Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+ interracial orgy as advertised
+ black guys with big dicks on latina girls as advertised
+ plenty of action, including anal
+ decent quality pictures
+ lots of bonus sites (FilthFreaks network)
Cons:
----- most episodes are incomplete (see explanation below)
-- only 400x300 video clips
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
-- supposedly no updates
Bottom Line:
After pretty good experience with FilthFreak's BubbleButtOrgy, I've decided to try another their site Orgyental, and was fased with a MAJOR disappointment. While all parameters of Orgyental are about the same as BubbleButtOrgy, and it should have ended up with a similar rating, there is one HUGE thing which is different between these 2 sites, and it is that Orgyental just doesn't work properly.
Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental is about multi-guy multi-girl orgy, the difference is that for Orgyental girls are latina (and the guys are still black). Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental has some introductory stuff which makes things more interesting. Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental starts mildly and then goes to all-out orgy.
But here is where the difference kicks in. While Orgyental has 24 episodes, and it looks that every episode was intended to consist of 15-20 5-minute clips, on site there are only 2 (or so) full episodes, and the rest just abruptly ends after 5-7 clips, leaving the best part out. Most likely it is just a technical oversight, but as a user I don't really care.
Bottom line: if it would be a single site, I would say it is outright rip-off, but as it is a part of the network, I won't be that harsh. On the other hand, such sites make me frustrated, which definitely affects overall feeling about the whole network (which BTW wasn't that high from the very beginning).
I'm not a member myself now, but the most recent videos I have from them (maybe half a year ago or so) is 960x540 @920kbit/s, and quality is good for these parameters.
As for re-joining - if it is your cup of tea, it should be worth it, but on the other hand I shall tell that even these days things like anal are quite rare, so personally I prefer to join once in a while (probably will do it again soon), grab more intensive content (especially tag teams), and then unsubscribe.
Have you seen their "Tag Team" matches (2-girl teams)? They have been added not so long ago, and IMHO they have made a HUGE difference for the site. And if Amber is losing, it often leads to DP, though I agree that more anal overall definitely wouldn't hurt :-).
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+ orgy as advertised
+ all-black action as advertised (black guys, black girls)
+ plenty of action, including anal and occasional DP
++ real emotions (or a very good imitation)
+ initial conversation adds an additional twist
+ decent quality pictures
+- decent lighting and cameraguy work (at least compared to previously reviewed FilthFreaks sites)
Cons:
- girls are not models, some are ugly
-- only 400x300 clips
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
- technical problems with the site
- no ZIPped downloads
-- supposedly no updates
Bottom Line:
After disappointment with first two sites of FilthFreaks network (see my reviews of BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger), I didn't really expect much from BubbleButtOrgy, and I shall say that I was pleasantly surprised with it.
The site is about several black girls (4 to 6) and several black guys (about the same number) having fun together. Girls are not models, and some are ugly, but on the plus side they seem to have fun (unlike girls in BlackGangWhiteBang). Every episode starts with some conversation and/or girls showing their assets (usually assets are substantial), and then it moves towards the all-out orgy, which usually includes some anal, and sometimes includes DP.
Site has about 22 episodes, each consisting of 12-20 clips 5 minutes each. This is where lack of ZIP-ped downloads kicks in, as downloading 20 clips one by one is not fun. Unlike BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger, pictures are not screencaps, but are from separate photoshoot, and are of decent size (varies, but can be as much as 2900 width). Updates are not dated and most likely are absent. As with the other FilthFreaks sites, I've experienced a few "Cannot find server" errors.
Bottom line: not bad content, provided that you're not scared by mediocre girls (who on the plus side can have fun on camera). Unfortunately, lack of updates and minor glitches here and there make this site not so interesting, but if FilthFreaks have more sites of similar quality (and NOT like BlackGangWhiteBang and ALuckyStranger), the network might be worth the price (again, if you're not scared away by mediocre girls).
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+ "stranger" storyline
+ really average-looking guys
+ quite long pre-action video, adding some additional twist
+ lots of bonus sites (FilthFreaks network)
Cons:
-- I don't really believe in "as a member of ALuckyStranger.com you could win a chance to have blindfolded sex with anonymous strangers aka pornstars!"
- girls attractiveness varies
- poor lighting
- only 640x480 clips of rather poor quality
- pictures are 640x480, probably video screencaps
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
- minor technical problems with the site
The site leaves mixed feelings. On one hand, the idea is not bad (though I don't really believe any site which claims that it's members will have a chance to fuck models). On the other hand, it is rather poorly implemented.
Quality of videos is limited to rather poor 640x480 @800kBit/s (looks that guys didn't know what deinterlacing is about); lighting is poor, girls are not top-notch (though are not that ugly as on BlackGandWhiteBang), actions are not too different from each other.
Site has about 35 episodes, each consisting of 4-5 clips of up to 10 minutes each. Pictures are about 1024x768, but quality is poor (like that of screencaps). Like on BlackGandWhiteBang, updates are not dated and most likely are infrequent. Also I've experienced the same several minor technical problems (like "Cannot find server" errors), as on BlackGandWhiteBang.
Overall, while judging from just two sites can be too early, it seems to me that this whole FilthFreaks network is just an attempt to resell some old content. While I don't see anything bad with this idea as such, but for FilthFreaks content quality (from model selection to encoding), which wasn't top-notch (to put it mildly) even when it was produced, looks even worse these days.
Bottom line: if all the sites in the network will be of such dubious quality, I don't think it will be attractive even at the special PU price; there are many places where you can get MUCH better content at at least comparable prices. Still, stay tuned for further reviews of FilthFreak sites.
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros:
+ hardcore action (multiple penetrations including double anal), as advertised
+ interracial content in every episode, as advertised
+ the girl usually undresses before action starts, adding some additional twist
+ lots of bonus sites (FilthFreaks network)
Cons:
-- about the same thing in every episode
-- too often girls are ugly
-- girls don't like it
- no attention to settings
- poor lighting
-- only 400x300 clips
- pictures are 640x480, probably video screencaps
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
- technical problems with the site
Bottom Line:
Coming back from oblivion :-), I've recently subscribed to a new (for me) Filth Freak network. Unfortunately, so far it disappoints me.
At the first glance, BlackGangWhiteBang has everything it advertises - white girls taking four big guys in every hole, sometimes with double anal. So far so good. But then a few things start to annoy. First of all, videos with 400x300 resolution? I've double-checked my calendar, and found that it's 2009 out there, so these 400x300 clips look a bit out of date. Sorry guys, it's not what most people expect, even if it is crystal clear 400x300 at 1500kBit/s. I'm not asking for 1080i or something, but these days everything below 768 or so is way too small.
Further, some of the girls are outright ugly, and out of the rest most don't even pretend they're enjoying it. I know, it's difficult to find girls who enjoy this kind of stuff, but it's a job of any good site to find such girls, and I've seen sites with girls who seem to enjoy it.
From minor annoyances I shall mention poor (or non-existent?) lighting and quite poor settings, on the plus side - a bit of striptease before the action starts.
Site has about 25 episodes, each consisting of 5-8 clips 5 minutes each. Pictures are 640x480, most likely screencaps. Updates are not dated and most likely are infrequent. I've experienced several minor technical problems, like some "Cannot find server" errors and some links leading nowhere, nothing too bad but still annoying.
Bottom line: I don't think that this site will be of interest to anybody except for fans of interracial gangbangs, and even for them the value is significantly reduced by poor video quality and ugly girls disliking what they are doing. While the rest of the network MIGHT have some value, but if all the sites are like this one, the whole network won't IMHO be worth even PU special price.
Are you sure it's a good idea to put that low rating for the site just because it's not your cup of tea? I mean that all "cons" in your review (except for the first one) are HIGHLY subjective and there are will be LOTS of people who have an exactly opposite opinion. Personally I'm at least trying to avoid setting low (especially THAT low) ratings to the sites which just aren't my cup of tea, at least if inside member area they provide essentially the same stuff as advertised on the tour pages.
Oh, this background of yours indeed explains "attention to details" which sometimes crosses the border of "not seeing forest for the trees". And it's not your fault, but the one of the whole huge legal system which is built to make formalities dominate over common sense and reason. BTW, if I would be in your place (which is not too likely), I would care much more about "not guilty person behind the bars" rather than about "guilty person walking free".
Anyway, I don't see how this background of yours is relevant to the concern I have raised.
Wow, thanks for the information, but how can I see if any of the other users also has such suspicious "computer sharing"? Or you just automatically suspend them?
I don't "target" anybody (come on, do you really expect me to care that much about your image here?), I'm just expressing my concern. About those people "below you" - could you elaborate a bit? ANYBODY who will post his/her FIRST review with 98 or so rating is suspicious to me until proven otherwise, period. In formal terms - such rating in the FIRST review by definition carries significant negative credibility attached to it.
> I don't think it's suspicious when someone starts their posting career
> at PU giving the highest ratings ever - probably because that's what I
> did.
Interesting, maybe I'm suspicious because I didn't it? :-) But seriously, starting with 98 or so review is a "business card" of the typical "shill" (we've seen many of them here, and there is no doubt about it); while I agree it is not conclusive evidence, it is still suspicious.
> Met Art deserves high praise...
If only they would make their models look a bit more alive than current "dead fish" looks... But unfortunately there is no holy grail in porn, not even in softcore :-(.
> you cant really tell if any person on this site is honest or not
I think I can tell at least most of the time, otherwise what's the point of reading the site?
> I have the right to put out my opnion about a site
Right
> just cause you dont agree with my score dosent mean that I am lying
Right, but I'm suspicious about you _not_ because of disagreeing with you (come on, I disagree with every second person here, starting from exotics4me, but there are no regulars I can suspect), but because your pattern of reviews is quite close to a typical "shill" who tries to promote the site (or sites) for money.
> I think hondaman done some fine things here after all
For the first review - yes, but IMHO it's still too one-handed. Ok, it can easily be "honestly one-handed", but it's still way too one-handed IMHO.
> But, bro - we'll see in the future - guess there's never any 100%..
For me there are a few 100%s here on PU, starting (surprise) from myself :-), and ending with about 50 or so people (yourself included :-) ); come on, suspecting roseman or exotics4me of shilling would be WAY too far fetching.
Well, bro, to put it bluntly - doesn't it look suspicious when somebody just STARTS his PU life with ridiculously high ratings? You're here longer than me, but even I myself have seen LOTS of different shills around here (coming, making 98 or so review for the site, seeing that rating doesn't count, then sometimes trying to make a few MUCH less detailed reviews to get points, and then usually giving up and disappearing). Granted, it doesn't look TOO suspicious for hondaman, but I'm still not 100% sure about him.
> Not sure what you mean by "lack of fire".
I've meant that at least most of Met-Art models are plastic dollies without any personality. Please read my review and also comments of the other PU'ers to my review.
> Are you sure that you where ever a member of this site?
Yes, I am. Also I'm sure of lots of the other things, though not 100% sure about search on Met-Arts. If it is there, good for them, but my rating stays (I even think of reducing it because of "lack of fire", which IMHO is not compensated by brilliant photo work and locations); just wondering: are ALL Russian models have so little personality?
> That done, I'd view her stuff right before going to her place,
> thinking, "Wow, I'M going to bone this babe! For REAL!"
I think I'd react the same way.
Hm, it would be a kind of quite misleading guarantee, won't it? It would be interesting to see if anybody has tried to use this kind of guarantee to see if it is real or "30 days or 30 seconds whichever comes first".
> Does anyone think that a stuntman would allow himself to be set on
> fire for that big scene without first putting some protection on?
Right, they take precautions - EXACTLY PRECAUTIONS THAT THEY THINK ARE APPROPRIATE. Why models should be denied THE SAME CHOICE?
> Yes some of them do get hurt, but it's not because of the lack of precautions.
Come on, when anybody get hurt in an accident it's ALMOST ALWAYS because of the lack of precautions, and is ALWAYS this way for stunts (to start with, they could easily refuse to participate in the particular stunt if they consider it too risky). BTW, the same is true for car accidents - the very basic precaution is to avoid driving completely, but very few people are taking it.
IMHO it is MUCH more complicated than simple "people have contracted some serious illnesses". People get infected and even get killed in all kinds of jobs (starting with medical ones), so IMHO just mere EXISTENCE of the chance doesn't make some thing "too bad" or not, for me it is important to know HOW BIG this chance is. To complete analogy with stuntman - some of them die or get permanently injured, but this doesn't mean that I won't watch "regular" movies which include stunts. Also it's quite obvious that using condoms does not GUARANTEE anything, it just reduces the chance, which again supports my point of view that it is all about "HOW BIG the chance is". EVERYTHING has some risk, even driving to work (this one is probably MUCH higher than any job-related risk BTW), so I tend to consider SOME risks as "normal" (yes, it is very sad if somebody dies in the car accident, but we won't give up cars because of it, will we?)
Now to the "HOW BIG the chance is" question for condomless porn - while I don't have any statistics on it (maybe somebody has? - then it would be interesting to compare it to statistics on stuntman injuries), I've got a feeling that with all the people who REALLY HATE porn, any such cases would be made VERY high-profile as a tool to fight porn, so as I don't hear of it every second day, it shouldn't be too bad even as it stands now. This obviously is just a wild speculation on my part, and I will be glad to see any real statistics (which in turn can make me reconsider my view of condomless porn).
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
