Posted on 05/28/2004 5:25:59 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
A Mormon Girl Gets Her Start in the Adult Movie Business
Jan. 23 — When 20-year-old Michelle saw the handsome Spaniard who would later become her fiancé, she thought it was love at first sight.
[WARNING: This article contains descriptions of sexual acts that some readers may find offensive.]
"The day we met, he said, 'You're going to be the mother of my children. I love you,'" she remembers. "You know what I mean? I never had that before. I never had a guy be so in love with me."
The couple met on the set of a porn film in a rented house in Prague in July 2001.
Michelle, the daughter of a retired Air Force captain and former bishop in the Mormon Church, was an up-and-coming starlet in the adult video world. She had had some setbacks in her first year in the business, but believed her career was turning around with the Prague trip, which would be her first starring role. Her co-star, 28-year-old Nacho Vidal, was already a well-established star.
The director had told Michelle that Vidal liked her work, and when the pair saw each other they immediately fell into each other's arms, kissing from one side of the house to the other.
"There's nothing bad about you," she told him admiringly as they prepared for the shoot. "You don't know me very well" he replied with a grin.
But when the director finally got the pair to settle down to the business at hand — filming a sex scene — the tone changed. Without any prompting, Vidal got rough during the sex, slapping Michelle's face violently from side to side, and choking her. [Pleased to meet you/Hope you guessed my name]
Afterward, she looked shaken, her face reddened and her eyes watery. But she insisted she was OK. "I look torn up — can you tell?," she asked an ABCNEWS producer who was following her progress for Primetime. Laughing and wiping her eye, she turned away and said without conviction, "I took a beating today, and it was great."
'Belladonna' Is Born
Michelle had gotten her start in the business at 18, when she came to Los Angeles from her home in Utah to look for work as a nude photograph model. When she failed to get modeling work, her agent encouraged her to try porn. She refused at first. "I always hated porn. I thought it was the most disgusting thing in the world," she told Primetime, which followed her career for more than two years.
But she finally agreed. Taking the name Belladonna, like the poisonous flower, she found herself preparing for what she thought would be a simple boy-girl sex scene. She was shocked when the director told her he wanted her to do anal sex — something she says she had never even thought about before. Worried she'd have to go through with it if she wanted to work again, she let him talk her into it. "I was kind of scared. I didn't know if I could say no," she remembers. "I didn't know any better, you know?"
After the session, she was shattered. "I wasn't ready for anal sex.... It was painful. But I can hide it really well." She had just turned 18, the legal age for participation in sexually explicit films.
Michelle went on more shoots over the next few months. Then her agent sent her on a job where she would have sex with male actors in prison outfits — 12 of them. Once again, she tried to back out, telling the director it was "sick," but once again she was talked into it. She had sex — all kinds — with the 12 men. "It was really hard because I really felt like a piece of meat ... in a lion's cage, 12 lions.... I had to do a lot of things I can't imagine anyone wanting to do." She was paid $4,000.
Afterward, she says, she couldn't stop crying. She packed her bags and went home to her family in Utah.
Glimpse of the Big Time
But within a year, she was back, even agreeing to promote the prison movie that had so upset her.
She began to feel that her career was picking up. She got a small part in a movie for VCA, one of the "high end" companies that produce big-budget films, and hoped it might lead to a contract. On the shoot, she met porn legend Ron Jeremy, who was making a cameo, and began to feel like she was fitting in. "The first second I walk in, this girl grabs my breast, and I'm like, Wow, you know, that's like the best welcome ... 'cause then you feel like, Oh, someone likes me, you know?"
Another company considered giving her a contract, but at a meeting, the owner, veteran porn star Ona Zee, sensed that Michelle was not emotionally ready to become an adult star. "There's a part of me that wants to say to you, 'Run for the hills, girl, do something else, because you can be something better,'" she told her.
At the high-end companies — which produce a small proportion of the thousands of adult titles released each year — performers often have contracts and can make six figures by shooting just eight to 10 movies a year. They can pick their own partners and condoms are generally required. Shot on film with elaborate, sets, costumes and plots, the movies can have budgets up to $250,000.
But Michelle did not get a studio contract, and ended up taking a job with a company known for "gonzo" porn — sex-only, amateur-looking productions shot on video. The company, Elegant Angel, was making a film in Prague and offered her a starring role, which she hoped would show the big studios that she could carry a film.
Love Blossoms in Prague
She was thrilled at the attention Vidal gave her during the week in Prague — but wary. "It's weird to have a guy love you that much. That almost scares me because I have a hard time trusting men," she told Primetime, explaining that her first boyfriend cheated on her repeatedly and ultimately left her for a stripper. Privately, Vidal had told Primetime he could never be with just one woman, and would be happy if Michelle's attraction did not lead anywhere.
She came back to Los Angeles by herself, so sore from the week's filming that she says she could hardly walk. But then she flew to Spain to visit Vidal, and their relationship seemed to be going places. She said he could keep having sex with other women, as long as he agreed to be "honest to me, loyal, and just respect me and tell me that I'm number one every day."
She even began hearing wedding bells, telling Primetime, "The second I get married, I won't having sex with men in this business any more."
Wedding Bells
By December 2001, Michelle and Vidal were engaged. As she proudly showed off her diamond ring, saying how pretty it was, Vidal joked in his Spanish accent, "I need to f—k so many girls for that ring."
The couple was in love, Michelle says, but they were fighting regularly. Vidal would sometimes get what he calls "Latino jealous" when he saw her talking to other men at clubs. Michelle told Primetime, "It's hard to be in a relationship with someone in porn."
By now, she was working steadily, even shooting for the same company she shot the prison gangbang for. "I guess now I've gotten past the whole feeling-bad-about-it thing. I'm like, 'OK, I did it and that was pretty damn rough of me' ... Like wow, you know?," she said with a laugh. "I can say that I've done pretty much everything there is to do, and I can walk away feeling a little proud about it, you know?"
The Primetime producers who had been following her noticed changes. At 18, she had said she would never use drugs, but now Primetime learned that she was sometimes high on marijuana during her scenes. She was working without condoms, though she said the risk of AIDS was never far from her mind — or her prayers. "The fans don't like to see condoms ... If I would have said I want to use condoms every time, I really wouldn't get any work," she explained. She contracted chlamydia, which can make you sterile.
And anal sex — which she had be talked into during her first shoot — was now her specialty. "Funny, isn't it? Something I didn't want to do and now I'm known best for it," she told Primetime. No longer a fresh face in the business, she found she had to agree to even riskier sex acts to earn the same money.
Ona Zee, the producer who had interviewed Michelle the previous year, noticed a difference, too. "I said to my husband, Our baby is all grown up and left home. She's no longer the adorable fresh-faced girl that I met ... Now she's really in the life ... Even in the pictures that I see of her, she's much harder, much tougher."
Behind the Smile
During interviews with Primetime, Michelle kept the happy smile she had always had — even when describing things that many people would find disturbing. However, her composure cracked when Diane Sawyer asked why she always smiled. Tears came to her eyes as she said, "Because I like to hide — hide everything, you know?" Then she began to cry, explaining that she hides her real emotions because she wants to show everyone how happy she is. "And I'm not happy ... I don't like myself at all," she said.
Michelle confessed she often felt physical revulsion during her scenes: "My whole entire body feels it when I'm doing it and ... I feel so — so gross." While pretending to be enjoying the sex, she said, she was in fact counting the minutes, telling herself, "Hey, I only have this much time left. Don't worry about it. Get the check. Gonna go deposit it in your bank." She admitted: "You get addicted to the money."
Like other performers Primetime spoke to, Michelle said that during shooting she often imagines herself outside her body. "I call it the 'other half,'" she said.
Bringing Home a Trophy
In January 2002, Michelle's Prague movie won an award at the Adult Video News awards in Las Vegas, considered the Oscars of the adult industry. Things were not going smoothly with Vidal that day — he complained that Michelle "don't do the ironing my clothes... I still 28 and I need my mother," and at the ceremony he openly checked out other women — but there were crowds of admiring fans for Michelle and she soaked up the attention.
After going on stage to pick the trophy, she was beaming, telling Primetime she had worked hard for it. "I think this is the very beginning of my career, like I've just begun," she said.
And at the 2003 AVN awards two weeks ago, Michelle was an even bigger winner, taking home awards for best supporting actress and three other categories.
You've contradicted yourself again. If the purpose of the State[sic] is to promote the "common good", then any undesirable (i.e. detrimental to the common good) actions it takes are necessarily illegitimate.
Now, now; you know your history better that that.
Come on. You can say it. Four letters; starts with "J"....
And in our country, the Constitution is the basis for our system of government, which is the State.
2) Given what you mean by "prohibit evils", your position is at war with everything the Founders understood the general welfare to be.
In their day I suspect that every state prohibited intrinsic evils like abortion, artificial means of birth control, pornography (as it might have existed then), adultery, sodomy, etc.
I'm not familiar with their justification for the first amendment, but they didn't object to established state churches, just a national established church. Many states had established churches well into the 19th century.
They certainly weren't dogmatic defenders of unlimited "free speech" either. They limited many forms of expression, including blasphemy. Courts into the late 19th century excluded the testimony of self-proclaimed atheists.
Yes, and they kept slaves too. It is common knowledge that moral understanding has advanced by leaps and bounds since those days.
Are all porn stars going to hell? What about swingers?
Unlike theft, murder, and abortion all sides agreed to be in porn. Doesn't that count for something? If I want to sell myself for money, who does it hurt?
Interesting question.
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Same thing. It's not referring to the food stamp program.
You must have missed it. Football is not inherently evil. Pornography is.
"Overconsideration, in the form of government policies that create not merely a safety net, but a nice comfy hammock from which one has little incentive to rise and go to work, can cost us our Republic. I'm astonished that I have to explain this here, of all places."-steve-b
Which is why I used the words "more likely". Yes, I agree, overconsideration can cost us our country. It's just underconsideration has God's promise that it will, therefore I consider underconsideration to be the "more likely". In light of God's promise, it's better to err on the side of overconsideration. However, It's always better not to err at all.
Having to explain this here, of all places, is wearisome, but here goes. The phrase "promote the general welfare" clearly refers to the overall benefits derived to people generally as a result of achieving the other objectives of providing for the common defense, insuring domestic tranquility, and securing the blessings of liberty. It certainly does not encompass any of your socialistic notions of "common good". In fact, even your own notions do not serve the "common good", but only the good of your anointed elite rulers.
Again, the same argument applies to both, or it applies to neither.
Lying is intrinsically evil. Some are worse than others, depending on the gravity of the subject matter.
some do not (e.g. "That dress looks just fine, dear")...
An evil, but not serious.
and some actively defend against the evil of agression (e.g. "Nein, Herr Gauleiter, there aren't any Jews hidden around here"), the question cannot be answered without more specific information.
No. The lie remains intrinsically evil. This is an example of choosing the lesser of two evils. The person must choose between lying about harboring Jews or turning over innocent people to be slaughtered.
The lie remains evil, but the liar is not guilty of sin because, under duress, he is force to choose between one of two evils.
No, because Catholicism is the true(st) religion. Therefore, any regime that persecuted Catholicism would be acting unjustly.
An "intrinsically evil" (whatever that means) act is not necessarily sinful; however, an "intrinsically evil" act is necessarily subject to state prohibition.
I advise you in all sincerity: quit digging before you end up in China.
Sorry, but you have by your own arguments conceded to the state the decision of which, if any, religion is the true one.
What of nontheistic religions such as Buddhism?
What about them? Could Buddhists be justly punished for blasphemy? If they blaspheme, yes.
The problem with nontheistic religions is that in denying what is naturally knowable, the existence of God, they undercut ethics, since pantheism necessarily conflates good and evil, making a coherent ethical system impossible. The state of Indian (Hindu) society is no accident. Hinduism in practice does not promote the common good.
Does evil exist?
If you answer "no," you have no intellectual basis for criminalizing anything.
If you answer "yes," you must define evil.
Evil is unnatural or disordered activity.
Pornography is disordered and unnatural, as explained above many times.
If you disagree, you must offer a better definition of properly ordered human sexuality.
Therefore, pornography is evil, and is knowable by all as such.
What about a husband and wife filming themselves, is that wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.