| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Comment
576
|
I Love Bitties
(0)
|
|
12-29-12 09:37am
Replies (0)
|
Reply
577
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
The crap available on US TV has caused me to reduce my viewing, but I still watch a lot of it:
News shows (real news, not the silly news on many stations)
Sports (Baseball, American Football, some basketball)
That's about it.
|
12-28-12 10:46am
|
Reply
578
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
When Jennifer Avalon, who refused to do any B/G, started into extremely graphic BJ's and Cunt Munching, I expected the B/G hardcore to be coming soon. It finally came, but rather late in her career, and yet I still felt a "tinge" of dismay.
Then along came Andie Valentino (Andrea on FTV) with her perfect body and munchable cunt who showed up on most of the softcore sites. She did mostly solo stuff and some routine lesbo stuff but not really heavy duty. She loved showing off her perfect body (narcissistic, perhaps?) and I enjoyed watching her do it. I recently found one scene where she's boinking some middle aged dude which seems to be her only fuck scene...at least as far as I can tell. I felt more sadness than dismay b/c I'm sure she fucked plenty in her off screen life.
Finally is Jana Jordan (Jana Foxy) with the (formerly) tiny puffy tits, great ass and perfect pussy. I don't know is she's done any fuck scenes but the boob job, although reasonably well done, ruined it for me. Her total Texas face, attitude and accent were all I needed to get a big rise. That tit job was much more dismaying than Andie and Jennifer getting porked on screen.
|
12-26-12 09:02am
|
Reply
579
|
Elegant Angel
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Review
I agree with virtually everything RA said in his excellent review. I stayed away earlier because of the slimeball billing scams (see comment section) but decided to signed up when legit. billers were brought into the game. The frequency of updates makes this an annual re-up site (sign up at the PU discount for just one month,rain the new good stuff and wait another year to sign up again.
|
12-23-12 10:44am
|
Reply
580
|
21Sextury.com
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Sad. I was a very enthusiastic member of this site for well over a year. Then they decided to split into two sites forcing me to accept less than half the original deal (I was assigned 21sextreme, not my favorite) with no apology or alternative.
With a lousy run of updates I finally dropped them altogether.
Thought (hoped) maybe they improved the sites and/or recombined them but clearly they did not.
Oh well.
|
12-21-12 09:20am
|
Reply
581
|
N/A
|
Reply of
pat362's Reply
Totally agree. The info is useful for evaluating other sites, good and bad. Sometimes when I find a great site I have found other great sites that I might have missed.
|
12-19-12 11:21pm
|
Reply
582
|
Wet And Puffy
(0)
|
Reply of
oldfizzywig's Reply
Ho oldfizzywig,
I have no issue at all with your review of the content; in fact I totally agree.
My issue was solely with gaining access to all three sites and, with the absence of any real support function I lost s significant amount of time.
The webmaster responded to my post on PU, not to my several communications to their customer service function. He had to jury rig my access to Wet and Pussy to get me access. I still have heard nothing from their customer service function.
The site is great with outstanding video quality and, in my opinion, if they would put the same effort in their customer support function as they do on their content, their three sites would be superior.
|
12-19-12 11:14pm
|
Reply
583
|
N/A
|
Reply of
otoh's Reply
640 is usually OK but there's just enough extra sharpness to 1280x720 that I usually go for that. I agree with otoh that it's really tough to see what 1080 brings to the party especially when the files are huge and the download time, even with fast d/l speeds, is just not worth it.
When I watch some of the 320 stuff in my stash, there is enough discernable difference to even 640 to warrant the larger file sizes; but the difference to 1080 is minimal.
|
12-12-12 08:17am
|
Reply
584
|
N/A
|
Reply of
alexbrawn's Poll
I fully support the idea of trials. Yes, the per day price of a trial may be higher than the cost of full membership, but if the trial provides full access it's the best way for a site to demonstrate its quality.
It's kind of like taking a car out for a test drive before buying it.
|
12-09-12 09:50am
|
Reply
585
|
N/A
|
Reply of
gaypornolover's Reply
gaypornlover, "I can only assume the major studios will relocate and some of the smaller ones will ignore the law - I mean how can you prove where a movie was filmed really?"
The proposition calls for all porn production companies to notify a new bureaucracy whenever they start a production so that the bureau can send an inspector* to the site. Failure to do so will result in serious penalties.
Because this was a ballot proposition and not a city ordinance, it cannot be ignored, but if they choose to, the producers can take the proposition through a court process which will delay implementation at worst, and possibly cause the law to be thrown out..
My guess is that the serious economic consequences to the City will result in a future proposition reversing this one. Soon. (The porn industry is located in the San Fernando Valley which is part of the City of LA. There are small towns and unincorporated areas that are not part of the proposition spotted throughout the city but none of them are near Chatsworth or Canoga Park where most of the big producers are located.
* This would be my kinda job!
|
11-22-12 09:17am
|
Reply
586
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
Reply of
peskysushi's Review
Totally agree!
First they made it very difficult to access their site on FireFox for some unknown reason which thus required using IE; then this.
And their predilection to post women with obvious aftermarket boobs, which is the main reason I cancelled, this site is in a self-destruct mode.
Too many other great sites out there and so little time, why even bother with Reality Kings?
|
11-15-12 09:02am
|
Reply
587
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Poll
Fully dressed...but with a load of tease and a quick disrobe.
Best start that I found totally memorable:
Video begins with babe in a nice black dress with the cameraman moving down to an upskirt shot and hods the position as the model pulls her boobs out. She then pulls her panties off and stands there with her clamshell pussy and slowly gets naked.
Another is a babe in a short plaid schoolgirl scene walking normally but a bit sexy interacting with real people giving a good impression that it's all real. The wind blows and lifts her skirt displaying her pantiless private parts fo all to see.
|
11-14-12 08:45am
|
Reply
588
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Colm4's Poll
There's no way I will ever join any site without seeing a review. I've been burned by some that had mediocre or worse reviews where I still joined so there's no way I'll ever go in blind.
|
11-10-12 12:16am
|
Reply
589
|
N/A
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
Ditto Slutty and the others. Last I checked DP requires two stunt cocks who are usually blocking (or, at least obstructing) the view of my interest in viewing porn; the babe's body parts.
The worst scene I've seen is a triple penetration with crossed swords in the cunt and one more up the shitter. (And yet another in her mouth.
The only thing that interested me was the contortion of the guys in the shot.
And I seriously doubt the babe got any enjoyment at all from the experience except when the cash was distributed when the torture was over.
|
11-06-12 11:10pm
|
Reply
590
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Review
I'm good with all of Pat's observations, especially the identification issues and the low quality of the older stuff. Those two aspects are what makes me score this site at 85 (I reserve 90+ for superb sites with no significant shortcomings.
Identification - What's the problem with the site here? There's no legitimate reason these people can't maintain a consistent naming convention and make it easy on those of us who pay the bills to find what we want when we want. My only conclusion is pure laziness.
Older stuff - At least the site could tie the multiple clips together for Pete's sake. It isn't that hard to do. Then consider doing what Bang Bros has been doing; remastering the really good stuff in the archives.
I have one additional significant beef with this site; they don't do a decent job supporting Fire Fox Mozilla browsers. While a member I was forced to switch over to IE to access the site, a real pain in the ass because my download manager is a Fire Fox add-in.
Three significant issues (with a few minor ones at well) make this a low 80's for me.
|
10-26-12 08:11am
|
Reply
591
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Except in porno.
|
10-23-12 12:00am
|
Reply
592
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
About 10 years ago a local (in the west San Fernando Valley area) porn video store had a "event" with a porn star (don't remember who but it was a well known one) who was there to chat and sign her VHS tapes.
It was really a nothing event because no one had much to say and there was nothing to autograph unless you bought some of her tapes.
As I recall she wore a nice dress that emphasized her boobs but she was totally G-rated.
I find that the local "gentlemen's clubs" are much more interesting because a few of the babes in the business show their stuff as guest performers. Some (not many) will even do lap dances.
Frankly, back in the day I might have been interested in attending just out of curiosity. But these days I'm perfectly happy with what I can get on the web.
|
10-21-12 11:01am
|
Reply
593
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
mike11w's Comment
Ditto everything mike says.
The one saving grace is the fan base frequently provides identifications in the comments.
Being cynical, I expect that the VB folks will remove the comments feature as well.
|
10-18-12 09:35am
|
Reply
594
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Hooliganzo's Reply
Thanks Hooliganzo, for a great reply. It works as a "bottom line" commentary to your review.
I have relatively minor issues with the site's search function by criteria; for example, the cup sizes are not accurate, there is no search by natural/enhanced but there is a search by state (who really cares about state?), no search by soft core/hard core, no search by solo vs. G/G or B/G, etc.
I also give it an uptick for dating everything no matter how old, a clear indication of original content and a halfway decent discussion forum and a responsive webmaster who tries to be responsive to most comments.
|
10-15-12 10:25pm
|
Reply
595
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
You Hell betcha! Not just the porno but everything is password protected. I really don't understand why anyone would not do that!
|
10-15-12 12:06am
|
Reply
596
|
N/A
|
Reply of
graymane's Poll
I'm known as RFA.
Ready
Fire
Aim
Also as Quick Draw McGraw - fastest shot in the west.
I start off with my schlong liberated b/c I don't want the jizz in my drawers.
|
10-13-12 10:56am
|
Reply
597
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Reply
Ditto.
I have been a member for quite a while and would be most interested in the reasons for a 93 score.
Thanks.
|
10-12-12 10:25am
|
Reply
598
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I answered YES.
I like to check just to see whether the reviewer tends to be generous or stingy with points. If I see a score of 90 or more and the review is OK but not glowing, it makes it easier to understand the rating.
PU is a totally great site. Frankly it has steered me to some truly superb sites that I would never have found and away from sites with deceptively good preview sites.
The best part is the very high quality of participation in the discussions by fellow members who are both articulate and are also into high quality erotica (the PC way of describing porn).
That's why, as my primary resource, I tend to use every feature of PU.
|
10-12-12 10:23am
|
Reply
599
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Toadsith's Reply
Totally agree with Toadsith! I'm into basic vaginal insertions and really don't get the appeal of anal. Most pornstars look like they endure it for the bucks but don't really enjoy it.
|
10-09-12 08:52am
|
Reply
600
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Having been burned badly by unkept promises by 21st Sextury, I no longer trust anything offered unless the long term price is far better than a monthly price.
That said, I have been a member of VideoBox since 2005 and renew with annual memberships. Yes I have some issues with the site but at $7 per month and at least 5 updates a day (that's 4.6 cents per full title), it's really hard to go wrong.
|
10-09-12 08:48am
|
