| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1351
|
N/A
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
Your reference to your being a moderator of a Psychological forum on the web prompted me to add a new thread in the PU Forum: The Psychology of Porn - Actresses. I'd appreciate reading your thoughts on the subject.
|
06-22-08 09:01am
|
Reply
1352
|
Alison Angel
(0)
|
Reply of
Rattlesnake's Reply
His name is actually Robert Simyar who is a Scottsdale dentist and who is also webmaster of FTVGIRLS.com and AllisonAngel.com
Here's an article about his ride (a Lambo) and his exploits.
And here's his model agency website: www.simyar.com
|
06-21-08 01:19pm
|
Reply
1353
|
Adult Movie Club
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Excellent review, as always, E4M,
I checked out the site and it's my guess that the $4,95 was a typobecause of the sperial $14,95 TBP price.
The site permits nonmembers full access to the navigation and scene details which I really like, But the one annoyance I have with Video Box occurs on this site even more, and that is the large number of cases where the porn star name is "not available." While in some cases that can be true because the producer does not make them available, there are so many missing names that the search feature is of marginal value.
That means a serious collector has to go to another source (iafd.com, for example) to get a listing of all titles in which a porn star appears, then go back to this site and do a title search.
At $14.95 I can't complain and will probably sign up to grab a few scenes missing from my collection from Video Box and other sources that look like are in the A.M.C. collection.
|
06-21-08 07:33am
|
Reply
1354
|
Mommy Got Boobs
(0)
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
I have Big Naturals on my A list of sites that I'm signing up for when I cancel my membership in a current site. The PU reviews are great and I like the public site.
|
06-18-08 03:48pm
|
Reply
1355
|
Mommy Got Boobs
(0)
|
Reply of
Cybertoad's Review
Just to let folks know, the network is Brazzers.com. I'm a current member and agree with much/most of the review. My only beef is that many of the current updates of this and other network sites are babes with oversized aftermarket boob enhancements. I'm an "all natural" kind of guy. That said, this is a very good site that has, in my opinion, overtaken Bang Bros. in its genre.
|
06-18-08 11:56am
|
Reply
1356
|
N/A
|
Reply of
roseman's Poll
The bad part is that I suspect it can get rather nasty when dealing with content providers unless I'm creating my own content, and the process for establishing good contact development must be difficult. In other words, it takes a lot of hard work and one must be ready for the crap that must go on behind the scenes, but once established, the notion of making a nice buck and having access to all manner of stuff is attractive.
|
06-18-08 10:54am
|
Reply
1357
|
Czech Babes
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Review
Thanks for this review! Well done. I hadn't heard of this site until your review today so I checked it out (no pun intended).
First things first. Boy, the gene pool in Eastern Europe is just wonderful when it produces so many fine, innocent looking and just gorgeous women.
Now, after checking out some of the sample videos, the reproduction quality isn't up to current standards. If the site has been stagnant for a year or two, I suspect the member access videos are equally not as crisp and sharp as they could be. Am I right?
Also, based on your comments and what I saw in the samplers, the content could be described as a bit edgier than what is on Met-Art.com (where several of the models can be found in shoots and videos that are less erotic than the ones on this site).
I'm tempted to sign up for a month and, as you did, drain off as much as I can, then cancel.
Thanks for finding this site and for your review.
By the way, for you Silvia Saint fans out there, on page 5 of the models directory there is a small set and a sample video of the Saint herself when she was very young. Take the time to check it out.
|
06-17-08 08:19am
|
Reply
1358
|
Busty Ones
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
Just found this out with the Twisty's review. I've been holding off signing up again (had a 10 month membership in late 2006 for $99 before they dropped that deal) but with the three bonus sites and the PU/TBP $19.99 price, I'm in. Too bad they dropped the $99 for 10 month deal, but the 6 month price is still pretty good.
|
06-16-08 06:35pm
|
Reply
1359
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
I found TBP quite a while ago and used it always before signing up. On the few occasions where I signed up on a site not reviewed by TBP, I was disappointed.
When PU was set up, it only added to the mix because I am now able to carefully evaluate a site knowing what I can expect.
PU also provides a great way to warn others when a lousy site or rip-off wembaster practices are discovered.
The two resources are must reads before I'll even think about a site.
|
06-16-08 06:55am
|
Reply
1360
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Mr Fountain's Review
As a previous subscriber and a subscriber to their free newsletter I received an email from Met-Art offering a $19.99 per month deal. I don't think the price is available to "walk-ins."
But if this genre is your thing, they have a $99.99 per year deal which is a Helluva deal in comparison to the month-to-month price ($8.33 per month). After 3-1/2 months you get the rest of the year free.
|
06-15-08 10:28am
|
Reply
1361
|
Bangbros Network
(0)
|
Reply of
Dawn123's Reply
Bottom line, I've taken advantage of several TBP/PU discount offers and all, except Bang Bros, have been honored as offered and all of them were really good deals.
And the folks at TBP/PU immediately pulled the offer as soon as I reported it.
Finally, BangBros belatedly extended my full price membership to make up for the matter.
So I lost nothing except a few minutes of time posting these messages. I suggest staying on top of any deals and squawking immediately if you run into any snags.
|
06-11-08 08:48am
|
Reply
1362
|
ALS Scan
(0)
|
Reply of
wiild1's Review
Excellent review.
Your score doesn't match what I'll score it when I've finished my review, but you did an excellent job of explaining why you scored it as you did which, if always done the way you did, adds a lot to the value of P. U. reviews.
I, personally, like a variety of insertions, because that means the girl is enjoying herself, showing off her body and giving me a good opportunity to enjoy looking at her private parts.
While fornication is also fun to watch, seeing a hairy male asshole staring back at me while his sausage is doing its thing in the babe's vagina or butt hole, does nothing at all for me.
That said, each of us has our individual preferences. I really am turned off by excessive and/or poorly located tattoos (example, a lousily oriented script "F" on Friday's lower groin area). I just cannot watch a porn vid with excessive tat's for more than a minute. But some people love tat's.
Your experience with ALS Scans matches mine for an all tattoo site I wasted my money on. The site had good PU reviews and a high average score but it took me about an hour after signing up to put through the cancellation.
It's all about what floats your boat and when people post good descriptive reviews like yours, it really helps the decision process.
|
06-09-08 11:23am
|
Reply
1363
|
Gangbang Playground
(0)
|
Reply of
Jay G's Reply
OK. Based on your reply I signed up for a 3 day shot at $5.
A quick run through and a successful download of two otherwise unavailable Christoph videos downloaded at "wicked" resolution - which isn't quite HD but pretty damned good) has convinced me that you are dead bang right. I'll be busy for the next few days exploring the site and doing some downloading, but this one looks great.
Jay, thanks a million. First, I would never check out a site like this that has such misleading stuff, and second, I'm not into Gangbang videos.
The webmaster needs work on how to market his site, but I agree with you. At $40 for 2 months it's a Hell of a deal.
I'll be canceling my trial on Monday, then will sign up for the 2 month gig.
Again, thanks Jay, and thanks PU for providing such a useful site.
|
06-07-08 05:14pm
|
Reply
1364
|
Gangbang Playground
(0)
|
Reply of
Jay G's Review
Question.
You say this is part of the Evil Angel network, but when I go to Evil Angel using the autolink in your review, they want $14.99 for a 30-day license for each video. The same results for EvilEmpire.com
Based on your comments I'm ready to pop $40 for 2 months, but I don't want to pay $15 more for each download and the GangbangPlayground.com says nothing about that subject.
Also, in GangbangPlayground.com's signup page the other 20 sites are listed but they aren't linked, and a search yields nothing.
I am a big fan of Christoph Clark whose "Big Natural Tits" is listed in the "other 20 sites"
Are they real "sites" or are they just sections of this website?
Thanks for any input you can provide.
|
06-07-08 02:52pm
|
Reply
1365
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
Is masturbation healthy? Damned right.
Frankly I am really into masturbation videos in a big way. I enjoy watching babes doing themselves with whatever is available including baseball bats, pool cues, panties, dildos, cucumbers, zucchinis, carrots, pearl necklaces, even fingers. Babes who are into self pleasuring sure beats the Hell out of looking up a guy's butt while he's doing the dirty.
And you know it's much more healthy for the babes if the objet's d'penetration are fresh veggies and not some tattooed dude's sausage because no STD's can be transmitted via a celery stick.
Oh? What's that? You say the question is about men jerking off? Sorry.
|
06-06-08 01:36pm
|
Reply
1366
|
N/A
|
Reply of
badandy400's Reply
On that note, I have been told about pretty good sites by people on here rather than reading a review I will have someone actually suggest a site, Aniazi.com for example.
I'll betcha you meant Aziani.com. And that is a good site!
|
06-04-08 05:58pm
|
Reply
1367
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Because you refined the question so that nit includes any website, I changed my vote to Often.
I keep a small pad in my wallet where I jot down sites mentioned by colleagues and friends, that I see published in newspapers and magazines, and that are mentioned on radio and TV. I also check out links mentioned here on Porn Users, some of which (porn and non-porn) have been most useful.
|
06-04-08 12:58pm
|
Reply
1368
|
Ass Traffic
(0)
|
Reply of
joekerr1's Review
joekerr1:
This network of sites renames some of their girls for reasons I know not. However, the network hosts this FREE site: http://www.indexxxed.com which summarizes a lot of things including on which of its 10 sites a specific girl appears.
I'm still waiting for these guys to offer a multi-site access package of some kind. The previews are terrific and they seem to do a great job finding the right babes to do their thing.
Good review. Thanks.
|
06-02-08 08:57am
|
Reply
1369
|
YouStrip
(0)
|
Reply of
njolin's Reply
Thanks. Maybe someday a download capability will come along, but at their prtice, storing the videos of interest as favorites will be fine.
Interesting site. Thanks.
|
06-02-08 07:04am
|
Reply
1370
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
But men should also have the right to stare at their unadorned mammaries without fear of being accused of molestation or any other crime.
|
06-02-08 12:13am
|
Reply
1371
|
Incredible Pass
(0)
|
Reply of
Northern Pike's Review
Once again I call for PU to start listing all sites with known cases of scam billing like this. At least a caution list of some kind is called for. It would be a tremendous positive feature in PU.
|
06-01-08 11:33am
|
Reply
1372
|
N/A
|
Reply of
nygiants03's Poll
I think Hillary would be most likely because the feminists view porn as misogynist exploitation of women and are the leaders at attempts to close or restrict porn shops and "gentlemens' clubs" in most cities.
Obama is my second choice because he has shown a preference for government controls over almost everything.
McCain is least likely to meddle in that arena because his base really doesn't care that much about passive issues like porn (on the web, in clubs or in stores). His base is much more interested in activist issues such as teaching condom use to 3rd graders, encouraging gay studies for 6th graders, bans on gay marriage, etc.
By the way, it's a real kick to see political philosophies being argued when the question was a very simple one about who would most likely restrict porn.
|
05-31-08 12:47pm
|
Reply
1373
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Wittyguy's Reply
Thanks. Interesting site...for sure. And his success at communicating with the webmaster has me thinking about doing a lot more myself.
|
05-30-08 08:36pm
|
Reply
1374
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
joekerr1's Review
I agree. This is the kind of review that adds to the quality of PU and I'm looking forward to seeing more of your reviews going forward.
As for Video Box, I've been with them for at least 2 years and agree with both you and Denner. There is no site that has more stuff and as frequent an update schedule than these guys (imagine, 1,825 updates per year).
My primary beef with that site (and with many porn video productions in general) is that many of the girls are not identified at all so the search function will not capture all scenes for a particular babe. My secondary beef is that they are getting careless when they do identify the chick so that the name and scene don't match correctly.
Minor issues because it's fun digging thru the archives looking at the stuff and always finding some stunning talent that I haven't seen before.
And the comments for each scene/DVD are amusing, and occasionally useful. Always watch for comments by Rope-a-Dope. This guy has an all consuming passion for porn and seems to have cataloged each and every porn flick ever made...and he's always posting great info.
|
05-30-08 01:07pm
|
Reply
1375
|
N/A
|
Reply of
mr smut's Reply
"Even better was/is the correspondence with the Crazies who run AO30."
What's AO30?
|
05-30-08 12:54pm
|
