NL- Good discussion topic going on over at the Adultdvdtalk forum on "Boxcover Lies – Do you care?" I’ll tell you what, any lying bothers me, and if something on the boxcover is not in the movie, THAT is downright lying and deceptive advertising. I’d like to hear of some examples you guys have found of this, I’ll then talk to the companies and see what they have to say. I’ve grabbed some quotes from the topic, you can read the whole thing here- http://forum.adultdvdtalk.com/forum
Den Writes- I have been having email and phone discussion with B. Skow about Vivid’s boxcovers.
Please read my review of Brand New Faces #22
I have complaining for 8 months that Vivid Boxcover includes extras that are not on the disc.I think it is wrong and should be stopped. It is bad for B. Skow and Vivid and for the entire adult industry! Don Houston did a fine job taking my complaint to the very top of Vivid management and reportedly getting their attention (which I could not manage to do).Now today I am reading reviews on iafd.com and I find this quote in Don Houston’s review of Bounce 2:Again, there was no positions menu for the one guy that reportedly cares. 😉 Yes Don, I do care! I care when one of our leading Studios lies on a boxcover repeatedly! I wish you cared. And, Don, for some reason I don’t think I am the only person who cares!
Don Houston writes-Hi Den! Just because I fussed at the folks over at Vivid doesn’t mean I feel obligated to exaggerate the specific importance of an extra to the world. Just as a photogallery/slide show adds nothing for me, trailers add almost nothing, and a short BTS with no meat in it adds very little, a positions menu is worthless for me. You were right to point it out to me and I was right to point it out to Vivid but you’re the only person that has ever complained about it to me.
If I sound harsh, consider that there are indeed degrees of worthiness when it comes to raising any issue. I lowered the score of the movie advertising "five stories" when there were four and mentioned the positions menu issue there in passing. If there is a groundswell of people upset over the matter, I will adjust future reviews but so far, there’s just you. Liking you doesn’t mean I should tear down a rating to "Skip It" over something so minute (I consider the full range of scores in my reviews, not just an artificial range from 7.0 to 9.0 or whatever you do now).
Best Wishes, Don
For the record, I believe that everything listed on a cover should be in the movie and all compilations should list what movies the scenes are from. This includes pictured sex acts, credited performers, listed directors, and any extras. I said as much in my various replies to Den when he asked, took the issue to the company, and mentioned it in the review. Den and I disagree on a couple of topics but also seem to agree on a great many others so while we occasionally get contentious, it is usually in the spirit of how much we both want the best porn possible.
I admit that I found Den’s initial emails on the topic (which started BEFORE Bounce #2) a bit surprising. He “awarded” Brand New Faces #22 his lowest rating because of what he called a “fraud”, the extras advertised on the cover missing and his suggestion that one of the ladies might have worked for another company before this scene was shot (the series advertises a money back guarantee if you find one of the ladies in a previous scene).
As we sometimes do, we exchanged some emails delving into the specifics, my pointing out that Jen’s scene in credited as 4/5/2008 in the movie, her later appearance being in a Lethal Hardcore flick credited as 6/25/2009. I suggested he try to verify the dates and call Vivid on their guarantee if I was wrong but amazingly, he dropped that aspect of his complaint (perhaps he watched credits at regular speed the second time through and saw the date once I pointed it out). We both agreed that it would be nice if the scenes were more contemporary, our collective understanding being that the company provides a longer window online before releasing on DVD (a standard practice).
In all this though, my position never wavered that all companies should make every attempt to provide everything listed on the cover, in the actual DVD. When Bounce #2 came out and lacked a positions menu, the lamest of “extras” short of “digital mastering” or “stereo sound” seen so often on covers, I mentioned it more than once, teasingly suggesting that only one person seemed to care about it since no one had ever said a word to me in ten years of reviewing. Again for the record, I don’t consider a “position menu” to elevate a score and if that is an important extra on movies with oral and vaginal sex only for anyone, I suggest they take a look at the larger picture.
Both Brand New Faces #22 and Bounce #2 are over 4 hours long, B2 including more bonus scenes than many companies provide as their entire release; both sporting a lower MSRP than similar efforts by other companies. B2 also had almost an hour of BTS and the usual commercials you can skip with your remote control, as well as the standard junk (photogallery and trailers). If you look at the big picture though, the sheer amount of quality fuck for the buck provided is a great deal more than most companies provide outside of their compilations, Skow himself working with the DVD people to squeeze as much stuff on each disc and keep it acceptable looking as possible.
Den then knowingly posted the matter on a forum I cannot access or respond to (I’ve gone over it before with him), conveniently leaving out the context of our ongoing conversation (which sprang forth from his complaints about the AVN awards not using his rules to pick nominees in a particular category; the man graciously apologizing here on LIB later when the verbiage was made clear). Vivid is aware of the issue but just as I wouldn’t sanction the missing “extra”, I wasn’t about to cut off my nose to spite my face either. 4+ hours of movie, ~110 minutes of bonus scenes, ~ an hour of BTS, trailers, and a photogallery combined for a Highly Recommended package made Bounce #2 well worth checking into, especially for fans of Hannah Hilton (who has left porn IIRC).
To me, mentioning mistakes on covers is important but if my response is to yell “fraud” and try to initiate criminal proceedings on a company before having the decency of calling the company to verify whether it is a mistake, a last minute choice, or intentional, people would rightfully marginalize what I said. Remember that Den was the one trying to get the Ohio Attorney General prosecuting Hustler awhile back for leaving out a couple minutes of BTS footage on a portion of their titles. You can view that as being a consumer advocate or going overboard as you see fit but for those of you seeing runaway prosecutions during the Bush years, it’s worth thinking about.
So, if I found the huge package of material in Bounce #2 good enough to overlook a marginal aspect that no one has ever brought up in the past, I stand by my review. And if I occasionally tease Den about his summaries and he bounces one back (pun intended) about my reviews, it has been repeatedly pointed out that none of this will matter in a few years given the changes in the industry. I will not run to big brother government to get a company in trouble over something so insignificant as he choose to, and I will still base the rating on the totality of the package instead of the tiniest of aspects (a second worth of choking merits a bottom score from Den too; even in a movie about rough sex where the ladies want it that way), but I will support his opinion as independent as any other online. 🙂
Funny you mention this, are you stalking me??!! Because I seriously just had a meeting about this very subject! LOL
But seriously, it is a huge pet peeve of mine and there is nothing worse than buying a movie for a girl or even a feature on the box cover only to find that it’s not in the movie itself.
I think bonus features have become the norm and those companies who don’t have them don’t find themselves with a ton of verbal complaints but overall they do find their customers disappointed. So sure maybe one guy write in and bitches, but how many thousands just didn’t bother but still felt equally as slighted?
I guess what I’m trying to say is this … if a girl is not in the movie then don’t put her on the box cover. Period.
Also companies should invest a small amount of time in putting some DVD extras into a movie, even if they don’t feel they are THAT important. It is the little touches after all that makes a okay product “great”.
Even if you think customers don’t notice, trust me as a customer, we do notice.
We want porn star bios, slideshows of photos, movie trailers from other titles you have and yes, bloopers and outtakes.
Give us that extra hour of footage of just crap that cost you nothing to produce, as you already have it, and make us, the customer feel like we are getting more bang for our buck.
And last but not least, if you say you have something on the box cover, then have it in the movie. People within a company seriously need to learn to communicate. If your box cover guy says there is a 30 minute blooper reel, then there better be a 30 minute blooper reel in that DVD. Seriously. Stop pissing off your customers and treat them with enough respect to at the very least try and produce what you’ve promised them when they bought your product.
If you know your history, you know errors or outright lying on boxcovers has been a problem in porn since there was such a thing as a porn boxcover. Back when VHS used to cost, it sure could be annoying to buy a tape only to find a certain performer or several performers were not even in the movie. I can laugh about it now but I remember one cast listing on a box which was ENTIRELY wrong.
Don,
Thanks for the post. Yes, I agree we both want the best porn possible.
I had been emailing B. Skow for 8 months about Vivid boxcovers listing DVD extras and they are missing.
I gave Brand New Faces #22 my lowest rating of the year. B. Skow and I then talked twice on phone. He too was upset about the missing items and promised to get to the bottom of it. I also complained that it took 20 months for Jen Teal scene to be released on 12/01/2009 and that Stoney Curtis released his Jen Teal scene on 06/25/2008! I was wrong on this, Vivid does put up on website first and then later puts on DVD.
As I mentioned in my BNF #22 review addendum:
Don did not mention the missing items in his review and via email said he didn’t have the boxcover. But, he did mention in his review that he couldn’t find B. Skows name on the front or back of the box.
Oops. Don did then revise his review to include a remark about it. He gave the review a 60% rating and a Recommeded.
Hustler took awhile to fix things, but they no longer have missing BTS.
Patrick Collins had this problem many years ago and he immediately went on ADT and apologized, offered a #5.00 off next purchase coupon and invited ADT reviewers to Elegant Angel studio to check things out. And, the problem was fixed immediately!.
I am sorry that I posted on ADT. I didn’t remember that Don had been banned. I hope Don can read the posts. I am NOT the only person complaining.
Yes, I like B. Skow and I am sorry he is in this mess. I know he is not in charge of boxcovers.
It will be interesting to see how Vivid responds to this.
And lastly, I want to thank B. Skow for putting his CAVR black trophy on the counter where the gals sign their Certificates.
I will continue to tell the truth in my reviews from a consumers point of view.
Den
From email by an ADT regular:
“Is he bitching at you because he’s mad you wouldn’t lower the rating or is this his yearly bitch used to promote his awards again?”
Technically, I think the yearly bitch was over AVN’s best new starlet award versus his new starlet of the year award (kidding). Seriously though, Den is an all or nothing type of guy unable to see shades of gray and whatever kidding I do with him about it, the world could use more people like that. Having read the thread in question, it is clear my original assessment of the matter is pretty accurate; no one buys a DVD for an extra called “positions menu” but people don’t like to feel they were cheated out of something. Astro’s response is most akin to how I handle missing extras “in general”, lower a rating a little and move on rather than jump off a cliff by rating something the lowest amount over a de minimis issue.
To me, his approach is no more consumer friendly than any other “all or nothing” method of dealing with such matters, his own rating scale giving tiny points for such an extra (.05 points, not 5%) when present but invoking a virtual death penalty when not. I’ve pointed out that in the BNF series, the same interviews and tease other companies use in a separated BTS is incorporated into the scenes themselves (some of which last the better part of an hour each) but it fell on deaf ears. And as a consumer myself, when I found out a movie has a running time in excess of four hours on a single disc, I am less apt to crucify the company when industry standard is closer to two hours in that price range, the picture quality far better than most of that BTS footage found in a certain sitcum director’s titles.
If anything else, I’d think he’d be happy that I acknowledged my initial error (my review detailed everything actually on the disc) because none of us are perfect (or even close; Den skips all sorts of things in his summaries, like Easter Eggs). Generally, most reviewers barely mention extras unless dealing with a blockbuster title or fail to provide even a semblance of detail regarding the visual/auditory portions of a release so I’m still well positioned by comparison but I welcome Denny to upgrade his summaries and in return, I will note all titles missing a positions menu. lol
Why don’t you two nancy-boys man up and give Vivid’s usual nonsense a F or one star when then pull this shit?
Likewise, who in the hell is STILL being fooled by stuff like this? VHS boxcovers were notorious for screwing over the viewer half the time. Today, people’s patience is a lot lower and when they get dicked over, they’ll either stop getting that company’s product or just steal it off the internet (damn the boxcover).
Sammy, in the days of VHS, particularly before the internet became popular, it was rare to find a cover that completely told the truth. Most companies seemed to spend the bulk of their funding on the covers too, since that is what consumers had to rely on. As the internet became more important, companies were taken to task for incorrect information as was the case here.
Both Den and I mentioned the missing positions room (something I wouldn’t call an extra for the life of me) in Bounce #2, my review pointing out that no one had ever complained about that feature in the past (either asking for it or complaining of its absence). While it is fine to beat up on a company for advertising anal that isn’t there, a performer that isn’t in the movie, a listed running time far less than advertised, etc, merely mentioning the actual contents in the review should be sufficient.
All the fanboy talk about the matter on another forum revolves around box cover issue in generalities, not the specific context of this one. Go look up my review of Tera Patrick’s Porn Star Pool Party to see how I handle a lead performer not in a scene (Skip It). As far as people that use the flimsiest excuses to steal, well, that displays their lack of character more than anything else. 🙂
Mainstream also misreps itself with box images which never appear in their films. Welcome to the world of make believe bullshit.