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 Student Sex Parties

Student Sex Parties (0)

Newbie
60*
Jaimes (3) 11-10-13  01:48pm
Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (12), NO (0)
Status: Was a member approx. 1 month prior to this review.
Pros: Cute girls.
Girls (for the most part) don't look like porn stars.
Exclusive content.
Bonus sites with WTF pass.
Cons: Unbelievably bad camera work on the majority of videos.
Photo albums are often incomplete AND redundant.
Often videos contain girls that don't get naked or only topless.
Distracting and annoying subtitles and MOVING watermarks.
Other peoples niche chocolate in my porn peanut butter.
Bottom Line: STUDENT SEX PARTIES has every single problem that modern porn is guilty of:a propensity to try to satisfy too many niches that should NOT be part of porn sought by the demographic that seeks orgies: I would say MOST of this demographic do not want to see CFNM,(clothed females naked males)urination or worse.(seriously, what kind of a twisted twist wants to see girls getting "sick" in porn) We want to see naked girls! Often girls don't even get naked, or the camera is at an angle so we only see men's butts. Not a pretty sight.Also,girl's stripping (one of the most erotic ingredients to good porn) is often either completely missing, avoided or badly botched in extreme close-ups. Speaking of camera work. Hire a professional please! None of their "frat boys" seem to know a thing about head space or framing and the constant attention-span whiplashes often made me sea sick. In some videos it was so bad, it ruined the video and I deleted it. The ONLY time the camera seemed to stop for any period and hold still, was for the many, many, many blow jobs. Then there is the distracting subtitles (who cares what inane things they say! And trust me, they say quite a plethora of inanities)and ESPECIALLY the site's little MOVING postmark that mar EVERY single video. The downloads were incredibly slow.(one site took me 2 months to get through-often wasting hours only to find that that video could not download and I had to try a different download option) As to the rest of the "bonus" sites. Only ONE reason I even bothered to look at any of them: to find girls that didn't get naked in Student Sex Parties for "completion." Sometimes I did. Many times I was frustrated. Oh,one more thing:WTF stop insisting these parties are real and not staged with porn actors. Stop insulting our intelligence so you can get away with all of the stupidity above! Overall, a few decent picture sets and video, but A LOT of garbage to wade through. If you are OCD like me and a completest, you will have many hours editing the videos to subtract the redundant, gross and annoying watermarks.Not worth more than a month of your time.

Reply To Review

Review Replies (2)

Replies to the user review above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

Monahan (38) BJ's are overdone everywhere (except on my dick) but seems to be the only point of interest for these amateur videographers. My beef is that, as Jaimes says, they seem to be fixated on male body parts and really have only a passing interest in PTA (Pussy, Tits and ass).

Thanks, Jaimes for saying what needed to be said for this site.

BTW, a 60 is too generous in my humble opinion.

11-10-13  03:06pm

Reply To Message

2

Jaimes (3) REPLY TO #1 - Monahan :

60 IS probably too generous. But for the 10 or so videos where all the girls DID get naked, in the end, (after much editing) it might be worth a month.(but not two)Still, compared to something like DARE DORM this is a much better site. DARE DORM is a vicious crime against porn humanity. Talk about purposely and remorselessly torturing viewers. 3 (maybe 4) if your lucky out of (many times) groups of girls, get naked on an average DARE DORM. I fast forwarded the last DVD in 20 minutes and saw NOTHING worth keeping. The camera work was EVEN worse than S.S.P. S.S.P. is closer to COLLEGE RULES where SOMETIMES all the girls get naked but often, not so much. Other torture sites to be wary of: MOFOS and BANG BROTHERS. And if you sense a bit of redundancy in porn these days it's because most sites are owned by three companies: MANWIN (now MINDGEEK), TAINSTER (used to be ERROMAX) and the entity calling themselves MOFOS...
11-10-13  07:05pm

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 0.01 seconds.