Reviewers Recommend Working Girls 3 (Reality Junkies) - review by Captain Jack Director: Mike Quasar Starring: Danny Mountain, Derrick Pierce, Anissa Kate, Codey Steele, Adira Allure, Elizabeth Skylar, Taylor Wild, Jay Romero. Read review
I just noticed Capsule's review and feel bound to disagree with Capsule's comments on the girls, who Capsule thinks are nearly all 'ugly'.
Clearly people have different opinions on what is ugly and what is beautiful. When I saw this movie a few days ago, I made the following notes on my first impressions: 'scene 1, 3 beautiful girls, excellent. scene 2, 3 very beautiful girls, VG. scene 3, 2 beatiful girls, excellent'.
True, some of the girls are not sterotype Hollywood beauties. Some of them have very small breasts (this is not a movie for big tit fans!), one of them has a very hairy pussy and asshole (which Rocco gives his full attention to), and one of them has a prominent jawline (I presume this is the one Capsule calls 'horsefaced'). But all of them are beautiful in their own way, IMO.
You may agree with Capsule, or you may agree with me, but make your own mind up.
I saw Capsule's review as well and found it curious. I have Initiations 5, but haven't watched it yet. Capsule's review has prompted me to move it to the top of the viewing order though, and I think I might go ahead and do a review on it. I have no idea whether I'll find the girls unattractive, but if I do... it would be the first Rocco title I've seen where I thought that at least some of the performers didn't have redeeming qualities. :) In any case, I can be sure I'll avoid derogatory terms like "horsefaced"...
Mike, I just wanted to add my two cents to this discussion.
First, I've not seen this movie, so I can't comment on the validity of the comments. But, I am definitely one of the more critical ADT reviewers when it comes to the beauty factor. I personally feel that it is necessary for the reviewer to give a clear and accurate assessment of the girls' visual appeal, as he sees it. To do any less would dilute the review itself. Now, as for the terminology to be used... horsefaced is probably a bit on the unnecessary side. But in my reviews, I do not pander to the actresses sense of self worth at the expense of the review. They chose to build a career path around a very public occupation. You pay your dime and you take your chance!
aybesea, part of reading and writing reviews is getting to know the style and likes/dislikes of the reviewer. I can tell from your reviews that you look for very different criteria in a movie than I do, so that Fill Her Up, for example, was not to your taste, but very much to mine, with opposite reactions to Antonio Adamo's work. I would hope that after visitors have read a few reviews by both of us, they will have a feel for our particular taste. In the same way, I think visitors will be able to understand what Kobiedsule got from Initiations 5, and what I experienced in watching it, and not have much trouble deciding which view will be closer to their own taste.
I state the above because, for example, I truly find Sarah Hoffman quite attractive, but this is only enhanced by her passionate performances. But I can still understand why someone might label her as "horsefaced," even if I disagree. But I'm not about to write, "she's not that good looking," in my review, because I DO find her quite good looking. You simply won't find mass agreement in most cases over what constitutes "beauty" and "good looks." FWIW, I have never had any use for Jenna Jameson or Jill Kelly, but I recognize that many do find them very attractive. So be it, and as I said above, a few reviews read will allow the readers to accomodate to the reviewer.
Speelie, I agree wholeheartedly! All I'm saying is that no one should try to put a gag order on reviewers who comment on the physical beauty of the actresses as they see it! You are very right that it doesn't take long to discern where you share common ground, and where you differ from a particular reviewer. I just don't want to see these reviews become PC about stating your opinion of whether the girls looked good or not! Of course, judgement can always be applied in picking the descriptive adjectives.
Capsule doesn't mince words and he's a tough one to please, but are we to 'call out' a reviewer everytime we disagree with their opinion? I haven't seen the movie, but I've read a lot worse things written about ladies in less popular titles.
Reading his other reviews, he does seem to have impossibly high or quirky standards, but still, that's his right. I look forward to MLyon's and Speelie's reviews as well.
I just hate the thought of reviewers getting so gun-shy about speaking their mind that they water everything down so they don't offend anyone. That becomes a useless review, to me.
No no... please don't get me wrong. I was not meaning to blast Capsule for his opinion at all, and I certainly agree that reviewers should not become gunshy over how they express it. That's just silly. Capsule has a worthy review there, and I don't expect him to be censored or passed over because of his choice of words. Absolutely not. Just like I love seeing some of Roccofan's colorful opinions, and those of others who have any kind of constructive insight.
Personally though, I do find it important to exhibit some amount of care in the way that I express my opinions. It's just the way I am, and the way I like to do things. I don't expect others to do what I do at all. I sincerely hope this doesn't destroy the credibility of my reviews just becuase I'm careful about how I express my negative opinions. I don't think it does.
Capsule's review merely intrigued me--not because he was especially harsh but because I've heard opposing viewpoints on that particular title and I was curious. Like Speelie said, with a number of different reviews, people will be able to make up their own minds according to their own tastes.
Maybe it seems like I'm backpeddling here, but truly... I was not making judgements about Capsule's review. I was merely interested in the descrepency between what he said and what I've heard from others.
MikeL, Not to worry. I appreciate your diplomacy, and you're such a gifted writer that you can easily get your opinion across without calling someone a horse-face. I was more concerned about people starting these threads as a common occurance. Although it does lead to some interesting discussions, it can also adversely effect other reviewers reading them, and not wishing to be next week's topic, they might alter their opinions.
I haven't, although I did find it necessary to utilize the Skankometer, a sensitive piece of equipment that takes decision making out of my hands, therefore less personal. Although I received some flak for even employing THAT, what can you do? Capsule might want to look into getting one.
Here here! ADT values honest opinions above all else... this is extremely important and you state it extremely well SB. If reviewers stop being honest about how they feel, ADT's reviews will lose their impact--and that's a fact.LOL... damn that's funny. I wouldn't have the balls to make use of one of those... but the possibilities.... You could turn it into a multipart gif and have it peg followed by glass shattering--the possibilities are endless!!!
But seriously though. Honesty is what counts, and in its multifacated way, it's probably truly the most difficult aspect of reviewing--which brings to mind a thought about a post I might make in another review related thread....
I, personally, would never call a performer "ugly" in my reviews, there are so many other ways of saying that without just saying it. Why? Because I've gotten email from a few performers who came across () my reviews and thanked me for an honest opinion/review.
I know I got one from Steve Holmes about my review of Euro Hardball 15, of course the bum had to rub it in about how hot Sandra Taylor was in person, and how great the scene was. The bum
I don't like being dowright mean, hey, my early reviews sucked, but they've evolved. And I feel that they are always getting better. I feel that so many reviewers out there definitely have their own way of putting things () and there's no problem-O with that. Everyone is entitled to their opinions...
---BIGmike, going and going and going since MCMLXXX---
I agree totally and I wasn't trying to say anything about people not being honest with the Riley crack. There is a difference between being honest & frank and being cruel at the expense of someone's feelings. There is a difference between calling a woman "horsefaced" and saying that you don't find a certain actress attractive. Just my 2 cents. Best
Max Booty Its like butter
[Link]
DenverDon Benevolent
Firmly Embedded in Depravity 5914 Posts 7/02
Posted - Nov 12 2002 : 11:48PM
I have always read reviews as the reviewers opinions.
I particularly try and read a review from anyone on a movie that I have seen already, so I can get the feel of that reviewer and see if his views match mine. If they don't then I learn where to make adjustments for that reviewer so they match what I want.
After reading several reviews by one reviewer, then I have a handle and can translate his opinions to suit my needs.
For me, the first scene fuckin' rocked and employs everything that I love about Rocco movies--sexy girls, situational dominance without roughness, and great performances by all. The second and third scenes were not as good, but still had a few moments here and there. It was a tough disk to rate because of the wildly unbalanced emjoyment level I had for the three scenes.
