| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
401
|
N/A
|
Reply of
anyonebutme's Reply
I'm assuming she would have had electrolysis right before the fateful trip that gets us stranded on the island!
If I'm to believe that I'm stranded on an island with my favorite star than I'm also going to believe that 'carpet' problems do not exist.
|
03-22-10 11:36am
|
Reply
402
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
Aw man, I would love to have a hot porn star (gotta populate the island) but if I don't have sun screen I would probably die of exposure within a few hours.
: - (
Knowing my luck the island would have trees for shade from the sun but the porn star would accidentally eat a poisonous plant and die to leave me like Tom Hanks in "Cast Away"--alone with dental problems and only a volleyball to talk to for the next four years.
|
03-22-10 11:30am
|
Reply
403
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Reply
That hardcore scene was a bonus of another site's content caught behind the scenes by ALS--not exactly there regular material by any means, and not even theirs really. I didn't like that idea at all, but it was irregular material so I didn't make much of it.
Maybe I should blame Tanner Mayes since she's in both your examples...though I am sure if I had been the cameraman she would've been asking for a plane ticket home not if I wanted to play 'never-never land.' : - (
|
03-21-10 08:15pm
|
Reply
404
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Jeffrey99's Reply
While I haven't seen the video yet (they haven't released it) I think Alex is just hyping his language up a little. If you're used to his writing, mostly in his blog, he is in love with hyperbole like most other adult webmasters out--hell, everyone on the Net--and you can't take him at his exact word. 'Ram' probably doesn't mean Max Hardcore is making a conjugal visit or that it's that violent of a scene, it's just Alex's way of getting members to keep on clickin'.
I think he was also trying to emphasize they weren't suddenly doing facial or an all out hardcore scene, just a BJ for now. Members are probably thrown off plenty with a guy entering the scene they don't need him shooting off his fireworks all over the place. Plus I'm sure there are more than enough body fluids to clean up with just one female model! :-0
|
03-21-10 10:45am
|
Reply
405
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
hodayathink's Reply
Well this is really new territory for ALS--just read the first two responses to my comment--hardcore has never been their thing. At all. For longtime members this is like throwing out the Bill of Rights because it goes against what the site has been traditionally doing for years.
Good to hear she's not shy though!
|
03-21-10 10:38am
|
Reply
406
|
N/A
|
Reply of
kkman112's Reply
Far too expensive? Really? I've seen new players for under $150. I think Amazon currently sells a Sony Blu-Ray player for about $130. Of course this is just the player, and these rarely, if ever, come with an HDMI cable that's required to send a high definition signal to the display (which needs to be HD to show the best picture, BTW). These cables usually start around $15 dollars and can easily go over $100 so I'm sure it's a complex cable-player manufacturer conspiracy devised to nickel and dime consumers for their recession dollars. ; )
I would argue a complete system--HD display, player, and sound system (optional but it's nice)--is where the initial cost comes in. My real problem is the disc prices are outrageous. Unless you're a genuine film aficionado with money to burn and DVD resolution just doesn't cut it for you I can't see much benefit (literally, my vision is terrible) in buying a Blu-Ray version of a release over the DVD one. Studios don't seem to be pushing Blu-Ray versions much beyond mentioning them first in marketing; "Available on Blu-Ray and DVD Tuesday!"
And I'd assume the studios, or whoever they contract to author the discs, simply make two compressed versions from the final cut of the film or whatever show they are selling. They might offer additional audio tracks and bonus crap if it fits on a Blu-Ray disc but DVDs still sell. But I don't even think a lot of buyers' decisions are based that much on specific extras or bonus features--they really just want the movie to play, not skip, and be able to do that over and over again for years.
|
03-21-10 10:30am
|
Reply
407
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
And I haven't even gotten a chance for her to become my girlfriend yet! : ( I guess I'll wait and see the video to make my final judgment, but I'm not too happy about this experimenting they're doing. Amy Brooke sounds like a genuinely crazy horny girl--not the shy first-timer type--so it probably wasn't too hard to get her to do a BJ scene. At least Alex claims she did lots of anal and squirting.
|
03-21-10 10:01am
|
Comment
408
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
|
03-21-10 01:49am
Replies (10)
|
Reply
409
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Yes, but it's a PS3 and I have yet to actually watch a BluRay movie on it--just been using it to play video games.
|
03-20-10 05:59pm
|
Reply
410
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Duante Amorculo's Poll
In person or just watching on video? : )
Okay, to be more serious I'd say masturbation, or other if there was such a choice.
|
03-18-10 09:32am
|
Reply
411
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Reply
You can get rid of your spy agencies in Denmark simply by voting them out? Sorry, but here in America voting only changes the names on the corner offices and the photos on the wall (which I have always found very creepy). The last thing any voter would be able to do is dictate the policies of the FBI or NSA or any of the other alphabet soup agencies 'protecting' us, much less get rid of them all together. Hell, if we could do that I might start voting again and get the defense budget cut by half, legalize all drugs and prostitution, outlaw the Patriot Acts and have the top officials from the last Bush administration arrested and sent to Gitmo. ; )
Oh, if only it were so...
|
03-16-10 07:22pm
|
Reply
412
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Poll
I am sure they are already reading my e-mails so why not all my "web travels" as well? The only problem is I am a pretty boring guy online (and in real life...) and they're just wasting their time. Oh fuck it, keep up the good work FBI, CIA, NSA, or whoever are spending their time, money--ours, by the way--and manpower finding out how perverted its own citizens really are.
If these James Bond super spy wannabe assholes wish to catch real criminals I suggest they stop reading citizens' browser histories and start doing real intelligence work.
|
03-16-10 12:39am
|
Reply
413
|
N/A
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
I agree that the old warehouse is probably the worst place to shoot but I find it's because it can be really creepy and weird, like the scene of a crime rather than something erotic and enjoyable.
|
03-14-10 06:16pm
|
Reply
414
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
Sounds nice and I guess you can never be too prepared (though I am sure you'll be overwhelmed with choice in videos and photos). Why are you so worried about 2012? Sarah Palin or someone even crazier and stupider is going to get elected and society will collapse within a matter of days?
|
03-11-10 09:40pm
|
Reply
415
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
That way you can defend your collection by force, right? (Remind me to never piss you off. ; ) )
|
03-10-10 09:33pm
|
Reply
416
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
No, never.
Most politicians are anti-porn even if they've never been asked and are not open about it (just like their extramarital affairs, private income sources, lobbying connections, criminal records, Ponzi schemes, etc.). I don't vote as it is so it doesn't exactly effect me--99% of politicians don't give a shit about 99% of what actually matters to me anyway.
Like Drooler mentioned porn is just a wedge issue designed to distract voters and pretty much anyone else who will listen from caring or even thinking about real issues. And if some political actor genuinely cares about porn they are usually just using it to push religion--masqueraded as 'morals' and 'values'--further into government affairs despite the Establishment Clause.
|
03-10-10 09:11pm
|
Reply
417
|
Femanic
(0)
|
Reply of
BadMrFrosty's Review
Nice review, BadMrFrosty.
I have to say I have more than just a passing interest in joining this site but those download limits you mentioned are unbelievable--hourly, what's this site thinking?! I guess all things in moderation is the reasoning here.
|
03-09-10 08:15pm
|
Reply
418
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
I just joined a few days ago and they do have quite a bit of old-but-new-to-you releases (previously unreleased) as well as some so-so remasters. I like the video remasters because it seems in the past ('90s through early 2000s) they weren't as concerned about video releases as they are now and a lot of this stuff just didn't make it to the site or wasn't archived for long periods like they do now (which go back to April 2007).
The photo remasters are really nothing special in my book; much bigger sizes but a lot of them are from when ALS was shooting on film and they just don't digitize as well as pictures originally shot digitally (sounds obvious, but some film can look great even when it's been scanned). I assume these are from negatives or slides or something similar but the colors look too dark and deep and the film grain is obvious in the higher resolution photos. I don't think they are really worth all the trouble unless you have a real boner for a model from years ago.
Also, a note about their video download options, much like a recent thread, there doesn't seem to be any noticeable difference between quality in older ones. For example a recent Brea release shot in the mid-2000s; it was shot in SD and the download options are either a 640x480 DivX or a 720x540 WMV. It's a short four minute video of her, well, let's say making a very good excuse to clean the bathroom floor. ; ) Anyway the WMV is slightly bigger in resolution but the file size is 16MB smaller and I can't see any difference in quality.
Their HD releases however are offered in three options of two sizes; 1280x720 in MP4 and DivX plus massive 1920x1080 WMVs that are around twice the file size of the DivXs and MP4s, and the qualitative difference is noticeable here (as are the gargantuan space requirements).
They are shooting some super hot new models, but it's still fun to look at previous models without having to take up vast swaths of hard drive space with half hour bonus videos.
|
03-09-10 01:35pm
|
Reply
419
|
N/A
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Lol. Yes, and women WILL judge and get testy! It sucks because women don't see it as just looking but as serious boredom/disinterest/wandering in a relationship. I think you're lucky if she's quietly accepting or at least neutral on the subject--she doesn't gloat about it during the holidays but she doesn't seek out a marriage counselor either.
|
03-09-10 01:08pm
|
Reply
420
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pornwatcher's Poll
I would say "Never! I've been with this porn a lot longer than I've been with you and it's never yelled at me or judged me!" but on the other hand I am constantly reminding myself to never say "never" as I really can't predict the future. Having said that (and not having a girlfriend at the moment) I would expect it to be a very good and fulfilling--not to mention distracting--relationship for me to go and say "I guess I don't need this porn after all."
I've said it before but if you have to choose between a partner and your collection you probably didn't do a great job choosing your partner and you really shouldn't have to give up a harmless innocent habit just to please someone else.
|
03-09-10 01:01pm
|
Reply
421
|
Filthy And Fisting
(0)
|
Reply of
BadMrFrosty's Review
Welcome to PU and thanks for the review.
This looks like a cool site with a lot of what I like to call 'entertaining' content and sister sites but it's just too damn expensive for what doesn't look to be a lot of quantity. Wish they had a full trial available. : ( I do love how you describe Alysa as a "Super Mega Extreme Gaporama Babe." Wow! She's hired!
|
03-06-10 12:37pm
|
Reply
422
|
MC Nudes
(0)
|
Reply of
Torque's Review
Welcome to PU and thanks for the review, but I was wondering if you could give a little more insight into your score and review. For example, in the Bottom Line you wrote that the site is "the superior one" to five other soft core but you didn't explain why or how it's superior. Just some suggestions, and welcome to PU.
|
03-06-10 12:31pm
|
Comment
423
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
|
03-06-10 12:24pm
Replies (5)
|
Reply
424
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Reply
"Didn't know women have orgasms"...in porn. ; )
I just couldn't resist either, but c'mon, really? Every time a girl does a scene she lifts off at the end and produces another mind-blowing orgasm? Sorry, but I doubt it (but I can dream can't I?).
Unless she's a squirter--another controversial topic--than what exactly does she have to physically do or 'prove' the way a guy does when he, ahem, hits his mark? I understand some convulsing and screaming as if she is possessed by satan himself is to be expected in some cases, but a little light moaning and groaning and most directors seem to be satisfied. It's hard to believe that they are really climaxing that often though.
|
03-06-10 11:32am
|
Reply
425
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
I have to say the guys armed with the big guns (you know, measured in the double digits) truly are stunt cocks. What other career path is going to reward them for being so, well, naturally rewarded themselves?
My problem is that too often John Doe's third leg becomes the focus of these hardcore scenes and most of the video is spent watching him thrust/force his way into the poor woman like he's helping her commit hara-kiri using his penis-sword of death. It also doesn't help that so many of these guys look like they never tire of watching the girl on the receiving end suffer--their creepy-crawly sneers and jeers don't exactly make the whole experience look like a romantic date. It's like the dudes have turned into Toyotas and can't stop 'moving forward.' :0
|
03-04-10 05:23pm
|
