1) Susan models 2) Latisha and Ed screw poorly 3)Randy and Latisha screw somewhat poorly 4) Cindy models 5) Kari masturbates and screws Mr X
6) Lorraine and Ed screw poorly and she takes it anally
7) Deseree and Ed screw, she takes a facial
8) Traci masturbates, has sex with Ed .

Now I'm not a fan of breaking down every little sex act in a movie.
However, this dvd is so mechanical in how it approaches the
process that I felt compelled to do so. None of the women looked
to be having a good time and everyone's acting sucked.

Edited by - dumblonde on Oct 15 2000

[Link]

I think one of the reasons why you see reviews like you described is because most "porn reviewers" see so much porn that they become really jaded. Believe me, it's really hard to say something original about most porn today since it's pretty much the same.

I suspect that some reviewers who tend to give a "play by play" or "sex boxscore" find it easier to do that than actually review the video. I don't always blame them--sometimes, I will want to write "Standard oral-oral-two positions-cumshot scene. It was okay, nothing to write home about." That may work fine for an AVN capsule, but not for anyone who claims to be "reviewing" a video.

Then there's a portion of reviewers who I'm convinced watch the DVD or tape on fast forward and pay no attention to the plot, dialogue, or even the sex. Again, I don't blame them for wanting to do that, but it pretty much makes the review meaningless.

It also may be a problem of expectations. For example, if you review according to a bell-scale, you should be giving a whole bunch of "C's" and very few "A's" and "F's." But I don't think very many reviewers stick to that standard for a variety of reasons (bias, kickbacks, or even just an aversion to the inevitable "Why did you fucking give 'Some Random Porno Movie' an
'F'?!?!?!?! 'Starlet ABC' is my favorite star! You don't know what the fuck you're talking about!")

Then there's the other extreme... say for instance the Imperator scale, which believes that no modern adult feature can get a perfect score.

In my case, I generally don't review everything that comes my way. I don't like to review crap, and I certainly don't buy crap. So my reviews tend to be on the upper end of the scale because I gravitate toward good porn. I know better than to waste my time with the Colt 45's of the adult world.

In a perfect world, people would all agree on the same standards and then critique everything honestly. But since that's never going to happen, the only advice I can give is for reviewers to:

1. Be descriptive. As long as you back up your opinions with enough description, your reviews will be accessible to the widest audience. For example, instead of "I hated this scene," "I hated this scene because there was only five seconds of explicit sex out of the 20 minute scene."

2. Be honest. If you hated it, say so (and back it up with your reasons). Different strokes for different folks, right? Saying that it's great when it's not is one way to piss people off and never get them to read your reviews again.

3. Be coherent. I'm not talking about being 100% serious or have perfect grammar and spelling. But if I have to read what you wrote more than twice, then forget it. Whether you break the review down into categories or scenes, it should definitely have some rhyme or reason to it.

Just my two cents,

Saki

[Link]

Others, like on most of the AVN reviews, say virtually nothing about a title. I hoped to be something in between-give enough basic material for someone to make a decision based on general terms and quality of dvd. Maybe people will come to listen to my rantings too someday. ;)

To be honest, I'll review almost anything put in front of me. Granted, if someone sends me an Ed Powers dvd, the chances of it getting a good rating are about the same as Jenna hand delivering it to my apt-pretty darn slim (unless, by a miracle, he actually makes a good one someday-my suggested title is "Ed Powers Retires" on the box it'll read-no footage of Ed anywhere on the dvd).

I promise to only write honest evaluations of what I watch. Sometimes I go a bit overboard but the intent is always clear in my reviews. If I get good titles in-a recent order had a variety of stuff in it-they get good ratings. Maybe if the producers offered us some free dvd's to review (and not rely on whatever cheapo titles we get on sale), they'd be happier with some of our reviews.

I've gotten some hate email over reviews and all it did was make me enjoy reviewing stinkers even more. If a star looks bad in a particular scene or dvd, I'll suggest another movie to watch where they look better (should I know of one). That's the fairest I can be.

Oh, and I'mm looking for that title worth a 5-a few came close this week but just missed it...

[Link]

Second, I find that I am just not of the proper mindset to be rigorously consistent (or even fair) in my reviews. I just can't get into this as a "job". I enjoy doing it, don't get me wrong. I just can't bring myself to establish a consistent style or methodology. My template that I use for an outline is about as close as I come to consistency.

I am finding that I am starting to treat my reviews as... stress relief. Something close to the equivalent of a flushing the brain stem than a duty to inform the populace of a particularly blah DVD. Unfortunately, this means that I have a tendency to avoid the average DVDs and just review the good ones or the really bad ones. The average ones sit on my shelf and get avoided, unfortunately. I'll get around to them, but I've got this really cool DVD that is soooo much more fun to write about...

The reviews are more of an exercise in being clever, I'm afraid. In the meantime, I'll give you my honest opinion of the movie. But what I'm after is the mental workout.

Wow, I'm starting to sound like a pompous ass of an "arteest", eh?

I write reviews because it is a challenge. I pick out of the ordinary movies because they inspire the more enjoyable mental wanderings. As such, average DVDs get put on the bottom of the stack.

"There's a sucker born every minute, but swallowers are hard to find. "
------------------
Who is [ invalid url ]

Edited by - Darkmage on Oct 29 2000

[Link]

But just to add my $.02 here, I think that it should be recognized that when it comes to the standards of high art or even popular art, porn and porno movies are basically all crap to begin with and really serve no purpose other than to get the viewer off. Once we accept the fact that drama, pathos, characterization, or even emotion (other than feeling horny) are never treated with any degree of real seriousness in this ghettoized genre, then we can also accept the fact that any criteria used for reviewing adult movies are considerably more compromised and more superficial than any other standards we would apply to other forms of art, such as music or mainstream film.

And because porn almost always employs the lowest production values and most inane scripts imaginable (Andrew Blake vignettes are the most notable exception), any useful criticiscm towards suck and fuck films has to account and accomodate for this lesser quality. To me, it is unfair to complain that a certain Elegant Angel DVD has crappy digital video quality (which, by the way, most certainly do!) when the original master videotape was no better. If the DVD was a faithful and accurate transfer of the original movie, then it would be more valid to criticize the original source instead of the DVD itself. It's like complaining about the mono CD sound of an early Miles Davis recording, when in fact, the original recording sessions were mixed monaurally.

Therefore, I don't think that one can possibly apply formal standards towards the review and rating of a porno DVD, when it comes to content or sexual heat. Sure, some DVD productions from Leisure Time are obvious crap, but it's difficult to denigrate a movie starring Lauren Hall if you are a fan of hers, or to praise a movie starring Bridget The Midget if you have a preference for tall women. I have seen more porn movies than I care to mention (at the risk of looking like a sexual deviant...just kidding) and while I acknowledge that only a handful out of the hundreds I've seen are worth mentioning, there is just too many differences in opinion and too many personal preferences when it comes to sex (I like watching enthusiastic, hand-less blowjobs as delivered by women like Tiffany Mynx, Ginger Lynn and Tori Welles; and I prefer to watch women make-out as opposed to seeing them prodded by toys and all sorts of weird foreign objects), women (I am partial to petite brunettes), and directorial styles (Andrew Blake, pre-Evil Angel John Leslie, and gonzo a la Seymore Butts are my favorite pornographers) to keep reviewers and their criticisms consistent or even suitable to the consumer's liking.

[Let the flames begin...!]

[Link]

Well, some of the premium releases from Wicked, Adam & Eve, and VCA (to name a few) have each of the qualities you seem to feel don't exist outside mainstream. Further, most of them have decent production values without spending several million per movie. Heck, an episode of a sit-com usually costs much more than a high budget porn movie yet look how much they can do with so little money.

When most of us review a title, we make comments based on the circumstances as a whole. My recent review of 8 to 4 admits that the movie is almost 20 years old and doesn't even try to compare it to a newly released feature. It's still a fun movie. On the other hand, we could look at a movie released 7 years ago-Bottom Dweller-which looks worse than the 20 year old feature.

Sometimes, it's just a horrible dvd transfer (which BD has in spades) and other times the source material is at fault. If a company can't afford a proper transfer, they need to sell the rights to someone who can rather than sucker us into buying it.

My personal opinion is that porn may not always be great but it certainly can be better. For the most part, accepting crap as "the way it is" will never force anyone to change for the better. How many companies are now adding really neat extra's after hearing that we want them? How many companies are making higher budget movies since we asked for them? My answer is the companies that want to compete will be more responsive-we've seen this on ADT, both producers and stores who want our money improve.

How many DVD ADvantage or Five Star Video's are out there? Not many, that's for sure. How many Wicked, VCA or Adam & Eve's are out there too? Again, not many-the throw shit together companies outnumber them 50 to 1. Guess who'll survive over the long haul? The stores and production companies that decide quality and customer service count, that's who.

My guess is that you weren't overjoyed with my review of BD. At the end I wrote: "If you feel compelled to release older titles onto dvd, please look for better sources of the movie and/or better company's to master the transfer." According to your own admission, my review was dead on accurate regarding video quality. I even praise Elegant Angel by saying: "Elegant Angel's newer releases are so much better than this one that you shouldn't even think twice about getting crap like this." Granted, I was being extra nice but I was also telling the truth. If Patrick (the main guy there) had a beef with my review, he could let me know about it too.

I bought the title myself-ask DVD Empire if you like. I didn't get a free copy from anyone and I wasn't paid to write the review. The review was geared to consumers and written by a consumer (ask any of the major online stores how many dvd's I've bought from them-or go check my list at dvdtracker). I intend on writing a review of Chloe's I Came Did You? soon-I bought this one awhile back and will get to it soon. IIRC, the audio/video was pretty weak on it too and the overall rating will show it. I remember the sex being great (Chloe and Tina are two favorites of mine) so the rating will show that as well.

In any case, if you'd like to discuss this particular review with me-my offer still stands. Email me as several others have on other titles. The review was fair and accurate-just like all my reviews have been.

[Link]

Incidentally, I should point out that it is undeniable that I have a soft spot and a hard on for "older" porn flicks. Although some of cheapest and cheesiest videos came from the eighties and nineties, that was also a time when condoms weren't mandatory and featured stunning performers like Leena, Selena Steele, Lauren Hall, Rachel Ryan, Ginger Lynn and so many others who unfortunately, weren't given much of a chance to perform in upper echelon shot on 35 MM porn movies. However, as a reviewer, we often find ourselves with no choice but to excuse an overall weak video so as to recommend a worthwhile, notable scene. I would hate for people to miss Leena's incredible encounter with Francesca Le in her self-titled older movie from Video Team (called, appropriately enough, LEENA) once it hits the DVD market, because I believe that their particular girl-girl scene is far, far hotter and more erotic than any lesbian tryst I have seen in any new release this year! Of course, I would mention in my review that the overall quality of this video is barely average, but the mitigating qualities (namely an early appearance by Leena herself) clearly outweigh the inferior production of this standard release.

I agree that criticism is necessary in order to hold these products to an acceptable consumer standard. In fact, I groaned and whined about the quality of THE DINNER PARTY in a quickie review on Adult DVD Empire, which did prompt a response from the good people at Adam & Eve Video. However, it also occurs to me that since porn is considered to be "low art" (at best) that it is unavoidable, but necessary to apply lower standards when reviewing porno discs. And while I am cognizant that many adult movies aspire to elevate their material and themes to a more mature, sophisticated status, I'm afraid that it's all a lost cause. Even soap operas have more literary and literate "stories" than some of the better porn movies (Paul Thomas' NOTHING TO HIDE 2: JUSTINE got critical raves for its sophisticated storyline. But the truth is, this movie was only as good when considered within the limitations of the porn genre. There is no way that it would have garnered any real praise outside in the mainstream --- which, by the way is also a compromised forum [i.e., critical praise of E.R. does not raise it to the level of a William Faulkner novel]), which of course means that we have to lower the critical bar when it comes to reviewing this beloved genre, which I believe most porn reviewers do instinctively. However, in no way did I imply, nor should you infer, that I believe porn should be accepted the way it is. There is always room for improvement in the production process as there is for our reviews.

(Since it is late and I should be sleeping for a full day's work tomorrow (or rather this morning), I reserve the right to alter my opinion on the basis of my weary and worn present condition.)

[Link]

Diesel, I think the scene you are referring to has Tiffany and Nikki Shane.

On the quality issue: I never saw the tape. I took a long, long hiatus from watching adult stuff and came back with the advent of dvd. To be even moderately consistent, I rate the audio/video quality based on it's genre, not past releases (unless it looks worse of course). With Bottom Dweller having always looked crappy, it doesn't gain points for this category. That would be akin to saying a crummy movie is now better because I'm comparing it to itself and not the rest of the market.

Even if this particular title had truly been a gonzo, all sex dvd (which, as a rule, have lower production values) it still wouldn't have been rated too much higher-maybe a point. Many of it's problems related to what appears to be a poor transfer and not just the poor original quality of the movie.

If the only problem with it had been the poor audio/video quality and the rest had been exceptionally awesome, it would have received a better rating. In this case, the females were below average, the males were mostly ugly, the sex had little if any heat, the plot/acting sucked, the extra's consisted of some trailers and a photo gallery, on top of the poor A/V quality. I'm not directly comparing it to Satyr, Blue Matrix, or Flashpoint.

Your points about poor source material are well taken. If a movie is a "classic" it gets a bit more leeway since it's rare that most company's take good care of their older stuff. I don't fault 8 to 4 for not having shaved women any more than I'd fault a current movie for not having Shauna Grant in it (may she rest in peace). Classic, to me at least, means pre-90's.

I agree that we shouldn't compare porn to mainstream as well. How many double dvd sets do we see in porn? How often do we see the level of extra's found in the Abyss, Tarzan, T2 Ultimate, or Criterion's Armegeddon? Basic quality of production values, however, can be found in a lot of older titles. Instead of comparing them to the original release, isn't it fairer to compare them to other movies shot around the same time or movies from the same genre? In either case, BD falls short. Elegant seems to always had problems with A/V quality and they aren't going to change unless forced to.

Your claim: "...which of course means that we have to lower the critical bar when it comes to reviewing this beloved genre, which I believe most porn reviewers do instinctively." is partially true. Porn reviewers aren't doing it instinctively, they're doing it quite conciously. Most people who review porn are paid to do so while we aren't on ADT. They have a vested interest in spouting the party line for the most part. We do not.

Of all the reviews I've read, I have yet to see anyone hold porn to mainstream standards on ADT, RAME, Roger's site, etc. I certainly don't. All of us reading those reviews accept the basic condition that "plot and acting", for example, has a different meaning in porn. When a porn movie has both of these at a grade B mainstream level, we applaude it as great. In the mainstream world, such titles are often direct to video-if you know what I mean.

Sorry for the longwinded rant but the bottom line (pun intended) is that each reviewer has their own style. If some of them want to praise mediocre titles, that's their priviledge. In the long run, readers will find reviewers they can trust more than that with their hard earned dollars. As an example, Roger has a large following that he built up over a long time. They trust his judgement based on those years of experience. Roger's reviews focus on the actual action. My reviews spend more time on the technical qualities of the movie because that's what people asked for and I didn't see much out there in this regard. Our reviews compliment one another. Perhaps people will agree with you and turn a deaf ear to what I say (on the basis that all porn is substandard). Somehow, I doubt that will happen. ;)

[Link]

I agree that people tend to gravitate to reviewers/reviews that they feel comfortable with. If they find a reviewer they like they may respect his/her opinion and read their reviews and forum posts. If they think someone doesn't have a clue or is full of shit they (hopefully) ignore the individual's reviews and forum posts. It keeps the signal-to-noise ratio down.

[Link]

Also, I would never claim to be the Pauline Kael of porn. I've only written a handful of reviews, and to start taking myself seriously would be to suggest I'm important or in competition with others. That said, I doubt anyone gets a kick out of this stuff more than I do. It's really all very fun and very silly. There's something laughingly satisfying and humbling about being a "porn reviewer." After all, what in the entertainment world gets less respect than pornography and film critics?

[Link]

(though I do take notes because I think it's funny to have a notebook full of tidbits like 'veiny dick' 'she sucks like a powervac' etc. - someday I'll do something useful with the notebook :)

[Link]

Diville, I hear you buddy. I take notes because I want to do a good job when I review a movie. Sometimes they amount to little more than free associations but they still qualify as "notes". That's why I watch a movie twice-the first time is for my pleasure and the second time is to write down some of the details. There are worse hobbies a guy could have than to write about movies (of any kind).

I doubt that anyone here views themselves as important because of their reviews. If I ever come across that way-meet me in chat and we'll discuss it. I promised a friend that I would do a good job at reviewing them and as long as I have fun doing it-I'll continue reviewing them. I can be serious and have fun at the same time. ;)

Steph, ever the voice of reason. I look forward to reading your memoirs some day. ;)

[Link]

I was very surprised that Eyes of Desire was a good looking movie. I thought the quality was on a par with many a main stream movie too...I'd even go so far as to say that "Missy" is a pretty fair actress. The one thing that bugged me was the dude with the spotted dick, but I guess it'd hurt a lot to try and bleach it or something... ;-) I'd use it to it's full potential (could be a pun in there somewhere) and let one of the gals play connect the dots...

Anyway, didn't mean to break my self imposed code of silence, just thought I'd mention that I'm a very infrequent buyer and certainly not an expert like most of y'all, but I trusted what I read and it meant a lot to me to see someone that was honest and not just trying to sell a product.

That's all folks.... :-0

Tenderized, battered & breaded in Dixie...

-ChickenFriedSteak

[Link]

Remember, even though you don't buy much here-you don't have to settle for crappy quality releases. It's a big market with plenty of gems out there. One of the biggest advantages to the reviews here is that they aren't censored or bought and paid for like so many other sources of reviews seem to be. If that makes a few company's or people uncomfortable, so be it. In the long run, honesty will bring people back for more.

BTW, I didn't notice any spots on anyone's penis in the movie. Granted, I wasn't l;ooking that hard at any of them... Take care

[Link]

I don't doubt you didn't notice it, but FTR it was in the 2nd chapter the guy that the star watches through the telescope while he's getting a BJ from the happy-to-be-doing-it-to-a-spotted-dick-chick....

I dunno, call me a purist, but even though I admired the rigidity, the bumps and spots were a turn off not to mention the fact that it looked rather liver colored..... eeeuuuuu....

It's been awhile since I've seen one though, so maybe I'm just used to looking at my hot pink, latex lover...

Thud.

Tenderized, battered & breaded in Dixie...

-ChickenFriedSteak

[Link]