Dear Producers: The sudden submersion... not a fan

[Chimerix]

I know we all have our unique set of preferences when it comes to quicksand. Mine is for a gradual descent at a more-or-less constant speed, beginning at ankle-deep and continuing through quicksand slowly rolling closed over unturned faces, preferably with some struggling breaths. In recent years, though, it seems the trendy way of shooting the scenes is for the victim to get really deep, somewhere between chin deep and upturned face, take a few deep breaths in preparation, then plunge themselves under.

Producers, I would just like to say, you have at least one long-time consumer who does not approve.

Thank you for everything you do! Thank you for recruiting new models, and for continuing with veteran favorties. Thank you for creating reliable sets, and for exploring natural locations. Thank you for endlessly trying to spin fresh variances on our simple fascination. Thank you for having a variety of bogs. Thanks you for improving the quality of your products. In so many, many ways, you give me exactly what I want.

Now, if we could work on this one more thing

[YerK]

Do you ever get into the mud yourself?
If you get into mud that is thick enough for a slow descent, it is usually really thick and hard to move in. A gradual descent that becomes a submergence is going to be a seriously rare thing, likely where you have quicksand that has a fairly dry layer on top that liquifies from the movements of the person who gets stuck. I can't see that working with a clay pit or a peat pit.

(all that being typed, that sort of film is a kind of a "holy grail", so far as I'm concerned)

[Nessie]

I agree -- it'd be nice to get, but it's a Holy Grail.

The submergence thing is the easier one to address. When you're told to go under in mud and you've never done it before, people tend to tackle the job the same way they tackle going under in water. This has to be overcome, and it's mostly a matter of practice combined with coaching.

The ankle thing, though, that one's harder. I've yet to meet a mudpit anywhere, either natural or artificial, that didn't take me up around to thigh-deep naturally when I simply stepped into it. And that's a thicker pit. Usually I'll drop in to the waist, even at the relatively thick clay-sand mix at Massivia.

If mud is so thick that I slow down at the ankle, it's not likely I'll get much deeper. Mud that thick is just way too thick to sink in.

I'm sure that someday somebody here will figure it out.

In the meantime, I'm spending my time out in cold mudpits realizing that I can't get in past the chest, so I'm trying to slow things down by beginning my descent at the ankles by standing on protruding cattail mat and hoping it will slowwwwwwwwwwly give way until I drop into the muck.

(Is that the answer? Throw cattail mat on top of an otherwise medium-thick mudpit?)

Nessie

[Fred588]

I think the answer, if there is one, will be something LIKE a cattail mat but a bit more engineered. ANything made out of something like that will fall apart quickly and tend to get mixed in with the mud - not desirable in a permanent pit. Something like a plastic mat might work but it would be quite tricky to get it to the right size. Too small and it will tip over; too big and it will be impossible to remove from the pit after use. If its too flexible it will just buckle under the model's feet and if its too rigid and hard it will be extremely difficult or impossible to maintain balance while ankle deep. That could lead to a fall onto the solid ground - not good.

[Nessie]

I think the answer, if there is one, will be something LIKE a cattail mat but a bit more engineered.

Yeah, I'd never put a cattail mat on your claypit. It would ruin the smooth purity of it.

Nessie

[rickyj]

The poster has a valid point, but everyone knows that you can never satisfy every single person, so the producers do what they can, by making a variety of different sorts of scenes. They've done everything from slowly walking in, to flat-out jumps. I think they all do a good job and each one excells at certain aspects. However I do agree with you--there has been a "trend" toward those kinds of sinks, mabye it is just easier and safer to do. Personally, I've always felt that having a DVD of like 10 scenes of 5 mins. each, with a lot of variety, would be a lot better than 5 scenes of 10 minutes each. Variety is the key, because the more of it you have the more people will be interested.
One thing though I notice from time to time which really sort of takes away from a scene is when you can tell the model is clearly trying to "pull" herself under by wading her arms up/around under the mud or whatever it is, as if it the only way they can submerge is by having to force themselves down because it won't happen naturally. It just looks well...sort of fake.
But everyone would agree the producers do a great job and have made huge strides over the last 10 years.

[bart1997]

..

[Fred588]

Your point about the number of scenes per DVD is largely moot when scenes are available individually. With the exception of a very difficult partial layback, which requires the right mud conditions and considerable abdominal strength, using the arms to force oneself under IS the only way to complete a submergence. Any kind of mud, with the exception of cork floating in water, is heavier than water and this provides much more buoyancy than water. This has to be overcome somehow.

The poster has a valid point, but everyone knows that you can never satisfy every single person, so the producers do what they can, by making a variety of different sorts of scenes. They've done everything from slowly walking in, to flat-out jumps. I think they all do a good job and each one excells at certain aspects. However I do agree with you--there has been a "trend" toward those kinds of sinks, mabye it is just easier and safer to do. Personally, I've always felt that having a DVD of like 10 scenes of 5 mins. each, with a lot of variety, would be a lot better than 5 scenes of 10 minutes each. Variety is the key, because the more of it you have the more people will be interested.
One thing though I notice from time to time which really sort of takes away from a scene is when you can tell the model is clearly trying to "pull" herself under by wading her arms up/around under the mud or whatever it is, as if it the only way they can submerge is by having to force themselves down because it won't happen naturally. It just looks well...sort of fake.
But everyone would agree the producers do a great job and have made huge strides over the last 10 years.

[wysvp]

Hi,

I, personally, like the slow, gradual sink, and have tried to do that in many of my videos. But, it is very hard on the models, especially using a natural setting, which is why it looks forced at some points. Also, the final submergence is also very hard for the models/actresses to accomplish in a gradual fashion - issues like making sure the mud/clay does not go up the nose, in the mouth, into ears, etc. Also making sure that they take in enough breath to hold while under. Etc.

So, I will continue to try for that slow, gradual sink all the way, but reality says I will not succeed all the time.

Mike

[Chimerix]

Interesting. I guess that I tried so hard to make sure I wasn't being critical that what I was trying to say got lost. At least, that's the only thing I can garner from the resulting conversation.

This post wasn't about slow sinking, it was about abrupt endings.

And to those who said I needed to try it before I could complain...
A> I'm not complaining, I'm expressing an opinion
B> How do you know I haven't?
C> Really? What, I can't have a preference? You never disliked food from a restaurant despite never having prepared it yourself? You never disliked a book despite never having written one yourself? You never dislike a politician despite never having held office yourself? Get over it. I have an opinion, and an anus, and neither stinks any more than yours.

Now, back to the plunge, this has nothing to do with buoyancy, or thickness, or new performers. Since it happens to be my most recent purchase, I'll use QS: Breaking New Ground from MPV as an example. 10 submersions, either in peat or floating cork, by performers ranging from sexy veteran to newcomer. And in each of these scenes, the end is an abrupt plunge. This is a choice being made by someone, not a concession to reality.

That being said, I don't want to give the opinion that I'm remotely unhappy with my purchase. I love it, and have already watched it through twice in as many days. It's excellent work.

Neither do I want anyone to infer that I'm being critical of MPV. They have, in the past, done excellent slow submersions, some with the same performers in Breaking New Ground. And other producers here have climbed on the "abrupt plunge" bandwagon.

All I am trying to do here is offer a piece of feedback.