Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!


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

Visit FTV Girls

FTV Girls (2)

jd1961 (95) 09-30-07  04:08am
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (52), NO (1)
Status: Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
Pros: - A Lot Of Material
- Hi Res Photos
- Zip Files
- Many Videos
- Decent DL Speed
Cons: - Much Of The Material Is Somewhat Boring
- NO Hardcore
- Infrequent Updating
Bottom Line: After thumbing through their extensive preview, I was anxious to see the site. I was somewhat disappointed. It's a very attractive site, and easy to navigate. It does have an awful lot of material, photos and videos. But, something is missing. It's not exciting. A bit bland. Some of the sets seem to be nudity optional! Others, the old statue posing. There is no hardcore. That would be fine if the material was highly erotic, but most of it is not. I guess if you never saw a girl nude before, it would be. But for jaded porn surfers, nah! It's not that there isn't good material here, there is, but you have to search for it. The photos are hi-res, at the lower end of the scale (1200px), and zipped for convenience. They do have a page of larger sized photos (2000x3000), but just 1 page.The videos are offered in wmv (640x480), and divx (360x240). Being First Time Videos, the girls are basically presented as the archetypal "girl next door". I don't know about your neighborhood, but the girls nowadays are a little more wild than those presented here!

Reply To Review

Review Replies (9)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date


Drooler (220) I haven't been to FTV since June '06 myself for the same basic reason you gave: lack of excitement. It's also a strange mixture of very lightcore stuff and then sudden frenzies of phallus maxiumus.

I also hate the way they break shoots into different galleries. Which pics should go where? I don't join sites for the pleasure of solving such puzzles.

And anyway, I've seen too many galleries of women just looking around, looking away, looking "dead" ... Why join for that a lack of eroticism? I think some sites have some pretty half-baked ideas about what their own content is supposed to communicate. It's not always true of FTV, but it's still too often the case. I don't understand why some people like it so much, but at least they're happy with it.

09-30-07  04:58am

Reply To Message


Denner (235) Well, jd1961 - I think you're absolutly right about this site. A lot of photos and videos of young girls, but it never get's really exiting.
Been a member twice (last time in December 2006), but have not had the urge to go back again.
I was tempted with new previews, but saw some of these videos in full elsewhere (usernet) - and I still hang on to that same feeling: It's generally boring stuff - and the video-scenes are all in the same style...

Thanks for that update-review.....

09-30-07  07:43am

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #1 - Drooler :

Just looking around....I call it JC Penny posing!
09-30-07  02:06pm

Reply To Message


Drooler (220) REPLY TO #3 - jd1961 :

Now that is good. Our friends outside the USA might not be able to grasp it (lucky them!), but that's a phrase that will no doubt come in handy again. Probably soon, too.

Thanks. I had a great laugh. Still laughing!

09-30-07  04:42pm

Reply To Message


Robare (6) You know, I just don't get people dinging a site for being what the site advertises itself to be. A site that advertises itself as presenting certain content, then fails to present that type, quantity, or quality of content, should get dinged. But, on the first tour page of FTVGirls is a collection of 161 update cover pages. In none of them is a male featured. In fact, nowhere on the site is heterosexual activity advertised. In none of the reviews of that site on this site is there a statement affirming heterosexual activity being presented on that site. It seems to me any reviewer dinging a site, for not being what it never said it would be, is being just as stupid as a person who goes out and buys a carton of milk and then complains that the milk isn't orange juice. It seems that one claiming to be jaded might have accrued adequate experience to distinguish the nature of the content of a website prior to purchasing. That would seem to be particularly so when the website has done a very comprehensive job of representing it's content on it's tour pages. And, it seems that one, having availed themselves of such information, would be well positioned to avoid disappointing themselves. But, then again, perhaps all is not what it seems...
10-01-07  12:20pm

Reply To Message


nygiants03 (162) Hmm. I dont agree but everyone has an opinion, i cant really think of many better sites then ftv girls. Every site gets boring eventually which is why we join new ones. FTV girls is not hardcore, but i everything but. There are many erotic scenes i think, good quality, hot girls, natural environment, cant get to much better for me. Also it gives me the real orgasms many sites fail to deliver.
10-01-07  01:32pm

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #5 - Robare :

I gave this site a good mark. The mark was not reflective of the fact that it does not have hardcore, that was mentioned however. I mentioned the comprehensive preview twice, in the review, and in a comment. Obviously I knew what was in the site. I mentioned being "Jaded" to point out that the inexperienced porn surfers would find the material exciting. I did not "ding" the site. I gave credit where credit was due, IMO. Flaming people is "stupid", not honest reviews.
10-01-07  02:39pm

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #6 - nygiants03 :

thanks for disagreeing without calling me names.
10-02-07  12:01am

Reply To Message


jd1961 (95) REPLY TO #5 - Robare :

BTW Robare, you also called the TBP reviewer "stupid" for having exactly the same con as I do.
10-02-07  02:03am

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.


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 0.01 seconds.