Rog Blog

Running Time & Other Stuff

Running Time Response: Just to remind everyone, Reader X sent these thoughts about running time. Below his email is my response and some new thoughts.

Reader X Writes:

I’ve noticed that this is a pet peeve of yours, Rog, and I think it’s an issue where the perspective of the reviewer is different than the perspective of the consumer.

To properly review a DVD, of course you need to watch the whole thing if you’re going to be fair – so if you’re going to review a 5 hour DVD, you have to watch 5 hours in 1 or 2 sittings – that’s definitely a chore, and it’s probably one good reason why I wouldn’t want to be a reviewer.
For the consumer, though, it’s 5 hours of material that one can choose to watch in any way one wants. I feel no compunction to watch any DVD, especially porn DVD’s, from start to finish. I feel perfectly happy knowing that I’ve only watched portions of the DVD’s in my collection – there’s more to see – maybe I haven’t even watched the best parts yet – maybe I never will. If a porn DVD gets me off and I enjoy what I see of it, I consider it a good DVD. If I watch a lot of it and it keeps getting me off, I’ll consider it a great DVD. Does that mean that I watch the whole thing? Rarely. Some of my fave DVD’s, like Stephanie Swift’s gang-bang DVD, are my faves because I know that any time I go back to see my favorite sections, like the very beginning of the main gang bang scene, it’s going to get me off. I’ve never watched that entire scene though, and don’t care if I ever do. It’s still great.
Erik Everhard’s stuff gets substantial criticism from you for being too long, but I think his stuff is great. His tease material is great, his set-ups are great, the outfits that he puts on the women are great, the women themselves are great, and the sex is blisteringly hot, though I can’t say that it’s still hot 30 minutes into a scene because I’ve gotten off and stopped watching long before then. Chances are that when I come back to the DVD, I’ll check out a different scene or watch the scene that I enjoyed so much again.

My attitude towards length of a DVD – no problem, so long as what is on the DVD is hot stuff.

Rog Replies:

You make some excellent points. You are right of course, I do have to watch an entire movie in one or two sittings. OK, I don’t have to. Plenty of reviewers just don’t bother watching the whole thing, but I do. As a consumer and a fan I appreciate the longer movies for the same reasons you state above. In general, more bang for the buck I good. I also recognize that the longer scenes allow people to find whatever angle, fetish or whatever they want. My point of contention, and perhaps this wasn’t clear enough in the blog post, (It certainly is in the reviews) is not that I dislike the overall running time. It’ the fact that every scene is now close to or even over one hour in length. If someone wants to give me six scenes instead of five I’m all for that. Even if that extra scene doesn’t work for me, it is bound to please someone. What I question is adding 30 minutes of stuff to a scene that just last year would have been left on the cutting room floor. Does it add to the overall heat? Does it provide you with more truly stroke-worthy footage? Or does it just pad the running time with stuff that makes you want to hit the fast-forward button?

Your point that four hours gives you more of a chance to get off to your favorite parts is well put. I agree. We all edit the stuff in our homes anyway. We skip to the parts we like best. As a fan, I only mildly disagree with you. I’ve always been a fan of quality over quantity even as a consumer. I’d rather have a great 2 hour movie than a 6 hour collection of crap. (Though to be fair, one man’s crap is another man’s porno gold.) As a critic though, I’m stuck. It is my job to critique the movie as a whole. When I see a scene that is sixty minutes long, but much of the footage is mediocre or just pointless, I can’t help but notice that it would be better as a shorter scene. It isn’t so much the five hour movie that I question, it’s the sixty minute scenes. I just don’t think that performers can maintain intensity for that long.

Remember, a lot of the footage we see now is stuff that would have been “bonus” footage last year and totally cut out just a few years ago. I guess my point is that sometimes adding weaker stuff in with something stronger doesn’t aid in the overall result. It makes the movies longer, but not necessarily better.

The floor is once again open. Take it away guys.

Eye Candy: Big loads and little Asians, Tia Tanaka takes on Papa Loads.

Cancer Week: Normally with two huge cancer stories in the news, I would be taking a few lines to slam the petty little poli-cheers who run sites that actually pound their hands together with glee over things like this. Not this week. I’m taking a few days off to be with my mother for her third, and we pray her final, cancer surgery. My heart goes out to Senator Edwards and to his wife. It also goes out to Tony Snow and his family. It is a lot to go through and they should both be thankful to have access to good health care.

Eye Candy: Busty beauty Audrey Bitoni posing and showing off.

Next Topic For Discussion: I’ve been thinking about the next topic and I came up with a short list of things we always see from certain performers. Trademarks I guess. Like Ed Powers’ black socks, Mr. Marcus’ hat and Nick Manning’s “dropping loads.” I was going to do a piece on the most annoying signature movies/clothing, but some of them aren’t annoying at all. So maybe we’ll just go with a list of the most memorable and then we can decide if they are fun or annoying.

Eye Candy: XRCO Awards are in a week. Tera Patrick is hosting. Here she is in all of her gorgeous perfection.

Federal Prosecutor Stuff: I know that the usual political babble-bags and hate sites are chewing up this story, but let’s take a look at it from a porn perspective. Before we go attacking the AG or even Bush for (allegedly) firing some politically appointed prosecutors, let’s remember that this kind of partisan attack has legs. If the argument is that letting such appointees go because of political reasons is wrong, then we are reversing years of tradition and setting a precedent that we may not like. Imagine this little scenario. Somewhere down the road, a new President wants Federal Prosecutors to lay off of the adult industry and wants to clean house. Yeah, but he (or she) can’t because in 2007 some members of Congress, desperate to take focus off of their own failures, wanted to fling mud. Fair is fair.

Eye Candy: Fair is fair, but what isn’t fair is that these two guys to get unload all over Tera’s beautiful face.

Eye Candy: How about a little Creampie Surprise for sexy Cindy Crawford.

Oh My Gawd: I know that I shouldn’t even be watching American Idol this late in the season, but I am. (Fucking sue me, all right.) I keep saying it every week, but honestly, how fucking bad is that Sanjaya kid? That hair just HAS to be a joke, right? And his rendition of “Bathwater” (Great song by the way) was so fucking painful that I just had to laugh. I’ve only been to Porn Star Karaoke once, but I swear half of the people there could sing circles around this little pecker head.

Kim Kardashian: In case you guys missed it, I reviewed Kim Kardashian, Superstar yesterday. It’s a must-have for celebriporn collectors. Not sure how many raincoaters are going to dig it because that guy Ray J is as much of a porn director as he is a celebrity. Hey, it’s not the first time Vivid has thrown money at people who have no business directing porn. On the other hand, Kim might be the best looking woman in a celebriporn flick since Pam Anderson. This young woman really should be the one who landed the contract with Vivid. What do you say guys? Anyone second that one?