I have just purchased RSM Vol61 given that it advertised sativa as doing anal. the disc i got shows no anal. has anyone else bought this disc for the reason i have and been disappointed by the misleading ad.
I've been meaning to post something about RSM 61 myself. I bought the VHS copy a couple of months ago and there is NO Sativa anal in the video even though the boxcover advertises one.
This series generally delivered over the years, with some great scenes, but I guess I can no longer buy w/confidence...
Well, the original poster said he had the DVD and I got the VHS, so that sounds like all bases covered. It's false advertising.
But it is odd, if there's a screenshot on the box...it makes you wonder. Is the photo a fake? Did they shoot the scene and there was a problem that caused the whole anal to be edited out (but not before they got a still photo of it)..?
Similar oddity with Chica Boom 26, which has a HOT boxcover photo of Yazmene Milan getting in doggie anal. But the scene in the video (again VHS for me) has a brief missionary anal and THAT'S IT. I posted here about it, thinking that maybe someone with the DVD could confirm if the disc had the scene as depicted on the boxcover. It would be good to have a whole thread devoted to disappointments and false advertising.
The topic comes up from time to time. When you are dealing with compilations, incorrect pics on the box are often done to mislead. When you are dealing with new titles it becomes a little harder to tell because the artwork is normally done for the box based upon stills taken at the time the footage was shot. Sometimes the 'hot' stuff gets left in the editing bay, with the resulting mismatch between the cover and the movie causing the consternation we've all experienced.
Left in the editing bay... sheesh! that's not as bad as outright deception but it's still pitiful. And, in the end, it's the customer who is pitiful 'cause he gets screwed.
At RAME I used to periodically see threads w/"ripoff alert" in the subject line. Wouldn't hurt to see a few being posted here...
One the one hand, yes, it is pitiful. On the other, everybody wants to get their product out to the consumers ASAP. Not only is there the cash turnover to consider, but if you've got the 'hot chick' you want to make bank before the crowd moves on to the next one.
Frankly, I think some companies try harder than others, but it happens. The good news is that most of the well-known companies send out screeners, so if you check the reviews you can usually discover when this kind of thing happens before spending your money.
Yeah, you're right on target about reading reviews -- that's a must these days with such a high volume of vids coming out. I usually read reviews before buying, but because Real Sex Magazine has been around for -- what -- ten years, I figured they'd deliver.
RSM doesn't get reviewed much, it seems, even though they (like E. Powers) get porn stars 'before they're stars'. Are they one of the companies that do not send out screeners? I thought that, in this competitive environment, they ALL had to...? I'm learning here....
I happened to watch this Real Sex Magazine vol61 of sativa. Though it's just basic, yet, I liked it being very teen sativa. when the camera focus on her pussy, it's so thrill to see, her pussy lip edges risen up like her mouth lips, as if a duplicate mouth is kept bottom in vertical !! wow... And the male artist wonders after seeing her pussy and appreciate to see the wonderful pussy !! I enjoyed watching this porn.