Skip to comments.Max Hardcore Offices Raided by FBI; Servers, Tapes Seized
Posted on 10/10/2005 1:05:39 PM PDT by Drew68
click here to read article
In 2001, Hardcore was prosecuted by the city of Los Angeles for obscenity, which was not resolved until 2004 with a company plea to a public nuisance.
When one is charged with obscenity in Los Angeles, you can bet the stuff is out there. I'm not going to plead ignorance to Hardcore's work. I have seen it. If you have never seen a Max Hardcore film, you have abolutely never seen anything like it. Watching this film was a stomach-churning experience. There was nothing arousing about it at all.
I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the population who enjoy pornography would find a film by Max Hardcore to be totally repulsive.
He's not well-liked within the industry for two major reasons. First, he scares away the new talent. Young women who find themselves in his films usually are new to the business and typically flee the industry after being subjected to the painful, wholly humiliating and degrading experience of working with this man. Second, he is indefensible. He epitomizes everything that those against pornography rally against. He makes Larry Flynt look like Walt Disney and your typical Vivid Video production look like wholesome family entertainment. That is no hyperbole.
(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
OK, so it's repulsive. So the federal gubmint should shut them down?
You in big trouble, mister!!
Sounds like the Feds are getting Hard Core with THEM!
Had the same thought. I don't buy into such things as Max peddles, but I'm still trying to figure out where the FBI became the Porn Police. I musta missed that article the last time I read the Constitution...
It's a good thing you re-viewed these movies for us, thanks.
Nope. Never heard of him.
Max must be selling enough films to keep body and soul together so somebody is watching it.
I remember reading statistics on % of hotel guests who access porn from their rooms, and it was over 50%, as I recall. I think the story had to do with Rupert Murdoch, because he peddles that stuff to hotels everywhere. I just think it's a big fat waste of time, but some ppl like stuff like that: go after porn, go after marijuana, and pass anti flag burning amendments.
The sacrifice is simply staggering.
My bet is these jezebels knock on this creep's door when everyone else gives em the boot. Glad to know all the terrorists are all rounded up.
the poster sounded downright saddened by the possibility of someone being abused to the point of quitting porn. My head hurts.
It's official. I'm over the hill and out of touch with the culture. I've never heard of this person.
No, but there's a line in porn that shouldn't be crossed. I have no problem with mainstream, run-of-the-mill porn. These are your Vivid Video, the Adam and Eve, the companies that just produce regulare porn.
Max Hardcore, on the other hand (no pun intended LOL), borders on some devious s--t. I'm talking stuff you'll find in those "Faces of Deaths" films and other snuff pieces. Real heinous stuff that even most porn aficiondos find disgusting.
I'm not necessarily advocating that. Certainly this man knows enough to dot his "i's" and cross his "t's" when it comes to the work he does. I'm certain that he diligently verifies the ages of the actresses in his films. And certainly these actresses are adults and have no one but themselves to blame when they show up on the set of one of his films.
But to say he stretches the boundries is an understatement. He steps waaaaay over the line. It is difficult to say there is nothing wrong with adults enjoying pornography and then try to defend one of Max's films.
I really don't know. If he isn't breaking any laws, then he isn't breaking any laws. Truthfully, Max Hardcore's films were the inevitable evolution of an industry that is constantly trying to see how far it can go and what it can get away with.
Well, I've not seen his work so I can't comment on it.
I wasn't aware the Constitution addressed porn.
This is a waste of tax payer money.
That was my point. It doesn't. So why is the FBI involved?
The Constitution doesn't address quite a few things that the FBI may be involved in.
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.