Thursday, January 29, 2009

Get OUTTA Here Ron Jeremy!

Here begins my delving into the (relatively new) world of pornified sit-coms from yesteryear. They're usually pretty good (Not The Bradys is great), and after Not Bewitched won a shit ton of awards at AVN 2009, I figured this had to be next on my list. And besides, it's got Nina Hartley in it!

Hartley does not disappoint - she's by far the best thing in it, and her lisp is as charming as ever. She really embodies her role as Samantha's mother, Endora. Then, on the other end of the scale, is Ron Jeremy as Dr. Bombay who stops by to help celebrate Tabitha's birthday (more on her later...), and then leaves to apparently watch a harem orgy, and participate at a distance. What could have been a great scene, was instead spoiled by Ron Jeremy's hideous self appearing at the periphery over and over, and I was reduced to yelling at the TV screen, "Get outta here!!" He even whipped out his "manhood" which was a particularly unpleasant spectacle. He kept his clothes on aside from that though.

Enough about nasty Ron. What really interested me about this film, was the way they handled the fact that the original show had a young girl (Tabitha). I have been intrigued by how pornography deals with the presence (or lack of presence) of children when they're trying to depict family life, especially when it's an adaptation or a spoof. I remember writing an essay about The Passions of Carol, which was an adult adaptation of A Christmas Carol, and in one scene the "Hatchets" mention their crippled daughter, "Tiny Kim" - she never appears but they say she's in her room, and show her crutches. Then the parents have sex under the Christmas tree...apparently with Tiny Kim still sitting in her room...without her crutches. In effect, the film gets around the problem of such an iconic character as Tiny Tim by using the equally iconic crutches synecdochically.

Not Bewitched deals with this "problem" by making Tabitha (Teagan) a very young baby at the beginning, followed by a magic spell cast on her by her Aunt (Eva Angelina) which makes her an 18-year-old. How convenient! The film seems to embrace Tabitha's new sexual awareness, while at the same time maintaining a slightly self-conscious awareness that Tabitha is really an innocent baby (for example, she tries to go with Dr. Bombay to join in the orgy, but he brings her back, deeming her presence inappropriate). For some time, after Tabitha's solo scene, I really thought they weren't going to put Teagan in a full-on sex scene because of the unusual scenario. Well, obviously, I was wrong about that...

I mused over whether or not, once Tabitha got changed back to a baby (which throughout the narrative they make clear will happen), they would make any allusion to the fact that their baby is not a virgin... Well, they outright said it! I was really surprised, and somewhat impressed. It was all played in the comedic style of the original sitcom, so it didn't come across as shocking, though it sure made me think. The filmmakers clearly made a decision to make Tabitha a baby, rather than a five-year-old -- there is clearly something "not ok" about having a child (as opposed to a baby) in an adult film, even in a non-sexual role. I see this discomfort regarding children and sexuality throughout our culture - most obviously in the way we allow children to watch horrific scenes of violence, yet not nudity, let alone sex. I'm not saying we should put children in porn (before someone hysterically accuses me of whatever the Daily Mail is screaming about this week...), I just think it's interesting how porn evades and avoids the problem. Furthermore, I think the tools these films employ to acknowledge the existence of children in the narrative, but simultaneously evade their image, is informative of our societal attitude toward children and sexuality. 


9 comments:

T. L. Bugg said...

I've been eagerly awaiting your next post, and it did not disappoint. Great insight as always, and I totally must see this flick.

Gore-Gore Girl said...

Thanks! I appreciate it!

Johnny 666 said...

Not a Ron Jeremy fan? How come?

Gore-Gore Girl said...

Hmmm...mostly on a purely physical level. If that makes me shallow, so be it - I just don't much care for him, either on an acting level (his performance in this movie was so out of synch with everyone else) or on a physical level. There is something noticeably smug about him, too, which I find a real turn off.

Johnny 666 said...

thats interesting. I guess I'm only familiar with his older, pre-90's stuff...but I could see why you dont find fat, hairy, sleazy old guys attractive...

The Igloo Keeper... said...

I'm guessing that you're secretly in love with Ron but don't wanna admit it...?

Gore-Gore Girl said...

Oh lord - NO! Don't want to provoke "the lady doth protest too much" responses, but he really grosses me out. That said, I haven't watched much stuff from when he was young, so maybe I'm judging him too harshly...but his recent stuff. I my. Horrendous.

Incidentally, I met him a year or so ago, and he didn't exactly make a favorable impression. Nothing terrible, just that bored smugness thing...maybe I'm being too hard on the guy. He has been in the business for decades...

Nina Hartley, on the other hand, was so freakin awesome in person, and wouldn't stop talking to me and my boyfriend about a whole bunch of different things. Very cool. Love that woman.

the posturing (and admittedly rather irritating) little popinjay said...

my dear gore-gore girl, allow me to give you some important imfomation. The time that we have lived through and are living through now (the late twentieth and early twenti-first centurys) will always be remembered by future historians as being "the time of sexual repression" and the primary reason will be the incredibly negative attitude that most people in american society had towards the idea of adults having sex with children, you see within 30 years (as all the lies, hypocrisy, sexual repression, and censorship that has poisoned and plagued american society for hundreds of years is finally and thankfully wiped out once and for all) it will be compulsory to have sex with your children to prepare them for the completely sex based world that they will be growing up into, i`ve always felt incredibly angry and bitter (as i`m sure you do as well) that i was born into this appalling time in history ("the time of sexual repression") when liars, hypocrites, cowards, and deceivers (who masquerade as so-called politicians) were allowed to demonise certain forms of sexual activity for their own pathetic, desperate, absurd, idiotic, out-moded, hateful, spiteful reasons, (because thats what so-called politics and government has always been all about, maximising the despair of the people and minimising their pleasure, the exact opposite of what the people now want!) well let me tell you something gore-gore girl their days are numbered, (just like the days of the religious bastards who oppressed us for hundreds of years were numbered 150 years ago as the brave new world beckoned) soon so-called politicians and having a so-called government will be just a hideous nightmare from a by-gone era (just like religion is for us) as another brave new world emerges, a world of total and utter sexual freedom where everybody will be fucking everybody else 24 hours a day, and yes my dear gore-gore girl that will include the children especially the children, signifying that all the lies, hypocrisy, sexual repression, and censorship that has poisoned and plagued "our" lives is gone forever, and that "the time of sexual repression" is over once and for all.

willy jerk-off said...

just a word about the previous comment, the name of the person who left the comment didn`t appear in its entirety when the comment appeared, so just for clarification, the persons name is "THE POSTURING (AND ADMITTEDLY RATHER IRRITATING) LITTLE POPINJAY", (what a fabulously witty, clever, and charming name) thank-you, and by the way, what they wrote was absolutely brilliant and completely true.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails