Talk:Sexploitation film

Pornography High‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Nudity Mid‑importance

	Nudity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of nudity and naturism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NudityWikipedia:WikiProject NudityTemplate:WikiProject Nuditynudity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Porky's, Russ Meyer films

These are *not* sexploitation films. They are comedies that have a sexual element, often added ironically. True sexploitation films are pure pornography disguised as something else. Martyn Smith 17:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Well, some of Meyer's films had more comic elements than others, but they are still not comedies. His early works (e.g. "Lorna" or "Mudhoney") are dramas with sexual elements. The films he made in the seventies are definitely sexploitation. And by the way, sexploitation films are NOT pornographic. They were simply made to tease the audience and to make money without showing explicit sexual intercourse. --80.133.223.208 14:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A film does not need to show explicit sexual intercourse to be deemed pornographic; see Softcore pornography. The boundary between sexploitation and softcore is blurred, some argue non-existent.Willy turner (talk) 21:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In The History of Sex in American Film, Jody Pennington groups Russ Meyer in with sexploitation directors such as Doris Wishman and Roger Corman. She cites Meyer's The Immoral Mr. Teas as an early nudie-cutie, and Lorna as a roughie, both subgenres of sexploitation in her framework.Dongord (talk) 16:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First "roughie?"

I've read too that Meyer's Lorna is considered the first "roughie". But I've also seen H.G. Lewis'/David Friedman's Scum of the Earth! called the first in that genre, and it was made a year before Lorna... Dekkappai (talk) 07:02, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]