SuperJunior

I think he’s being a joker. A million pages ago in thread we decided the winning lodge would be determined by a series of oil wrestling matches. Victor Powers volunteered to rep CC. They’ll be held in my room because I’m so giving.

I ask the question and eat the ass while the interviewee is responding. Close up on his face. Hopefully I will not ask yes or not questions.

Well, that is a delicious arrangement.

In your description of one of the impending sections of ILikePinga you state there will be

"A new series, ASS KING QUESTION (tank you to Purplekow from the M4M forums for creating the title), where I will interview adult entertainers while eating their asses."

Is that to be taken literally because I can not figure out how you verbally interview while your tongue is being used for other things? Or do you have questions on cards that the pleasurees will answer as you proceed.

By the way, I have chosen ASS KING QUESTIONS.
Thank you so much.
http://ilikepinga.com/2018/03/30/new-ilikepinga/

Redefining Masculinity: On Armie Hammer In ‘Call Me By Your Name’
A Nylon article from last November which is quite insightful about Mr. Hammer's contribution:

 
https://nylon.com/articles/redefining-masculinity-armie-hammer-call-me-by-your-name
 
TruHart1

Well thanks guys!
 
I'm late to this party. I first saw CMBYN about a month ago, and have now seen it twice. I just took the time to binge read 26 pages of comments on this thread, and watched a number of the attached videos. You've proven there is a wisdom of crowds. I've thought about the movie a lot, and had a number of long discussions about it. It was really fun to read everybody's comments and takes.
 
The first time I saw it was with Dane Scott, who is of course quite out, as well as emotional and intuitive. The second time was with a client who is married and deeply closeted and has very limited opportunities to let out his inner Gay. I think it is a testament to the movie's brilliance that all three of us are very different people and we were all simply emotionally floored. It's a movie that keeps giving - whether you are out and completely comfortable in your sexuality, or closeted. It evokes something deep and longing, judging from the reactions of the people I've seen it with and talked to after I saw it. I'd almost say it's like the mythology the movie itself portrays - about something fleeting and beautiful and maybe not quite real, but that we still all long for - whether it's the joy and pain of first love, or that scene with the "too good to be true" father. I don't really think it matters if it's too good to be true, any more than it matters whether the statue of David is too good to be true.
 
I had no problem suspending disbelief and getting into the feel of the movie, even though I agree with many of you that Chalamet's acting was brilliant and Hammer's was merely good. I think the film just resonates deeply in terms of what people want to feel, and how we wish or idealize life and love could be.
 
I cut and pasted a few comments that stood out to me over the course of the 26 pages I just binge read.
 

 
God is that true! My sister-in-law got the movie even though she didn't see it, based on my description. The phrase she used is it's a movie about "becoming who you are." How nice to have a sweet movie where nothing much really happens, other than a sweet and beautiful young Gay man becomes who he is!
 
From the Guardian interview of James Ivory:
 
"Ivory’s script has scooped most of the big prizes, including a Bafta and a Writers Guild of America award, but he sounds dazed when asked to reflect on its success. “Its wide appeal is still something of a mystery to me. And it really is adored, especially by young women and older people. Married couples come up to me on the street in New York – often in their 70s or 80s – and they rave about the movie. I guess it’s an unabashed first-love idea everyone can identify with. The sexual orientation of the characters doesn’t mean as much as the emotion of the story.”
 
Again, how true! As I was watching the movie, I kept wondering: is this a movie about how a 17 year old would experience first love, or how an 80 year old man might recall or idealize first love? The answer could be both, and more. I loved the subtlety of the script (except for the peach, of course) and how it gradually kept pushing deeper into an emotionally raw and deep well of feeling that moved so many people. I'd argue it might have helped that they had no budget to work with, because there were no green screens or special effects to get in the way of the actors' emotions.
 
This is a year in which we (maybe) learned that mass audiences are willing to experience horror and comic book adventure through the eyes of Black protagonists, and action heroism through the eyes of wonder women. Wouldn't it be great if a mass audience could view the wonder and pain of first love through the eyes of a young Gay man? I'm still not sure Hollywood or our culture is at that point, but CMBYN offers the promise that it is getting there.
 

 
Thank you, LoveNDino, for all the interesting pieces and videos you posted. This video in particular was really interesting. It made me feel that if the Oscars screwed up, it was in not giving Guadagnino a Best Director nomination. Perhaps part of the reason is that it may not have been a technically complex movie, as the video explained. He shot the film to be emotionally accessible, and I think that really worked. Like I said, I agree with some of the comments on Hammer's limitations. But my guess is that Guadagnino knew exactly what he was doing, and he picked his actors to be able to inhabit their characters' souls. Chalamet had to be the emotionally expressive powerhouse, and he was. My guess is Hammer as a person and actor isn't all that different than Oliver - whether you want to praise him as seductive and sexy or criticize him as aloof or shallow. I suspect Guadagnino judged that the chemistry and longing between Chalamet and Hammer would power the movie to the depths he wanted, and I think it did.
 
The thing I enjoyed a lot watching the movie several times and that the video LoveNDino posted talked about from a technical standpoint was how visceral and visual and in the moment it was. I think if James Ivory had directed it, it would have been a very different movie. One of my favorite movies is Ivory's Remains Of The Day, which I see as being about unrelenting emotional repression. Guadagnino did a great job of doing almost the opposite: he gradually and lovingly pealed back emotional layers, and took the audience along with him. I loved it.
 
The one criticism I have is about the sex - or lack of Gay sex. The lack of full frontal nudity didn't bother me at all. Right or wrong, it was clearly a contract provision for both lead actors. I don't think they showed full frontal female nudity either (there were breasts, but not pussy). What did bother me was the cut away when Oliver and Ellio finally got it on. Here's an interview in which Guadagnino talks about his artistic choice:
 
http://www.indiewire.com/2017/12/call-me-by-your-name-sex-scene-luca-guadagnino-1201910219/
 
"Guadagnino was prepared for backlash about the lack of gay sex in the film. Speaking after a showing at the New York Film Festival earlier this year, he summed up his reason with characteristic flair. “To put our gaze upon their lovemaking would have been a sort of unkind intrusion,” the director said in Italian-accented English. “I think that their love is in all things, so when we gaze towards the window and we see the trees, there is a sense of witnessing that.
 
Interesting argument, but I don't really buy it. I'm with TruthBTold on this one:
 

 
The words "visual" and "visceral" and "in the moment" are all good ones to describe the Director's overriding intent, which I think he pulled off masterfully. That's true whether it was about Hammer drinking apricot juice, or Chalamet cumming into a peach, or fucking his sorta girlfriend. All of that was pulled off beautifully and very explicitly, but without actual dick shots. Since the point was to be visceral and visual and in the moment, it does seem odd that at the key moment - when it comes to the 17 year old horned up kid finally getting it on with the man he's lusting for - somehow Guadagnino suddenly decided to be "romantic" or "artistic" about it. I'm suspicious that it had to do with fears about studio funding, or audience reception, or even the actors' own fears about having to have an explicit Gay sex scene on their resume. It just didn't make sense.
 
For comparative purposes, here's one of the "sex" scenes from Ivory's Maurice, which I thought worked beautifully. You didn't really need to focus on Elio and Oliver's hard cocks. Their longing eyes and lusting lips would have worked just fine. Either would have been sexier and more fulfilling than a tree!
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh4OrFm3Cgs

@Mikegaite will be in and around the area but not until after the 10th. You might want to see if you two can connect. Definitely the jock type.
https://rentmen.eu/MikeGaite

Stolen from LoveNDino (and not ashamed of it) . . . .
 

about 1 second after the first pic above drove to to search images for him on the net
 
he totally drives me over the edge in a good way

The word in the street is that this man is the real deal and can be seen in one of the Bangkok bars:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ixjyJ94nA78/UeCqU1dPGRI/AAAAAAAAkWc/ck8xXizvRto/s1600/tumblr_mi97wwQd2p1r3qbmlo1_500.jpg Lordy, Lordy, Lordy.

I’ve seen him twice. He’s that cocky jock you liked in high school, but a huge bottom.
 
He’s really sweet and totally willing to get kinky if you ask nicely.

If that's you in the avatar... I'm sure A LOT would happen
 

 

I would too. And I'm a bottom!!

I too don't get the hate. I do think his rates are crazy, but I'm not going to pretend he's not attractive.
 
The funny thing is he proves more and more why I don't really hire anymore. I remember not being able to afford his rates at $400 an hour. Now I can, and he's charging $600. And it's been less than a year. The universe really does hate me.

I think he’s hot af. If we’re ever in the same city, I’d make an appointment in a heartbeat.

I suggest to go back to talk about adorable Alam/Justin. Leave his haters drown in their own venom. They do not deserve a nanosecond of attention.
Enjoy beauty.

I can't believe I just noticed this thread about Justin Teen. I've been drooling over this kid for a couple weeks. This little hunk has physical attributes that are highly arousing for me. #1: The gorgeous legs and ass. I do love a beautiful set of muscular legs, #2: Beautiful, smooth skin. #3: Defined, V-shaped torso. #4: Cute, twinky face. Hell, I'd hire the guy and wrap myself up in those legs for the entire session and I'd be a happy camper. I know he's expensive, but how often does a man like this come along? A couple years ago I had a ripped hunk like Justin who was very reasonably priced for me, but he, basically, dropped off the face of the earth for a couple years and doesn't escort anymore. Going through the pages of Rentmen there's just no one who fits my tastes like Justin who's rousingly attractive to me. Not that I haven't hired other guys; just no one like Justin. I'm 65, so I'm not getting any younger. I don't know how many years are left when I can still fully enjoy physical activities with an escort, so I'm thinking maybe I should take the plunge and try to hire Justin just once for the experience. That is if he takes older men for clients. Since I am still in the closet, just having another gay man to spend time with and talk to is just as important as the physical activities, and from what I've read Justin sounds like a friendly kid with a good sense of humor. Damn that boy is HOT!

This topic again. I will do this for the second time, perhaps starting a new routine. My apologies for repeating myself on a repeated subject.
 
I am glad so many of you do not like tattoos. Here we have a few examples of guys the rest of us will not have to share with you.
http://worldofarts.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/4-tribal-tattoos.jpg http://www.tattooscreens.com//bulk_images_tribal/beautiful-tribal-art-tattoos-for-men.jpg http://www.tattoostime.com/images/358/beautiful-african-man-chest-tattoo.jpg http://www.tattoos-3d.com/table4/meaningful-cross-tattoos-beautiful-men-hd-3d-picture-idea.jpg http://41.media.tumblr.com/cf08ee7621ebbfc22b7296f9d8b8ef3e/tumblr_nc2zkciMJ11tgzq12o1_500.jpg I hope I made my point.

Tattoos aren't done for you. They are done for the person with the tattoo. Some have incredibly deep meaning to the recipient, and others are just for appearance purposes. I, personally, see lots of tattoos that I like and lot's that I don't like. But I also recognize and respect that my opinion on someones tattoos, just like my opinion on their hairstyle, shoes, or choice of boyfriend, wasn't solicited nor likely welcome.

My tattoos are meaningful to me, and I'm pleased I have them. If that loses me some business, so be it. (Happily, though, many clients comment that they like them, so it may be the case that it gets me different business). There are lots of tattoos on others that I don't like, but I don't generally feel the need to comment on it, nor has it ever decisively put me off of somebody.

Im rather heavily tattooed. I think it's fine for others not to like tattoos. What I don't understand is the unusual animus toward them. It seems some people are angry that you didn't check with them before you got tattoed, even though you're perfect strangers.

As I wrote the review I can attest that this man is as good as he was 10 years ago. As to any guy I would see now that I saw almost 10 years ago two: Pete Karjailanen and Antton Harri.