|
|
Welcome to the Database Correction page. This page is for letting me or the other editors know of corrections that need to be made. Please read the posting instructions carefully.
|
|
| Tue Jan 16 08:49:13 2001
Here's that one I was talking about over on Discussion... |
| Record number: 4110 Title: Caligula Medium: TV Series Actress: Helen Mirren, unknown Description: This bizarre Roman spectacle has two scenes: 1) Caesonia (Mirren) is bound in a spreadeagle so she can (unwillingly) give birth to her child before the ogling hoi polloi. 2) A naked slave is dangled by her wrists and ankles face down and is lashed in that positon. First, Mirren is not bound in the first scene. She's holding onto a couple of rings while she screams with her labor pains, in what would be a "Fay Wray" position if she were bound (although she's sitting on a stoool, not standing), but her wrists aren't tied. Go back and look closely if you don't believe this. Second, I frankly don't remember the second scene, but I have to admit I fast-forwarded through a lot of this movie, so this one may really be there. This one aired a few months back, so I was able to examine the birth scene rather closely before deciding not to keep it. |
| Bindan Gagher |
| tie_her_up@usa.net |
| Tue Jan 16 18:59:54 2001
Re: Here's that one I was talking about over on Discussion... |
| > Record number: 4110 > Title: Caligula > Medium: TV Series > Actress: Helen Mirren, unknown > > > Description: This bizarre Roman spectacle has two scenes: > > > 1) Caesonia (Mirren) is bound in a spreadeagle so she can > (unwillingly) give birth to her child before the > ogling hoi polloi. > > 2) A naked slave is dangled by her wrists and ankles face > down and is lashed in that positon. > > First, Mirren is not bound in the first scene. She's > holding onto a couple of rings while she screams with her > labor pains, in what would be a "Fay Wray" position if > she were bound (although she's sitting on a stoool, not > standing), but her wrists aren't tied. Go back and look > closely if you don't believe this. > > Second, I frankly don't remember the second scene, but I > have to admit I fast-forwarded through a lot of this > movie, so this one may really be there. > > This one aired a few months back, so I was able to > examine the birth scene rather closely before deciding > not to keep it. I threw it the database based on one of Carl McGuire's Bound for Hollywood columns from 1985 or thereabouts (I'm working from Harmony's compilation of his columns.) He says Mirren's "arms and legs are spread out and immobilized" -- and then goes onto describe the nude slave scene. You've seen it; I'm just trying to paraphrase a secondary source. Since I brought it into this world, I'll take the entry out. If the scene shows up in one of those "Director's Cut" additions someone can always put it back. |
| David |
|
|