<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bewitching Brief &#8211; Part 1</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 19:11:54 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ropeadope</title>
		<link>http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-40471</link>
		<dc:creator>ropeadope</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.videobox.com/blog/?p=3235#comment-40471</guid>
		<description>@ &lt;strong&gt;Papayaman1&lt;/strong&gt; - Regarding Teagan, I have bad news, then good news, then bad news again. First, the (first) bad news. The boobs that Teagan is featuring in Not Bewitched XXX have very little movement to them. As in none. Not a jiggle to be found. But, here&#039;s the good news. Although Not Bewitched XXX was released in November 2008, the production dates were March to April 2008. Meaning, these are not Teagan&#039;s current boobs. The boobs seen in this movie were swapped out and upgraded on July 1, 2008. Remember the Ebay fiasco? Now the (second) bad news. Teagan&#039;s newest boobs are only available for girl-girl and solo filming. However, pornsatar decisions generally aren&#039;t set in stone. So who knows, maybe the new boobs will eventually see some boy-girl activity in front of the camera. See Alison&#039;s posts &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/18/today-in-new-breasts-teagan-presley/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/08/you-can-buy-teagans-breast-implants/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/05/23/porn-star-boob-jobs-before-and-after/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; for related coverage.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ <strong>Papayaman1</strong> &#8211; Regarding Teagan, I have bad news, then good news, then bad news again. First, the (first) bad news. The boobs that Teagan is featuring in Not Bewitched XXX have very little movement to them. As in none. Not a jiggle to be found. But, here&#8217;s the good news. Although Not Bewitched XXX was released in November 2008, the production dates were March to April 2008. Meaning, these are not Teagan&#8217;s current boobs. The boobs seen in this movie were swapped out and upgraded on July 1, 2008. Remember the Ebay fiasco? Now the (second) bad news. Teagan&#8217;s newest boobs are only available for girl-girl and solo filming. However, pornsatar decisions generally aren&#8217;t set in stone. So who knows, maybe the new boobs will eventually see some boy-girl activity in front of the camera. See Alison&#8217;s posts <a href="http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/18/today-in-new-breasts-teagan-presley/" rel="nofollow">here</a>, <a href="http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/07/08/you-can-buy-teagans-breast-implants/" rel="nofollow">here</a>, and <a href="http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2008/05/23/porn-star-boob-jobs-before-and-after/" rel="nofollow">here</a> for related coverage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Papayaman1</title>
		<link>http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-40460</link>
		<dc:creator>Papayaman1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:18:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.videobox.com/blog/?p=3235#comment-40460</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m old enough to remember the TV program and I think it is one of the ideas that could have promise as a porn project.  At any rate it has to be better than the Nicole Kidman remake - though if Nicole had been involved in some of the action portrayed here, who knows?  Certainly Mike Horner and Nina Hartley should have the chops to make a decent job of their roles.  I always think that those two were a cut above the average in that they have always had the smarts to show a little sense of humour about what they were engaged in.

For my part, I&#039;m happy to be teased with Sasha pics.  And doesn&#039;t she look stunning with the bush!  That alone is tempting me to watch this film.  But I am disappointed to see that Teagan has evidently had a boob job.  I loved her natural look.  Can you tell us Rope, is it at least a decent boob job that allows for some movement and doesn&#039;t look too artificial?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m old enough to remember the TV program and I think it is one of the ideas that could have promise as a porn project.  At any rate it has to be better than the Nicole Kidman remake &#8211; though if Nicole had been involved in some of the action portrayed here, who knows?  Certainly Mike Horner and Nina Hartley should have the chops to make a decent job of their roles.  I always think that those two were a cut above the average in that they have always had the smarts to show a little sense of humour about what they were engaged in.</p>
<p>For my part, I&#8217;m happy to be teased with Sasha pics.  And doesn&#8217;t she look stunning with the bush!  That alone is tempting me to watch this film.  But I am disappointed to see that Teagan has evidently had a boob job.  I loved her natural look.  Can you tell us Rope, is it at least a decent boob job that allows for some movement and doesn&#8217;t look too artificial?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ropeadope</title>
		<link>http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-40450</link>
		<dc:creator>ropeadope</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.videobox.com/blog/?p=3235#comment-40450</guid>
		<description>@ &lt;strong&gt;JRoth&lt;/strong&gt; - Lol, I apologize for that. I tried to minimize the damage by incorporating just a tiny thumbnail into the body of the post. My feeling was that by requiring readers to click the image to view full size, a decision could be made to bypass the enlargement process if so desired. But for those with sharper eyesight than myself (pretty much a given), I&#039;m truly sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ <strong>JRoth</strong> &#8211; Lol, I apologize for that. I tried to minimize the damage by incorporating just a tiny thumbnail into the body of the post. My feeling was that by requiring readers to click the image to view full size, a decision could be made to bypass the enlargement process if so desired. But for those with sharper eyesight than myself (pretty much a given), I&#8217;m truly sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JRoth</title>
		<link>http://blog.videobox.com/blog/index.php/2009/11/04/bewitching-brief-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-40442</link>
		<dc:creator>JRoth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 04:05:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.videobox.com/blog/?p=3235#comment-40442</guid>
		<description>It is evil to tease us with Sasha Grey pics</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is evil to tease us with Sasha Grey pics</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
