AVS Forum banner

Californication on SHO

127K views 1K replies 158 participants last post by  acebreathe 
#1 ·
Looking forward to this new original on Showtime. Theme song they play on some of the promos (The Girl I'll Never Have) gets stuck in my head for days. Hope it's as good as the promos make it out to be.
 
#82 ·
I liked it, too. I have always got a kick out of Duchovny. His charming, laid back, but slightly depressed persona works well in Californication. There were too many funny but slightly pornographic one line zingers to count in the pilot. The show has a lot of promise.
 
#86 ·
What is wrong with these people who produce this show? I love the gratuitous nudity, but come on now! There's a scene where our writer hero lying on a bed, fully clothed, and examining the naked charms of a comely lass...but the shot is set so that he's holding a glass of liquor directly in front of her nether region.


Talk about double standards! We can see bare t*ts and bare a*s, but bare p*ssy (or p*bic hair) is a no-no? Is there something in Broadcast Standards and Practices that prohibits this? On pay cable? Like we're going to see something unseemly in a TV-MA rated broadcast!


Oh puh-leeze!
 
#87 ·
Gotta keep it softcore and artistic. Anything hardcore would probably have to be restricted to airing after midnight and would also drive the WAF way down. Besides, there's this whole other place called the Internet where you can find all the hardcore porn you could ever want, for free.
 
#88 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by coyoteaz /forum/post/11366570


Besides, there's this whole other place called the Internet where you can find all the hardcore porn you could ever want, for free.

That's a myth. There hasn't been "free porn" available over the Internet since its early days. That industry pioneered the 'net as a viable commercial enterprise and has implemented ever more ingenious ways to part the pornophile from his money ever since.


As to the anatomical regions revealed in this show, topless is just fine, thanks. There's not a great deal of demand for bottomless in the non-porn world, and that's just as well.
 
#89 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by humdinger70 /forum/post/11366441


What is wrong with these people who produce this show? I love the gratuitous nudity, but come on now! There's a scene where our writer hero lying on a bed, fully clothed, and examining the naked charms of a comely lass...but the shot is set so that he's holding a glass of liquor directly in front of her nether region.


Talk about double standards! We can see bare t*ts and bare a*s, but bare p*ssy (or p*bic hair) is a no-no? Is there something in Broadcast Standards and Practices that prohibits this? On pay cable? Like we're going to see something unseemly in a TV-MA rated broadcast!


Oh puh-leeze!

Do CGI breasts count? I thought something didn't look right about the Paula Marshall scene when I first watched. I think they used a body double for the rear shot and put CGI boobs on her. Check it out.
 
#94 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by UTV2TiVo /forum/post/11372005


You're just looking in the wrong places...

Perhaps if you're willing to dig long and hard for it (no pun intended), but I remember looking for it once a few years back (literally only once; after what happened to my computer I'd never do it again
) just to see if it was out there and every single site was a pay-site. Sometimes, they'd have some kind of a tease out front (maybe that's where the myth of "free" porn comes from), but the "good stuff" was all locked away and required a fee. Somebody puts porn on the web, they're going to want to get paid.
 
#96 ·
I don't know nothing 'bout no Internet porn. Hell, I don't even have a pornograph.
 
#97 ·
This show illustrates what excellent writing and acting can do for a show without fancy special effects, expensive sets, or...a plot.
 
#99 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by archiguy /forum/post/11374524


I kind of felt the same way about 'John from Cincinnati'.

Yeah but the only thing people are arguing about here is if those breasts were the actresses, a body double's or CGI. That's much better than arguing if the parrot is God and just saved Shaunie, or who the hell is John and why are the Hawaiins there. This show is infinitely better than JFC.
 
#100 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ralphyboy /forum/post/11375897


Yeah but the only thing people are arguing about here is if those breasts were the actresses, a body double's or CGI. That's much better than arguing if the parrot is God and just saved Shaunie, or who the hell is John and why are the Hawaiins there. This show is infinitely better than JFC.

To each his own, but I would fundamentally disagree with your premise. This show, while entertaining and containing a wonderfully large amount of boobage, is nowhere near JfC in terms of the weight of talent brought to bear on the production. Understand that I may be considered an "apologist" for that show, but I thought it was brilliant. Weird, yes; opaque, mostly; confounding, occasionally; but nonetheless brilliant. I was hugely disappointed there won't be a second season. I'm sure there are one or two others who feel likewise.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top