Thomas Zupko Boots Me From His Set
2003-06-29 14:46:16
Scott Fayner writes on l-keford.com:
...Luke found himself in the position to leaf through a production folder he had no right whatsoever to be looking at. It is property of Elegant Angel. Apparently, reporters are now allowed access to whatever they so desire.
I saw the folder in question. It was packed with tons of pages, one of which happened to be a cast list with each person’s pay rate for the movie. And I’m not positive whether slinking his menacing fingers into this data is legal or not, but I know for certain it was not the work of a principled journalist.
Luke posted his stolen findings on his Web site, in the exact order they appeared on the page within the folder. And from what I was told from everyone who was there, not once did Luke attempt to validate his illegally obtained information.
Later that day Luke was asked to leave for other reasons. He was lucky he evacuated when he did, because someone at the set quietly put a $300 bounty on his head, declaring that whomever knocked the shifty reporter out would find themselves a tad bit richer.
Sparky writes l-keford.com: So, apparantly, investigative journalism is dead. And corporate lackeyism is thriving. Whatever happened to reporters taking risks, digging for info, getting their fingers dirty?
Oh, the only dirty fingers you are getting Fayner is from the soiled gash you play with in your life as a quasi-reporter.
Admit it, you are just the Entertainment Weekly of Porn and barely that. You might as well be US.
I hate Luke and think he's a dick, but, come on, as soon as reporters make friends with their subjects, they aren't reporting in an unbiased fashion anymore. Look at Gulf War the Sequel.
Fayner=Industry Lapdog writes: Maybe you should sober up, then try re-writing this to make it coherent. If "reporters are now allowed access to whatever they so desire," then why is it that "he had no right whatsoever to be looking at [it]"?
If you, faux-Luke, saw, and know the contents of, the folder, why is it not OK for the real Luke to have seen it?
If "I’m not positive whether slinking his menacing fingers into this data is legal or not," then why is it "illegally obtained information"?
What the hell does "validate his illegally obtained information" mean?
What qualifies you to discuss "principled journalist" behaviour? Which journalism school was it that you attended?
XXX Director writes: I mostly shoot stuff one scene at a time these days. And I usually schedule scenes with little notice. I keep my crew down to 3 or 4 plus talent. I'm a very low-profile shooter. I don't trust people. I often shoot without permits and I know of some individuals in this business who will turn people into the police because they're
shooting without a permit, but actually because they're shooting without a permit obtained through them. They're
called rats, by the way. And will f--k anyone for a buck.
............................................
Video Team director David Aaron Clark writes Luke: I disagree over this with many of my friends and colleagues, but I really think you've matured as a reporter and this is another excellent on-set piece, full of nothing but facts and what seems to be to be very fair observations. The trouble with the people in porn -- many of them, as I say, friends of mine who I do respect -- is that they have no idea what actual journalism is, as opposed to PR puffery where the writer colludes with the subject to produce nothing but fluff designed to move more pieces. Not there isn't a place for this -- Entertainment Weekly, anyone? -- and that I haven't used to it to my advantage in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. C'mon, my friends and fellow journalists, look at all the terrible abuses going on in this industry and worry about them, not about a damn Internet columnist who has ocassionally made you look bad!
If someone doesn't want you on their set, that's certainly their right, but I think it's ridiculous how personal people make it. And I am disappointed in friends and colleagues in the porn press who try to throw their weight around and have you thrown off set when they arrive. It's nothing short of childish, bully-like behavior; I've expressed this to them personally, and don't mind stating it here for the record. Though I've been irritated in the past by my own crew and cast saying things to you I would have rather not seen in print, I am very aware that that is the name of the game, and if they suffer from diaherrea of the mouth in front of the media, that is my problem to deal with, and I don't blame you for it. I might try to keep them AWAY from you, but again that's the game ... :)
As I'm sure you know, there is absolutely nothing "illegal" about you reading figures in a book left out in the open and printing them. Any "journalist" who suggest so has about as much of a background in actual journalistic practices and ethics as, oh, my dead cat (who I miss very much, but never put paw to keyboard, thank God). Not that I would be that thrilled to have you do the same on my set, but perhaps I wouldn't leave the budget lying the f-ck around where anybody could see it ... I don't see what the source of embarassment is, considering Zupko and Elegant are paying fair-market prices (though the lack of "golden time" pay for my buddy's terribly long shooting days is the fault of a forever unorganized and unregulated industry).
And as for the needle thing, what does AIM have to do with it, and why the f-ck did their board have to consult on it???!!!!! While I certainly wouldn't recommend someone who doesn't know what they're doing poking a needle in somebody's arm (embolism, anyone?) someone who knows what they're doing can easily do so without any danger .... Tom, next time you want to do something where someone is a junkie as opposed to an alcoholic, consult me. I spent enough time in the East Village to help you with the details.
Whoever "put a $300 bounty on [DUC]'s head" is, to be crass about it, an absolute pussy. If someone doesn't have the balls to walk up to you and confront you, and makes a cowardly offer like that -- even in jest -- should do a gonad-check on themselves.
......................
I was on set of Thomas Zupko's movie OPERA Sunday and I peeked in the book with the salaries for the various participants in the movie. I published this on setgo.com and was asked to stay away from the next day's shoot. Did I act unethically?
Steve replies on GFY: I feel that is an invasion of privacy. Are they running for public office? No. So why make thier income public knowledge?
Fillmore Slim writes: You acted how you wanted to act. You knew it was wrong but you did it for the purposes of self-interest.
Don't ask others to condone or condemn your actions...thats a cop out. If you did it for the purposes of reporting it as an investigative journalist...accept your responsibility.
Deepundercover is a known and admitted gossip/news shark.
The producers of the movie should have known before granting him access....however, in the future, scoops might be a little more difficult for him to uncover as he wont be allowed back on many sets.
Besides the copyright infringement when he pulls comments from boards and posts them on his blog, I actually enjoy the deepundercover posts.
ErosWebmaster writes to Luke: Was it worth it? Shat will it cost you in the end vs the little bit of notoriety you get today?
DUC replies: I wasn't going to publish the information except they kept harassing me on set not to do certain things and then they booted me early so the other porno press could feel comfortable. So I said, forget it, I'm publishing everything I know from the shoot.
Lee Noga writes: Yes, it was if your mention of the salaries was the first public awareness of this.
Fillmore Slim writes: Was he on set as the character deepundercover or was he there in a different role?
If he was there for news gathering. I think he gathered news.
Steve writes: When you let a wolf into the pig pen, you really can't bitch when he eats a sow.
...........................................
On the first day of the movie, Saturday (7/28/03), the shoot ran from 8AM to midnight.
Franz, a heterosexual opera singer, did a scene where he was covered with live rats.
I arrive on Thomas Zupko's set Sunday 8:45AM and run into Franz and Katja Kassin, a 5'3" meaty girl from Germany who's getting paid $1000 in cash. She's represented by Mark Spiegler.
Katja, 23 years old, began her porn career in March in the LA. She returned seven weeks ago. She's appeared in about 15 films. She didn't want to do porn in Europe because they treat the women so bad.
She's three years into her program in Germany literature and Political Science at a German university.
Papillon, the production manager/caterer/costumer/performer, is nowhere in sight. She doesn't show until 10:15AM. She will earn $1500 for her labors on the shoot.
The owner and operator of the camera will make the most money - $1800.
Make-up artist Marianne aka Kelly Nichols arrives shortly after 8AM.
Franz, who's making his first appearance in a porn film, was laid on the set yesterday by intellectual porn newcomer Vivica Vengeance, roommate of porn star Allura Bond. Their sex took place in a room you have to cross through to get to the bathroom, so a lot of people got to see what was going on.
Vivica heard Franz sing, and was so impressed, she shared the greatest intimacy two human beings can have. Amazingly, they did not seem particularly bonded by the experience and there was no talk of marriage, let alone a relationship.
I don't understand how people can have sex without the context of love and commitment.
I've always gotten along with Thomas Zupko even though I disagree with most of his atheistic values and his glorification of human degradation. I've never seen any of his movies because I don't like to watch porn movies, particularly not the gross kind he makes. This is my first time on his set.
Thomas warns everybody that everything they say to me will show up on the Internet.
Luke: "Have you ever been a heroin addict?"
Thomas: "No. My only addiction is Bud Light."
Luke: "How many Bud Lights did you have yesterday?"
Tom: "Not that many."
Luke: "How many is that?"
Tom: "I'm not going to say that to you. Four or five.
"Everything I've ever done creatively [has been under the influence of alcohol]. As William Faulkner said when asked what it takes to be a good writer - 'pen, paper, tobacco and whiskey.'
"You have a drink and you're opened up. The intimidation is gone. The fear is taken away and you're ready to tap into your imagination."
Marianne: "You're the Hemingway of porn."
Zupko says he's going to quit drinking in a couple of weeks and that Papillon, his production manager, has encouraged him to cut down.
For the AVN Awards, Zupko plans to be down to 160 pounds (a loss of about 40 pounds from his current weight).
Tom laughs: "He's put the most unflattering pictures of me up on the Internet."
Luke: "Everyone says that."
Marianne, the make-up artist: "[Tom] wants to be the Rob Zombie of porn."
Luke: "Who's Rob Zombie?"
Zombie is a cult hero, rockn'roll gore, edgy appearance.
Tom says he has only one tattoo but he plans to get two on his arm - one of Dostoevsky and a shot of a bleeeding Christ.
Zupko says he identifies with the protagonist of the Fyodor Dostoevsky novel The Idiot. "He was this brilliant good-hearted person who cared but when he came back [from the institution) into society, he reverted back to being a child and was put back in the institution.
"I went through a period with my former company [Extreme Associates] where it was mandated that you put people down. I don't believe in that any more. I believe that we are all in this business together. There are so many forces fighting against us on every level that we have to unite. That's one of the reasons I left [Extreme]. I don't believe in alienating yourself from this business. We're all in this together."
Marianne: "People love pornography. They hate themselves for loving pornography."
Tom: "I don't need the promise of Heaven or the threat of Hell to be good person."
Luke: "So you believe in goodness. How is goodness objectively defined or is it all just personal opinion?"
I provoke Zupko about God and he goes on a long angry rant about how there is no God because little children suffer. Then he leaves the room.
Later, he pulls me aside. "I have to say something for the record. The most beautiful human being I've met in my life is Papillon. She has made me quit drinking for good."
Zupko tells Papillon that the only person who can drink on the set is Scott Fayner.
The dry set is for the benefit of setgo.com readers.
Zupko and Franz say they considered shooting a needle penetrating the skin for the movie but after asking AIM, which consulted its board of directors, they abided by its recommendation of no.
Luke: "Were any of the five movies seized from Extreme directed by you?"
Zupko shakes his head: "There we go. There we go. Yes. One - Ass Clowns 3. The director's cut. I had Brian Surewood on a cross having his dick sucked by a fallen angel. It was about the hypocrisy of religion and all that.
"[DUC] is always digging. He's the devil. He seems so nice and sweet, with a sweet smile, that's just applying the bait.
"I believe in what I do. I'm not going to back down."
I chat with articulate boom operator Axel Hose, who performed in porn for two years because his fiance Allyson Embers talked him into it. Most of the time he now works behind the scenes in mainstream entertainment like Court TV shows.
Axel: "Allyson wanted to be a porn star, and once she became one, I couldn't let her be one by herself. It started off, 'I'm only going to do girl-girl.' To, 'I'm only going to do boy-girl with my fiance.' And the first job she did was a DP with MickeyG and some big black guy with a dick the size of a salami.
"It was about the money. Girl-girl pays $300. Boy-girl pays about $800. DPs were about $1500-$2500. So all of a sudden I had to throw myself in as a performer to fill [one of those holes]. She did 160 movies in two years. I did 42 in two years.
"I'm a kinky nasty dirty person. I like bondage. We went to swing clubs.
"One of the reasons we quit [porn] was because we couldn't take the drugs, the alcohol abuse... This industry is hard on the girls. It eats the girl's soul.
"I've had a charmed life sexually. I've been to a lot of orgies and things. Without the drugs, without the alcohol and without the cameras aimed at your dick, the sex takes a bizarre turn. I expect that type of excitement at home and it took a year to get weaned from that whacky sex.
"I was hardcore addicted to methamphetamine, alcohol, and that lifestyle.
"We did Sex Survivor 2000 and made $14,000 cash plus some lumps. We took that money and bought stupid furniture, a fountain for our front room. She made over $100,000 the first year. We took that money and snorted it, pissed it away, bought stupid cars... It's all gone. We have nothing left.
"We were so high, so cranked up on the business and working all the time... We went to AVN [Awards]. Walked the red carpet. Thousands of people taking pictures of you. You forget. You think you are somebody."
Luke: "Do you find the industry socially isolating?"
Axel: "Yes. I went back to mainstream and someone found out I was a porn star. I touched something on the crafts service table and they wouldn't touch the food after I did. Being a porn star is like being the scourge of the universe. I'm 47 years old, so I don't care. If I were younger, it would kill me."
Luke: "I talked to this porn star Stevi and she said she didn't have one friend. She said she didn't want to be friends with anyone in the porn industry and she didn't want to be friends with anyone in the mainstream."
Axel: "My wife and I have no friends. No social life. We have dogs, cats and rats. I can't have a social life. The moment people find out I was a porn star, they're fascinated for a few minutes and then they want nothing to do with me."
Luke: "There's no escape and no redemption from the taint of porn."
This shakes Franz up. He says, "I'm glad I'm just doing extra work."
Luke: "It will be interesting to see what happens to you as a consequence of doing this."
Franz: "Look at the mainstream stars who've done porn. Rob Lowe with that young girl. R. Kelley caught with that 13-year old girl. It killed their careers. Look at Pamela Anderson and Tommy Lee. It ruins them for a long time if not forever.
"I figure that being a junkie in a film like this is not that bad."
Zupko has Franz crawl in the dumpster and crawl around.
Now he wants Franzo to puke.
I grab my tape recorder and camera to record Tom's directions.
Tom: "Talk about puking in dumpsters, and [DUC's] camera comes out."
It's true. I have no interest in the ordinary goings-on on a porn set. I want to capture human drama. I have no interest in rating the heat of sex scenes.
Zupko exults after Franz pukes for a second time. He claps his hands and chuckles. He delights in degradation, in wallowing in the gutter, in the most depraved tendencies.
Tom: "After all the great sex, [DUC] will put up in a headline, 'Zupko has someone puke. This is what is wrong with pornography.'"
Luke: "That's the most powerful puke I've ever seen."
Tom to Franz: "I want you to crawl around in the dumpster, in the garbage..."
Franz protests: "There's broken glass in here."
I repeat his words into my tape recorder and Zupko erupts with bitter laughter. "Don't you do that. Puke and broken glass..."
I go up to the dumpster to capture a picture of the broken glass but my floppy disc is full and I must walk upstairs to get a new one.
After I do so, Papillon (relaying orders from Zupko) tells me that if I photograph the broken glass, I will be asked to leave the set.
Half an hour later, I sit upstairs in the make-up room. Zupko walks in and is about to give me a friendly pat on the leg, when I jump. My body expected him to punch me. Perhaps I suffer from paranoia?
Tom Zupko is an auteur director, the author of his films. His detractors on set say he's on a power trip. His supporter, who are many, says he's a brilliant artist and they feel privileged to work for him.
Most porn directors are low key and have a 'We're all in this together. Let's pull together so we can go home early," approach. Zupko is a perfectionist who demands many takes. Some say he is happiest in life when he is directing and he wants to stretch out this pleasurable experience.
Allura Bond, Zupko's roommate, is two hours late for her scene. His other roommate is Slain Wayne. Tom used to live with David Aaron Clark, who now lives with Brian Surewood.
Papillon and Zupko clash at times because they both have strong views. Papillon once dated a heroin addicted rocker James Lin Strait from the band Snot. Lyn died in 1998. He also dated Daisy Chain.
Papillon believes she knows a lot about heroin. She's smoked it. She thinks the way Zupko shot the use of heroin yesterday was unrealistic.
Zupko goes to the refrigerator.
Crew member: "Are you having a beer?"
Tom: "No. I'm not drinking anymore."
Papillon tells me: "We are putting on our best wardrobe for you today."
A woman on set asks for cigarettes. A man comes back with a pack of Newports. She doesn't want them. She says, 'Newports are for black people. I like Benson and Hedges.'"
David Aaron Clark has a great deal at Video Team, which has bought him expensive editing equipment. He's finishing editing Asian Noir 3. In the fall, he will shoot an Asian girl pop group show.
Pete Pistol, a recent college graduate, former PR guy for Sineplex and independent Internet guy, does a BJ scene with his ex-girlfriend Vivica Vengeance (her first movie scene) in the alley on top of Franz. Yesterday, Vivica did Franz for free on the couch because she liked his singing.
Pete and Vivica broke up in February, in part because Vivica wanted to become a porn star.
Franz: "Let's go. I'm having cold feet about people having sex on top of me. It's not what I signed up for. I don't mind being a junkie."
Franz freaks out five minutes into the scene and rolls away and jumps up. He couldn't take it any more. He never expected to lie beneath sex. He only came here to sing and do a few background scenes.
Franz: "I wasn't told about this. You said I'd play a junkie and sing and a dance sequence but I did not know anything about this."
Pistol Pete drugs Franz out of the scene and the couple resume their action. The dog Buddy walks back and forth across the scene.
I chat with Tom Zupko.
Luke: "Have you ever done scenes?"
Tom: "When I was 160 pounds, in 1991, I used to manage a strip club in Las Vegas for Ray Pistol. I did an amateur scene. It was the worst experience of my life."
Crew member: "Did they put you in a trash can?"
Tom laughs: "No."
He talks about a favorite scene he directed: "Shay Sights on a cross, an umbilical cord coming out of her pussy, attached to the belly buttons of three girls, all three girls getting f---ed in the ass... It was in the desert. The sun was going down. Shay Sights said, 'This is inhumane. I don't care how much money you're paying me.'
"A week later, she called me up in tears. 'This is the most beautiful thing I've ever done in my whole life.'"
Axel Hose, who was there: "Everybody was ready to slit their wrists on the set.
"My fiance was in it. It was one of the last movies she ever did.
"She wanted to kill herself during that shoot. We didn't talk for a week afterwards. But when she saw it, she said, 'That is so great.'
"It's like while you're getting breast augmentation, it hurts, but after you see the results, you say, wow."
The crew ribs Zupko for shooting a softcore version of this movie.
Tom says he wants to shoot a sequel to In Love, Chuck Vincent's namy pamby 1983 porn. "It was one of the most beautiful... It's a love story. Any one who watches it cries. That's going to be my next movie. A beautiful sweet..."
Luke: "Have you mellowed?"
I turn to Vivica: "Did that scene bring back your romantic feelings for your ex-boyfriend?"
Vivica: "At least he knows how to face-f---. I taught him that much."
Luke: "Did it touch your heart to share such intimacy with him again?"
Vivica: "He's my best friend but I'm not in love with him."
Luke: "Do you blow him off camera?"
Vivica: "Sometimes. If he's nice. If he's deserving."
Pistol Pete says he's abandoned drinking and smoking weed. He smokes cigarettes like a chimney.
I chat upstairs with a shaking Franz.
Franz, who will earn $400 for his labors: "I just can't do that. You have to be a special kind of person to do that. I'll chalk it up to experience. It's not an industry that I want to be in. He said I could get money for singing. Then he said, 'I've got some extra money if you will do some extra work.' It was the lure of the money.
"You do your gig for the money. You look through the trash for the money just like I looked through the trash for the money.
"I'm modest. I'm moral. When they were doing that that close, I had to go."
Luke: "How would your friends react to this movie?"
Franz: "My engineering friends would have no problem with it. My opera friends would be appalled. I'm realizing who I am. I am more like my opera friends. I am more traditional."
I chat with Vivica, 22-years old and has had between 30-35 lovers. "Why would you want to get into this industry?"
Vivica: "Because I love sex."
Luke: "Then get a boyfriend and have sex."
Vivica: "This way, you can have sex with a good amount of people, choose who you work with, they're all tested, and you don't have too many people acting too dramatic. There's less drama with the sex. It's an easy way to have sex and not have too many complications."
Luke: "Don't you realize that by doing this, you are socially ostracizing yourself for the rest of your life?"
Vivica: "I don't believe that. I'm already a forensic anthropology major. I've already taken an internship at the LA Coroners doing autopsies. I'm already very well educated. I graduated valedictorian from high school. If people don't hire me, that will be their loss."
Luke: "Do you prefer to have sex with live bodies or dead bodies?"
Vivica: "Live bodies. Are you joking?"
Luke: "What about animals?"
Vivica: "No. It doesn't seem right. Animals can't tell me directly if that is an ok thing or not. Plus it is illegal."
Pistol Pete: "I hope so. That's sick. Why are we talking about bestiality? I need context here."
Vivica: "We were talking about having sex with dead bodies..."
Luke: "Do you support the state of Israel?"
Vivica: "I support the state of everything. Do I support George Bush? No."
Luke: "Do you support gay marriage?"
Vivica: "Yes, I was raised by loving gay men and women."
Luke: "When did you lose your virginity?"
Vivica: "I was thirteen and I lost my virginity to two girls who were living with me. They were not family members."
1PM: Ren Savant and Bryn Pryor arrive on set. Ren edited Bryn's mainstream movie Poker. Bryn then pushed for Ren's Seven Deadly Sins Vivid movie to clean up at the AVN Awards, which it did. The movie was written by AVN staffer Rebecca Gray.
Bryn was managing editor of AVN. Prone to screaming fits and displays of temper, he alienated many staffers and porn companies. In the year 2000, he was convicted of dealing in stolen property and served prison time. He also picked up trash along the side of freeways with other prisoners.
The dog Buddy runs outside, across the street and takes a leak. A black man yells at me, "You better watch out. You're in the hood."
I run across the street, grab the dog, and bring him back inside, closing the door.
DUC to Papillon: "Who do you know high up in the biker world?"
Papillon: "I can't talk about that. I wouldn't say Hells Angels. Let's just say that my daughter's father came from South Carolina. He's in a rock band. And he rolls with people from Venice and all over Southern California. He told me that if I ever needed anything, just to give certain people a call. But if I make that call, I have to take responsibility for what happens to the person I call against. It's horrible."
Luke: "Have you ever made that call?"
Papillon: "Close. Someone was screwing with my older brother. Michelle happened to be black. I didn't realize that when I was telling my daughter's father about it, that his friends despise anyone not white, no matter how intelligent you were. So I had no clue that what I was telling my daughter's father was getting back to them. And Michelle almost got hurt over it. He lost his job because of this bitch. He has seven kids. I don't know exactly what went down. She didn't get hurt but she was close to it.
"When I get upset, certain people freak and they want to beat up everybody who causes me problems.
"Everyone is scared in the industry because I talk all the time that I am going to tell you something. 'Oh yeah, you'll call your friend [DUC] and I'm sure I will be reading about it.'
"I don't care. I see it this way: Don't piss me off and I won't tell him what happened. I will do it in a coy way. I won't put my name on it. People are scared of you [DUC] for some reason. I think you are a great guy."
Jade Blue, who was in David Aaron Clark's original Asianatrix, has a scandalous naked leather sex scene for The Damnation of Faust at the San Francisco Opera. People walked out on it because they were so offended.
Jade is doing single-armed handstands and performing contortions in the circus.
Tom Zupko walks over: "[DUC] reports on the hypocrisy of porn. One day I want to do the opposite, and report on the hypocrisy of religion."
Papillon yells at Tom to get away. She doesn't like to hear his anti-religious views.
Luke: "Zupko has a religion-complex. All his movies have religious [blasphemous] themes. He's fighting with God."
Papillon: "I took this test they give to mass murderers and I scored like a mass murderer."
1:45PM. AVN's chubby middle-aged assistant editor Heidi Pike-Johnson arrives on set. She's introduced to me. She clearly has no time for me. I don't bother to extend my hand. She avoids me.
2PM: Papillon asks me not to take any photos of Heidi. I agree.
2:15PM: Papillon asks me not to talk to Heidi. I have not and I do not plan to.
2:30PM: Papillon says I need to leave the set at Zupko's request. About ten members of the porno press are due to arrive soon and these tender souls will feel uncomfortable at my presence.
Scott Fayner and Allura Bond don't show up Sunday.
Pay scale on the movie:
Avy Scott - $1200
Dennis M. - $400
Allura Bond - $400
Spiegler's girls - $100-$200.
Katja - $1000 cash.
Tony Tedeschi - $500
Satine Diamond - $1000
Valentino - $500.
Ashley Blue - $1000.
MickeyG - $400.
9:22PM. Production manager Papillon calls and leaves me this message: "I haven't turned on the computer yet but I heard about the article you wrote and about how much money everyone makes... The offer of coming to the set tomorrow no longer stands."
Pistol Pete writes: Vivica Vengeance- she is is a bit of an intellectual and she knows how to f-ck- hopefully that makes an inkling of a dent in the site of porn stereotyping.
Check out "McCabe and Mrs. Miller". I have written (and copywritten) a remake of it to the "La Casa Nostra" chapter of your book.
Sunday had to have been the powderkeg of porn journalism history. I can safely say, with absolutely no white-washing of the matter- that production was the single most enlightening, purging (in an emotional way) experience of my life. Tom is a fine filmmaker. I was there to see if the art and exploitation could co-exist... In my humble opinion- yes, they did. "Opera" is going to be a milestone in erotica, which is needed with all the generic pro-am junk out there.
Sarettah writes on setgo.com's forum: I don't know if it is unethical. But it is definitely a way for you to make new enemies and to guarantee that you don't ever get invited to another shoot with those particular folks...
Money is usually kept quiet in adult or mainstream..... When one person finds out that another person is making more than them it causes unnecessary strife... A person in any job gets what they can negotiate, a better negotiator will end up getting more money even though they might be doing the exact same job....
For example, if you (Duck) found out that both Anthony and Voodooman were making at least twice what you are and if Anthony knew that Dig was paying Voodooman $10,000 more a year than he is making (check it out, it's fact... Dig told me so himself...trust me) then that would probably make for some pretty tense moments when you guys go to lunch and Voodoo, Ant and Dig all inform you it's your turn to buy....
I hope I didn't divulge any confidences here... But I figure that you probably already knew seeing as you live in your van and Voodoo is looking for a nice apartment at the beach and all...What's The Story With AVN's Heidi Pike-Johnson?
2003-06-30 15:22:54
1:45PM. AVN's chubby middle-aged married assistant editor Heidi Pike-Johnson arrives on set. She's introduced to me. She clearly has no time for me. I don't bother to extend my hand because she clearly hates me.
2PM: Papillon asks me not to take any photos of Heidi. I agree.
2:15PM: Papillon asks me not to talk to Heidi. I have not and I did not plan to. It's the first time I've been asked on a set not to talk to someone, let alone not to talk to a fellow journalist. She must be a fragile soul.
2:30PM: Papillon says I need to leave the set at Zupko's request. About ten members of the porno press are due to arrive soon and these tender souls will feel uncomfortable at my presence.
Monday I sent out some emails and made some phone calls to get the scoop on Heidi Pike-Johnson.
Publicist Jason Sechrest writes: "Heidi Pike-Johnson is one of the few people over at AVN who I consider to be totally trustworthy and abound with integrity, not to mention so f-cking talented as a staff writer and the creator of AVNInsider.com. She is one of the few people I know who actually respects our industry enough to take real pride in her work. She cares about what she puts out there and it shows. I don't know why I'm even defending this. Her work should speak volumes for itself. She is one of AVN's most valuable players."
Cindi Loftus writes: "[DUC], Just my two cents worth. It sounds like your feelings were hurt when Heidi didn't talk to you on the set. You felt that she wasn't treating you like a fellow journalist. To alot of people you are not an industry friendly person, and they want to stay away from you. You decided That Heidi didn't like you and you decided to knock her down a peg or two. This is the kind of crap you find in "The Globe." I have alot of respect for Heidi. She takes her job very seriously. She works hard to acheive her own high standards. She is an excellent writer. (and I do have experience in this department), and a nice person. [DUC], I think you went overboard picking on someone who didn't deserve to be picked on."
An AVN source tells me: "She's the devil. She must have photos of Paul Fishbein with a dog or something [to explain why she's still employed at AVN].
"She used to work for Buttman magazine and the story I heard is that Evil Angel owner John Stagliano begged Paul to take her off his hands.
"Almost everyone at AVN hates working with her, particularly the AVN Online team. She'd steal stories from AVN Online to put on AVN.com (when the sites were separated). She would add errors. She would complain to managing editor Mikey Ramone if someone were talking too loud while she was trying to review a film. If you look at her the wrong way, she will go to someone and complain. She's a general pain in the ass.
"She'd complain about Rebecca Gray talking too loud. Heidi couldn't watch her porn and concentrate if Rebecca talked loudly.
"Paul would say, 'It's a newsroom. There should be people talking in a newsroom. It's not a library.'
"Rebecca Gray is fun and smart. She's another person at AVN, like Tod Hunter, who could do better than working in porn.
"Heidi's a bad writer. She adds errors into stories. She's an unpleasant person. You were generous when you called her chubby because she's enormous. She's not a happy person.
"She's basically a porn fan. She's a Mark Kernes-style industry loyalist. She's a porn groupie. She's a lifer. She worships Jenna Jameson. She did a Jenna story for Ton magazine."
Luke: "She was sending the poor production manager over to me every few minutes to keep me away from her."
AVN Source: "For whatever reason, Mikey Ramone protects her.
"She's always goading those she works with.
"A few people who worked for her quit. She may be the reason Gram Ponante left. I think he's going out with Rebecca Gray?
"When Suzie Erhlich left, Heidi wanted her office. Heidi thought she was at that level in the company, which everyone thought was funny.
"Heidi was supposed to be the website administrator for AVN.com. She turned the title into being managing editor of avn.com. She moved over to be associate editor of AVN magazine for a while but that did not work out.
"Heidi sends out long-winded accusatory emails, complaining about people for the most inane reasons (i.e., he spoke to me inappropriately). She likes to stir things up. She'd run to Mikey Ramone at the slightest provocation."Christian Mann vs DUC On Publishing Porn Star Salaries
2003-07-03 12:07:52
Geoff to Luke: "This is what I love about you. Just when you piss me off the most, I have to laugh at you. You baited Christian so badly and I can't believe Christian even fell for the bait.
"I'm reading your response to you and I'm cracking up. We're all cracking up. This guy reads you every day but he doesn't want to like you because his friends (Paul Fishbein, Steve Hirsch etc) don't like you."
Luke: "Whenever we're in person, he always comes up to me in the most friendly way and we have a nice chat."
Geoff: "He definitely thinks you are a smart guy and he definitely reads you every day. He normally doesn't get sucked in to stupid little debates like that but you sucked him in. Kudos!
"The vocabulary that Christian pulls out is wasted on the readers of l-keford.com. Christian Mann is the Dennis Miller of porn. Some people will understand because they're educated and they will catch references and vocabulary and there's the status quo idiots."
......................................
On Sunday, June 29, I looked over the shoulder of production manager Papillon at her production book, which listed the salaries of those who worked on Tom Zupko's Elegant Angel movie Opera.
To double check my memories of those salaries, I looked in the book again when Papillon was gone. The book was left by the crafts service table in plain sight. This is what I found:
Katja: $1000
Camera operator: $1800
Papillon, PM, caterer, actress: $1500
Avy Scott - $1200
Dennis M. - $400
Allura Bond - $400
Spiegler's girls - $100-$200.
Katja - $1000 cash.
Tony Tedeschi - $500
Satine Diamond - $1000
Valentino - $500.
Ashley Blue - $1000.
MickeyG - $400.
Fred writes: What the hell did "Spiegler's girls" do? They only
got $100-$200?
Luke: Dunno.
How many days work were required for the cameraman to
earn $1800? Was this for more than one cameraman?
Luke: Three days. Rental of equipment.
Was the account book open, or did you flip through it?
Luke: One time of each.
Do the actors/actresses generally know what each other
gets? Does this cause rivalry?
Luke: Sometimes to both.
James DiGiorgio writes: "If you did that to me, I'd be
pissed but I don't think I'd accuse you of violating any
hard-and-fast ethical practice. But I wouldn't be happy
about it and probably wouldn't ever have you on my set
again."
Cindi Loftus writes: "Very interesting piece of work. I loved your back and forth with Christian. But as interesting as it is, if I had seen those numbers, I would not have published them. I try to keep my reporting on people's work in porn, not on anything that is personal to them. Just seems like the right thing to do. I do also understand though, the fact that when someone treats you badly, you feel like you don't owe them anything and you print what you want to print. Luckily, on one ever treats ME badly."
Alexander the Poet writes: Here are my thoughts on the matter:
1. Everyone in porn should know what {DUC} is about. If they invite him on to a set, they better damn well except him to try to find some "dirt", as they say. DUC does not do PR. He tries to find info that will be interesting to all. And if it upsets some, it's no different than what tabloids like Star and National Enquirer do.
2. It seems to me that America is the only country where people are so protective of the salaries they make. I know that overseas, it's not so inappropriate to ask someone, how much they make. Only in America, do people get offended by it and are very secretive about it.
3. I found the salary info very informative and interesting. Why was it perceived to be "evil" to publish it? Pornstars must realize not all get the same pay. And I do feel that this was very good info to post, and quite journalistic.
4. I agree with Mike South in that, if those guys left the books on the table, they were negligent because with DUC around, they should have known better.
..............................
On l-keford.com, Scott Fayner blasted me for a lack of ethics.
Video Team contract director David Aaron Clark came to my defense:
Video Team director David Aaron Clark writes Luke: I disagree over this with many of my friends and colleagues, but I really think you've matured as a reporter and this is another excellent on-set piece, full of nothing but facts and what seems to be to be very fair observations. The trouble with the people in porn -- many of them, as I say, friends of mine who I do respect -- is that they have no idea what actual journalism is, as opposed to PR puffery where the writer colludes with the subject to produce nothing but fluff designed to move more pieces. Not there isn't a place for this -- Entertainment Weekly, anyone? -- and that I haven't used to it to my advantage in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. C'mon, my friends and fellow journalists, look at all the terrible abuses going on in this industry and worry about them, not about a damn Internet columnist who has ocassionally made you look bad!
If someone doesn't want you on their set, that's certainly their right, but I think it's ridiculous how personal people make it. And I am disappointed in friends and colleagues in the porn press who try to throw their weight around and have you thrown off set when they arrive. It's nothing short of childish, bully-like behavior; I've expressed this to them personally, and don't mind stating it here for the record. Though I've been irritated in the past by my own crew and cast saying things to you I would have rather not seen in print, I am very aware that that is the name of the game, and if they suffer from diaherrea of the mouth in front of the media, that is my problem to deal with, and I don't blame you for it. I might try to keep them AWAY from you, but again that's the game ... :)
As I'm sure you know, there is absolutely nothing "illegal" about you reading figures in a book left out in the open and printing them. Any "journalist" who suggest so has about as much of a background in actual journalistic practices and ethics as, oh, my dead cat (who I miss very much, but never put paw to keyboard, thank God). Not that I would be that thrilled to have you do the same on my set, but perhaps I wouldn't leave the budget lying the f-ck around where anybody could see it ... I don't see what the source of embarassment is, considering Zupko and Elegant are paying fair-market prices (though the lack of "golden time" pay for my buddy's terribly long shooting days is the fault of a forever unorganized and unregulated industry).
And as for the needle thing, what does AIM have to do with it, and why the f-ck did their board have to consult on it???!!!!! While I certainly wouldn't recommend someone who doesn't know what they're doing poking a needle in somebody's arm (embolism, anyone?) someone who knows what they're doing can easily do so without any danger .... Tom, next time you want to do something where someone is a junkie as opposed to an alcoholic, consult me. I spent enough time in the East Village to help you with the details.
Whoever "put a $300 bounty on [DUC]'s head" is, to be crass about it, an absolute pussy. If someone doesn't have the balls to walk up to you and confront you, and makes a cowardly offer like that -- even in jest -- should do a gonad-check on themselves.
..........................................
Scott Fayner writes on l-keford.com: First off, Davey, [DUC] admitted to “peek(ing) in the book” and pilfering the information. I doubt it was left open, as you assumed. If it was, it’s even less likely it would be ajar to that page. But let’s move on…
Mike South writes on l-keford.com: That's why you aren't a lawyer. [DUC] was an invited guest meaning that he is not tresspassing until such time as he has been asked to leave and even then its a very thin case because he was, in fact invited to be there. As a journalist he enjoys first ammendment protection regarding what he writes, as long as it is true. If there is a civil case in this matter it would be against Zupko for his negligent act of leaving this information unprotected.
Christian Mann, owner of Video Team, writes:
Despite the fact David Aaron Clark is under contract with my company, and I love him (figuratively) and the movies he directs for us, his opinions are his own and do not reflect mine or Video Team's.
I do not always agree with David on every subject, and this is one such case. I do not purport to know the legality of [DUC]'s snooping, but I know that as far as etiquette is concerned, an INVITED guest should not rifle through personal belongings or paperwork under the guise of "journalism". If he fancies himself a wannabe Woodward/Bernstein style investigative muckraker, then maybe he's entitled to these practices by law, but his actions remain reprehensible, ethically speaking.
I wish to state emphatically, I do not mean to suggest that Luke is anything like a journalist or that he should be mentioned in the same paragraph as Bob Woodward, only that he may harbor such delusions to justify his traitorious actions. The betrayal occurs when one is invited as friendly press, and then seeks to discover and divulge damaging or proprietary information.
I think the two main differences between [DUC] and real investigative journalists is the level of deceit used in getting the story, and the end objective. Does [DUC] seek to expose things out of a journalist's quest to show some injustice, or does he just feel empowered by causing harm regardless of the journalistic purpose? Was it journalism when he published the home address of my salesperson's parents? Of course not. It was his way of saying "I have the power to cause you grief!", despite the fact that no reader was served by such a publication. If [DUC] can conjure up a valid journalistic purpose to pilfering and maybe exposing pay records of someone's shoot, then it is only a testament to his cunning ability to twist logic to rationalize acts for which there is no valid defense. I only wonder if he actually believes he's justified when he does this. Is he truly deluded or merely a liar? I know which of these I believe.
DUC replies: As for the charge of rifling, I looked over the shoulder of a production manager and got all the relevant numbers. Later, to double check my memory, I looked at that sheet lying in a book on the crafts service table. I then checked the numbers with a couple of people to make sure they were accurate.
I didn't plan to publish the numbers, and normally would not have without the permission of the producer, except I was continually hounded all day about what I may or may not photograph, write, talk to, etc, and then finally I was kicked off the set at 2:30PM (not because I had done anything they had forbidden me) because other porno press members were going to feel upset with my presence.
So after that treatment, I felt zero loyalty to my host, and went home and wrote it all.
I've been on many Video Team sets. There's never been an incident. I've been on many of David Clark's sets and he's never felt shafted (though at times unhappy with what I've written.) But if you decide to screw me over, I will screw you right back.
What's so reprehensible about what I did? I looked over someone's shoulder and got all the relevant info. I then confirmed it with various sources.
As for traitorous actions: To be a traitor, one must pretend to support a cause. I have never pretended to support the porn industry. I have never pretended to try to help you sell your product. I have never pretended to be porn's friend or your friend. I've been about as upfront and open with my feelings about porn and pornographers as you can be. So I may be many things, but I cannot be a traitor to porn, or to a particular set, because I've never pretended to want to be one of you, to support what you do, and to want to help you sell more of your product.
I don't remember publishing the home address of your salesman's parents but I regret that. That sort of thing happened on fewer than ten times with me in the past. It was wrong.
Publishing home addresses often happens in the mainstream media. "John Doe, a resident of 4500 Ground Street, Los Angeles, was arrested for..."
If I've missed any of your challenges, please let me know. My initial post on this thread was for entertainment purposes only.
I've been around porn since 1996. All things that I've done that are unethical, I regret and try not to repeat.
If I come to a set, and books are opened up in front of me, I will usually take a look and try to memorize the information if it is interesting. I will then use my discretion in publishing it. If I feel I'm being shafted on the set, I will be more likely to publish salaries. What great harm does it do? It's interesting information.
I don't publish home addresses. The few times I did that in the past (1999), after looking through public records on the most powerful pornographers, I quickly regretted it and removed said information.
Though I'm answering your challenges, I don't accord any moral weight to pornographers. When pornographers charge me or anyone with unethical behavior or bad journalism, or tabloid journalism, or immorality, I don't take it seriously. I find it hilarious when pimps and prostitutes lecture me on journalistic responsibility. Everyone in porn and the sex industry is a pimp or a ho.
Many of these pimps and hos are nice people. I like many of them. I kinda like Chris Mann. Many porners lead good lives outside of their work. But working as a hooker or a pimp does not make for a strong moral platform.
I'm not saying porners shouldn't express their opinions on any issue and that they should not speak out against bad journalism or anything bad.
I just want to keep things in perspective.
PS: As for the general issue of waiting until I am invited to appear on a set, a meeting, a news event etc, that's always nice. It is easier for me to appear where I am invited but I by no means feel compelled to wait for an invitation. I go where the news is, whether I am wanted or not.
..................................
Christian Mann writes: I can't believe I allowed myself to get sucked into a debate about someone else's movie set and [DUC]! I originally wanted to make clear one pertinent idea: David Aaron Clark does not represent Video Team when he posts, only when he shoots!
Nonetheless, I appreciate [DUC]'s serious answer to my original post.
If in fact [DUC] merely "looked over a shoulder" into a payrate book, memorized information, and then published same, it's the same as "rifling" through a book. It wasn't his book to "peek" at, and it was not proffered to him. It remains an univited invasion of privacy and is still bad form, in my opinion.
The fact that [DUC] says he didn't intend to publish the information until he felt he was mistreated on the set serves to validate my belief that his publication of this information was not intended to serve the reader or any journalistic purpose, but rather to harass the producer of the movie by causing strife among the actors.
If [DUC] has "been on many Video Team sets", it is news to me. I am aware of one incident where he was actually invited, either by Scott Stein or David Aaron Clark. Both are now aware of my policy to only allow press with a track record of providing at least fair, and hopefully positive coverage. Since Luke has deliberately printed lies about me and my associates (no I won't bother backing up this claim - who you gonna believe, me or [DUC]???), and because he is known to be an ill mannered guest, he is not welcome on my sets. It's not that I wish any harm to [DUC], I truly don't. I just don't wish harm or grief to me or my associates and that's what one gets when one invites {DUC].
As for being traitorious: I disagree with [DUC]'s definition. A traitor does not need to support or fight a cause. A traitor merely has to pretend to be a friend, and covertly behave like a foe. I know {DUC] will rationalize his behavior because he was asked to leave. It's odd that he armed himself with confidential information before he was slighted, isn't it? As I like to say: rationalize = rational lies.
Did {DUC] publish addresses, by his own admission, yes. His "apology" tactic is part of his smarmy m.o.: "Oh, did I spread a vicious lie about you? I am so sorry." Repeat behavior. Apologize again. Ad nauseum.
I will give {DUC] credit for one truth (see above), i.e. he acknowledged that he is no friend of the industry and he has made clear (ocassionally) his real feelings about the business. He has stated in posts his desire to see the obliteration of the business, or words to that effect.
I am bothered by the hypocrisy of this person wishing for the downfall of the business that supports him. I prefered it when he was elsewhere irritating mainstream Hollywood or poor unsuspecting Rabbis or whatever he was doing.
I forgive [DUC] because he seems to be sick and it seems based on his writings that he has so many self destructive demons that accompany his scorched earth campaign.
I just don't see why we as a business community would invite him anywhere. As I told DAC earlier today: remember the parable of the scorpion crossing the river on the back of the dog. Why did he sting the dog even though it meant certain death for both? It's in his nature. I choose to keep the scorpions outside.
Enough of my rant. I wish peace to all, even [DUC].
...........................................
DUC replies: Unlike most of the other journalists covering this industry, I don't wait for information to be "proferred" to me. I don't wait to regurtitate press releases. I didn't wait for the industry to tell me Marc Wallice was positive. I went out and found the evidence of a long trail of infections following his anal performances and I published that unproffered information. I was subsequently pillored by the industry, though thanked by the actresses whose lives I saved.
What really bothers Christian Mann is that unlike the rest of the porno press corp, I am not in his/Vivid's/AVNs/Goalie's pocket. I don't let them limit me on what I can report. You better believe that today Christian tried to put the screws on David Clark to not write positively about me in the future (I have no evidence for this, just my educated guess).
Christian and his friend Steve Hirsch are used to controlling the industry's information flow through its approved channel - AVN. I don't play that game.
If I were interviewing Christian or anyone, and I saw something interesting over their shoulder, you bet I would try to memorize it, and I would consider using it. One consideration for not using would be to keep good relations with that source. If that source had just shown no intentions to keep good relations with me, then I will not bother to maintain that with him.
I am kinder with people who are kind to me and crueler with people who are cruel to me.
I don't need to own a book to look at it.
................................................
Smiling Arab writes on l-keford.com: 95% of journalism is not about "exposing injustice." In an idealized world, maybe, but not here. Look in your morning paper and tell me what you find: reports of traffic accidents, political jockeying, what the president said yesterday, who the Lakers are going to sign with the mid-level exemption. That number shrinkes to less than .001% when it comes to this industry.
And what is responsible industry journalism? The hatchet job that the very responsible Mark Kernes did on Mike South this morning? The fifty-caliber exhaust pipe that Kernes' mouth becomes every time he sees [DUC]?
People didn't invite [DUC] on the set to expose injustice. They invited him there for free PR. The free market draws him more traffic than a press release or one of Fayner's goofy on-set pieces about all the places he'd like to shove his wanky, but you're still free to invite him or bar him from your sets.