a pulsion

Well obviously the good guy/bad guy dichotomy has to do with the pretense the antagonists labor under, not the moral rightness or wrongness of their actions. Obviously from a moral standpoint what is being portrayed is wrong, the antagonists are doing bad things. Hence the quotation marks around "good guys". But in my opinion if the whole goal of a supposedly justified action like punishing someone who's guilty of something, or extracting a confession, is just a flimsy pretense for torturing the victim, then the whole thing just seems kind of pointless doesn't it? Like why is the pretense there in the first place if hedonistic pleasure is the real goal?

Or, on the other hand, if the goal of the torturer is actually important, then that kind of throws a wrench in the action IMO.

Re: The poll question: if the ending is going to be death, then there's not much difference: I could be a political prisoner strapped down naked on an interrogation table in the basement of a government ministry while the secret police clip electrodes to my nipples, or the abducted victim of a serial killer strapped down naked on a table in his torture den with jumper cables being attached to my breasts; I'm still going to undergo hours or days of electrical torture before being executed/murdered.

Poor Alexa's had better days. I bet she's really regretting that Arcas model contract at the moment...

@Arcas: There's a contract? Where do I sign?!?

Interesting forum question/poll. In a way, there's not much separating A from B: they're both acting inhumanely against another human being. The difference is that one is operating with a set of rules while the other is simply limited by imagination and the law of physics. Having said that, and given the truthfulness of that is assumed as correct, then my vote is for "A".

Inquisitors, interrogators, etc. are operating where the goal is not so much to cause pain, but to cause pain as a means to an end: to get information, to force a way of thinking, to punish. In a way, the victim has some control over how much pain is to be inflicted by simply refusing to cooperate. It is this powerplay that I find interesting. The torturer will only commit the torture for as long as the victim allows. That's the dramatic element in the story - the play between the protagonist and the antagonist.

Under "B", the sky is the limit. Anything can happen and the victim has no control. Where's the dramatic element in that? It's just gore for gore's sake. There is no protagonist or antagonist and therefore no drama. The victim is just an inanimate object, like a frog in a high school biology class pinned to a gummy table to be dissected.

From a storytelling perspective, the stronger villain will be "A" unless "B" is operating under some set of rules, self-made or otherwise. Even Buffalo Bill played by a set of rules. They were rules he made, but they were still rules. Now rub the lotion on your skin before you get the hose again!

I would think it's the method of torture that would determine who is a bad guy (B) or a good guy (A). And a reason for the torture too. The job description of the good guys can be the same as bad guys if they are torturing innocent women.

What torture line do the good guys have cross to become bad guys?

Inquisitors are good guys and kidnappers are bad guys.

Don't they do the same thing in movies and stories to the gimps? I'm sorry, just having a hard time understanding why Inquisitors are good guys. Bill K.

Like I said before, it has to do with the pretense the action takes place under: either some kind of "righteous cause", such as finding witches/gaining intel, etc, or, on the other hand, the purely hedonistic whims of sadomasochistic maniacs who do what they do for greed or lust or whatever. Obviously things like witch hunts are not "good", they are ridiculous and tragic knowing what we know today, but I thought that'd be obvious...

Regarding the poll. Both have their appeal and one of my favorite fantasies is a B pretending to be an A.

Kidnap the victim and start asking her a question. What is the safe combination? Where are the drugs hidden? The actual question doesn't matter. You pretend not to believe her when she says she doesn't know what your talking about.

You then spend a very long time torturing her (including rape of course) for information that she doesn't have. All the time she would be thinking that she could stop this if only she knew the answer. Even better would be if there was a way to give her a few days amnesia just before the kidnapping, then she would believe she really does know the answer to stop the torture, if only she could remember it.

I guess that means I vote for B.

For the poll, definitely A. For two reasons, I think: a) imagine the state apparatus being deployed against you - there is no escape, you are utterly alone. They have uniforms, equipment, cells. You have nothing. There's room within that, of course, for individuals to be extra cruel. The guards play with you all night and then in the morning it's off for another session of interrogation and electric shocks. And there's a reason for progression: we start with level one - you've resisted, ok, level two. With a lone psycho, why not just go to max straight away? It takes out a lot of the psychological element.

And b) there's something in the bureaucracy of it that appeals to me. The moment when the judge signs the order for you to be handed over to the special police. Or the sentence: you will receive 50 lashes and no matter how much you scream or beg that's what you'll take.