Andy Warhol and Norman Mailer and even Cassavetes used to make movies in the late 60's that remind me of current pornography. All that blind improvisation often times seemed to exist in those films with the expressed purpose of putting the females ill at ease, as they are generally the more reactive of the genders and the more interesting visually when they are off balance or confused, for a variety of reasons some obvious and some probabbly not so much maybe. But I agree with you only insofar as a scenario and a vague script could be discussed with the women beforehand, but only if only if only if the peni are instructed to change it or disregard it once the media devices are humming, these instructions being unknown to the women of course. But I think a return to narrative based pornography is a ludicrous suggestion. There has been no bertter development in this monstrous genre than when the shackles of those conceit were discarded. It wasn't a deliberate aesthetic choice on the troglodyte pornographers, but purely and economic one, which makes it even more legitimate and correct in my opinion. A conscious rejection of artifice only leads to more artificve. Anyway, all you need to realize is that the vast majority of that gone poornography leaned upon humor as a crutch and a salve. It was worthless obfuscation. Doesn't matter how pornography arrived at where it is now. The point is it actually is meaning something and getting down to elemental business. This is a wonderful thing in some senses, a monstrous thing in others. The line dividing the two can't be delineated with two points.