Welcome to ADT!
Good first post!

You've hit on a real pet peeve of mine. I think what sometimes happens is that the production company is putting stills from the photoshoots that are captured during the filming of the scenes. A lot of those stills might not make it even into the stills actually published on the DVD. Or, the stills are taken during sequences (like the one you mentioned) that ended up on the cutting room floor.

I've rented films with pictures on the back cover of girls staring into the camera while doing all sorts of nasty things, and then was thoroughly disgusted when those scenes ended up not only not having the images portrayed on the back cover, but sometimes with almost the entire movie lacking in performer eye-contact with the camera filming the action.

Digital Sin has done this a few times. I think they might be getting a little better about it, but it sounds like they're still doing it (I rarely rent DS films, maybe due to having been burned before).

This is a rip-off and should be stopped!

[Link]

Edited by - wally on 5/19/2004 11:19:32 PM

[Link]

i always look screenshots from a good store e.g. xonair.com before i rent or buy a dvd.

[Link]

Thanks for the advice Wally, I still have the last couple scenes to watch for Black In The Ass 3. I was so disappointed after Sharka's scene that I didnt get too far. Most DVD's I purchase are also from Evil Angel, RLD, Platinum X and Devils Film as well. Its rare that any of these studios have a misleading boxcover, so they have my trust for the most part. With other studios I may get one from time to time that doesnt feature what I was looking for judging by the boxcover, but in this case, especially with Ass Angels 2, it was just much too frequent. I never used to purchase DS in the past, but they have undergone quite a facelift since then - especially Johnni Darkko's stuff(who has now moved on to EA). I am STILL bummed...sad isn't it??

[Link]

"Living Life is not made up of material things"

[Link]

When will the learn never to over edit and to check box covers?

Ron

[Link]

Another problem with pictures lately is that a lot of the box photos are DECEPTIVELY BAD (!!!!!) I'll look at a box and discard it because the girl looks like death warmed over in the photos....but then a month later I'll get interested in some other girl who's in that movie, so I'll check it out--and guess what! --> The girl who looked below average on the box actually looks pretty damn good in the movie itself! What the hell?

So here's my 2 point plan for improving porn overnight:
* If you have a hot performer, you need to sell her as the hottie she is! That means better stills. Not deceptive, just better.
* If you have a performer who won't do anal (or whatever) except in stills, either get a different performer or improve your negotiating skills, or have an open bar on the set.

Now let's try to put ourselves in the pornographer's shoes, to better understand why they use misleading pictures:
Some of them might not even be aware of this issue. They may just have a diffenent policy when it comes to the still photos. ---> They want to sell as many copies as they can. So if they're not happy with how a scene turned out, they might have the still photographer shoot some different things....so in their own minds they think they're helping to salvage the scene by giving the fans a little bit more than what the scene contained? Or if they shot the stills first, the woman might have changed her mind in mid-shoot about what she was willing to do in the scene.... so now the only anal content is the photos.... and shouldn't the fans be allowed to see those photos?

Ummm, that's still a crappy move. Sorry, I tried to sympathize with the folks who use deceptive pictures on the boxes, but I still reached the same conclusion: they blow.

[Link]