05/16/2006
Genre Preview: Physique Reimagined
One of the features Genre magazine has planned for their upcoming Pride issue is a "Beefcake Moderne" tribute to 1950's male physique icons starring some of today's big names in porn. I'm happy to bring you a special preview of the issue which will be on newsstands at the end of the month.
Playing the vintage-turned-21st century bodybuilder pin-ups are Falcon video stars Matthew Rush, Roman Heart, Erik Rhodes, and Ethan Kage.
The shoot was styled by Marko Kalfa and photographed by Aaron Cobbett. Click the photos for larger versions!
Thanks to Genre for this glimpse at their next issue, which will be on newsstands at the end of the month.
Posted 10:15 AM EST by Andy in Magazines, Photography, Porn | Permalink
Comments
Holy crap.
Posted by: Brian | May 16, 2006 10:57:01 AM
I am still a little amazed at how mainstream porn models have become. I don't think it is a bad thing either, sex is good.
Posted by: Donald | May 16, 2006 10:58:22 AM
When did Matthew Rush start looking like a 65-year old Fort Lauderdale retiree with an all-you-can-tan membership?
Posted by: Loudon | May 16, 2006 11:06:03 AM
I think it should be called "Steroid Moderne". Two of the models are admitted steroid users. Which, in my opinion, should not be glorified.
Posted by: Blue | May 16, 2006 11:40:25 AM
Fun stuff. Thanks.
Posted by: Victor | May 16, 2006 12:17:11 PM
The photos in GENRE have gotten very sexy as of late!
Check out the dark, sweaty jock pics in their May issue (on stands now). It's their Sports & Fitness edition--very, very erotic!
And P.S. I like these pics from a creative standpoint. Whether the models are on roids or hung light a light switch is irrelevant. It's about color, composition and celebrating being queer.
Posted by: Joe Fitrzyk | May 16, 2006 1:16:06 PM
Looks R-E-T-A-R-D-E-D...it doesn't even look fifties it looks like the eighties, and they all look like dorks. I hate seeing porn stars outside the context of a video...it is always so depressing, it just makes you realize that these guys are basically prostitutes and are probably too dumb to excel at any meaningful or dignified vocation. Anyone who has seen the statistics knows that these guys will not be around in five years, whether it is H.I.V., hepatitis, meth or suicide.
Posted by: Mike | May 16, 2006 1:47:48 PM
Mike, where did you get these "statistics", the religious-right? Because you sound just as insensitive and intolerant as they are, jerk.
Posted by: another mike | May 16, 2006 1:58:51 PM
Hey Mike - Judge much?
Posted by: fiver | May 16, 2006 2:00:42 PM
There was a glossy magazine put out in 2001 called "THE LIST" and one of the list was about porn actors that is where the stats come from, and you don't have to be a bigot to believe that sex with lots of different partners puts you at greater risk for H.I.V. and you don't have to be a bigot to think that being paid for sex is dehumanizing...
Posted by: Mike | May 16, 2006 2:02:27 PM
I'm up and awake after seeing that.
Posted by: Steven. | May 16, 2006 2:21:46 PM
That football boy with his ass sticking out is just too f**king hot for words ...
Posted by: Kenneth | May 16, 2006 2:22:22 PM
why would you be happy to preview this half-baked, derivative mess?
and how the hell is some faggot in a cowboy hat moderne?
Posted by: brodie | May 16, 2006 2:26:11 PM
"and you don't have to be a bigot to believe ..."
No, but it's a start.
Posted by: fiver | May 16, 2006 2:34:12 PM
Hyper Mediocrity
Posted by: BC | May 16, 2006 3:02:12 PM
YAWN!
Posted by: Robert | May 16, 2006 3:20:58 PM
This layout just doesn't work for me. I don't find it very sexy at all. I think it could be because I've seen a couple of these guys naked and having sex already. The mystery is already gone, and these shots don't have any sex appeal to them.
Also, the entire 50's thing just isn't working here at all. Nobody would know this was the theme if not told. Buff men in the 50s had different body types than buff men today, so you really can't pay homage to a 50s beefcake theme with a 90s/00s body.
Posted by: Patrick | May 16, 2006 4:32:08 PM
Jeez - what a bunch of prissy queens are readers on this site. They're nice pictures - the colors are cool, the imagry is kitchy and kind of fun, and the guys look pretty good in clothes. It's obviously a light-hearted shoot - maybe you snoots should try looking at these images without the synical jaded goggles on your precious, perfect little eyes.
Posted by: mike | May 16, 2006 4:55:54 PM
That shot with Ethan Kage lying on the shag carpet with wooden panelling behind him is a complete ripoff of those Calvin Klein kidddie-porn ads back in the 90s that caused a stir. Those ads get ripped off all the time. Not very original for the photog.
Posted by: Ryan | May 16, 2006 7:04:47 PM
Can an outift make a hot guy look unhot? Yeah.
Posted by: Chad Hanging | May 16, 2006 7:58:23 PM
I like #5 The BEST.
It's so POWerfully atmosPHERic...
I mean like: leave SOMEthing to the imagination people =).
~
Posted by: Gilli | May 16, 2006 10:22:27 PM
Out of all the porn personalities that could have been used for the shoot, I was proud they asked me.
I have been in the industry for 6 years. In that time, I have never had an STD or been addicted to Meth. I am proud ot have been able to use my persona to raise money for HIV and Meth Abuse. In fact wasn't it recently that the straight porn industry came to a halt because of unsafe sex practices?
If you could look past the pornography, you would find that a lot of us arent the stupid, drug addicted, prostitutes that society labels us to be. In fact a lot of us have an education and hold regular 9-5 jobs.
What amazes me is the fact as gay men, we want equality. To be accepted by society. Yet we are the firt to cast judgement on each one another. How do we expect to get anywhere with this type of behavior?
One of my favorite quotes is by a Vietnamese monk named Tich Nhat Hanh. He says:
"When you plant lettuce, if it does not grow well, you don't blame the lettuce. You look for reasons it is not doing well. It may need fertilizer, or more water, or less sun. You never blame the lettuce. Yet if we have problems with our friends or family, we blame the other person. But if we know how to take care of them, they will grow well, like the lettuce. Blaming has no positive effect at all, nor does trying to persuade using reason and argument. That is my experience. No blame, no reasoning, no argument, just understanding. If you understand, and you show that you understand, you can love, and the situation will change."
I know my post is going to get torn to shreds and that's fine. I'm proud to be a openly gay man and what I have achieved in life.
Posted by: Matthew Rush | May 17, 2006 12:45:51 AM
Ouch, somehow...they're not that hot. It sucks, but the fake lighting and 80's make-up and costuming just doesn't work for me (not as 50's anyway)...
Posted by: Minus the Halo | May 17, 2006 1:25:15 AM
Amen Matt - It's nice to see you defending yourself against these queens. I wouldn't worry though - these pictures are very cool and show a lot of creativity. I think these people are jealous that you're comfortable with yourself and are not afraid of your sexuality in any way.
These queens are probably the same people who look at a hot guy and immediatly look for a flaw, rather than just enjoying the beauty. (mostly because they're bitter and hateful people anyway)
Its amazing how so many of these "art critics" are so comfortable with tearing apart these images for not fitting exactly into a paradigm of being 1950's pin up offered up within the guise of today's world. People - these are silly, fun ad sexy pieces of art that you're so apt to shred to pieces, not some treatise on modern art.
You uptight meanies all need to chill the fuck out, take the pottery barn out of your asses, and remember what it's like to be verbally destroyed for the way you appear. (and probably get laid also.)
Posted by: mike | May 17, 2006 7:48:59 AM
I guess I've just seen it all.
Posted by: randy | May 17, 2006 11:11:09 AM
Mike, it is quite ironic that your own post above is doing exactly what Matthew Rush is speaking against....
"What amazes me is the fact as gay men, we want equality. To be accepted by society. Yet we are the first to cast judgement on each one another?"
Your intended use of the word "queen" as in insult portrays this perfectly.
Re-reading all of the posts above, I don't see this thread as a whole as passing judgement on other gay men at all, but merely giving an opinion on the aesthetics of the actual photographs, which I personally don't like myself. A concept was shown to us that I personally don't think works for the reasons I stated in my other post above. It has nothing to do with being bitchy or jealous or "queeny".
To Matthew Rush, you are an extremely attractive man both facially and in physique and I made no previous comment about your photograph displayed here, but in all honesty, it isn't the most flattering image of you facially. Just an honest opinion and as a model, I'm sure you're use to constructive critique. Other than one or two rather rude comment above, I think most of the critique on this thread is honest and legitimate.
Gay men can be vicious, as I know all too well, but that doesn't mean all forms of criticism about a photo spread in a magazine that happens to feature gay men should be taken as a personal attack on other gay men.
Posted by: Patrick | May 17, 2006 11:13:46 AM
It's not necessarily the photos that I'm talking about. God knows there are some not so flattering photos of me out there.
My gripe is the comments about STD's and Steroid use. Just becasue we make movies, we are automatically labeled.
The photos do not glorify steroid use. The photographer was trying to capture a 50's style beefcake look.
Magazines like FLEX, Muscle and Fitness, etc. glorify steroid abuse while leading the average reader to believe that these pro bodybuilders are natural and live a "healthy" lifestyle.
The STD statistics mentioned in the post above are ridiculous. At Falcon we have to follow specific guidelines and we never practice unsafe sex. Falcon won't even hire models who have done barebacking videos.
If you Google meth abuse in the Gay community you will see that the suicide rate and STD rate has increased in the gay community more than it has anywhere else. Meth alters ones way of thinking and lowers inhibitions therefore someone is more than likely to practice unsafe sex and get an STD. It mentions nothing about the porn industry being the cause for the increase or that a porn star is more likely to fall into this lifestyle.
I love this quote from Joe Fitrzyk:
"I hate seeing porn stars outside the context of a video...it is always so depressing, it just makes you realize that these guys are basically prostitutes and are probably too dumb to excel at any meaningful or dignified vocation"
Out of four models used, only one is an escort. If thats what he wants to do then so be it. It's his life to live, not yours.
You are the one who is watching our movies so in societies eyes, you would be labeled a pervert. Just because we do porn doesn't make us prostitutes.
As far as excelling, my porn career has allowed me to do theater, work in two mainstream movies and has allowed me to invest the money I make to live a comfortable lifestyle that I have always wanted.
You can lable us all you want but what you can't do is take away our pride.
Posted by: Matthew Rush | May 17, 2006 1:18:44 PM
hey gurl, queen isn't derogatory. Mary - its just the way we fags talk to eachother. The point of my comment was all the miss judy boots on this site were making such harsh comments about something that was obviously meant to just be something fun. Listen Barbara, I don't love everything about these pics, but lady, let me say, many of the judgemental comments in response to them are downright mean and catty. Each and every one of us homos are entitled to their opinoins, but i do think we mo-mo's need to be a little bit nicer to eachother. Thats all girl.
Posted by: mike | May 17, 2006 1:21:34 PM
I'm sorry it was the quote by Mike, Not Joe Fitrzyk. Sorry Joe!
Posted by: Matthew Rush | May 17, 2006 1:22:11 PM
Matthew, your point is well taken. I actually only skimmed those particular posts you mention, so I see your point in regard to that entirely.
Posted by: Patrick | May 17, 2006 2:23:03 PM
Hello, I am the Mike who posted the comment yesterday, and I didn't think it was so controversial. I would like to apologize to Matthew, I totally believe that what you do with your life is up to you, and I am sorry for making certain assumptions. I also apologize to the person who emailed me: I shouldn't ahve used the word 'retarded' pejoratively.
That being said, pornography plainly promotes casual sex, whether the actors wear condoms or not. I also believe that acting in pornography is a form of prostitution. I think that there are lots of other gay men out there crossing boundaries and bettering the world and that if gay magazines celebrated those figures we would all be better off.
A lot of the people responding to the post said things like 'lighten up' and 'it is just a fun photo shoot' and so on; but we are indundated with this kind of content all the time, and pornography really has become the wallpaper of the gay community, and that has a very real effect, which I think is negative.
I would also like to add that I am not a member of the religous right by any means, I am agnostic and proudly liberal and I don't think that disliking the effects of pornography on our community makes you a bigot.
Posted by: Mike | May 17, 2006 2:54:26 PM
Ok, what is such the big deal with porn? People fuck. People like watching people fuck. So what? Like Matt said, Falcon men must use condoms. So aren't they sending a good message to the gays? Have sex and use condoms? Why do we have to be soooo uptight about sex. And its hardly the wallpaper of the gay community. I think will and grace and queer eye for the straight guy (oddly, completely de-sex'd versions of gay) are much more of the current wall paper. But even if it were, who cares? What is the harm in admiring the human body and human sexuality, so long as its practiced safely and responsibly. I also think porn stops people from having careless sex, cuz really, once you get off to a movie, you just want to pass out and go to sleep, not troll around in some bathhouse.
Posted by: mike | May 17, 2006 3:31:25 PM
I accept your appology Mike. So we don't see eye to eye on the pornography and that's fine.
Why is it that sex in the privacy of your home is OK but when it's caught on camera, it's suddenly taboo?
I make movies and people point and yell prostitute. The very same people that point and yell, watch the porn and contribute to the "prostitution" and apparently that's OK.
I would love to invite some of you to a porn set so you could see first hand what it takes to make a movie. The hours can be long and the set conditions can be unbearable. We constantly have to cheat to the camera and we have to endure some pretty uncomfortable positions. There is a lot of starting and stopping and it's very mechanical. You have the director, the make-up artist, the camera man, the production assistant, the set designer and the lighting guy on the set. It's the furthest thing from sex that I can think of.
Like the second Mike says, Sex is something that is natural. We should celebrate the fact that we can't get arrested for sodomy anymore.
I have been around the world and when it comes to Americans and sex, we are pretty uptight.
Posted by: Matthew Rush | May 17, 2006 4:50:54 PM
Matthew....there is nothing wrong with sex, obviously, and I personally have no problem with pornography, but when you say being on a set can be unbearable and that the act of performing is very mechanical "it's the furthest thing from sex I can think of", then you're sort of making it sound like the only reason to do it is for the money, which some can interpret as prostitution, as that is how actual prostitutes describe what they do....it's not the sex they enjoy....they're just performing and the client is getting off.
Now, this isn't my personal opinion of people who work in the pornography business....as I think some porn can actually be considered art, but what you're saying can send mixed messages on this issue. You're telling us that making porn is "Mechanical" and there's constant "Cheating to the camera" in one paragraph and in your next you're saying "Sex is something that is natural", so with all due respect....that is where some can get confused as to what you mean. Does that make sense?
Posted by: Patrick | May 17, 2006 6:00:20 PM
I see your point. When I was talking about sex being natural, I was stating that sex is a natural part of being human. My point is when someone hires an escort, the one paying is getting some sort of sexual pleasure out of it.
Shooting a movie can be fun but it can be a lot of hard work as well making the experience less sexual (awkward positions, cheating to the camera, and at times unbearable set conditions). On the flip side, as a performer, you strive for that perfect scene. The scene that will be noticed by the reviewers and earn you a GayVN or Grabby nomination. Just like with any job money is a factor and you have to take the good with the bad. I love the challenge of giving my all, making the director happy as well as the reviewers and the fans.
The subject of pornography and prostitution is a gray area. I do get paid for my work on camera which I guess technically is a form of prostitution. However, I don't, in the traditional sense of the word, meet with clients on a personal level and exchange sexual favors for money.
Posted by: Matthew Rush | May 18, 2006 12:26:23 AM
Many people do jobs that they don't viscerally enjoy. Are they hookers too?
Posted by: Brandon | May 18, 2006 1:00:50 AM
Bottom line Matt - you are an adult, actually, we're all pretty much adults, and you can decide for yourself if you want to be a porn star, a prostitute, or if you so desiried, a school marm. Its your life. For those of us who view porn - we're adults too - meaning I'm fully capable and mental mature enough to look at an orgy on a video screen and think its hot, but not run out and do it myself. (did i run around the country killing people after playing the video game DOOM?) That's the frustrating thing about many of these anti-porn posts from people claiming to be liberal. I could understand if porn was being presented to children or young teens, but in this case it's not. Falcon pretty much targeting gay male adults (as does GENRE and towleroad), unless they have some kind of underground campaign to recruit gay babies that i just don't know about.
A sad day it truely is when liberals turn into taste-nazis.
Posted by: mike | May 18, 2006 7:42:05 AM
Is Roman Hart wearing white tights under those football pants? Awesome!
Posted by: Random | May 19, 2006 11:50:28 AM
OK, Matthew, you aren't a prostitute. I hear ya. And I have no complaint about a good looking model or performer doing porn.
But Matthew, it's the porn that sucks. Specifically Falcon. The last time I saw a Falcon video, I swear I nearly passed out I was so bored. It was "slick" in the worst possible way. All the performers were such shaved overly-made up nauteulized dinky little things, ooo'ing and ahhh'ing like, well, like they were being paid for it. And this is supposed to be a turn-on??
It would be nice to see a porn with performers who could actually act "turned-on" convincingly.
I know, it'll never happen. So for now, those who want porn will have to watch overly-cosmeticized performers like yourself squealing "Ooo, baby, yea, harder, harder." That is, if they can't help doubling over with laughter.
Posted by: jjabely | May 19, 2006 5:03:54 PM
Hey, Matthew and any other porn stars reading this! I'm not a fan of Falcon per se, but a porn fan nontheless. I personally think you porn stars are doing public service work. For those of us who aren't in a relationship and don't want to have casual sex, watching porn is a great, healthy way to satisfy our sexual needs. So, THANKS! Ignore all of these idiots and keep doing the good work you're doing, for the better of the world (and uh...my psyche)!
To you posters guys, hey if you enjoy porn stop cutting down the guys who make it. They're doing us all a favor. If you don't like it, don't watch it.
Posted by: Brett | May 20, 2006 10:26:54 AM
I thought Matthew Rush was in prison.
Posted by: Chad Hanging | May 20, 2006 12:49:39 PM
since when does this one person become the spokes person for safe sex. its clear that mr rush has had many unsafe encounters in his life and has done drugs. its unreal that certain persons just kiss his ass the dude is fucks for money he isnt a lawyer, doctor. please wake up
Posted by: a concerned gay man | May 22, 2006 10:27:20 PM
"Concerned Gay Man", how is it "...clear that mr rush has had many unsafe encounters in his life and has done done drugs"? Are you 12? And if your "bold" assertions were correct, what difference would it make anyway in assessing the man's worth as a person, you judgmental prick? Concern yourself with your own issues and let others live their own lives as they see fit.
Posted by: Tom | May 23, 2006 3:01:22 AM
Actually I think the photos are pretty good...
as a long time art director I understand the complexity of putting together this sort of shoot... the casual observer doesn't... nor do they have to...
good or bad?...10 guys will give you 10 opinions
Not original? ...a riff on the CK ads?..So what?.the CK ads were a riff on porn shots.. its a derivative/sampling culture... we revel in recycling...
points for trying?..Hell yeh ...how many people here even ATTEMPTED anything creative today....
as for Matthew...I think ya look great kid...and as someone who is pretty upfront about who you are, what you do and not afraid to publicly call attention to it... more power to you... as for not being a lawyer ..LOL... they may not FUCK for money but they sell their time for it just like ALL of us bro...
Plenty of haters out there... if ya don't like the picture stop looking... but don't tell me I shouldnt look... or that the models should stop posing.. or that the photographers should stop shooting..
YOUR issues are YOUR problem...
Posted by: james | May 23, 2006 11:52:53 AM
OK TOM, it seems like you get fired up rather quickly, take a breath honey its not that bad. Just practice what you peach sista you aint that special.
Posted by: A CONCERNED GAY MAN | May 23, 2006 10:24:00 PM
Amen to that post. you are so right concerned. tom needs a spanking
Posted by: Toms Lover | May 23, 2006 10:26:00 PM
very good
Posted by: chiskop | Aug 11, 2006 11:01:03 PM
Recent Comments