They should have picked someone more..eh..slender and younger(?) to play "Supergirl". This actress is way too busty for the role.
Concur. Like someone said, she looks more like Power Girl as drawn by a hacksturbator like Michael Turner, when a Supergirl porno needs to be based on slightly less disturbing imagery by Ian Churchill.
Is her chest even real, btw?
It's made of atoms.
As for the whole porn parody craze... I find it depressing. I'll not lie and say I don't enjoy porn/erotica in modest doses, but I like my adult material to be, if not legitimately amateur, then at least small-scale. It's pretty much impossible, imho, to spending large amounts of time, energy and money on porn and not have the resulting business be creepy as hell. If a porn performer wants to throw on a Trek uniform or a Supergirl miniskirt, great. But a whole scripted, scored, edited and "acted" porn parody feature? Ick.
They can both coexist. There's reasons to recommend both.
if you're gonna try to do story, try to find actors who can act. James Deen is actually pretty keen comedically, for example. Sasha Grey has been in an actual feature film, and although it sucked badly, it was very obviously Soderbergh's fault because he thought what people who had rented Grey's cinematic debut wanted to see was a Goddamn treatise on the economic downturn
instead of, you know, a story about a ultra-high-end prostitute played by ultra-high-end pornographic actress Sasha Grey.
I think she's out of the porno game these days, although she actually would be good casting for a Supergirl, if you could convince her to put on a blonde wig.
Anyway, I do sort of agree that nerdsploitation pornos are a little creepy, but for entirely different reasons. Like, I know people jack off to Zatanna. Paul Dini has actual sex with Actual Zatanna. Steve Englehart probably magically married Mantis decades before Grant Morrison was casting spells on himself with the Invisibles. There are people who think they're in relationships with anime characters and people who wish they were ten feet tall and really want to share genetic information through their hair.
It's a weird blurring of fantasy and reality. It's a little off-putting. There's a difference between being a bit turned on by a drawing of Fire and Ice and actually following through with an elaborate narrative about a climate-controlled threesome with them, you know? Is it necessary or wise to interpose sexual fantasies into someone else's narrative?
Not to say there's anything wrong with it. Indeed, I shouldn't say that such pornos are creepy in and of themselves, but rather that I suspect that such works are manna from heaven for a particularly creepy demographic.
Of course, I like women with gasmasks on. I already am the creepy demographic.
I know about the laws regarding parodies... but it still seems pretty warped that Disney can sue and shut down a little Mom & Pop eatery calling itself the Magic Kingdom, while you can have a movie like this be perfectly legal and make money for the producer based off the works done by another company.
How is that warped? Parody, pornographic or not, is vital to artistic discourse. Some jerk who stole the name for her restaurant is not.