www.seakingsfemfight.com

[Seaking]

I'll start this thread because some fans expressed the need to let the producers know what they want to see.. So, have at 'er boys.. and gals.

Just keep it mature and honest ok? That's all.

Have fun, cheers!

[kramer]

Hollywood: You are the best one out there, but your recent videos have sucked. You have made great videos in the past, and when you do, you have no peer. Keep turning out the regular output if you must, but throw some of your most long-time fans a bone. Just once, put the Wonder Woman costume in the closet, take off the stupid cowbot hat and lose the affected squeal. Wrestle once, in a serious, realISTIC match , in an Academy-like format, with another woman who approacehes your level of attractiveness and skill. Again, not real, but realistic. Erotic. A little sweat, a little honest effort. You have done this in the past, in your best work with LFF and Rolen. Academy format. No one gets hurt, or even approaching it. That is not what this is about. Then you can go back to your "delightful romps" with Tanya and Goldie or whoever. And stop misrepresenting the videos coming out of your company. Friends?

[Seaking]

[quote="kramer"]Hollywood: You are the best one out there, but your recent videos have sucked. You have made great videos in the past, and when you do, you have no peer. Keep turning out the regular output if you must, but throw some of your most long-time fans a bone. Just once, put the Wonder Woman costume in the closet, take off the stupid cowbot hat and lose the affected squeal. Wrestle once, in a serious, realISTIC match , in an Academy-like format, with another woman who approacehes your level of attractiveness and skill. Again, not real, but realistic. Erotic. A little sweat, a little honest effort. You have done this in the past, in your best work with LFF and Rolen. Academy format. No one gets hurt, or even approaching it. That is not what this is about. Then you can go back to your "delightful romps" with Tanya and Goldie or whoever. And stop misrepresenting the videos coming out of your company. Friends?[/quote]

I take it you're refering to Hollywood from www.webkitten.com ?

I think it would be nice to see her in a good struggles match.. like you said, no pain no hurt but some good holds and moves is always appreciated...

Have you emailed her about this?

[mike wilson]

Seaking; Thanks for clearing up the violence issue. No one, not you, not me, not the producers and certainly not the models, want violence or for anyone to get hurt. Anyone who wants to go in that direction is genuinely sick, and should go to prison where that stuff takes place on a daily basis.
About your poll: it is too black and white. What I personally am looking for is erotic female wrestling. Fierce LOOKING, real LOOKING, competitive LOOKING matches between attractive women with great bodies, where the eroticism is INHERENT in the close-contact struggle.
Finally, you say a way to pursue Kramer's proposed match involving Hollywood is to email her with the request. Is it not a better way to go about it the way he is, involving the voice , and the number of people it reaches, that this forum provides? He already has you weighing in with your ascent, along with a Hollywood "between the lines" look at her business perspective, as well as reaching the broader audience. So instead of one lone voice in email form, you now have Hollywood exposed to the "voice of the people", so to speak.
Thanks for your involvement, and this thread in the forum.

[Seaking]

(NOTE: this one was brought back from a different thread to this thread)

[quote="Seaking"][quote="mike wilson"]Seaking: Thanks for finally coming in. We (this forum) have a shot for some really special dialogue.
First, I gotta get something off my chest. Why is it you, and others, always look to the violence card? Where, in any postings in this thread, have you seen ANYONE call for violence? Jesus, almost every, if not all postings, have rejected REAL fights in no uncertain terms. A major knock on US IS its real nature, and lack of interest therein. Please, go back through all 100 plus posts, and find even ONE call for violence, or blood, or punching, or "bitch fights", if you will. They are simply not there. Where are you coming up with this?[/quote]

My bad.. I get a lot of emails concerning this, that I sometimes just lump one with all.. my bad.

[quote="mike wilson"]What the Manifesto addresses is honesty and consistency in products, to eliminate disappointments and the resulting bitterness they engender in consumers who feel misled by less-than-scrupulous producers. It is a desire to assure that the consumer get what they are led to expect, that there money IS spent on the products they desire. In your quote from me, you left out the part about promotional material matching up with content, so there are no awful surprises. That the companies HONESTLY represent their products. Almost an industry-wide objective rating system to cover participants and the action. This would prevent such misrepresentations as the typical Hollywood-hyped video. Such a system would prevent her from ever using terms such as "fierce", and replace them with such phrases as "costume oriented" and adjectives like "romp". So, in this system, the promotional blurb for one of her videos might read "Hollywood appears in a silly cowboy hat and mugs for the camera. Her body does look great in a string bikini. She and Tanya embrace, and pretend to be really wrestling for a while. The tops come off. Both have great breasts. Then they pretend to punch each other for a while. Then Hollywood pretends to win, or Tanya pretends to lose, hard to tell. Hollywood then sees her way clear to apply nipple clamps to Tanya. Lots of laughs as Hollywood and Tanya romp arou for 35 minutes. $39.99" By contrast, Academy's promos would remain largely unchanged.[/quote]

I follow what you're saying.. Some companies put too much detail in their promos whilst others don't put enough and worse yet others definetly mislead.

Without trying to promite my own videos, have a look at www.ladyfist.com where we come out and tell you that we do it "Realistic but not Real".. but yet we still get emails from people saying there is no way that we did that scene or this scene fake.. it's too real. The video descriptions that go with the videos are detailed and lengthy (some complain that they are TOO lengthy) but I fall back on my experiences as a Fan and customer where I would be pissed at not knowing if my money was going to a good video, or a shyte video.. it was hard to tell in most cases.

Your complaints about how some people represent their products are valid I have to admit. And once again, sites such as Hollywood's and others have mostly soft action as I would describe them.. and a lot of their content are Custom Videos, which have been produced a la carte for specific Customers who wanted to see that video done a specific way and paid for it. We do it all the time at Ladyfist but we're a little rougher and tougher but still remain in the safe zone.

I do know that Hollywood has a huge fan base who totally enjoy the way her videos are produced and they love it just the way it is.. very soft, a hint of tease and of course T&A.. and toss in some girl fighting to finish it off. This is what they like and prefer. Obviously the video description as you pointed out describes the fantasy action side of things. I probably don't see it all as big a problem as you do because I've seen it for so long I know how to read between the lines, knowing who the players are and knowing how their production systems run... I know what to expect from most of them before hand.. This is their business model and it works for them..

Not to sound contrite or biased, but the bottom line is the dollar line. Money speaks large volumes in the business. If you don't like a company's product or how they run their business, then don't spend your dollars there, and email that company to explain the why you won't. Be specific and courtious of course, you'll be surprised at the response you'll get. If they don't want to change their ways or flip you off, then move on, your noted lack of purchase will speak loudly enough to them.

Cheers M8[/quote]

[Seaking]

[quote="mike wilson"]Seaking; Thanks for clearing up the violence issue. No one, not you, not me, not the producers and certainly not the models, want violence or for anyone to get hurt. Anyone who wants to go in that direction is genuinely sick, and should go to prison where that stuff takes place on a daily basis.[/quote]

Well let's step that back a bit as well.. I know of a few companies out there who do 'real' fighting between skilled fighters, with strikes and locks who do it safely. But it is indeed real action. Look at boxing and UFC style fights, even the one I recently reviewed. Good competition I know you will agree.. but what we mostly hate to see are those gosh awefull bouts where two women are promised prize money to the winner (an example) and they go all out to win it.. chunks of hair ripped out, bloody noses, split lips, injuries.. geesus why?!

Look at some of the companies out there like www.tanyakicks.com for example. The women there were good competitors and respected each other and when they got into their battles, it was all out within their established guidelines and rules to prevent maiming and permanent injury. You'd be surprised how easy it is to cripple a person!.. But these women are of a rare breed, this is how they prefer to do their fights and they were not coerced into it etc.. It's a competitive sport to them, just like full contact karate or boxing is to others.

Of the ladyfist women, a few of them prefer to go all out as it's their workout fun. They agree to go into that way and come out of it as friends, but battle it out all the way.. Too scary for me especially when we can do the same thing realisticly without hurting anyone..

I'm with you though, unless the women are mutually consenting to a good sporting event, the real violence shouldn't be pandered to.. gah.

[quote="mike wilson"] About your poll: it is too black and white. What I personally am looking for is erotic female wrestling. Fierce LOOKING, real LOOKING, competitive LOOKING matches between attractive women with great bodies, where the eroticism is INHERENT in the close-contact struggle.[/quote]

So you're looking for a lesbian sex film with fighting tossed in? Just kidding.. Ok I see where you're going with that.. www.academywrestling.com is a good example of doing that where the victim is often caught in a trapping hold and 'played' with.. Mostly seen in their SOAP series.. very graphic.

Is this what you mean?


[quote="mike wilson"] Finally, you say a way to pursue Kramer's proposed match involving Hollywood is to email her with the request. Is it not a better way to go about it the way he is, involving the voice , and the number of people it reaches, that this forum provides? He already has you weighing in with your ascent, along with a Hollywood "between the lines" look at her business perspective, as well as reaching the broader audience. So instead of one lone voice in email form, you now have Hollywood exposed to the "voice of the people", so to speak.
Thanks for your involvement, and this thread in the forum.[/quote]

I hear what you're saying, you're hoping that Hollywood would grace our forum with a reply, that is if she even knows that it's here. She's a busy woman no doubt and I do know she cares about her fan base...

But let me digress for a second.. and please bear with me.. I'm having a 'devil's advocate' moment coming on..

From all of what I have been reading (some people email me their views instead of bringing it here) is that :

(A) You're a Hollywood fan and you love seeing her in action..

(B) Though a fan, you hate the soft giggly too fake not trying hard enough action scenes in her latest productions, because you KNOW she's capable of more..

(C) You would LOVE to see Hollywood and other, go back to making videos where the action is more believable and intense (though it doesn't have to be real at all, just make it look like it is)

If all three assumptions are correct, then I am going to put this to you:

Why not gather up the boys and pony up for a custom video requesting JUST what you want to see because you do get the voice then to request just what you want to see. From what I know of the lady, she'll either give you just what you want to see, or say that she can't do it like that anymore..

And if the 3 assumptions are not entirely correct then it's time to move on to another female fighter out there who can provide you with the action you crave.

I'm with you, I think I know what you're getting on about and I appreciate what you're saying... I just don't know if you can make a company change their ways either by mass voice or by single push..

I am assuming you are a member of her site as well though? =)[/quote]

[mike wilson]

I want to take this slowly and thoroughly, as this is the level of discussion I was hoping to start. To get different, informed, well written, serious opinions shared. To praise what is right, and to expose what is dishonest. To insure that every dollar is well spent for the products one will enjoy, and have a reasonable right to expect based on how the product was represented by its producer.
First of all, I don't think a step back is necessary. But I do think a problem occured in the way I phrased my point, which led to an incorrect inference on your part. I have no issue with the companies who produce the more violent videos. In fact, I applaud them for the honesty with which they represent their products. My issue is with those CUSTOMERS for whom the hurt, the injury, of one or both participants, is the goal, for whom the violence is just a vehicle toward that end. That is to whom that statement is aimed. I will say, howver, that personally, the violence is of no interest, and no model posessing the level of attractiveness I am looking for would risk their looks in such a way. The companies that produce such have their place, and I have PRAISED their honest approach, but I personally find their product anti-erotic.
What you next said about Academy is true. You got that exactly right. That is why my posts have concentrated on them, as I care very much about them. I believe that that very few people have as large a collection of Academy videos as I, and it is almost numerically impossible for anyone to have more Hannah/Academy videos. I believe I am almost comprehensive, save where she wrestled a girl who simply had too many tattoos to allow me to purchase it. The issues I have with the present Academy output has been well documented, and I will not go over them again here. I will say that Academybruce has assured me that I have been heard, and that he IS looking to produce what I am after, as we share a lot of common ground. His seems like a stand up guy, and, because of his body of work, I OWE him the benefit of any doubt. For the near future, his word is good for me.
Now, Hollywood: To your point a), make that BIG FAN. To point b) I don't hate "soft giggly too fake" stuff. I hate the fact it is REPRESENTED as something else in her promotional materials. As a paying consumer, I have to pay hard earned money to obtain the ability to "read between the lines" as you said in a previous post. That is where the resentment, the lingering anger, comes from. Point c) is right on the money.
Perhaps, with your connections, you could forward these feeligs on to her. After all, they come from her fans.
Love the discussion.

[shelflife]

I hope both producers and consumers respond to Mike Wilson's Manifesto, and to the opportunity to have it housed in the Seaking Forum. Imagine a marketplace where producers can come in to thoroughly and honestly talk about and promote their products in a digified and respectful setting. A place where consumers can learn about the marketplace and their options therein. Imagine a way for the right videos can go to those consumers who will get exactly what they are looking for, exactly what they believe they are paying for. A place where producers can hear the feedback from the purchasing public, and make adjustments to suit the marketplace. No more unhappy customers. No more in-the-dark producers. No more excuses for unhappiness or disillusionment from either side. You are on to something, Mike. It is up to both sides now.

[Seaking]

[quote="mike wilson"]
What you next said about Academy is true. You got that exactly right. That is why my posts have concentrated on them, as I care very much about them. I believe that that very few people have as large a collection of Academy videos as I, and it is almost numerically impossible for anyone to have more Hannah/Academy videos. I believe I am almost comprehensive, save where she wrestled a girl who simply had too many tattoos to allow me to purchase it. The issues I have with the present Academy output has been well documented, and I will not go over them again here. I will say that Academybruce has assured me that I have been heard, and that he IS looking to produce what I am after, as we share a lot of common ground. His seems like a stand up guy, and, because of his body of work, I OWE him the benefit of any doubt. For the near future, his word is good for me.[quote="mike wilson"]y the camera man could learn how to handle his camera better, less shake and less movements, their vids would be even that much better. I had to stop watching one vid (can't remember which) because the camera work was annoying me that much.. I'm sure the gals put on one hell of a match but I couldn't tell.. =)

[quote="mike wilson"]Now, Hollywood: To your point a), make that BIG FAN. To point b) I don't hate "soft giggly too fake" stuff. I hate the fact it is REPRESENTED as something else in her promotional materials. As a paying consumer, I have to pay hard earned money to obtain the ability to "read between the lines" as you said in a previous post. That is where the resentment, the lingering anger, comes from. Point c) is right on the money.
Perhaps, with your connections, you could forward these feeligs on to her. After all, they come from her fans.
Love the discussion.[/quote]

She's been here to read the messages, trust me.. And she's prolly asked the same question as I did earlier.

One question though, which video inparticular were you refering to? Or was it a general observation to all of the desctiptions?

Discussion is good, Cheers!

[mike wilson]

I did take your suggestion to contact Hollywood personally regarding my frustrations. She made a strong and well-received point that I should have contacted her immediately and for sure before going to a public forum. In this, she is right. She deserved that courtesy, and I was wrong to do so.
What was not addressed satisfactorily was the issue of misrepresentation in promotional material. That butresses my point that producers do not wish to have light shined on them in this area, and that some voluntary standards to protect consumers, a way in which promotional materials are compelled to honestly portray products, are needed. This industry is not art, like the motion pictures, where hyperbole and anything-goes promotion is the expected norm. The videos are more like commercial instructional videos, designed to cater to certain consumer-driven styles of action and performers. To mix metaphors, don't say you are offering a small, yellow-feathered, flightless duck for sale. Say you are selling a chicken. And don't IMPLY duck when you have this chicken and then say the problem was the inference on the customer's part. Or just not say anything at all.
As far as a custom video, I think you have a strong point. I think that is the way to go.
I also know that Hollywood is, as you said, aware of these postings. I can only assume that other producers are, also, and more will be in the near future. So, maybe it is working. Again, the idea is to assure the consumer gets what he wants, and that producers have all satisfied customers. I again publicly apologize for not contacting Hollywood first. She deserved that courtesy. But someone had to be thrown under the bus first, in the pursuit of , again, satisfied customers and responsible, responsive producers. Discussion is good, and the exchange of views even better.

[mike wilson]

Seaking: one last point. You asked if a specific video was in question, or was this an observation in general. For me to generalize about promotional material whose video I have not seen would make me as irresponsible as the producers that need exposing. My complaint is specific. It is Hollywood Productions #225. I challenge you and every reader to look at Kramer's description, then read Hollywood's promotional material for this video, then watch the video. Which is the more accurate? At best, I think both are equally misrepresentative of the product, although I would go for Kramer's.
Seaking, I'll bet you are under some sort of siege for this thread. Honesty is not painless, and producers can't be liking this scrutiny one bit.

[kuntakinte]

I like Hollywood. Always have. And I do have the video in question, the one with Tanya Danielle. So I read Kramer's description, and I've got to tell you man, if REAL TRUTH is the goal, you are a MILE off to the south! Then I went to webkitten.com and reread Hollywood's own descriptor. It was an eye opener. I got to tell you, wrestlingbabe, you are a MILE AND A HALF off to the north! If you were thinking of buying it, you'd be better off reading Kramer's. Mike Wilson is right!
This is one stinky can of worms you are opening, man. You seem like you are a guy who has lost a lot of money to acquire the perspective you have. I am a little concerned you may have less Upton Sinclair in you than you think, and more Pol Pot. You may have hit this one right, but I'd proceed with caution.

[professoray8]

As a professor, I am used to resolving issues of competing data.Lets look at Mike Wilson's description of the video in question, as well as Hollywood's on her website which is used to sell the video. In light of the content of this site, lets frame the exercise in the form of a fight.
In Round One, both emerge from their corners. Hollywood opens with a jab, talking accurately of the skimpy string bikinis both participants are wearing, and connects. Wilson counters with his own jab, and announces what his strategy is to be, with a barb about Hollywood's "Silly cowboy hat" and her "mugging" for the camera. If brevity is the sole of wit, Wilson looks to be a formidable, if laconic, opponent. Hollywood's head flies back, her nose is bloodied. Round one to Wilson.
Hollywood comes out in Round Two and mentions the the "competitive streaks" and "conflicts" inherent, that it is "time to settle" things, all of which terms imply that a certain intensity, or fierceness, is a reasonable expectation on the part of a prospective consumer. As it turns out, as watching the video will show, she has missed her target. Wilson, with the punching economy of Joe Louis in his considered prime, throws a short right, the punch traveling no more than 6 inches, saying that "Hollywood and Tanya embrace and pretend to wrestle". The punch, unseen by most of the crowd and certainly not by Hollywood, floors the Webkitten, sending her to the canvas for an 8 count. This is not going well for the beautiful blonde. Round Two to Wilson, 10 to 8.
In round Three, Hollywood speaks of the holds in the video, all of which, while lacking a certain anticipated intensity and honesty of effort, do appear. Wilson is now cruising, and returns to his "pretend" attack, turning his attention to the punching, which, in the video, is the weakest part of an increasingly weak performance by the two "combatants", Hollywood and Tanya. The judges, almost feeling sorry for Hollywood at this point, call the round even.
For the fourth Round, Wilson employs a daring strategy. He sits on his stool, and proceeds to read the latest issue of Newsweek, ignoring Hollywood. Madness? Maybe not. Hollywwod emerges from her corner, and throws around such terms as "torment" and "punishment" and alludes to "submission holds". With this last punch, she hits HERSELF in the snout, and goes down by her own hand. Round 4 goes to Mike Wilson without him leaving his stool.
With Round 5, Wilson knows he is on to something. He again remains on his stool, his handlers handing him a cold one. Hollywood, by now thoroughly confused and disheartened, comes out and talks about a an"alternate ending" with a HUGE swing. This simply does not appear in my copy of the video! It ain't there! Hollywood stumbles around the ring, finally tripping herself and getting tangled in the ropes. She is now choking, caught inescapably in a choke hold as her throat is constricted by said ropes. The stunned referee has no choice but to end the fight, and declare a well-rested Mike Wilson the winner by TKO.
So, my conclusion: a prospective buyer would be better served by relying on Mike Wilson's description of Hollywood Productions Video #225 than by Hollywood's own, which is deemed misleading and disingenuous.

[Seaking]

[quote="mike wilson"]Seaking: one last point. You asked if a specific video was in question, or was this an observation in general. For me to generalize about promotional material whose video I have not seen would make me as irresponsible as the producers that need exposing. My complaint is specific. It is Hollywood Productions #225. I challenge you and every reader to look at Kramer's description, then read Hollywood's promotional material for this video, then watch the video. Which is the more accurate? At best, I think both are equally misrepresentative of the product, although I would go for Kramer's.
Seaking, I'll bet you are under some sort of siege for this thread. Honesty is not painless, and producers can't be liking this scrutiny one bit.[/quote]

Under siege? nah not even close. If nothing else I don't delve on ego or play to other people's egoes. Most of the producers know me this way and so do most of this site's fan base also appreciate.. I tells it likes it is..

But I do appreciate fairness and honesty. If someone comes out and says "This video is shyte" then fine but show us the why you think it is. And you guys have stressed your point about this HP225. I read the descriptions and made my comments about it. I haven't seen the video so can't go further than that.

The one thing I won't do is slam someone else's production work when I know they have a lot of other fine products out there.. If you follow the video reviews on this site, you'll get a sense on how I do my reviews.. fairly and evenly..

There is an exception to every rule.. I had been asked a while back to review someone's videos and I declined their offer because I couldn't find anything nicer to say than "at least the lady was pretty". The action was that horrible.. But to me, worse than that, was the fact that their advert descriptions were bold faced lies and outdone themselves.. Real competitive mix match? Nah, it wasn't even 'real', even the lamest video out there by the other companies don't come close. I shudder to think how many people bought these videos only to get angered at the industry.. Don't ask me who that company is. It won't matter.

But getting back to your initial issue of the descriptions being not honest or close to the facts at hand within the video.. I'm sure the writers of such stuff aren't puposely out there trying to rip anyone off, they're not all that silly.. Some do get carried away and some don't. I hate to say this but you learn after a while to read between the lines (Yes, I know we went through this before.. =)

Cheers M8

[mike wilson]

I am glad you are not under siege. Your words on your integrity, and level of commitment, though eloquent, are far outpaced by your actions in hosting, and participating, in this out of the ordinary, serious discussion. Now, back to the raging debate.
My focus on this is more narrow than yours. I am not saying the HP video in question is "shyte". I am saying it is misrepresented by its producer. I am using this concrete example to illuminate an industry-wide problem. As Kuntekinte pointed out, it is true I have lost a lot of money being what I consider misled in this manner, and I am not just tired of it, but searching for a way to make it stop. Professoray8's insanely clever posting was even more illuminating than funny.I had a REASONABLE EXPECTATION of a different level of action than that which occured in the video. It is black and white to me, while you seek the grey area. One of us right, and one of us is wrong in this matter. Either me or HP. And while Professoray8 did not exactly use the "scientific method" I think he drove home my point with more humor and force than I could muster.
In the props where props are due department, Kuntakinte's Upton Sinclair/Pol Pot reference was not only, again, insanely clever, but made me think. I am sure a bit of both drives me. Thank you.[/quote]