sombrefan

Have a look at the parody films the director has ummm directed.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3529203/

And if you have time, read Bleeding Cool's coverage of the Batman porn parody (based on the 60s tv show).

http://bleedingcool.com/?s=batman+xxx

From:

Yet it's just as recognizable if they call it Fluffy the Vampire Layer. It's parody, after all.

From:

gossi.livejournal.com

Yeah, they should just change the name. Fox and various other parties own the BUFFY brand name.

From:

I think they can get away with it because it's a parody and under copyright law that's ok. Plus none of the major studios have yet challenged the porn industry over it.

From:

I was reading up on this because of the fanfic kerfuffle and they have to justify it as parody, I believe. They can't just call it parody. It has to actually be parody. Which I guess is easy enough for a porno to do because it has to reimagine the story in a parodied situation.

From:

"Which I guess is easy enough for a porno to do because it has to reimagine the story in a parodied situation."

Yes. I think Disney will be the first company to take this matter head on. I can't seem a family styled organisation being too thrilled the likes of their characters like Iron Man, Captain America being turned into porn profit.

From:

These is grotesquely amusing to me in light of the parody-esque quality of the softcore porn images of #34. It's almost like the comic thankfully got there first. :-/

From:

I just view #34 as sex not porn. Weird sex but not softcore porn intended for people to masterbate too.

From:

It depends on how you define it. The images are similar to the images you can look up online that are called softcore porn. Legally, organizations recognize the images as violating non-pornagraphic rules (photobucket for example). I felt it crossed the line into pornagraphic territory not by the coy nudity, but by the extreme position changing mid-coitus to show how teh awesome it was. It was the gratuitous representation of the sex that pushed it into porn territory for me.

Edited Date: 2010-05-17 09:09 pm (UTC)

From:

"It depends on how you define it."

Material specifically designed to get the reader off.

"Extreme position changing mid-coitus to show how teh awesome it was."

Frantic weird sex then. I don't think it was gratuitous, just long. Artistic expression sometimes needs a stop watch.

I can actually see why people were offended by it and I can also see why others weren't that bothered. My sitting on the fence can be a gift and a curse.

From:

Haha, in that instance I think there were some Bangel fans getting off. Some fans even wrote in to say that it sexually aroused them and Meltzer was all 'what a compliment!' And I'm sure it fell out the same way as most porn does--many are offended, many are lured in by the sexual depictions and react to it.

It's not porn, it's art!

Edited Date: 2010-05-17 09:22 pm (UTC)

From:

"Some fans even wrote in to say that it sexually aroused them"

Eeeeewww. That's taking shipping a bit too far. I can see why some critics view us as an oversexualised fandom.

From:

ruthless1.livejournal.com

Next up - the first ever Buffy Furry convention!
::headdesk::

From:

menomegirl.livejournal.com

Oh Gawd.

From:

"I can see why some critics view us as an oversexualised fandom."

What, more then any other fandom? Or society in general for that matter?

From:

Nah, we're just a very horny fandom compared to others.

From:

And you can back up this statement how, exactly?

From:

We like to bear our breasts at actors. 20th Century Fox licenced Spike panties for us. Spike panties! We write lots and lots of slashy fic about our favourite characters having sex. We see subtext on screen all the time. We're really quite horny.

From:

And you really think that the Buffy fandom is the only fandom to do this? Oh dear, I think you need to look at other fandoms more. *g*

From:

I really don't care what happens in other fandoms. This is the one I want to love and snark at.

From:

Thing is though you're making sweeping statements about a fandom that can't be backed up at all.

I do have contact with other fandoms, and I'd say that on the whole they're all the same, to say nothing of the internet at large.

From:

"Thing is though you're making sweeping statements about a fandom that can't be backed up at all."

No I'm not. I'm making a comment about a fandom which is backed up by personal observations and facts. I did however forget to include the example of an actor storming off in a huff from a convention cause a couple of fans fondled his bum.

From:

And what about a year or so ago in the Supernatural fandom , where at a con a fan literally hurled themselves at one of the main stars and had to be prized off?

Every fandom has examples such as the one you cite.

From:

eilowyn.livejournal.com

I don't necessarily think it was an issue of shipping - no admitted Bangels I know of in the online fandom were discussing how aroused they were - the way Meltzer phrased it, I was imagining teenaged fanboys needing the dark room to read the comic. To dismiss aroused reactions as a shipping tendency really ignores the fact that regardless of who the characters having sex are, it came across as pornographic.

When you factor in that it was Buffy, hero to a generation of young women, shown so exploitatively, that's when the squick factor transfers into indignation.

In terms of oversexualized fandom, I think the fact that the show dealt so forthrightly with sexuality (while rarely treating sexuality exploitatively - you could argue Buffy's early costuming sexualized her too much as a teenaged girl, Cordelia was always shot to best display her assets, and Spike practically ran around naked in season 6, but compared to media at large, sexuality was treated frankly and fairly while occasionally delving into the morass of other shows) makes it a fandom that is honest about its own sexuality - it may come across as oversexualized, but that's because it's a show that does give freedom from sexual repression.

From: