Gay Porn Star: Johnny Castle Storms Falcon, Men

Posted October 26, 2007 1:47 AM by with 40 comments

Porn stars grow up so fast! We love it when one of our favorite amateurs makes it big. First, it means that maybe we’ve got taste. Second, it means that we have the full narrative after the crash, burn and murder spree. “Oh, I remember his first solo on Randy Blue,” we can opine. “He was so innocent — before the steroids, the coked-up Rock of Love girlfriend, the fraudulent eBay Hummel spree and the bareback scandal. Pity.”


We kid, we kid. But we have to admit that when Johnny Castle first showed up on our virtual doorstep, wearing blue boxers, an “I was just napping” yawn and a C’mon-in-friend wink, it was like the world’s most handsomest boy next store had just offered us a stone massage, a joint and a warm cup of head. In other words, a dream. With his debut in Falcon’s Hustle and Cruise, the cover of Men Magazine, a photo shoot with Playgirl and a lucrative deal with celebrity-sex-toy Fleshjack, it looks like not-so-little Johnny’s hit the big time. And while he may not be headed for a downward porn spiral anytime soon, that scurry, scurry graffiti covered set from the Hustle and Cruise boxcover has us wondering if he’s not headed for the wrong side of town.


From a recent Hot House shoot.

From his Playgirl pictorial


From his shoot with Fleshjack.

Gay Porn Amateurs: Randy Blue’s Johnny Castle (GayPornBlog)
Yes, More Johnny Castle (GayPornBlog)

Tags: , , , , , ,

40 responses to Gay Porn Star: Johnny Castle Storms Falcon, Men

  1. Chris October 27th, 2007 at 10:30 AM

    He’s ridiculously hot, has a great dick (not too small, not too big), but he’s straight.

    Is he even having gay sex in that Hustle film?


  2. Jackson October 27th, 2007 at 6:28 PM

    I’m all for straight guys showing off their bodies. But, Falcon really screwed up when they built a video around this character. The gay porn industry can do without a Mark Dalton clone. If you put Johnny Castle in a hard-core video, he should be actually having sex with someone other than himself.


  3. jayden October 28th, 2007 at 12:07 AM

    The dude looks tired..i think he needs some


  4. Michael October 28th, 2007 at 6:15 AM

    The guy is straight and refuses to have sex with men.

    So, why are you glorifying him on this site?

    He, like Mark Dalton before him, is a waste of time and should not be in a gay video or on the cover of a gay video if he is not going to have hardcore sex with another man.

    I am so fucking over these asshole straight guys using the gay community to make a buck and the gay community being dumb enough to fall for it and throwing money at them.

    There are plenty of hot gay men to spend money on without having to waste it on these losers.


  5. Tal October 28th, 2007 at 9:28 AM

    does it really matter if someone is gay or straight and wants to sell their looks to whomever wants to watch? There is room in the big ol’ porn industry for all types. They (porn stars and studios) want to mkae money so why bregrudge them from showing the goods in gay porn. There are trillions of gay videos with solo performances in them. We say relax and if you want to enjoy Mr Castle or any other straight man go ahead and do so.


  6. We don't need him October 28th, 2007 at 11:56 AM

    Michael, do you want to be like my best new friend, ’cause I totally agree with everything you said. We DON’T NEED so-called straight men to do us any favors, there are plenty of incredibly HOT gay men who actually enjoy having sex for us to watch. And this guy in particular…kind of weird looking if you ask me.


  7. kryx October 28th, 2007 at 9:31 PM

    Totally agree with Michael, this dude shouldnt even be on this site, he does a solo on that movie. Aweful there are hundreds of better looking gay men, to be wsting time on this one.


  8. Anonymous October 28th, 2007 at 10:30 PM




  9. max October 28th, 2007 at 11:31 PM

    he ain’t all that!


  10. JT October 29th, 2007 at 3:43 AM

    Didn’t he have his first “big break” on “Guys Gone Wild” ? BEFORE Randy Blue?


  11. trick or treat October 29th, 2007 at 5:20 AM

    Oh…..what a….supple face.
    How his cheeks hang…
    That yellow band is just adorable.
    Is his tongue going to fall out?
    How long is it?


  12. J² October 29th, 2007 at 9:56 AM

    Well, at least this story isn’t another. raging. stallion. puffpiece.


  13. nakedass October 29th, 2007 at 12:32 PM

    GAY FOR PAY… HE has the looks but is not smart and not nice to people in real life and is a jerk to work with….


  14. bma83 October 29th, 2007 at 2:55 PM

    I’m so sick of straight men in gay porn. I’m even more sick at the fact that these gay porn companies mostly only offer straight or gay-4-pay (bi) men. Whatever happened to the gay porn that featured men who love men and only men? Or did it never exist?


  15. Drew October 29th, 2007 at 4:02 PM

    Yeah so i’ve seen this film and his scene in one word “Boring!!” i hate gay for pay straight guys that do nothing what a fucking waste of space it’s those guys who are basically taking the piss out of us thinking cause there hot thats enough for us well mr “cant even remember your name?” it’s not


  16. John, Phoenix, Az October 29th, 2007 at 4:41 PM

    I think Johnny Castle is really hot, but that said, big deal? There are plenty of men just as hot, and even hotter that will do hardcore scenes with men for our viewing pleasure. I have nothing against Johnny Castle or Mark Dalton or the other straigt guys who just jerk off for the camera. There are guys that will buy that, and good for them. Personally, it’s more hat to watch a guy have sex with somebody other than himself,regardless of how hot he is.


  17. Chris October 29th, 2007 at 4:48 PM

    I do believe he is a waste of time. Until I see him doing something with a guy, I am not interested!


  18. Ramon October 29th, 2007 at 4:50 PM

    I wish Falcon would disappear, there movies have gone from BAD 2 WORSE in the last coulple of years, DAMN hang it up already, the foreign films & Ragging Stallion studios have u beat by far, i hope this move is your NAIL in the


  19. jake October 29th, 2007 at 6:36 PM

    whats wrong with a lil smudge on his butt crack…a blooper if u ask me…

    would have love to have seen that


  20. zealot October 29th, 2007 at 10:38 PM

    Gawd..not this tired old subject again. Look. He’s hot. We know it, he knows it and whatever in his psyche needs to titilate other men to have self worth and make a buck, more power to him. However, I would prefer my porn with honest to God gay (or bi, I’m good with bi…hey, I’m willing to consider it’s possible). We’ve been out long enough and there are plenty of hot gay men willing to put out on camera so as not to necessitate the Mr. Castles of the world to have to pretend for our sakes anymore.


  21. Vote porn 08! October 30th, 2007 at 6:06 PM

    He is profiled because he is sexy as hell and does a solo in a falcon movie and for rascal and that alone is more than what Zeb “ego” Atlas has done.

    Yes he is straight but there are hundreds of alleged “gay for pay” men in films who never get a bad rap unlike Castle who comes out and says he is straight and does not pretend to be gay.

    I suppose if you bought or rented Hustle or Sunstroked from rascal you would not watch his scene right ? lol


  22. Todi October 30th, 2007 at 6:35 PM

    I think the days of “gay for pay” are over…it’s the old queens that love to fantasise about seducing these straight boys…they hope that if they throw them a few bucks they may let them suck their dicks…as far as I know, Johnny is straight…he’s done lots of hardcore straight flicks…he’s ok looking…nice body, but unless he sucks dick…why should I buy this product?


  23. Grunt October 31st, 2007 at 5:59 AM

    I kinda agree. If you want gay money, for gay videos then I feel you should take it up the ass.

    If I were running a video studio the only way you would get my money, as a straight person, would be by getting fucked in your very first scene.

    I am tired of this really bad case of blue balls these gold diggers give me.


  24. Alex October 31st, 2007 at 12:57 PM

    I completely agree with Michael! The days of “Gay for Pay” ARE *****OVER**** and it is high time these gay porn studios start recognizing that. I refuse to spend one dime on any porno flick OR STUDIO that uses so-called “GAY FOR PAY” models.

    If the models aren’t gay or at least bisexual I am not interested! It is false advertisement and deceitful to me as a consumer. If I wanted to watch straight boys have sex I would buy straight porn. I am so sick of this crap. It sends a bad message to the gay youth in the community that being GAY in of itself and loving only MEN isn’t good enough!

    Besides once you’ve seen a REAL gay porno flick involving REAL GAY MEN that like to have sex with other men, then you can’t watch buffoons like Johnny Castle and the other so-called gay for pay assholes. Watching REAL GAY MEN have sex with other men they are attracted to on camera is too hot for words. It blows scenes with straight guys out of the water.

    Give us what we want porn studios. Start using REAL GAY MEN!


  25. David October 31st, 2007 at 1:04 PM

    I performed in gay porn in the 1980s. I didn’t know anyone who was straight in them. Bi, maybe. No hustlers wither. That was unacceptable at certain studios.

    I have to say, this guy isn’t especially attractive in my view. Gay or straight, he has kind of a bland, empty, homely face.


  26. CountFaigala October 31st, 2007 at 1:07 PM

    To say “He’s hot” in a definite way is just as stupid as saying that he isn’t and thinking that’s the last word.

    Some people like the way he looks (I’m not one of them)and some don’t.

    That said, I don’t see anything wrong with “gay for pay” as long as the straight guy isn’t a homophobe.

    I wonder how many guys on here, who are all bent out of shape about a person making money by feigning the superficial characteristics of a particular group, listen to Justin Timberlake.


  27. wil October 31st, 2007 at 8:35 PM


    You are so right!!! About these old queens wanting these tired ass looking (not even all that cute) straight guys in gay porn.

    My uncle (old queen) is in this business and knows Johnny. I’ve seen Johnny boy in person folks, shirtless in briefs whatever.

    I can honestly say to you all that, he is so average looking, at least to me. To be honest I don’t find him all that attractive, but each to his own.



  28. Brandon November 1st, 2007 at 4:02 PM

    That analogy may not fly since doubtlessly, not everyone expressing a distaste for “gay for pay”, is black. I happen to be. And yes, Justin’s style can irk me, though the extent to which it does depends on how much I think he’s merely imitating African American music. But unlike with porn, I can somewhat ignore the main person (the singer) and focus on the instrumentals. In porn, it’s all about the people, not the background. Certainly, it’s “supposed” to be all fantasy, but I think it’s a good sign when people aren’t so unrealistic that their fantasies are absolutely impervious to any reality.


  29. tiredOfFalcon November 2nd, 2007 at 6:23 AM

    Last thing I want to do is watch a porn where a guy doesn’t have sex with another guy. Falcon: I won’t be buying this. I hope you go bankrupt. How insulting to put a guy in a GAY porno who refuses to have sex with another man.


  30. Anonymous November 2nd, 2007 at 2:47 PM

    Nice line of bullshit, Brandon.

    Does that go over anywhere???


  31. Anonymous November 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 PM

    “Nice line of bullshit, Brandon.
    Does that go over anywhere”???

    More places than cheap shots like this. Since you didn’t feel inclined to include a supporting argument for your comment, I’ll assume you don’t have one.


  32. Anonymous November 3rd, 2007 at 8:42 AM

    Ah, Brandon, so it doesn’t go over anywhere, heh?


    Next time try something more substantive than, “I know you are but what am I?!”, you silly pseudo intellectual.


  33. CountFaigala November 3rd, 2007 at 11:59 PM


    One does not have to be Black (though I am as well) in order appreciate the Johnny / Justin parallel.

    By making the comparison, I was pointing to the irony of a group (Gays) being offended by a phenomenon like straight Johnny’s gay-for-pay performances while gladly consuming the racially appropriated (borderline minstrel show) nonsense of Timberlake. Conversely, there are, I’m sure, many Blacks who would respond to the Johnny issue with a shrug and in the next breath rail against Timberlake.

    See how that works? Any White, Asian, Hispanic person, who is paying attention, could appreciate that dynamic. It’s not that difficult.

    So, my analogy was made to point out the exploitation that goes on in all quarters. As consumers (let’s face it, we all are) we should ask questions about whatever product (porn, music, rice, pancake syrup) is being hawked.

    While I don’t necessarily share that person’s assessment of your previous post as “bullshit,” I can see how it might have seemed a skosh obtuse.


  34. Brandon November 4th, 2007 at 2:59 AM

    “Ah, Brandon, so it doesn’t go over anywhere, heh”?

    Zero is not “more” than zero. Not only do you not have a point, you don’t have a handle on basic math…or worse, can’t see what’s actually on the screen. Did you run out of Metamucil – is that why you’re so irritable?


    “One does not have to be Black (though I am as well) in order appreciate the Johnny / Justin parallel”.

    I never said they had to be. I simply expressed my doubt that it would matter otherwise. People can understand something intellectually, without it meaning a darn thing to them personally.

    “By making the comparison, I was pointing to the irony of a group…”

    It’s only “ironic” when you overlook the fact that most people (whether that is good or bad is another discussion) tend to respond to the personal, not the general. This most certainly isn’t difficult to do.

    “So, my analogy was made to point out the exploitation that goes on in all quarters. As consumers (let’s face it, we all are) we should ask questions about whatever product (porn, music, rice, pancake syrup) is being hawked”.

    One has to care first, IMO.

    For me, the issue is mainly believability. I definitely would be curious why one would choose to do something that doesn’t come naturally to them, but if one can give a convincing performance or product, and not be someone that just rubs me the wrong way, I’m okay. “Gay for pay” types like Johnny fall in the unimpressive category. One can pay for a tease if they like, but I’ll pass

    “While I don’t necessarily share that person’s assessment of your previous post as “bullshit,” I can see how it might have seemed a skosh obtuse”.

    Since that individual failed to form a complete response, I have no idea what he saw that bothered him and don’t care, to be honest.


  35. CountFaigala November 5th, 2007 at 12:20 PM


    Your juvenile exchanges with that person, whom you “don’t care” about, aren’t making your case any stronger.

    That said, what does any of your post mean? Most of it were statements of the obvious tantamount to “Well, I’m entitled to my opinion.”

    Really, all you did was cite general societal apathy (no kidding) and in a roundabout way, endorse it.

    Is this what passes for pragmatism these days — a sort of vague, almost adolescent cynicism?

    It seems you proved your own point about thoughtlessness through example.


  36. Brandon November 6th, 2007 at 5:22 PM

    “Your juvenile exchanges with that person, whom you “don’t care” about, aren’t making your case any stronger”.

    I’m obligated to persuade you of what and why….? If the explanation I gave didn’t satisfy your inquisitive mind, whose problem is that? Moreover, it’s quite telling why you’re so preoccupied with the interaction between this “anonymous” individual and myself. Let’s just hope this split personality of yours is a little more integrated offline.

    “Well, I’m entitled to my opinion.”

    Knock knock. Had you been present on earth with the rest of us, you would have noticed long ago that giving my opinion was precisely what I intended to do. “Anonymously” giving the immature comment “bullshit” and returning later with a facade of sophistication is what you intended to do.

    “Really, all you did was cite general societal apathy (no kidding) and in a roundabout way, endorse it”.

    It’s such a no-brainer to you, yet your comments betray that position. And there was no “endorsement” at all, merely an acknowledgment of what is, and what is likely to be – something you can’t say for yourself.

    “Is this what passes for pragmatism these days — a sort of vague, almost adolescent cynicism”?

    This question epitomizes such qualities so well, I can assume it does for you.

    “It seems you proved your own point about thoughtlessness through example”.

    I know you were taught in school to have a concluding statement, but it should actually make sense. Neglecting to tickle your ears is not the equivalent of “thoughtlessness”.


  37. CountFaigala November 8th, 2007 at 11:07 AM


    Now you’re accusing me of being two people who are disagreeing with you?

    For the sake of discussion, let’s set aside your delusion that I’m the same person criticizing you from two voices. From your first comments about my Johnny/Justin analogy to this latest post, you’ve simply written a collection of protracted “Oh yeahs!” instead of actually addressing the issue(s) at hand (which is especially odd considering your habit of quoting so extensively). Is this all you’re capable of — a sort of bathroom graffiti approach to discourse?

    Are you the “smart” one out in the sticks or in some notoriously vapid area like Chelsea or West Hollywood? I ask because you seem to have a problem with people who are able to recognize the thin intellectual veneer you apply to your posts. If you are as I’ve described, this hostility when contradicted (something that seldom happens to you) is easily explained.

    I hope, for your sake, you’re very young and all this can be attributed to youthful brio. This trait of wanting to contribute to the conversation so badly that you don’t care whether or not you actually have anything relevant to say speaks of a lot of energy but very little intellectual self-possession. I will say that you seem able to throw a noun at a verb and create an actual sentence (though some of your syntax needs work) and that’s more than most can do these days. I hope that if you are, as I suspect, just some disaffected, unfulfilled kid out in the middle of nowhere you’ll find a way to organize your thoughts and maybe channel all of “this” into something worthwile.

    In any event, it has become apparent to you me that you have a deep-seated need to be “right” and “win” here; even to the point of imagining that people (or the same person “posing as two people”) are out to get you.

    So, fine…

    You’re right. You win.

    You can now have a cherry on top of your victory sundae, that being the final word, because I think this has run its course.



  38. Brandon November 8th, 2007 at 6:39 PM

    “From your first comments about my Johnny/Justin analogy to this latest post, you’ve simply written a collection of protracted “Oh yeahs!”

    These feeble attempts by you and your other personality at summarizing others’ words would comical if it didn’t happen so reflexively and frequently. They really begin to suggest a reading comprehension problem. Either that, or a deliberate plan of pretending not to understand a response that has been given several times, in order to garner more attention. But, to that I say “how pathetic”!

    As for the rest of that self assessment, no comment.


  39. mcflyer54 November 17th, 2007 at 6:20 PM

    Sad that a straight guy makes more money in gay porn than in straight porn. Sadder still is that straight guys make more money is gay porn than gay guys! When the day’s over they are still nothing more than high paid trade. Think I’ll take my business elsewhere.


  40. MrsPatrickCampbell October 31st, 2010 at 12:44 PM

    How did they get Mary’s tiny little pinga hard while she was kissing that icky stinkfish (Lesbianism most foul!)??!!!


Leave a Reply