Ceci N’est Pas Une Bareback Studio

Posted April 9, 2008 8:55 PM by with 44 comments

falcon-bareback-classic.jpgFrom the physical direct mail packages last month from Falcon advertising their vintage pre-condom titles, rebranded as Falcon Bareback Classic.


Widespread Cum in Eyes May Have Made Falcon Bareback Question Unclear
Fleet Week Fuels Bareback Rumors (TheSword.com)


44 responses to Ceci N’est Pas Une Bareback Studio

  1. Anonymous April 9th, 2008 at 9:15 PM

    WO-O-O-W. I’m amazed they would do this. Very wrong. I’m not an anti-BB crusader, but pre-condom does NOT mean Bareback. Ridiculous, Falcon!


  2. will April 9th, 2008 at 9:24 PM

    I know everyone will be up in arms about the obvious thing here, but I find it almost as disgusting that they seem to be hiding, or at least downplaying, the fact that these are vintage titles. That is at once a kind of consumer fraud and a not-so-subtle testing of the waters. That banner headline sends chills.


  3. will April 9th, 2008 at 9:29 PM

    I just noticed the size of the font they used for the word “Classic.” Classy.


  4. sal April 9th, 2008 at 11:36 PM

    BB! PNP! HIV!


  5. josh April 9th, 2008 at 11:51 PM

    If you were to look past morality issues of all this (which is hard considering the CEO and the President of Falcon both died of AIDS), its also disingenuous and misleading.

    Bareback porn is very different than “vintage” or “pre-condom classic” porn. The stuff that’s being produced as “Bareback” is all about the fetishization of the semen: cum dripping out of a butthole, ingesting of semen; men behaving in risky behavior.

    However, vintage movies — like “Manrammer”, which is being advertised here — rarely show oral cumshots and they never show the top cumming in the bottom’s ass. These movies are all about the conventional “Pull out and cum on the back” moneyshot.

    People (dumb enough) to buy this because it says, “BB” will expect to see Dawson with fifty cumloads dripping out of his ass will be sorely disappointed.


  6. Mike April 10th, 2008 at 3:55 AM

    This was natural sex prior to a very deadly disease that changed gay life forever. To label it “bareback” sex to only make a buck is sick.
    Falcon keeps inching towards the bareback line with hiring of bareback models, promoting unsafe mouth ejaculation (10 times in one video),and now promoting older vintage titles “BAREBACK” instead of “CLASSIC.”
    To think that some of these models are no longer alive today and Falcon promotes this as bareback as some sort of fetish to cash in is so sick.
    These models and former CEO of Falcon are spinning in their graves.


  7. alfie April 10th, 2008 at 7:41 AM

    pretty sad. alot of the “actors” in these films have died due to AIDS. maybe they should mention that on this ad.


  8. Ted B. (Charging Rhino) April 10th, 2008 at 7:56 AM

    I enjoy the Classic-series not for the condomless sex; but for the naturally-hot sex, by guys that typically are “more sexual” and “real” than the steriodal, perfectly-tanned boytoys now.

    The old Falcon stable of porn stars were varied and intersting; guys who enjoyed the sex, not strippers and rent-boys too drugged-up to care. And there was a variety of body-types, ages and degrees of hairiness. Now, you need to track the tattoos to tell what shaved and tanned body-part belongs to whom.


  9. Anonymous April 10th, 2008 at 9:04 AM

    A sad and pathetic attempt to try and drive sales. Using the term “bareback” and all it denotes to try and sell pre-condom stuff is disgusting!


  10. Eric April 10th, 2008 at 10:01 AM

    This is a real shame. I love the Falcon classics and I imagine so do others. I actually recently bought one of their classics on DVD recently. They will always be popular because they were good videos. It is horrible that Falcon is degrading these fine performers with a bareback promotion.
    What the hell is Falcon doing?


  11. Bob K April 10th, 2008 at 12:51 PM

    I am a huge fan of the classic pre-condom movies by Falcon for the same reason as given by Ted B. I am not a fan of BB and never will be and I don’t consider pre-condom the same as BB for the reasons stated above. I have almost every Falcon classic pre-condom movie on DVD and will continue to enjoy them but this crap that Falcon is trying to pull is enough to make me think twice about ever buying another Falcon, Jocks or Mustang video again. It’s totally sick to market these great classic flicks as BB. Falcon is just out for the mighty buck by sucking in some unsuspecting customers thinking these are the same as BB. For shame, Falcon.


  12. chriso April 10th, 2008 at 4:28 PM

    How many of you go out and buy albums by artists that already exist but are “remastered” or come with “bonus tracks”? Cuz all of you who do need to just shut up about this. It’s marketing.


  13. Mytwocents April 10th, 2008 at 4:50 PM

    Hmmm interesting. Todd Montgomery and Jan at Jet Set are both promoting two plagues on the gay community.


  14. legend April 10th, 2008 at 5:46 PM

    Porn companies make money off of sex. Why is anyone surprised?
    These aren’t philanthropists for god’s sake.


  15. dav April 11th, 2008 at 12:20 AM

    falcon’s obviously getting desperate for sales.


  16. LG April 11th, 2008 at 3:54 AM

    It is pathetic that they are marketing them like that… But in the end, They aren’t using condoms, Which is the point.


  17. pauldb April 11th, 2008 at 6:48 AM

    Yep..this sort of misguided greed will do to the brand “Falcon” what Donatella has done for Versace..sad and tacky..sack the board..or sell ur shares fast..


  18. EuroboyFilms April 11th, 2008 at 7:18 AM

    I guess it’s all in the consumer’s head.
    Some people think pre-condom and BB are not the same, others do.


  19. Charles April 11th, 2008 at 9:17 AM

    Always remember any and all businesses are about making more profits. Falcon is only doing what is the “HOT TREND” at the moment. It is easy to do and does not require any other marketing just a few updated words and some copies at Kinko’s.

    The bigger truth is we as gay men cannot and should not look for a business to “do the right thing”. It is up to the person to decide, to act responsibly and maturely. The gay community has linked itself parasitically to the adult industry, cigarette and alcohol companies, circuit parties under the guise of helping with AIDS, while possibly supporting and reinforcing “drug use and unprotected sex”.

    If you are truly outraged do not buy even better throw it away; truly do something rather than state your discontent and continue to do what you are doing.

    Decide what your standard is and act upon it.


  20. ChicagoCub April 11th, 2008 at 4:05 PM

    Charles let’s not get carried away now. There is nothing wrong with the adult industy or adult movies. (why are you on a gay porn blog then).

    In fact I credit gay porn with potentially saving my life. I know I had less sex partners because sometimes it was easier to pop in a video (at the time) than to go out searching for a hook up. I am HIV negative and I think safe sex practices are the reason but gay porn didn’t hurt…it helped.

    Yes gay life is tied to events or places with alcohol but so it a lot of straight life. Smoking isn’t just a gay thing either.

    I think the circuit parties full of drugs/unsafe sex but giving money to AIDS charaties is another topic all togehter.

    (Or AIDS Rides/walks where all the money goes to the event rather than the cause)

    Let’s not be soooo judgemental now.


  21. Dan April 11th, 2008 at 9:06 PM

    I find this absurd.

    Not the whole classic vs. bareback chit chat. That really doesn’t matter.

    Pre-condom days or not, this scocial liability on studios and actors alike is just mind-blowing to me. If they want to promote themselves as barback or whatever, it’s really not these institutions responsibility to re enforce what we all ready know.

    By a show of hands, who here didn’t know using a condom can protect you from dangerous and even life threatening diseases? Anyone?

    Now again by a show of hands, who here is going to change their sexual habbits because of a marketing tactic by a pornography studio?


    I rest my case.


  22. will April 12th, 2008 at 3:31 AM

    Cbarles – The general tone of these comments to me is one of sadness and nostalgia for what Falcon used to be, and a dawning realization that gay porn as we have known it is probably diaappearing. I think people resent Falcon’s bald-faced desperation more than anything.


  23. Meyer April 12th, 2008 at 5:09 AM

    What we need to do is let Falcon know our feelings – that what they’re doing is wrong and that if they continue, we’ll take our business elsewhere.


  24. jeff April 13th, 2008 at 12:54 AM

    Oh, pleeze with the “shame on Falcon” ranting. They’re capitalists…they sell what sells. Both Classic and Bareback show exactly the same thing…raw fucking. You’re either for raw fucking or you’re not. If you’re against raw fucking, then don’t buy the Classic films either. Defending Classic and condemning Bareback takes some awfully special mental hool-a-hoops.

    If they’re going to sell raw fucking, they should at least be honest about it…no one was fooled by “Classic”, not even for minute. Classic is Bareback fucking.


  25. pauldb April 13th, 2008 at 7:45 AM

    hey all..falcon nedes to change..that is obvious to everyone.. but is this the way or their ultimate end thru realy bad judgement..plenty of other leading brands have gone that way..clever marketing will retain them..let’s see..i’m selling my shares tho’ ..any offers?


  26. daggerdan April 13th, 2008 at 10:42 PM

    Gentlemen; I know everyone is sick to hear this, but HIV is not a gay disease.Has anyone seen straight porn or bisex porn lately? No one is using condoms. All other porn is skin on skin. I would like to add, has any porn company shown an actor actually putting on a condom? Porn is a product. If we were all serious about HIV in films only Trojan would be making porn!


  27. dirkj April 14th, 2008 at 4:49 AM

    My only issue with this is how lightly Falcon seems to be dealing with the subject of bareback porn. Using it as a marketing ploy must require complete ignorance of the other, far less sexy implications. It kind of makes a joke of the company’s original stance on unsafe sex and the social responsibility they claimed to feel, back when barebacking was outlawed. If this trend in Falcon’s marketing continues, then much like people suffer consequences for not using a condom in real life, Falcon will also have to deal with the aftermath of their irresponsible antics.


  28. Jay April 14th, 2008 at 6:33 AM

    Why do we as gay people rely on gay porn to give us sex education?I think that for us to rely on the studios to tell us what to do and what not to do is absurd!This is why we had sex education in schools,and info readily available in clinics,etc.We even have public service announcements on television every hour.Porn is to be used for Fantasy reasons only,Thats the whole point of porn is for yourself to enjoy.I think if the models and studios are tested,then why not have barreback sex.im sure these porn stars know exactly what they are getting into when they dont use condoms as does the gay population.For everyone to say that it is the studios responsibility to tell us to use condoms is pretty ignorant.Just beacuase i watch a bareback film,does not make me want to go out and fuck without a condom.porn is an alternative to that.Get over it,its porn.Its not your public service announcements.We need to educate ourselves in different ways rather than relying on porn who are out to make money no matter what.


  29. manup April 14th, 2008 at 2:22 PM


    barebacking was never outlawed.


  30. Frank April 15th, 2008 at 3:36 AM

    BB porn is hot. Be responsible in your own life and keep the preaching out of the adult entertainment industry. Falcon is just marketing the word barebacking to a younger generation who perhaps wouldnt have given these classics a second glance. I feel ashamed not of the porn industry, or the HIV catching promiscuity of unsafe practices, but of people who feel like the anonymity of the internet allows them license to soapbox. Get a fucking clue.


  31. Will April 15th, 2008 at 7:27 AM

    Frank – “marketing the word barebacking to a younger generation. . .” Did you actually type that without retching?


  32. Dutch April 15th, 2008 at 7:46 AM

    Sad though the whole thing makes me (shame on you, Falcon!), the title of this entry paints a huge smile on my face.

    Ceci N’est Pas Une Bareback Studio!


  33. Frank April 15th, 2008 at 9:27 PM

    Why should marketing barebacking to a younger generation be such a bad thing? I fail to see how people react so angrily to it. I honestly feel if the actors were tested, and negative, then barebacking isn’t such a bad thing. And it looks fucking hot! Where the disconnect is coming from is this assumption that the adult entertainment industry should be interested in being role-models. If the porn industry is your role-model, then you have bigger problems than just having unsafe sex.


  34. Ftube April 16th, 2008 at 12:48 AM

    It does not matter. BB of yesterday or tomorrow. What ever Falcon calls it, it will SUCK in a bad way. They keep churning out crap. Xtube and the rest threats them and they can’t keep up. With directors like Chi-chi who care about the industry. Its only a matter of time before Falcon disappears like PanAm, Eastern, TWA, and the four latest airlines to bite the dust. Pretty sad that an uptight fag and a straight guy could so easily destroy Falcon in such a short time.


  35. Charles April 16th, 2008 at 4:54 AM

    What is interesting to me is that many negative men will watch bareback porn but would not date someone who is HIV+.


  36. slick nuts April 16th, 2008 at 6:10 PM

    wow….this is so tacky. WTF Falcon? The design is bad…great photo but missing the elegance of Falcon Classic.

    Seems like every porn studio is “walking the line” to bareback… cumshots in mouths, eyes.

    that’s why i work in the industry…not sure if I’d change careers if everything went bareback…?


  37. Anonymous April 23rd, 2008 at 9:24 AM

    What a bunch of old hens. For those of you looking up to porn stars I say, find yourself another role model. Bareback (which by the way is as a stupid term as power bottom) and pre-condom videos differ only by the title they are given. Lucky for us all we live in a porn democracy.

    If you don’t like it DON’T BUY IT!


  38. hotINBK April 23rd, 2008 at 8:51 PM

    I am against bareback porn. I’d rather not start a flame war here.

    But if Falcon wants to make a buck on the trend AND fulfill a market demand WITHOUT putting naive 18 year olds at risk for a disease they might not fully comprehend, I say good for Falcon.


  39. Rassy April 24th, 2008 at 2:49 AM

    Surely the difference between bareback porn and pre-condom is that in BB movies the use of condoms is consiously omitted while pre-condom movies date back to before safer sex practices were adopted.

    It seems that Falcon are trying to sit on the fence. They don’t shoot full-blown bareback movies, but “play” with the concept by adopting oral cumshots and “rebranding” older movies.

    This smacks of desperation. Falcon has not been an A1 studio for some time IMHO.

    And Frank, since when did BB sex have to be marketed? You only have to market something to encourage people to adopt it. So is that what is going on? Yeah, let’s show kids how hot BB sex is and get them to take risks….good plan (not)!


  40. Will April 24th, 2008 at 6:53 AM

    Rassy – I think what Frank MEANT was marketing vintage titles to a younger generation using a word that catches their eye. Still disgusting though.


  41. fierceTRANY April 24th, 2008 at 7:18 PM

    do the math

    treasure island = bb

    falcon = tranyMESS

    bb + tranyMESS = 2 dead fags rolling in their graves

    stick to your guns chi-chi


  42. Ted B. (Charging Rhino) April 29th, 2008 at 10:31 AM

    Interesting. Falcon made a big deal out of the return of Josh Weston, despite his crossing-over to bareback films, yet if you watch Fleet Week no-one actually fucks him or is fucked by him….I don’t think he even got his cock sucked. He gave his two playmates head then got fucked with a nightstick, but no-one even played with his cock or hole as I remember.

    Directorial quarantine? Coincidence? …Or no-one wanted to risk touching him since he’s been barebacking?


  43. Will May 1st, 2008 at 8:46 AM

    Ted B. – You are correct sir. Surprised they didn’t put condoms on their dicks during BJ’s. Most symbolic moment was Jaxx blasting his face and mouth with that cum volley.


  44. Brand May 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 AM

    “Bareback porn is very different than “vintage” or “pre-condom classic” porn. The stuff that’s being produced as “Bareback” is all about the fetishization of the semen: cum dripping out of a butthole, ingesting of semen; men behaving in risky behavior”.

    Surely, it’s not “all” about that. One similarity between it and the “pre-condom” classics is that both do not use condoms, and in many cases, for the same reason – the natural urge is to have sex without them. Now just harping on the fact that the bareback genre /usually/ goes further by adding the fetish element, is not the most persuasive argument for making a hard-line distinction between the two types of condom-free porn because all it takes is the replacement of the fetish stuff with content emulating the classic films. It’s not hard to imagine that happening. And when it does, the argument by the anti-bareback, pro-classic crowd becomes moot.


Leave a Reply