More Bait & Switch
Porns like that should all be titled "NBC Vol. 453,530,995," or whatever number they're up to. "NBC" stands for "Nothin' But Closeups" btw. You're right. It's impossible to see the models or even what's going on. I guess that's why they're called "skin flicks." Cocks slammin' hairy ass filmed so close you can pick out your favorite rhoids, and blurry cockheads squirtin blurry
shots. No faces, no muscle definition, no fun of any kind. One studio should do all of the NBCs for all of the closeup lovers, and let the other studios serve the actual market of discriminating viewers. But I guess Quinnipiac did some sort of survey that "proved" most of us love closeups - - - LOL. I don't think they asked if we like closeups 10% of the time, 50% of the time, or 99.999% of the time. Seriously, though, I figure studios like CF and SC have been successful because they use closeups less, not more---only about 10-20% of the time, I would say. Both really know how to film a money shot so viewers can see as much as possible. We always get perspectives from at least two cams. Studios who can't afford two should please leave the industry and start a cooking show or something like that. Or maybe a reality show about poverty. "Real House Husbands of Porno Loseropolis"---that might be good.
On an even more staggeringly cynical note: I just watched a BD flick advertised as P4u1 Fr3sh and T0m. If you've seen the former, you know he's a blond hunk to die for. And if you've seen the latter . . . well, in my view, he's not even quite tolerable to watch more than 0.02 or 0.03 nanosecs. So how did the flick play out? Absolutely no shots of the blond beauty above the waist, plus he wore a suit the whole time. The whole thing was the uggo sucking like a wolf eel and with about that much aesthetic appeal. Until he opens his maw for the money shot. I seriously doubt that the suit was PF. It could have been anybody. Avoid like the frickin plague!