scene title: blondes have more fun
performers: bunny de la cruz, mistress delicious
site: blush erotica
production credits: the sinematographer (dir.)
release date: september 29, 2021 | trailer
performers: bunny de la cruz, mistress delicious
site: blush erotica
production credits: the sinematographer (dir.)
release date: september 29, 2021 | trailer
 |
| l: bunny de la cruz, r: mistress delicious |
this scene isn't even six minutes long, which makes it hard to compare it to almost everything else i cover here. i mostly wanted to use this month's review to highlight the new site blush erotica, which is doing a lot of things right, some other things interesting, and some dealbreaker things wrong.
right: consistent use of plus-size performers, with appealing makeup and wardrobe, lit and shot glamorously and elegantly, with loving attention paid to their generous curves and beautiful faces. it's a newer site (the oldest content dates from january 2021), so there's not a huge back catalog, but racial and age diversity is pretty high for an "erotica" site, and some slimmer (though few big name) performers also appear. and the girl/girl scenes are just about as frequent as boy/girl, threesome, and solo, always a nice ratio.
interesting: the selling point of blush is that they are scripted audio vignettes with video to match. how well the video actually matches the recorded audio (mostly by the same voice performer) varies quite a bit, and it frequently feels like the audio and the visual are two disconnected streams running side by side than the full gestalt experience of cinema. the choice to have the voiceover run throughout the scene, detailing the sexual action, rather than just introducing the premise and letting the performers sell it, is one i'm not opposed to in theory (unlike the typical porn dogmatist, who demands nothing non-diegetic break immersion in the sex), but from the scenes i've sampled, it doesn't always work.
wrong: streaming-only, no downloads, is a viable choice for the vast majority of consumers a porn platform will see in 2021, but as an inveterate collector paranoid about data loss, i can't bring myself to endorse it. less forgivable is the extended-tongue, barely-connecting method by which the site seems to insist girl/girl cunnilingus be performed. performers who aren't attracted to women are one thing (and please don't cast them to perform sex with each other), but i've seen far more engaged performances from several of the women on the site, and can only assume it's the director demanding that genitals remain visible.
ultimately, because the video is secondary to the audio, merely an illustration of the encounter lady apollo is describing in her soporifically "sexy" tones rather than the primary document of an encounter being embellished by voiceover, the performers are almost never actually having sex at whatever pace feels natural to them, just slowly acting out a series of gifs, as though they were posing for still photography — only these photos move. but glacially, because the audio isn't hurrying.
my score below is still quite respectable, because the actual production values were solid, the performers are great, and the fact of having a script covers a lot. but i won't be renewing my subscription after this month. although i'll still keep an eye on the site, because the casting is so refreshing.
performances: 20
cinematography: 21
editing: 14
script: 12
sjw points: 8
total score:
editing: 14
script: 12
sjw points: 8
total score: