How many of you in the real world have self esteem issues about your looks? How many of you if you could would change something about yourself simply because someone else told you that they didn't like that one thing about you? How bad does that make you feel?
....Please think about that the next time you write a review on a porn movie. Review the movie. Tell us to open up, that we needed more energy, that the lighting was bad, or the sound was off or the scene itself flat out sucked. Those are all valid points to reviewing a movie. Something that we can work on and improve on for the next scene we do. That's what reviews are all about! Self improvement.
But when you write a review that says nothing about the scene and how well or bad we did and everything about our looks...all I have to say is what the f**k!??!!
We can't change our looks and we certainly shouldn't have to for your sake. Some guys consider supermodel bodies ugly and love the 300 pound bodies. To each their own. But keep your opinions on our looks out of movie reviews. If we aren't your cup of tea, fine! Don't watch movies with us in them find your ideal porn woman/man and watch their movies.
We are just as much effected and self conscious about our looks as you the reader and reviewer...if not more so because we have people telling us left and right what they do and don't like about us.
Please just think before your next movie review. And peace out! Pick on me fine, pick on my friends and hurt them BAD!
This does raise an interesting ethical question. To put things simply, I think its sometimes very difficult to isolate a girl's looks from the performance. However, just bashing a girl's looks without saying anything about her performance I feel is a bit insensitive.
I think its also important that the honesty is there. Sometimes a reviewer must mention what he thought of a girl's looks in order that the reader can gauge how he graded or reviewed a scene. If the performance was outstanding and the reviewer acknowledges this but still didn't like the scene because of looks then I think the reader should be aware of that. Hopefully he can say it in a polite manner. And as I said before it can sometimes be hard to see these two factors separately too.
Anyhow, I'm sorry your feelings were hurt, but just remember for next time, that it's just ONE person's opinion, and for one of his negative criticisms about you there's probably 5 other guys who think you're pretty.
Let's face it most girls in porn are already WAY prettier than the average girl- for what it's worth, I think you are very hot, Crissy!
But now I'm curious to what review you are referring to that made you post this.
The reader assumes too much when reading my postings. I never said I was the one hurt by a reviewer reviewing my looks, all I stated was review the performance. Reviewing looks, to me, is still off the subject in my opinion.
Most people believe what they read, most people are sheep and will believe what others say before thinking for themselves about what they actually thought of a scene and/or performance.
Again if a certain talent isn't your cup of tea...fine if you have to say it at all yes please state it in a polite way, but remember to critque the performance as well.
Well in my opinion, I think most consumers disregard opinions in reviews altogether. They just use them to mine out certain information, such as 'did this girl do gapes here?" stuff like that.
Give me a break! The girls are the ones who choose to put themselves in the spotlight, and they hardly leave us much to imagine about any inch of their bodies (or indeed a couple of inches of their insides!) If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen - I for one find that it's important for reviewers to say if a girl looks like a tatooed heroin junkie who slept in a trash can last night, because that's something that could spoil the scene for me, and therefore is useful information in a review.
[Link]
Pocketcomb_Pimp Deactivated User
1921 Posts 7/03
Posted - May 14 2005 : 7:53AM
Chrissy, In my book you are hotter than Georgia Asphalt! That said, I've only seen stills and no titles as of yet. Sounds like maybe you took a few lumps in a review and that's too bad.
My reviews are based on heat, not looks and my reviews are beroken down into two catagories, Looks and Heat. Either way, I call em like I see em.
I could mention names, bu this isn't the place, but some of the prettier women in porn are the worst performers in my opinion. On the other hand their are women who are made fun of for having manly faces or figures and even slightly heavy figures and they could fuck the top contract women under a table 7 days a week.
I'm not sure If I have some of your work in my collection, Crissy, but I will certainly get some. Ultimately my suggestion would be to get out of the biz if you are at all sensitive because the truth is for every fan you have, they'll be a hater. As a fan, I find out that some of the people that come off as asses are actually industry favorites because they are so pleasant to be around. I also hear from others that some people that always smile for the camera and the true asses off camera and on set.
Regardless of how good you are on screen, I'll say it again, I find you incredible attractive, but I won't lie when I say their are some attractive women in this business that need to get out. Hopefully you aren't one of them cause that ass you got is calling me!
God hates us all, you know it's true, God hates this place. - Slayer 1726 Posts 10/03
Posted - May 14 2005 : 7:53AM
Crissy,
I agree and I normally don't allow a girls look to effect my reviews. I start off each scene I review with what I think the girl looks like (attractive, pretty, sexy and so on), then say her hair color & length along with her bust size and type. Then on with the review... I'll be honest in saying there are girls who suit my tastes more than others, but I'd be the first to say I'd rather see a girl I think is OK looking but on a very energetic scene, than watch a girl who is smokin hot put on a scene where she's obviously not into the sex...
Inevitably looks do play a part in porn, it's a physical job, but I do my best to do as you say - rate the scene as a whole, not just on a girls looks.
"To put things simply, I think its sometimes very difficult to isolate a girl's looks from the performance. However, just bashing a girl's looks without saying anything about her performance I feel is a bit insensitive."
I rarely review anymore, but when I do I agree with that exactly.
[Link]
Ejac Deactivated User
851 Posts 9/04
Posted - May 14 2005 : 8:59AM
Without sounding brash, Andy2 has a valid point, though I do see where Crissy is cumming from. Typically I try to write reviews as scene breakdowns. I will note from a personal point of view whether the girl meets up to my expectations, then shift gears to the actual content, production, and so on.
As for the looks of performers, each has their preference. I feel obligated to note what I see, so that readers will know what to expect. But I don't go so far as to bash (that is rude). Box covers can be very misleading - right everyone? - as can advertising. I will simply make note of what is contained and move on. I may like thin girls with a belly-button ring wearing school-girl outfits, whle others may in fact like the 300 pound tsumo-wrestler with zits all over her face. How would one really know what to buy other than to read others impressions? How would you like to buy something and not get what you expected?
For example, Monica Sweetheart is no doubt beautiful. I have noted that on several occassions. But in one video that I reviewed, someone decided to make her up as some goth-chick. Fine. Sometimes I really fucking dig that look. But the way she was made up put about 20 years on top of her age, and the look was out of context of the setting. Monica looked horrible, IMO from that perspective, making the scene very un-enjoyable for me to watch.
There are enough people in the world with enough varied interests to keep the porn companies happy. Providing information - looks and otherwise - only makes the consumer happier on his/her next purchase. After all, it is a review and not an award ceremony.
I review the energy of the scene (almost exclusively), rather than looks, because that's what I find important.
However, for some guys, looks are everything, and they should review accordingly. For different reviewers, it's different things they look for. For some guys it's the cumshot; there's no telling whether they notice the girl's looks or her energy.
The review is one person's view.
Porn is all about looks. That's how the girls get their jobs. If it was all about energy, a whole lot of them would be out of work pronto.
I find sentences like "...is a cute readhead with nice tits..." in porn reviews worthless. Pics of nearly every porn chick can be easily found in the net.
I'd say it's almost impossible to expect someone to comment on a scene in a porno and not mention the girl's looks. Taste is subjective and it is possible to comment on looks without flat-out BASHING someone, but looks will be mentioned. It's funny to me that a few "reviewers" in this thread claim not to care about looks yet how many reviewers do you see who rate their scene by certain seperate criteria, including "Female Looks?"
I've said it in this forum and many other places time and time again: I couldn't care less what you look like as long as you "bring it" performance-wise. Have I slipped up and came down hard on some starlets in the past because of a look that may not have been to my personal liking? Sure, we all make mistakes or don't always take into account others' feelings at times; we don't think ALL the time. But for the most part, and especially recently, I'm perfectly cognizant of such things and do my best to avoid it. Besides, I'm a man who finds all women beautiful in their own way. I've fawned over scenes by Lisa Sparxxx just as much as I have scenes featuring Eva Angelina. I've beat off to Roxy Blaze and I've rubbed a few out to Katja Kassin. Someone obviously forgot to tell my dick to care what the mainstream considers to be "beautiful."
Personally, I include screenshots and links to galleries of the girls in my reviews and give each individual scene an overall star ranking, rather than breaking it down with concerns to energy/heat, performer looks, etc. I mention those things if it's warranted in the body of the review and on ADT, the reviews already have a section you can fill out regarding Overall Rating, Female Looks, Male Looks, Sex, A/V Quality, etc.
Tyler Knight recently told me that he doesn't even bother to read reviews as it doesn't serve him to do so. As a talent it's a losing and futile proposition, he thinks. If a scene is going bad, of course the talent is the first to know and once it's out there, they can't take it back and re-do it. I have to agree with that somewhat, not to mention the vast majority of "reviewers" (fans) out here have zero qualifications, no reason to be taken seriously and for some reason find it easier to bash someone and disparage them than to dole out a compliment or know how to effectively and constructively criticize. Who cares what they say?
Don't put too much stock into these so-called "reviews" (mine included) because as I've said to many a performer or director in the past, they're just one man's opinion.
Edited by - Crucifixio_Jones on 5/14/2005 10:06:18 AM
Looks have a place in reviews, subjective opinions about looks don't. For example, to say that Performer X has butt acne, a bad dye job, and knobby knees is objective - and therefore has a place in a review (so that people who like butt acne, bad dye jobs, and knobby knees know which movie to buy!!). To say Performer X looks like a run-down ho'bag is pretty much useless and definitely subjective. That has no place in a review.
To criticize or compliment features that are subjectively attractive, such as implants, size/shape of noses, weight vs height, or hairstyles, is unproductive. You might comment on them "Perfomer X has a new hairstyle in this video.", or "Performer X has gained some weight since Video #3.", but saying these things are ugly or beautiful is just not a useful thing to do.
Porn is a visual media. Looks matter to the consumer. If you're going to go to the trouble of researching reviews before you purchase, having an idea what the performers look like is important.
If you're going to be in porn, you need thick skin. Reviews don't always say things you like. Tough.
IMO that's the whole point: When you think a girl looks like a tattooed heroin junkie who slept in a trash can, there are a thousand better ways of saying that. It actually IS possible to state your dislike of a girl without insulting her. If you think her affinity to heroin and trash cans is so obvious, include a screen shot.
It's not a matter of dishonesty, but a matter of politeness and respect. Some people tend to forget that there are actually human beings behind all those tits and asses.
Nothing says I love you so much as a tongue in the ass. 2884 Posts 1/03
Posted - May 14 2005 : 11:19AM
I don't think you can deal with absolutes when reviewing, such as "never" or "always" commenting on someone's physical characteristics. It's a visual medium and looks count. If I'm reviewing a scene with Angel Dark in it, you're going to know that I'm floored by her beauty regardless of performance. Sometimes I'll comment on a boob job. Sorry if that bothers people but there are some viewers who may want to skip scenes that have surgically enhanced performers, and others that love them that way. Personally, I try not to be too negative about superficial things, and after basic attractiveness, it's all about the performance and chemistry. I realize that many performers have self esteem issues. That's one of the reasons some of them do porn in the first place. But you put yourself on display and people are going to comment on it. The flip side of it is that some very ordinary looking women have received slavering adulation, which should serve to boost self esteem. I totally understand where you're coming from Crissy, but it doesn't serve anybody to put a muzzle on all reviewers. I don't think anybody wants to hear that they're a lousy lay either, so that would leave us with just the lighting to discuss. It's all part of the fabric of visual entertainment. Take the good with the bad and all with a grain of salt.
I find it exspecially funny when a reviewer describes the looks of well-known, popular pornstars. Does this reviewer really think the reader doesn't know Angel Dark or Katja Kassin?
Not everyone who you personally consider to be well-known is well-known to everyone or a first-time consumer/viewer. I'm sure it's easier to find more people who don't even know who Katja Kassin or Angel Dark are, much less what they look like, than it is to find people who do. It's pretty arrogant to presume otherwise.
To me reviews are supposed to be subjective analysis anyway although it seems like more people are only interested in the spoiler aspect. I admit that I am very lazy in my analysis. I compared Crissy to several other actresses just using the feel/look test. Very subjective and useless to whoever who don't know what they look like. I don't give a fuck.
It may be useless to a one time reader who hasn't figured out my likes and dislikes when I talk about a beautiful honker or talk about her hair. I thought the whole point was read a couple of reviews to recognise the pattern and give the person some context on the reviewer.
I do note when I find someone unattractive but it'd probably be more insulting if I had to break it down point by point and then refer back to the gestalt. Kimi's advice sounds just as subjective. Bad dye job? Knobby knees? What the hell?
I remember an argument I had with a female friend about the attractiveness of another woman. You know the deal: I see someone I like and the friend starts criticising her butt or her makeup. I casually dismissed her opinions which made her madder and madder until I had to shut her up with "Look, I'm not a lesbian and neither are you".
Looks are important to the heat of the scene for me. Sometimes performance and looks meld together when I judge the attractiveness of a performer (think Belladonna) that I can't really separate the two.
As for the idea that people can't really change their looks so why criticise them, I'm tempted to cite to the Patrick Riley theory of reviewing. I've talked to producers that tell me they didn't find a girl attractive and I had to ask them why the hell they hired them. Sometimes the girl is a strong performer. Other times, they just need to meet a deadline and fill out a movie.
Again I am going to stress the reviews that I am referring to had nothing to do about me or my looks. Just guys bashing other guys looks etc...causing them to loose work with companies. Didn't even have anything to do with girls this time.
Good for you that's what I wanted to hear! I agree a girl that isn't the hottest but is into the sex for the sex and not the money DOES MAKE A BETTER SCENE!!!!
Good for you and well stated. I just have a few guy friends in the industry that keep getting their feelings hurt over said reviews and I am trying to teach and tell them the same things. Now that I have these responses I can just as easly show them how the world works and every bodies opinion of said topic that I started.
And yes the world wonders why so many stars have eating disorders, drug problems and self esteem issues....because of the people that forget we are real people behind our characters! Well stated and good for you!
Nothing says I love you so much as a tongue in the ass. 2884 Posts 1/03
Posted - May 14 2005 : 3:53PM
Glad to amuse you. I had never seen Angel Dark till viewing Crack Her Jack 3. Guess I came late to the party and I'm sure I'm not alone.I know that I try to rein myself in when it comes to critiquing guys and try to stick to performances. Unfortunately, there are guys who really don't belong in front of a camera and the viewer truly has to suspend his disbelief to accept some of these people pairing up with the cream of womanhood. There are a couple of men who are too ugly not to mention but for the most part guys get judged on lackluster or overly abusive performances. You should be thanking us if we're helping to weed out the miscreants, though I don't see any evidence of that happening. It's an old boy's network and directors hire people they can trust to deliver a scene. Anybody blaming reviewers for lack of work is just making excuses. On the other hand, when people start talking up a performer, especially women, there's a guaranteed fan base and sale to be made, and savvy ladies curry favor on boards like this. You already got more exposure and interest with your rant than you can imagine, and I'm not saying that's the reason for your post. Things just work that way.Going back a couple of years, Brandon Iron made a lot of friends on this board by publicly addressing a reviewer's gripes and assertions. He's a celebrated member of this community now.
Wow, I have so much to say on this topic I'll try to address different points separately.Well, I can empathize with what you are feeling, but the truth of the matter is that the performer's looks do have a lot to do with how much I enjoy or don't enjoy a particular movie, and I'm sure the majority of porn viewers feel the same way.
I understand that appearance is completely subjective; many guys like one body type and some may like the exact opposite. I tend to enjoy women of all shapes and sizes. But the main objective in writing a porn review, and really the only objective possible, is to convey an accurate picture of how much I liked/got off on a particular DVD.
That's really all I can do, is try to give the reader a sense of the impression that the movie makes on me personally. I can't speak for everyone everywhere or try to encompass all opinions into my reviews; I'm just one guy.
Therefore, by their very definition, reviews are an extremely subjective animal. And pornography is essentially visually driven. If all the girls in a particular movie perform like champions, but I am not attracted to any of them in the least, the movie will suck for me personally. But that's all a review can do, tell you how I personally felt. Not how I envision "the porn audience" will feel about a film.
There's a reason why there's two ratings for "Female Looks" and "Male Looks" in the reviews. It's because porn is a visual medium and it's based on sexual attraction, which includes physical attraction. For better or worse, how much I am attracted physically to the actresses in the movie plays a vital role in my enjoyment of said film.
I feel like I would be doing the readers a disservice by not going into detail about the girl's looks, frankly, because this is such an important component of a porn DVD.
I agree that sometimes people can be more tactful about this though. When I am in a bad mood or something it is easy to want to slip into writing mean things about performers. It is hard to say that you think a person is unattractive in a nice way but it can be done, I think. Being flat-out nasty about any of the talent in a film has no place.
So, on that note...
Click on beautiful Taylor Rain for great porn reviews!
Well, my reviews are probably worthless then. Trying to describe someone without using a picture is pretty damn hard, you know.
I don't like the idea of just giving my readers a stage name without any description whatsoever, and having them go on a goose-hunt around the internet to try to track down a picture of her...
A picture of her that may look totally different than how she appears in the current movie. If I reviewed a Melissa Lauren movie and didn't mention she was a brunette, a guy could go and find a picture of Melissa, assume she's blonde still in the movie, and get pissed off because he has a fetish for only blondes.
Noting physical characteristics of the performers, I can only assume is helpful to others because it gives them a brief idea of a girl's general appearance. If I describe Brooke Haven as a "luscious thick-bodied blonde" performer, you instantly know whether you will probably enjoy her or not. If you only like girls who look like Taylor Rain, you would know that the movie is not for you.
This is why we talk about looks in a movie, not to be mean, but to try to be as helpful as possible in uniting viewers with the movies that they will enjoy the most in this vast porn jungle. I least, I think that's the point.
I'm beginning to have a feeling you don't write reviews. Perhaps you should give one a shot sometime.
So, I should just assume that everyone who reads my reviews, male and female, knows most performers by name and is as big a porn fan as I am? not quite.
One of the first things I teach in Composition 101 is that you must assume in non-fiction writing your reader is non-expert. Not stupid, just not a person who knows as much about the subject as you do, which is likely, because (hopefully) you're writing it from a position of authority on the subject.
Reviews would be rather inhospitable to a beginner if I used technical porn jargon the entire time and just assumed everyone knew what everyone in porn looked like exactly.
Plus, dude, I own close to 300 porn movies, I watch it all day nearly every day, and I ain't got no friggin' clue who Angel Dark is or what she looks like.
OK, I'm done now.
Click on beautiful Taylor Rain for great porn reviews!
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - May 14 2005 : 6:27PM
I personally think that looks have a BIG importance in porn. I'm not saying that it has to be a certain specific look to be considered 'acceptable', but as some others have pointed out, sometimes when a consumer is reading a review, he doesn't know what the girl looks like, and maybe he ONLY goes for girls who have a lot of curves. If the reviewer gives a non-biased accurate description of the performers, then the reader can get a general idea of if he would like his first-impression of the performer.
Performance goes a long way though, so if a reviewer leaves out how good or bad a performance is, he's doing his readers a disservice.
Me - a good performance can definitely help me be into a girl or guy that otherwise I might not be so much into. But a bad performance once the BJs start will make me fast-forward no matter how into their looks I would have been.
If looks weren't important in porn, there wouldn't be so many pretty starlets, and so few not so pretty ones.
I just watched the first scene from Ben Dover's Kick Ass Anal Adventures 3, and the the starlet wasn't pretty at all (to put it kindly), probably by most wankers standards. Its a jolt sometimes to see that in porn, and if I wrote a review of the scene I would feel compelled to point it out. Of course, long time Ben fans expect some plain lookers, who often make up for their lack of pulchritude with some pleasingly sluttish performances.
As for guys, I once, in a review, described a current cocksman as looking like a cross between Mister Magoo and Heinrich Himmler. He's dependable with his sword, but I'm always thankful to photographers who block out his mug once the play begins.
The most egregious male miscreant in this department, as in all departments, was (is?) Tony T. I lived in fear that the moment of an exquisite pop would be devilishly synchronized with one of Chico's thrusting camera closeups of Tony's monstrous expression. A trauma I may not have been able to overcome.
No sudden change. I usually write longer reviews but sometimes I would write short reviews if someone else had covered the movie in detail or if I just don't have enough time.
I include looks in my reviews, but I never insult anyone. It depends on your reviewing style. some are just play by play and some are opinionated. I think they all have there place.
My goal in writing any review is to find as much positive aspects of the scene I'm watching. This could bring in the looks of the girl, the positions they shoot with the various angles. I like it when I sense the girl is bringing a lot of energy to the scene. I'm really starting to look for that more and more. There really aren't to many ways you can shoot the sexual positions that probably haven't been done so I want to describe that to someone who reads a review I do but to also bring in how the passion/ energy was impacting those positions. I don't always do my best at attempting this but it's my goal. I never want to forget these ladies are there to fulfill our fantasies and I feel I owe them the courtesy of writing about what I've seen but never to attack or degrade what they've done but to try and give them something positive I saw in that scene and perhaps I will mention something like I hope in a future scene she'll do more nipple licking or pussy eating. Well that's my little contribution to this thread. I love doing reviews and hope to continue doing them for the forseable future.
I love the show King of Queens. I've watched it from day one, and it gets funnier every season. This show started a formula that has dies off because other shows were not as funny. The formula was to put a fat lovable guy with a complete 10.
If some guys are losing work in the industry, that ain't my fault. If you got a dick like a pencil, you're completely out of shape, can't stay hard, or look like a muscle bound geek, you are most likely fuckin up the scene.
White men get mad when they see a brotha with a white girl. Black men get mad when they see a sistah with a white man and everyone gets mad when they see a no game gimp in the mall with a bad ass bitch.
When I watch porn I want to see good sex, and I'll be upfront and say that I'd take good sex over good looks, but lets face it, some people in the business just can't fuck.
Some people fake it, some don't got it and some just want a check. Most people don't have a lot of options after porn. My suggestion would be to only get in the business if you plan to tilt it on it's end. You can only make money off your looks or body so long and people ain't gonna pay for either if the presentaion doesn't match the package.
When I review I try to basically say what happened and whether or not it was strokeable for me. However I do think it is important to critique the looks of a girl. Just recently, I criticized two girls for this and they were Kelly Wells and Keiko. I don't mean to be rude to the girls but if they aren't strokeable than it most be known. This works both ways, because I finally saw a scene of Kelly Wells that I thought she looked good in and I will give details of it. Also their was a time when Keiko was highly strokable but the girl isn't to me now. However most of the time my critiques of the girls is on the action or lack their off. I just ask this though, if some stroker is going to buy a movie because of my review than he should know whether or not the girls were pretty or not, right? Even if it is just my opinoin.
I also think that reviewers spend to much time telling you everything in the scene, which is a waste to me. Let me know the basics, does she take it up the ass, how is the cumshot and how is her sex action. This is just my two cents.
[Link]
Ejac Deactivated User
851 Posts 9/04
Posted - May 15 2005 : 9:42PM
Heh-hem (clearing my throat) - I've been known to be graphically descriptive in my reviews.
Of course, these are not all of the ones I've written - most of my previous reviews are on other sites. Since recently becoming a member of ADT, everything I write will for the most part end up here.
RLD Fiend does in fact write pretty good reviews though!
RLD Fiend reviews movies I tend to watch myself and has a command of the language a lot of others lack. His descriptions and opinions on the action are communicated clear and concisely, something I appreiciate. I find myself not reading EJAC simply because he doesn't review any movies I have any interest in. Just my .02.
[Link]
Ejac Deactivated User
851 Posts 9/04
Posted - May 15 2005 : 10:09PM
Damn. Like, WTF brought that on? You have two completely different thoughts running together - is it because you feel that I don't have command of the language (which very well may be true)? Or is it because you don't have an interest in the videos I write about? Or, is it a combination of the two?
Point of clarification would be appreciated, and no hard feelings will be taken. Just please don't make me cry - I can be so sensitive at times!
I can't comment on how you write because I don't read your reviews. I see the titles and I'm not interested in any of them, so I pass on'em. No offense intended.
I thought I made it very clear, personally.
Doesn't get any clearer than that, don't know how you got confused.
Edited by - Crucifixio_Jones on 5/15/2005 10:14:26 PM
