Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Review A review of the site and any replies from other users.

Visit ALS Scan

ALS Scan (1)

Active
65
Davit (46) 01-12-08  06:07am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (29), NO (0)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: -Nice European and American solo and lesbian girls
-The sex is good and hard
-No men (except for the director, whose voice features in most movies)
-Variety of set locations, inside and outside
-Range of movie sizes, up to HD for many
-Movies are reasonably filmed and edited
-No music soundtrack (always a good thing)
-Zipped picture sets
Cons: -A lot of fisting. If fisting isn't your favourite thing, this site may become boring fast
-Lots of movie downloads are just filmings of photo shoots - and anyone that has seen a photo shoot will know that the reality can be boring and show the falseness of the situation
-Many of the movies are just 'behind the scenes' features
-Some movies are not even porn - they are just naked girls in public locations acting goofy
-Entire photo sets are spread over several updates
-Male director talks during movies (that has lost 20 points alone). He also sounds gay, and I believe he is called Alex. (Yes, indeed.)
-Design/Navigation is terrible
-Proper porn movie content is not as huge as other similarly priced sites
Bottom Line: If you like lots of fisting in your solo or lesbian porn (and I'm sure many guys out there do), and like hearing a male voice giving instruction and encouragement to the girls, then I would recommend this site to you.

As well as the fisting content, there are a couple of nice tribbing scenes too, and most of the girls generally seem very convincing and genuinely enjoying the sex - although there are clearly some 'actors' here not genuinely getting off. There's some anal too - but not in most scenes. And there is some peeing that tries to pretend it is 'squirting' (does anyone really believe that?) as well as some honest peeing, and a few apparently genuine orgasms where white girl goo is seen oozing from the open pussy (although after a fisting session you can't be sure it's not just lube).

There are better looking sites out there, offering more variety with better navigation and bigger content - but if you are looking around for something new, and can cope with the negative points mentioned, it might just be worth a look.

Highly recommended to guys that enjoy hearing a male voice (and especially a gay-sounding one) talking while they wank. The score leaps to 85 for those people.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (14)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

Denner (233) Quite agree
I may rate this site a bit higher - but not much.
Two things:

The fisting-thing are WAY overdone - if this is NOT your favorite thing. Why don't the call it ALS Fisting - that may cover it better.

The videos are mainly based on photo-shoots - certainly not my favorite either...

BTH - I like Davits review - no beating around the bush..

01-12-08  08:09am

Reply To Message

2

PinkPanther (46) Just a point or two for accuracy:

1) Alex isn't gay. He's married, has a couple of kids. I got the same impression that you had from his voice originally, but this is the story. He doen't think his voice is all that good either, but talks to get the most out of the models and the best shoots. For my tastes, he achieves that.

2) Their vid releases are clearly labeled as to whether they are photoshoots or not. The ones that are not only have Alex talking for a few seconds at the beginning at most - maybe he'll say "Hi" to the model and get her to tell us what she's going to do in the vid. Many of them, if the model is confident enough to talk to the camera, especially, he won't even do that. Looking at the last 10 vid releases, 60% have been non-photo shoot vids, so the amount of talking that Alex would have been doing in those would have been slim or none.

Alex's stated view is that he does the photoshoot vids more so that people can see what goes on in a real photoshoot than as stroke material. He's into that "educational" role of the site. One of my very favorite bonuses in the past year was a huge vid package showing a shoot in Czech from the time the crew woke up in the morning until they went back to their hotel at night. Given that the crew included Nella and Amber Rayne, both of whom were hotter than the models in the shoots, I was thoroughly entertained.

01-12-08  08:23am

Reply To Message

3

Drooler (218) I don't care for videos of photoshoots, nor for photoshoots published piecemeal. ("Let's see. This is Sophie Second Shoot Scene 3 Set 2. Did I ever get any of the other sets? Oh, and then part of it is in the promo zip, too. And THEN there's the stuff that came from the Director's Blog.")

All they have to do is just publish everything from one scene, three or four days in a row, and be done with it. It would still be piecemealing, but it wouldn't remind me so much of gathering things together for tax season. And it would just make, y'know, sense. Hey, it might even make it less complicated for them!

It's like what I feel like saying to Digital Desire, another site that is a notorious piecemealer: Congratulations, you've made something simple and straightforward into a royal pain in the ass!

And I just 86 the shots of the fisting, the peeing, the speculum/candles/"Rocket"/fresh produce insertions, or the pull-down-pussy-lips clamp. So yes, I've joined before because after a while, they have some pretty nice, high quality shots of some hot girls. But all of that weird other stuff is just crap as far as I'm concerned.

01-12-08  08:09pm

Reply To Message

4

Drooler (218) REPLY TO #1 - Denner :

"ALS Fisting." Good one!
01-12-08  08:12pm

Reply To Message

5

Robare (6) From your profile:
"I would like to see more negative reviews (not just here - I mean anywhere), as these are just as important as the positive reviews, to warn us when certain sites do not deliver what they promise (and there are LOTS of them). It would be great to have a kind of 'Hall Of Shame' that objectively lists the sites that, for example, have very low-quality movies, or a tiny amount of content, or just don't do what the tour pages promise. I think that would be highly appreciated by potential users."
It seems that in your eagerness to be credited with a negative review, you've managed to post a review that is not to your credit. You failed to meet the criteria you established for a negative review. You preferred to use terms like "lots" rather than quantify. It seems accommodating your sense of irritation and/or lassitude is more important to you than conveying reality.
I disagree with your assessment of the importance of being negative. Positive and negative in this context are terms resulting from subjective evaluations. As such, they are largely irrelevant. Positive and negative reviews are not needed. Truthful reviews are needed. And, it seems the truth about this site suffers a little at your hands. As examples:
1. You cited European girls but failed to cite American girls. Perhaps you failed to discern that American girls appear on the site, or perhaps you failed to perceive any of the American girls as being nice, but you left the reader with the impression that only Europeans appear on the site.
2. It's true that Alex interacts with models from an off-camera standpoint. In photoshoot videos, he's the photographer and it's quite normal for a photographer to give directions to the model. In behind-the-scenes videos, he and the others tend to interact casually and jovially, as one might expect. But, Alex understands that when a model is, or the models are, having sex, his interaction is a distraction and I've yet to see an instance of his speaking during the immediate build-up to, and achievement of, orgasm. It's usual for him to speak with the model during an introduction of a solo sex video and perhaps after the model has finished.
3. You seem to decry falsehood in your porn, yet you gave Sapphic Erotica an 89 and that site has conveyed far more falsities than ALSScan. Witness the preponderance of the seemingly mandatory breathing pattern, the play-acting of passion, and the paucity of wetness.
4. I've seen only one video on the site where the copious amount of fluid produced by the model during sex that might have been peeing. Your description failed to quantify and I suspect there's a good reason for that.
Playing loosely with the facts doesn't make for a good review, positive or negative...

01-13-08  10:20am

Reply To Message

6

Davit (46) REPLY TO #2 - PinkPanther :

Hi Pink Pantha, thanks for your reply mate. But I didn't think I was being inaccurate - if you notice I never suggested Alex actually was gay - I personally couldn't care less about someone's sexuality (I have gay friends like most people these days). I only said he *sounded* gay, which I think is fair to say - because he really does! Any male voice is not nice to hear on a site aimed at lesbian-loving hetro guys - but a gay-sounding one is even worse! Just my take on it.
01-13-08  12:18pm

Reply To Message

7

Davit (46) REPLY TO #5 - Robare :

Hi Robare - your point about me not mentioning American girls is valid - I'm about to amend my review. I didn't mean to mislead - it was an oversight, and I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. And while I find most American sites to feature annoyingly badly acting girls who can't shut up (!) I did actually find the Americans in this site to be generally much more natural.
If you think this was a negative review - you should hear my opinion on many sites that Porn Users don't feature. There are some dreadful ripoffs out there that I would struggle to give much more than zero, they're that bad, i.e. not delivering any of what is promised in the tour screens - just excuses to get an email address to send junk to!
So on balance, I reckon I gave Alsscan an above-average score.
One final point - you said you only saw one scene where the fluid 'might have been pee' - well, I can tell the difference, there's no 'might' about it! I know which hole pee comes out of, and what pee looks like, as opposed to girl cum. No offence intended.
Thanks for taking the time to reply.

01-13-08  12:28pm

Reply To Message

8

Davit (46) REPLY TO #2 - PinkPanther :

Forgot to mention, PP - I know they are clearly labelled as to whether they are photo shoots or whatever - that wasn't the point of my comment.
And the talking thing - he definitely talks in most non-photo shoot vids. I know it's generally not much - but just the occasional sound of his voice is still surely not a pleasant experience for the vast majority of viewers. Does anyone actually think it's a good thing? I suspect that most people who sign up to an all-girl site are people who really *really* would not want to hear a male voice in their porn vids at all, never mind occasionally. I reckon that's fair to say.

01-13-08  12:45pm

Reply To Message

9

Robare (6) REPLY TO #7 - Davit :

Hmmm...above average score...really...and you determined this by reckoning... That almost seems quaint...
I'd say that, based upon the information you've provided, your score is well below average. It's unfortunate you attempted to justify your decision based upon an undefined, unquantified list of sites which you state demonstrate some admittedly undesirable characteristics. However, as ALSScan has demonstrated none of those characteristics, I'd have to say they are irrelevant to the evaluation and using them as a basis for justification is unjustified.
Certainly, if we take a look at the well-defined, well-quantified list of sites which appear in the niche categories assigned by the TBP and PU staff, we'd have to admit your score is well below normal. And, you've more than once commented on how distasteful you find the male voice in the videos. Thus far, there is no reason to disbelieve your scoring of this site was largely motivated by an urge to slam the site and, in particular, the photographer/videographer/owner.
As to your supposed final point, I'm sure there are several readers who can appreciate the contributions of a self-renowned expert in the areas of human female physiology, physiological responses, and fluid production. I know I certainly do... But, I'll suggest that, unless you are in a position to evaluate those fluids with all five of your senses (rather than just the two that can be used with video), you're not well-poised to evaluate the authenticity, although I will admit that faking urination would be rather difficult and pointless...

01-17-08  08:30am

Reply To Message

10

Davit (46) REPLY TO #9 - Robare :

You're entitled to your view, Robare, I'm entitled to mine. I'm not sure how you got onto 'faking urination'. I didn't think that existed! Relax - you sound very angry, and there's really no need - it was just one opinion! (And I'll let you into a secret - we're only discussing porn here, not world politics - you don't need to get so worked up about it!)
01-17-08  10:28am

Reply To Message

11

Robare (6) REPLY TO #10 - Davit :

Ahhh...really...?
If there were any lingering doubts readers might have had concerning the care you take in formulating your opinions, it seems you've eliminated them. You're assistance in confirming your disregard is appreciated. It provides a valuable context for evaluating the qualities of your remarks concerning this site.
You state I sound angry. Regarding the voice you seem to be hearing: you might ask yourself about the qualities of that voice. Is it the voice of a soprano, alto, tenor, or bass? Could it possibly be a gay voice? Whatever the qualities are, I'm pretty sure it is not my voice you are hearing...

01-18-08  06:52am

Reply To Message

12

PosterDude (14) Divit you sound like crying baby that got milk taken away. 65 score is very bad so you are just mad not above average review like you say. You want alscan with above average review then change number to 85-90. Alsscan is one of best sites on internet and maybe best which should be 90-100 review. I have been member of over 150 sites what about you? Alscans has more content and better quality pictures and video than anybody I see. I count more than 75 percent of video are masturbation or girlgirl video. Below 25 percent is photoshoot video that is labeled. You do not like Alex voice then do not download photoshoot video. I like photoshoot video to and it show real girl. Still more video on site than 95% of other internet sites. Alsscan do not release photos in piece. Scenes have 2 or 3 theames. Some glamore with little and no insertion. Some explicit with lot of insertion and different toy and sometime fist. Each photo release completes set in order. I do not talk good English, I just no good porn.

Your review just seen as angry baby review. Nobody believe 65 score review.

01-19-08  07:11am

Reply To Message

13

Davit (46) REPLY TO #12 - PosterDude :

Hi Posterdude
I appreciate your opinion, but I can only speak from my own. We're all different, and will all have varying opinions. That's what makes user review sites like this so good.
There's no need for personal insults if you disagree - just say why you disagree (which is fair enough), and leave it at that!
Regards
Davit

01-19-08  12:08pm

Reply To Message

14

Davit (46) REPLY TO #11 - Robare :

The context I was writing in, was one of someone who appreciates good porn (as I see it of course - we can only speak for ourselves). I like to review music also. The fact that I don't consider porn or music to have the same importance as world politics (and clearly they don't!) does not mean I therefore paid little care to my review.
I happily corrected the mistake that you quite rightly pointed out. But everyone makes mistakes. Don't use my honesty in admitting that one error as a stick to beat me with, regarding my reviews in general!
As for that voice - I didn't say it was yours. Are you saying that you are the guy whose voice is on there? Why is it relevant whether I would consider it to be alto or bass or whatever? The only issue I had was that it *sounds* gay. I know the guy (you?) is NOT gay. I didn't use the term 'gay' as an insult either (I have no interest in homophobia, and find homophobics to be pathetic) - and I know you didn't accuse me of that, but I think it's important to clarify the point. But I still don't like to hear male voices - or worse still, gay-sounding male voices - in my porn videos.
I think it was valid to mention this in my review - I know from reading many other porn reviews in the past, that a dislike of male voices in all-girl porn films is not unique to me, so is a point of interest to potential subscribers.
Kind regards.

01-19-08  12:22pm

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.02 seconds.