Please read the original XCritic To Choke or Not to Choke and CAVR reply
This is Don Houston's reply.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, I wrote a blog advocating consumer choice in porn, suggesting
that people be able to buy titles that show consenting adults engaging
in sex without a interference from well meaning people (be they from
the government, the church, or individuals) that seek to limit your
access to what gets you off. Out of common courtesy, I did not mention
who was trying his best to prevent you from seeing what you wanted but
he has opened the door to scrutiny by posting a copy of my blog
(discarding "fair use standards") and trying again to support his failed
arguments against choking in porn and then making a lopsided comparison
of his review website versus Xcritic. Rather than bash the guy, I
welcome his comments as they help reinforce the mission at Xcritic to
serve the public trust over promoting a private agenda. So here are a
few points to consider for those that care:
Den has long been like a kindred spirit of mine, his outlines of porn titles
perhaps lacking depth but certainly making up for it in sheer quantity.
Our personal tastes in porn are quite similar and we often find ourselves
at odds with other reviewers and organizations because neither one of us
is a pack animal. Lets face it, there is a distinctive tendency in the
world of porn commentary to run with the pack, many waiting to see what
others say before venturing into reviews or scathing comments. Some of
this is because production companies are typically run by people that
make sure the rest of us march to their tune lest they apply various
sanctions, this dynamic followed by most in the industry, including trade
journals, gossip websites, and publicists that are unable to think of the
long term benefit of truthful reviews or articles (making me appreciate
the folks that are smarter and more progressive in how they view the term
"Free Speech").
That said, it has long been appreciated when I find folks that think outside
the box even when I disagree with them. Some, like Gram P., make a
cottage industry of witty writing and contrary thought that borders on
clever so often that if I were to take his prose at face value, I would
probably hate anything released in adult entertainment. Others, like
Roger P., have singularly impressed me with their ability to find the
best side of everything they watch, a trait I admittedly need a lot more
work on. Then, guys like Den come along and almost single-handedly
manage to reset the proverbial clock by the way they show a willingness
to take a stand and defend it, suffering the potshots taken by some
pretty nasty industry types in the process.
With a substantial amount of respect and admiration in mind, it is with this
concept that I now take my mentor to task yet again for his stance on
breath play in porn, as well as his limited understanding of what makes
Xcritic tick. Please keep in mind that friends can agree to disagree
(even aggressively disagree) without making it personal as some
allegedly "consumer friendly" consortium websites have in the past
(blackmailing production companies and initiating boycotts in a passive
aggressive manner is unfair and considered illegal in some places). My
original blog on the matter was To Choke or Not To Choke: Consumer
Choices and with that in mind, here I go...
First off, since Den posted his response publicly instead of via email, I
figure he must have wanted a public response. I'll email him a link as
he did to his recent article as a courtesy to my pal, this discussion a
microcosm of what has been discussed in porn on one level or another
since the 70's and earlier. I begin by answering his question about what
choking scenes were so good that I awarded. Truth be told, this is an
easy question though based on a faulty premise since I don't "award a
score" so much as consider a title EARNS a rating. I suggest Den and
others simply look for titles by well known extreme directors like Jim
Powers, Jake Malone, Mason, Jules Jordan, Belladonna, and several others
that employ hardcore acts in their porn flicks. Read the reviews and you
will often find my comments about how the women look like they are really
into the choking or pounding hard screwing. See, it is not the choking
that elevates the rating in these cases (I'm not a fan of the practice),
it is the fact that the ladies are into it or at least acting that way
(as evidenced by the BTS footage, their responses during the scene
itself, or occasionally when they tell me as much via a phone call or
email).
Den then took a fellow reviewer, Ravyn, to task on her rating for a movie
called Cry Wolf from Vivid Entertainment. I repeatedly tried to explain
to him how ratings vary between websites but as long as I've been
instructing people in numerous careers (successfully at that), I wasn't
able to enlighten him that his 6 to 9 point scale is not universal, a
"6" foisted on the title merely because it had some minor choking and
drug use as part of the plot. Remember, Vivid is a company most consider
to be too couples oriented with watered down sex (they have come a long
way in recent years though, showing a williness to change with the times
and provide some very strokable porn) so a few seconds of a single act
resulting in Den lowering what would have been a top pick. Den and I
examined the particulars and found his problem though, he uses a
mathematical formula that reduces any movie to a handful of numbers that
are then divided for the final result (adjusted for elements he hates
like choking, any sign of a gun in a shot, or any sign of fictional drug
use). Ravyn, on the other hand, points out that a movie that makes her
hot and sticky like Cry Wolf, was better than the sum of its parts, the
idea that the totality of the movie worked better for her than it did for
a guy old enough to be her father. Frankly, I like tech specs as much as
anyone but losing sight of the forest because all those darned trees are
in the way is the best analogy I can come up with here.
Cry Wolf from Vivid was "too rough?!?"
We then discovered the root of Den's initial discomfort with her review being
the choking aspects, his quest to eliminate it from modern porn falling
somewhat short in the last decade. To quote his comments: "I am very
happy that there have been no choking deaths on a porn set. We sure don't
need any snuff movies. My concern is the effect the choking scenes cause
to the viewing public. The ole monkey-see-monkey-do syndrome. Guy tries
choking his wife with tragic results." This line of thinking would
reduce all porn, and any entertainment material to the lowest common
denominator. Sorry, we can't have guns in action movies because
impressionable people might decide to emulate their movie star heroes.
Sorry, we can't show sex because so many people catch diseases in real
life when they also engage in risky behaviors. We then go through his
latest approach of showing a Google search of choking that yielded
results of an overly zealous mother charged with choking her daughter
as a form of parental discipline, an NBA star charged with choking
another man in a fight, and so on. Most people would realize the
difference between consensual sex play and people trying to inflict
pain/suffering on others out of anger. At least Den will now admit that
there have been no deaths in porn related to the act in question (almost
all such deaths reported by the media being "Auto-erotic Asphyxiation"
where a person literally hangs themself while masturbating to get a
stronger rush (the mere fact that a porn set includes other people that
could call for assistance, take someone to a hospital, etc, if things
went too far).
He then took Hustler to task for some of their titles lacking a Behind the
Scenes feature as advertised (in at least a number of cases, they could
argue that such footage was indeed present during the ending credits or
before the couples had sex, in others the added expense of reprinting
the box cover when the final cut of the movie required cutting the BTS
or losing the far more important longer sex scenes). Wicked Pictures
served as another example of misconduct with Delilah, an artistic feature
by Michael Raven, did not meet with his approval (in my review of the
title, I pointed out that while I wasn't keen on the technical aspects,
it was a pretty good movie) and the company refused to be interrogated
over it. Mason, JM Productions, and others were also taken to task as
much as the industry itself for not adopting specific guidelines in line
with Den's way of thinking, including his rose colored remembrance of
the "good old days" when a single guy could force everyone to do as he
pleased.
I think he got confused about some points too, suggesting he is the minority
regarding mentioning choking in reviews (almost every reviewer I know at
almost every website I've been to mentions prolonged choking as a sex act
in their reviews), or that companies care if it is mentioned in reviews
(not a single company has ever taken me to task for saying something
about choking, even when I pointed out it looked too real or the gal was
in pain). I'd be exceptionally curious to know who won't send him
screeners based on that point alone (many companies have cut back sending
out screeners, preferring to send them only to websites that are going to
thoroughly review them in depth, not quicky outlines). The reliance on
what a few industry lawyers believed at the 2008 AEE and a few unnamed
companies was another red herring, most of them that I know of don't
include choking because they focus on lighter sexual encounters (no cases
have been brought against companies solely on choking in the past 35+
years and if listening to lawyers is a good idea, remember that virtually
every company discarded the infamous Cambria List long ago).
Then he came up on the topic of condoms since my blog pointed out the lack of
them has resulted in more work days missed, more tragedy, and an
assortment of deaths. Choking has not caused a single porn death and
even the biggest stretch of the imagination yields no conclusive proof
tying a fan to emulating a choking scene that resulted in death but a
quick glance at the CDC statistics shows hundreds of thousands of deaths
tied to unsafe sex. Where is the balance in that kind of stance???
The bottom of his article then goes to a selective point/counter point
regarding his website versus Xcritic. Xcritic conceivably awards points
for choking (not quite) and Den cuts them off at the knees, Xcritic is
modern looking with 8600+ reviews while Den is 10+ years out of date
with a great many more outlines but not reviews, Xcritic lacks an
alphabetical index, he praises us for being so much higher in Alexa
ratings, and missed some of the features we have at Xcritic. Here's a
few of them he missed:
Xcritic has thousands of pictures of performers taken by staffers at
events and in the form of screen captures, not imported
galleries while...
Den does not have pictures (though in fairness, he caught up
to adding box covers)
Xcritic holds contests like the current one where Sunny Lane will
masturbate for you, call out your name, and you get a copy
of it or Teagan Presley will have phone sex with you, for
free.
Den hands out a wooden plaque to some people each year in the
industry.
Xcritic regularly publishes a Blue Room column with early looks at
titles, and recaps a bunch of top picks by a wide variety
of reviewers from all backgrounds
Den is a one man show without a column or regular early looks
at titles
Xcritic has a large selection of Bloggers from the industry like
Stoya, Penny Flame, Tricia Devereaux, Kayden Kross,
Ashlynn Brooke, Adrenalynn, Teagan Presley, Eva Angelina,
Riley Steele, and many more (including newcomers like
director's B. Skow and Aunt Gertrude)
Den has no bloggers
Xcritic has a series of year end lists that are said to influence
numerous others
Den has a single list of far smaller scope and hands out some
small trophies
Xcritic has a series of forums for fans to discuss matters with
others while
Den does not
Xcritic has an extensive list of High Definition titles reviewed
easily found via prominent links (as well as Gay titles
for those who care)
Den has a link to his outlines that further link to his
original SD reviews with nothing new added
Xcritic has an advice column hosted by Joanna Angel (and her lovely
ass)
Den offers advice about choking in porn
Xcritic offers sales, coupons, and special deals that are unrelated
to the editorial content
Den offers a link to his email address
Xcritic offers a wide variety of reviewers from all sorts of
backgrounds possessing a lot of specific expertise
Den is a nice guy with a lot of titles outlined but few done in
depth
In any case, both websites have a lot to offer people depending on what you
are looking for, each listed on the incredibly helpful IAFD. Den is a
good guy that I agree with a lot of the time, but just as I like screen
captures and trailers in my reviews, I also like seeing more detail than
he tends to provide. He is welcome to blog for Xcritic if he changes his
mind because we adhere to the premise of "an open mind, not an empty head"
and appreciate those that provide a different point of view even when we
disagree with it. As a consumer advocate myself, I stand behind my
original blog that advocated consumer choice over marching lockstep into
an series of slippery slopes where the lowest common denominator reigns,
the mission of Xcritic to provide readers with the choices they need to
make for what gets them off. We're still a work in progress and have
been determined to add a super powerful search engine (our website-wide
one is getting exceptionally good and the reviews can also be searched
via the IAFD or www.adultfilmdatabase) but need your help in figuring out
what YOU want us to provide.
Feel free to email me with comments at Houstondon at my hotmail account
if you are too shy for the forums... :)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My reply: 10/15/2008.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all I want to thank Don for his reply and nice thoughts. It looks
to me that nothing has changed on the choking front. Den is still
against it and Don is not.
I do want to apologize to Don for not making myself clear concerning my
XCritic - CAVR comparison. I was referring to only the Reviews
portion of XCritic.
I want to thank Don for making the correction to the Cry Wolf review
and I want to thank Ravyn C. for all of her very fine reviews.
She has a very nice and very personal blog about this subject
that can be found on XCritic.
I will try to be brief as possible.
CAVR reviews sex movies and writes about the sex in the movie. CAVR
has always said that you should read others reviews (such as
Rog, Don, AstroKnight, Bono-One, etc.) for a full and more
complete review.
I am only really interested in the sex in these sex movies.
I write very brief info that basically goes along the lines
of A had sex with B and C watched. The old KISS theory is
fine with me.
Example from most recent blockbuster:
Den wrote Anal
Don wrote He took her 'F..king Slutty Ass'.
I could never write a very detailed verbose review in a
million years and I admire Don for his very informative
and lengthy reviews. He is very good.
Search Engine XCritic is working on fixing their search
engine and that is good news.
CAVR is very happy with their search engine
and I am glad I finally added it.
Movie Index XCritic is not too keen on having A to Z movie index
and I am not sure why.
CAVR is quite proud of having A to Z movie index and
will always have it.
Stars XCritic has many Porn Star interviews, blogs,
interviews, etc. XCritic does not have an
A to Z Porn Stars index.
CAVR thinks the most important thing about Porn
movies is the Porn Stars. CAVR provides:
A to Z Stars list and the ladies reviews.
List of Top 3 Stars by Year.
List of Top Newbies.
List of Top Stars.
List of Top Contract Stars (MVP).
List of 1996 - 2008 CAVR nominees.
Web Scenes XCritic currently does not review the
newest thing on the block: On-line web scenes.
CAVR has just started reviewing on-line
web scenes and I am quite frankly feeling
my way around as I venture into this.
Links XCritic acknowledges CAVR has a link to
email.
CAVR has a link of each of the Stars in
a review to iafd.com that shows:
Picture of the Star.
Basic info and stats about her.
List of her movies.
Rebeca Linares example: iafd
Lists XCritic provides lists of current rankings and
previous years listing.
CAVR provides daily update of all their lists:
Reviews list by Title and Points on the same page.
Reviews list by Genre.
Best reviews list.
Worse reviews list.
Web Scenes list by Title and Points on same page.
Web Scenes list by Porn Star, by Studio and by Director.
Director list.
BTS list.
Stats list.
Points XCritic provides a rating in 5 categories and then an
overall rating. The detail rating points is not used
for the overall rating.
CAVR provides a rating in 3 or 4 categories and that
is the basis for the overall rating. CAVR lowest
rating is 6.00 and provides a 'worse' of the year
list. Choking movies rate 7.00 and are not automatically
on the 'worse' of the year list.
Hi Def XCritic provides some very nice Blu-ray reviews
and gay reviews.
CAVR reviews Blu-ray (and HD DVD) and selects
the best Hi Def of the year for a trophy.
2006 Camp Cuddly Pines HD DVD - Wicked
2007 Babysitters HD DVD - Digital Playground
2008 ? - Day & Date only.
Guns XCritic apparently has no problem with guns being used
in sex movies.
CAVR is against sex movies that shows gals giving a gun
a BJ and guns being inserted.
Hustler XCritic apparently thinks it is okay to have
deceptive DVD boxcovers.
CAVR says it is wrong for Hustler to have 44 DVDs
for 1 full year with this boxcover ripoff!
Please note: A few years ago Elegant Angel
released a movie with the boxcover saying
it had a Behind-the-Scenes and it did not.
I pointed this out on Adult DVD Talk. Within
3 hours Patrick Collins posted that he was sorry
for the problem and anyone could return the DVD
for a full refund or if they wanted to keep the DVD,
he would give them $5.00 off their next purchase!
Wicked XCritic has no problem with Wicked not explaining
what happened to Delilah DVD.
CAVR pointed out a major fault with the DVD.
Wicked recalled the DVD and asked me to
remove my review. My emails on this were
not answered for over 6 months. Then I got
an email from a Wicked VP saying that I was
the only person to complain and that 'AVN
gave it a good review'. I still think that
Wicked should issue a press release on this.
Trophies XCritic does not have year-end trophies.
(At least I could not find a picture of what their
trophy looks like). XCritic is not fond of CAVR trophy.
CAVR provides 10 or so black acrylic engraved trophies
annually. Sample:
I am very proud of this simple trophy and I remember
the first time I presented a trophy in person. It was
at the 2000 East Coast Video Show and was given to
Tera Patrick, 1999 Best New Star. According to Digital
Playground's website, it is the very first trophy DP
ever won.
Please note:
AVN switched to a similar trophy 2 years later and
just recently added the winner's name to the trophy.
CAVR has never had a wood trophy.
Web Sites XCritic is a very fine web site that does very
good reviews and has a lot of other items
that people love. They have a good Alexa
rating. They have a very nice reputation.
CAVR is a text based review web site only.
It has a reputation as the review web site
that other reviewers use.
(I actually think iafd.com is the best!).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAVR