Gourt Home::Gourt :: Come shot
A come shot (usually spelled cum shot), pop shot, or money shot is the record (on film or video or, less frequently, in some versions of glamour photography) of a man ejaculating, usually onto a person or object. It is the cinematographer's indication, within the narrative framework of a pornographic film, that the sexual act recorded has concluded. Since the "climax" of the act coincides with the "climax" of the male, it can be argued that the "come shot" is a male-oriented depiction of sexual activity.
Role of the "cum shot" in pornography
Jeremy Robinson argues that "pornography has the problem of representing the unrepresentable" – that is, trying to capture intimate sexual activities on film or videoTWO LADY CHATTERLEYS: D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover and Lawrence Durrell's Constance by Jeremy Robinson; available at http://www.crescentmoon.org.uk/cresmolawrdurr. Over the last several decades, pornography producers have tried to capture this "unrepresentable" element by making and more and more "explicit" depictions that include close-ups of genitals, penetration, and ejaculation.
Pornography film producers fetishize the "come shot", which can be seen in the existence of compilations of ejaculation scenes and in the inclusion of replays of the ejaculation sequence in some pornographic films. In order for viewers of pornography to be able to view the ejaculation, the pornographic actor must not ejaculate within the sexual partner. In the slang of the pornography subculture, an internal ejaculation is termed a creampie.
When the "come shot" was first popularized in pornography in the 1960s, it usually involved the man ejaculating near the woman's vulva or on the small of her back depending on the sexual position. Since the 1990s, a "come shot" is often received on the face of the recipient (sometimes referred to as a facial). However, ejaculations on or near the vulva, anus and breasts are still common.
The "come shot" adds a sense of realism to pornographic films, because unlike other aspects of the pornographic depiction, such as facial expressions or dialogue, it is a physiological response and therefore it cannot be faked (at least not without resorting to prosthetics and special effects). The ejaculation scene also performs a closure role in the simple narrative form of pornography.
Origin of related term "money shot"
The "come shot" is often referred to as the money shot in a borrowing from mainstream feature filmmakers, who used the term "money shot" as slang for the image that cost the most money to produce Extract of The Money Shot by Jane Mills; available at http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/17/money_shot_intro.html; in addition, the inclusion of this expensive special effect sequence would become a selling point for the film. For example, in an action thriller, an expensive special effects sequence of a dam bursting might be called the "money shot" of the film.
The pornography industry adopted the term "money shot" because the final ejaculation scene has become an important element in pornographic depictions, in part because it proves to the viewer that they have witnessed an actual sexual act. According to Stephen Ziplow, in The Film Maker's Guide to Pornography , "...the come shot, or, as some refer to it, 'the money shot', is the most important element in the movie and that everything else (if necessary) should be sacrificed at its expense." Extract of The Money Shot by Jane Mills; available at http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/17/money_shot_intro.html The "come shot" has become such a common conclusion to scenes in pornographic movies that if a scene does not conclude with an ejaculation sequence, viewers may believe that actor involved was unable to ejaculate.
Pornography and erotica without "come shots"
Two exceptions to this expectation are softcore pornography, in which penetration is not explicity shown and "couples erotica", which may involve penetration but is typically filmed in a more discreet manner intended to be romantic or educational rather than graphic. Softcore pornography that does not contain ejaculation sequences is produced both to respond to a demand by some consumers for less-explicit pornographic material, and to comply with government regulations or cable company rules that may dissallow depictions of ejaculation.
Variations
Several variations of the "come shot" exist (refer to the see also section below). Variations often involve objects or clothing onto which the semen is ejaculated, such as the "pantyhose fetish" sub-genre of pornography, which often features scenes of male actors ejaculating onto a female actress' pantyhose-clad legs. Other pornography subgenres depict actors ejaculating into containers (either directly or from an orifice or the mouth of the partner) and then consumed. These methods are sometimes advertised as "cumsumption" (a portmanteau of "cum consumption") and similar to the Japanese gokkun genre of pornography.
Other meanings
While the term "cum shot" normally refers to filming of the ejaculation scene in a pornographic movie; the term "shot" in "come shot" refers to the filming, or "shooting" of the scene). The term is also used more loosely to refer to the actual physiological event of male ejaculation.
Critiques of "cum shots"
It is common for a fellatio scene in pornography to end with the male actor ejaculating onto the woman actress' face. In Padraig McGrath's review of Laurence O'Toole's book Pornocopia – Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire, he rhetorically asks whether "...women enjoy having men ejaculate on their faces?" He suggests that the role of a "cum shot" scene such as this is to suggest that "...it doesn’t matter what the woman likes – she’ll like whatever the man wants her to like because she has no inner life of her own, in turn because she’s not a real person." McGrath argues that there is a "power-aspect" to depictions such as "come shots." He alleges that the "...central theme pornography is power...* implicitly violent...eroticized hatred." Padraig McGrath's review is available at http://www.threemonkeysonline.com/review_pornocopia_laurence_otoole_review.htm.
Peter Sandor Gardos has lectured on the "history and theory of the come shot in porn films". His research suggests that "... that the men who get most turned on by watching come shots are the ones who have positive attitudes toward women." Gardos notes that his finding is contrary to the feminist critique that "...coming on a woman is an act of misogynist domination." Bruce Herschensohn; Bill Clinton; Sexologists in San Diego; Future Sex 2 by Bruce Herschensohn; available at: http://www.nearbycafe.com/loveandlust/steinberg/erotic/cn/cn2.html
Tommy "The Truncheon" Degas, former adult actor-cum-director, takes the view that "Hosing the female lead down at the end of the scene is of crucial importance to the viewer. It is a signal that he needs to get a move on, fast forward to the next scene or rewind back to the start. It's got nothing to do with Feminism or misogyny. It's about a guy trying to get his rocks off. It's not as if he's blowing his load in the face of a female senator!".
Another critic of "come shot" scenes in pornography is the US porn star-turned writer, director and producer Candida Royalle. She produced pornography films aimed at women and their partners that avoid the "misogynous predictability" and depiction of sex in "...as grotesque and graphically way as possible." Royalle also criticizes the male-centreness of the typical pornography film, in which scenes end when the male actor ejaculates. Royalle’s films are not “goal oriented” towards a final "come shot"; instead, her films depict sexual activity within the broader context of women's emotional and social lives.Girls on top By Lilly Bragge June 16, 2004, published in The Age; available at http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:MeA6d5RZ0LQJ:www.kband.com/bluprnt/2004_06.html+%22come+shot%22+history&hl=en&gl=ca&ct=clnk&cd=76.
References
See also
"Come shot"