The CW’s ‘Fly Girls’ vs. The Adult ‘Fly Girls’

02.25.10 7 years ago

The CW

We don’t spend much time spotting trends in the adult film business, but thanks to reports on legitimate news shows, we know that TV parodies are all the rage in porn, whether they’re lampooning “The Brady Bunch,” “Saved By the Bell” or “The Vampire Diaries.”
However, in what we believe to be an industry first, The CW’s new reality series “Fly Girls” was beaten to the screen by its adult industry parody.
Probably it’s important to be able to tell the difference.
Digital Playground’s “Fly Girls” premiered on February 16 and features an all-star cast of adult entertainers including Jesse Jane, Sasha Grey, Jenna Haze, Evan Stone and Eric Everhard — It’s like the “Valentine’s Day” of pornos — and focuses on a group of fun-loving flight attendants being filmed by reality TV cameras as they make their ways across the friendly skies. It appears that the plot also borrows heavily from the comedy classic “Airplane!” and, if we’re being completely honest, it looks sortta funny — I laughed more times at the trailer for “Fly Girls” than at the three episodes of FOX’s “Brothers” I watched — and features special effects that aren’t appreciably worse than what you’d see on “Human Target.”
Check out this “Fly Girls” trailer. But not if you’re on-the-job. Do you really need me to mention that this is NSFW?
In contrast, The CW’s “Fly Girls” premieres on March 24 and focuses on a group of actual fun-loving Virgin America flight attendants being filmed by reality TV cameras as they make their ways across the friendly skies. It doesn’t appear to borrow heavily from the comedy classic “Airplane!” nor from any intentional comedy classics. Its stars include Farrah, Louise, Mandala, Tasha and Nikole  and its special effects seem to be negligible.
Meet Farrah. She’s perfectly SFW. 
[Note: It’s doubtful that Digital Playground’s “Fly Girls” is actually a full-on parody of The CW’s “Fly Girls,” since we don’t know when the adult film’s team of screenwriters would have been able to sneak a glimpse at the network version and then take the time to craft a witty and tongue-in-cheek (and, we suspect, other places) version of the story. Still, it seems a bit too big a coincidence to be a full-on coincidence, doesn’t it? And, while we’re at it, how bad a sign is it for an industry when porn scribes become too lazy to even bother coming up with “original” “ideas”? Whatever happened to the days of the innocent pizza delivery boy being seduced by the whole sorority? Also, remember when porn parodies used to have funny titles that were take-offs on the titles of the original works? Come on, Digital Playground! Not even “Unzipping Their Fly Girls”?]
Not surprisingly, The CW had no official comment regarding the potential for “Fly Girls” confusion this spring.

Around The Web