Tickled leaked, post release discussion thread

I'm gonna say it right now. It's exactly as bad as many of you were worried about in terms of "making us look bad".

It's 90% focused on (REDACTED) but the entire thing has this bizarre aurora of almost supernatural doom throughout the entire thing, which gets tiring. This is made worse by the time they get to Rich from MyFriendsFeet going to town on that guy, they make a point so shoot it in slow motion with this weird commercial sounding music with close ups to their faces and the body being tickled and it's just... offputting. Skincrawlingly bad. I think maybe they were trying to frame it as whimsical or something? But I make tickling videos, and I have tickle sessions for fun, and that shit was making my skin crawl, so I can only imagine how it was striking the normies who had never even heard of this until now. And I don't think they did it deliberately, up to that point they try and present the guy as a normal porn producer who is interested in a niche kink and treat him like a normal guy. But goddamn, when the action starts they really harp on... aspects of it.

The overall story is really interesting, I'm happy (REDACTED) was/is being exposed and his weird Batman villain tickle torture empire is crumbling. Maybe next time the guys don't need to shoot a documentary as though they were making aparticularly heavy handed episode of Unsolved Mysteries. Even the "wah they're making us look weird!" aspect aside, that approach made the thing almost tiring to watch throughout it's 90 minute run.

Are you talking about the movie that was released recently?

I hate that movie. And I do think it is giving tickling bad reputation.

Inb4 "Ewwww that movie had M/M ewwww you're gay for watching it EWWWW COOOTIES!!!"

EWWW- Oh shit, never mind. lol

Comfort Eagle said:

I'm gonna say it right now. It's exactly as bad as many of you were worried about in terms of "making us look bad".

It's 90% focused on (REDACTED) but the entire thing has this bizarre aurora of almost supernatural doom throughout the entire thing, which gets tiring. This is made worse by the time they get to Rich from MyFriendsFeet going to town on that guy, they make a point so shoot it in slow motion with this weird commercial sounding music with close ups to their faces and the body being tickled and it's just... offputting. Skincrawlingly bad. I think maybe they were trying to frame it as whimsical or something? But I make tickling videos, and I have tickle sessions for fun, and that shit was making my skin crawl, so I can only imagine how it was striking the normies who had never even heard of this until now. And I don't think they did it deliberately, up to that point they try and present the guy as a normal porn producer who is interested in a niche kink and treat him like a normal guy. But goddamn, when the action starts they really harp on... aspects of it.

The overall story is really interesting, I'm happy (REDACTED) was/is being exposed and his weird Batman villain tickle torture empire is crumbling. Maybe next time the guys don't need to shoot a documentary as though they were making aparticularly heavy handed episode of Unsolved Mysteries. Even the "wah they're making us look weird!" aspect aside, that approach made the thing almost tiring to watch throughout it's 90 minute run.

Click to expand...

I LOVE the movie "Tickled." I believe that it does not make the tickling community look bad and I've had the pleasure of interviewing co-director Dylan Reeve, who along with David Farrier, was very brave in tackling this subject.

There's been talk on this board about this movie before, but to keep focused on what it's really about--it's simply trying to find out who's behind Jane OBrien Media. Plain and simple. The whole reason why it has an "aura of supernatural doom" is because the filmmakers' livelihoods and lives have been threatened.

I'm not sure what sort of dramatic approach you might think is needed there, but I think they chose a great one. Keep in mind, this movie had a good run in theaters by positive word of mouth. I've seen the film four times in theaters (taking friends there to see it). I've talked with non-tickle fetishists after the movie about this. All I've heard from these people were positive things about how m/m tickling fetishists were presented and how that community was being exploited not by the filmmakers, but by the adversaries in the film.

(I really am interested in what you mean also by "normies." Is that word short for "normals"? Are you implying that tickle fetishism is abnormal? I'd like an explanation, please).

As to the scene that seems to have given the most trouble--from the outset, Richard Ivey had stated that m/m tickling is a part of him and it turns him on. So the slo-mo tickling scene is put in there to reinforce the erotic aspect of m/m tickling. Yes, I laughed out loud during the scene, but not AT them. It was a laughter of recognition of the turn-on that m/m bondage and tickling has for me.

The music during that scene had rock guitar droning--the type you would hear on a movie soundtrack if a bunch of tough guys walked into a bar in slow motion. "Whimsical" was the suggestion of what the scene approach was aiming for. Let me tell you, I've seen thousands of films from all over the world from the most artful to the sleaziest grindhouse. There's no way in hell I could ever take that scene for whimsical. Winnie the Pooh is whimsical. "Candy Man" by Sammy Davis, Jr. is whimsical. Rock guitar drones with a nearly nude man having his nipples tickled doesn't induce whimsy.

As for the scene being "skin-crawling"--if you are implying that you quite simply can't handle watching m/m tickling done in a genuine homoerotic manner as opposed to the "sport"-couched insincere approach in the Competitive Endurance Tickling, it's okay to say so.

I've stated on here that I don't like /f tickling at all. In fact, the skin-crawling response you seem to have with this scene of m/m tickling I have with Howard Stern tickling women in the tickle chair. I simply can't stand watching women being tied up and tickled. Never liked it and probably never will. Does that mean that a movie with /f tickling done with an erotic tone can't be a good one for me because I know I won't like that particular scene? No.

I'm excited the movie is doing very well and am proud that "Tickled" actually prompted me to "come out" as a member of the m/m tickling community on my podcast. I've received nothing but support from my friends for doing so. But then again, I choose my friends carefully and will not hesitate to give a hearty "Eff Off" to anyone who can't handle the way I live my life.

kucheeku said:

As for the scene being "skin-crawling"--if you are implying that you quite simply can't handle watching m/m tickling done in a genuine homoerotic manner as opposed to the "sport"-couched insincere approach in the Competitive Endurance Tickling, it's okay to say so.

Click to expand...

Yeah, ya got me. This was a verbose, round about way to say "EW, ICKY QUEERS!". I literally just made up several other things to sneak that in there...

I don't think vanilla folks are exactly rushing out to see it.

I probably won't, either, since I know the story, and the people depicted in the film who were either in the videos or who are associated with tickling fetish videos are portrayed as being victimized by a bad guy, anyway - so I think we're mostly safe. Perv away.

It's going to be on HBO isn't it?

Oddjob0226 said:

I don't think vanilla folks are exactly rushing out to see it.

I probably won't, either, since I know the story, and the people depicted in the film who were either in the videos or who are associated with tickling fetish videos are portrayed as being victimized by a bad guy, anyway - so I think we're mostly safe. Perv away.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying that "Tickled" is going to out gross "Star Wars" at the box office. What I am saying is that this doc, with a PR budget of something close to zero, did pretty darn well by word of mouth in theaters. It reached a peak of over 50 nationwide, which is not bad. But more importantly, in those theaters some weekly averages were over $1000. That's not too bad for 1) a movie with no PR push, 2) a movie that's supposed to somehow creep out folks "not into fetishism" or even this particular one between men, and 3) a doc that's competing with a number of other documentaries for your time and money--with this year being generally viewed as a good year for them. Check out the numbers at Box Office Mojo. Those numbers will most certainly increase once this movie reaches HBO (it's their production company).

I just watched the documentary on iTunes. While the short segment about the tickling producer in Orlando isn't very sympathetic or even fair, there isn't much about him, and the film is only tangentially even about this fetish.

It's mostly about David *******, a sociopath who gets enjoyment out of threatening and humiliating people by releasing their personal information online and posting compromising video of them. The video has the appearance of gay male tickling scenes, footage that the participants were told would be private -- and that they were well paid to be in. Most of them aren't actually gay, but the footage makes it seem as if they are, and that's unpins part of the humiliation.

While I'm into tickling women, and there's not one second of a woman being tickled in the entire film, I think it was well done and important. I'd recommend that anyone see it, even if they're not into tickling.