| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
51
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
Good idea and d'oh to me for not thinking of that solution. I'll let you all know what I think.
|
06-09-16 12:23pm
|
Reply
52
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
As a subscriber to MetArt, I've received an email offer to join MetArt X for $14.99, which seems like a more reasonable price indeed. I would include a link here but I cannot see how to get to this page directly without having received the email.
I was hoping to see some feedback from people who had actually joined the site. The "tour" claims daily updates but some of "this week's videos" are dated in July and the same is true for photo galleries. There is no indication of the ratio of galleries to videos that I can see.
|
06-09-16 11:29am
|
Reply
53
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Considering it's all on external hard drives... no problem.
|
05-18-16 10:36am
|
Reply
54
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Does PU count? Otherwise, no.
|
04-05-16 12:28pm
|
Reply
55
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
Your poll doesn't work properly, because it makes me choose just one. The answer is kitchen, bathroom, car and back yard. Oh, and on a Greyhound bus.
|
01-29-16 11:03am
|
Reply
56
|
Sex Art
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Excellent and thorough review. I'll go back and revisit the site. When it first appeared I wasn't getting much out of it but it sounds more promising now.
|
01-20-16 02:24pm
|
Reply
57
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
I should have said "other" although the man's shirt kills me. My trigger, in person or on screen, goes back to my youth: tight blue jeans, a flannel shirt (and long hair).
|
01-20-16 02:17pm
|
Reply
58
|
Twistys
(0)
|
Reply of
Amanda's Reply
That was very responsive customer service from both of you. Thanks and I'm signed up.
|
12-12-15 11:44am
|
Reply
59
|
Digital Desire
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Reply
Well, I missed that entirely, thanks. I had a DD subscription for several years and always loved the way they photographed the models. Better control of makeup and lighting than anyone else, IMO, and Stephen Hicks had a great eye for models and a long-time weakness for full-figured girls. Entirely wrong that he was taken at such a young age; I see they're including some hardcore now which he never would have tolerated for a second. Ah, well, $40 for three months is irresistible.
|
12-08-15 11:48am
|
Reply
60
|
Eternal Desire
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
December 4, 2015 and the $19.99 price is still available. I'm going to bite because I have a huge crush on Jennifer Mackay and there are three photosets of her.
|
12-04-15 05:16pm
|
Reply
61
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Reply
Thanks for the response, elephant. I had that experience at Nubiles in the past. They'd post five or six videos/sets of a model and then never bring her back.
|
11-19-15 03:48pm
|
Reply
62
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
elephant's Comment
What I can't figure out from the tour (such as it is) is whether individual models have multiple sets. By that I mean, do models come back from time to time or are they strictly F T ?
|
11-16-15 04:28pm
|
Reply
63
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
skippy's Review
This is a most excellent and helpful review. I was a huge Met-Art fan back in the day but it looks like I stopped in late 2010. Over time I've gotten more and more into video, mostly hardcore, but I miss those gorgeous women and have given serious thought to resubscribing. Your review pushes me closer and closer to doing that. Thanks.
And the discount doesn't hurt.
|
11-08-15 01:07pm
|
Reply
64
|
Digital Desire
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Comment
I haven't checked on DD for a long time but went looking when I discovered they had shot some Blake Eden / Blake Bartelli. Wow. They used to be one of the more affordable glamour sites but now? Disappointing.
|
10-20-15 03:45pm
|
Reply
65
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Amanda's Poll
Books and good bourbon. Oh and gin. And rum.
|
10-20-15 03:31pm
|
Reply
66
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have to be very confident that the website will continue to offer material I enjoy, taking into account the fact that I will have cleared out all the archived material I want within a couple of months at the most. The reality for me is that very few sites meet these criteria.
|
07-02-15 11:50am
|
Reply
67
|
Wow Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
lk2fireone's Reply
It's been awhile since I was subscribing to Wow Girls but as I recall, after paying for 30 days I was automatically registered to use Wow Porn and after 60 days I had access to the third site.
As I cull my porn collection I note that a lot of my favorite videos came from Wow Girls/Porn etc. I'm seriously thinking of going back. I do find some of the navigation annoying; if I'm looking at multiple pages of one model and look at a video, I do not want to be sent all the way back to page 1, especially if I've gotten to page 3 or later.
The distribution across three sites also makes it more of a challenge to dl all the desirable videos of one particular model.
|
06-24-15 02:36pm
|
Reply
68
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
rearadmiral's Comment
I can only get to Video Box by typing the website into the browser search. When I click on a link from Best Porn I get a 301 Moved Permanently. Not a huge deal considering the discount is $3 but it is odd. Thanks to your comment I think I'll go back for a month and see what gives. Maybe they've improved the Roku interface. Beware of cross-checks unless you want a subscription to Mr Skin
|
11-30-14 03:16pm
|
Reply
69
|
The Classic Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
pat362's Comment
I was really looking forward to all that vintage porn, including the French stuff but I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger. I started checking the site when I experienced some server errors and for the last several days all I get is a bad gateway error. Sorry, but I'm not handing over money to a website that can't reliably even stay online.
|
11-08-14 09:34am
|
Reply
70
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
It's just that they're always pre-checked. Otherwise there's not much point in doing them in the first place.
|
11-03-14 05:34pm
|
Reply
71
|
The Classic Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Thank you. Yes, the discount is back but now the pages aren't displaying content, just a server error. I think I want to see some stability there before I subscribe and I realllllly want to have access to the classics.
|
11-02-14 10:34am
|
Reply
72
|
The Classic Porn
(0)
|
Reply of
Irina's Reply
According to TBP there should be a monthly discounted rate of $19.95 when entering the site from The Best Porn. No such rate is being displayed, just the $34.95 monthly standard rate.
|
11-01-14 01:14pm
|
Reply
73
|
Wow Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
roamer13's Review
I've been meaning to post my own review, but have been too lazy. Sticking around for two months was definitely worth it; the access that followed was almost overwhelming. I love the site with its abundance of gorgeous young women (almost all European, slender, relatively small boobs)--might have stuck around just for all the Angelica videos (and Michelle aka Red Fox). My cup runneth over.
My only complaints with the site have to do with lousy navigation. Just getting through to the updates can be tricky, but the worst is while browsing through a model's page. Once you've moved to the next page, clicking on a video page means that going back to the model page you always end up on page 1. (That's garbled, I know, but it's hard to explain.)
If you're into peeing videos you're in luck. Never seen so many although I don't really get the appeal.
|
09-24-14 03:48pm
|
Reply
74
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I have as little interest in handjobs as I do extended blowjobs. When 50% or more of a video is a girl(s) mouthing a giant knob it's ridiculous. One of the best parts of classic porn was the presence of real foreplay -- remember kissing?
|
09-24-14 03:35pm
|
Reply
75
|
Wow Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
SexCliche's Review
You saved me the trouble of writing a review! I've got the same reaction across the board -- navigation issues like you describe, plus using a back button from a model's page 2 set always returns to page 1.
Yes, there are oodles of gorgeous sexy women and typically superb video, perfectly lit with high resolution. And a bare minimum of super close ups. No more loving shots of ballsacks or cervixes. The videos actually use multiple angles (and cameras?)
I don't know why they separate WowGirls and WowPorn, but it means having to check both model lists for a particular girl. Mildly irritating.
|
06-12-14 02:05pm
|
