Pornocratie: Les nouvelles multinationales du sexe (2017 TV Movie) User Reviews

The irony of this is amazing

[ritera1 · 7/10 · 21 January 2021]

Although well produced, it's an attack on the "new" face of the porn business by the old guard that positions themselves in a false light.

I come from a mindset of an ultra liberal. I have no desire (no pun intended) to ban porn. But at the same time the notion of "moral" pornographers is not a reality to me. That's where the viewpoint of this documentary comes from.

Like the mainstream movie business, it's a business many MANY times over. I don't see any creativity in it. Maybe the makers think they are but we'll agree to disagree. There has been big productions (I've never seen) and am not immune to sampling the free content. But I would not put my disposable income towards it.

I have no doubt the evils that this production alleges against "new" porn. None at all. But to frame the old way of porn as having morals and just normal workin' folk is a lie. Porn has always been a sleazy business that uses and abuses women. Takes advantage of their weaknesses and addictions. Promotes ugly stereotypes.

I read a bit about the filmmaker, Ovidie, a French ex-performer and self-professed feminist. She views porn as full of empowered women. We will agree to disagree. Probably some, but not a majority. A small minority.

Do women in porn wield great power over men via their sexuality? Or women in daily life with their sexuality? Yes. I don't really think that's a good thing on its own. If the roles were flipped---and they're not---I'd likely be corrupted by such and have uneven views. Same with any kind of power, I'd imagine. And am not immune to the sexuality of women, although I don't judge the whole person on that.

Do I have an issue with women practicing their sexuality? No.

As an examination of "new" porn, it was quite thorough, informative and interesting. Felt longer than its running time, though (another pun not intended). But avoiding the bad history of its narrators and industry was obvious and disappointing.

A deep insight from a defined dark aesthetic

[bustozoni · 7/10 · 18 August 2017]

Pornocratie introduces a debate where is porn watched in 2017. It departs from a historical recount of how the adult entertainment industry did its crossover from DVD towards digital streaming, and how this crossover it seriously changed the rules behind it. The material gathered, the sources and the comments by the documentary maker and host provide an insiders' perspective and a daring explanation for the porn tubes' phenomena.

It's watchable, not too bad

[lakatosgaspar · 2/10 · 20 July 2018]

I loved the first part where the general tone was 'oh, the girls have to shoot harder stuff' and 'these guys ruin these poor souls'. But the first two well known people 'in porn' shown were Woodman and Rocco, and to be honest these two guys back in the day made the hardest and most degrading stuff I've ever seen.

They also talked about how underage people are exposed to porn now, but even when there were only magazines, casettes, cds and dvds it was pretty easy to get your hand on one. Now I'm not saying those sites shouldn't have a better verfication. The method "Yes, I am over 18" is pretty bad.

Then came the vision of a shady porn empire that looks like it evades taxes. And they also take 78% of the money from I guess channels. And they don't respect the crew on a pornshoot. It was a really straightforward message. A bit onesided too. Wouldn't call this an investigation though.

A steaming pile of nonsense

[jake_fantom · 2/10 · 14 July 2018]

This documentary, and I hesitate to call it that, purports to reveal the secrets of the international digital porn industry - but in fact reveals very little about anything. The interviewer, ostensibly herself a former European porn star, remains largely mute during the interviews, so it is not surprising that she doesn't get much out of her subjects. The thread that runs through the film (along with titillating snippets of hardcore porn) is that a mysterious multinational porn cabal is up to something fishy, perhaps laundering money. Duh. I am tempted to give this a single star but am upping it to two stars solely because of the wonderful scene, early on in the film, where Pierre Woodman, one of the inventors of misogynist porn in which women are physically abused to the point of tears, complains so long and loud about the online "tube" industry stealing his content and virtually putting him out of business unless he shoots and edits his movies all by himself using a crappy camcorder and a laptop - that he crashes the car he is driving on the middle of the interview. THAT is worth watching. And from the expressionless interviewer, not a single word.

Preachy, biased and disingenuous

[nadblaster · 3/10 · 25 September 2018]

Production values are high and the facts aren't wrong, but they are very much skewed through the lens of a clear opponent to the industry. This movie is less about the shape and climate of the porn industry and is more a scathing indictment of it. There are some interesting facts in there - the part about Pornhub's creator rising from nobody to mogul was pretty cool - but the entire thing is just dripping in an overall attitude of "this is barbaric and you're a bad person if you watch porn". This angle runs throughout the entire film and while I could accept it as an opinion it's made very clear very quickly that the presenter thinks this is fact. Overall comes off as a sermon instead of cinema and you can safely avoid it.

This isn't a documentary - don't waste your time

[terzb · 1/10 · 5 January 2019]

If you are a conspiracy theorist or just like wasting your time watching a bunch of nonsensical and poorly researched content then this is still probably not worth your time.

Anti-capitalist and semi-feminist biased opinion

[misterjones-74909 · 2/10 · 22 October 2018]

As much as I hate pornography for ethical and moral reasons, this is a bad documentary. Also, too many long and unnecessary cuts from adult videos. The opinion of the director is heavily imposed on the viewer.

We should pursue this conglomerate for tax evasion and violation of law, but not for the fact they're destroying adult films. I don't care what salary gets the producer or those who participate in the act (by the way this documentary was solely focused on the salary of the women without mentioning the salary of men like they're not suffering too). It's just the way the market works. It's not easy out there. If you're a marxist feminist you should state that the very first minute of your documentary.

The very last bit was especially ridiculous. The evil platform-creators charge 70% of the income. Girls get even half of that if they work in the studio. Well...Those girls can create their own studio if they want to earn more. They can also create their own platform or encourage other people to do so to balance the market. I can't sympathize with a person who says working as a waitress is hard so I'm doing this cam thing.

Apparently, the sort of person who can sympathize with them is an ex-porn pro-feminist actress. But you're sympathizing with them for the wrong reasons. It's called bad judgment. You shouldn't destroy your personal live and damage your psyche for any money, even more so for little money. Take it from someone who lives in a country poorer than Romania. I'd better die than show my most private parts to other people for money.

Living is hard, it's true. Don't make your dying easier, it doesn't help.

Nothing

[billcr12 · 2/10 · 6 September 2022]

Ovidie is apparently a former porn actress and she has made a documentary critical of the way that the industry has, excuse me, screwed the stars of the "films". She has got to be kidding. The internet has changed the world of entertainment and the adult movie industry is certainly no exception to this trend. Ovidie interviews some of the performers and travels the world in search of answers, and in the end, finds none. A site called Pornhub seems to be the leader in streaming XXX videos without paying any royalties to either the producers or "talent". I am so upset that I must pause here for a tissue to wipe away my tears. The only positive aspect to this mess is that it runs under ninety minutes.