|
|
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.
|
|
| Thursday June 19 05:01:16 2003 Re: [#7685]- Veils On Topic? |
| > Similar to the above transparent blue scarf, without any > motif. "I was asking Jay why he was admonishing the poster." Hi Biff: The described "cover her entire face with a blue transparent scarf.", sounded like a veil. Person whom posted the entry claimed "no gags" Posted before when veils consided off-topic, and a few entries where Arab burkas (sp?) or belly dancing veils, whatever?, have been described as OTM's, as heard sqwacking when entries edited. Also the Moderator just went over about implied OTM Gags. From Discussion Page: Monday June 09 02:13:02 2003 Re: Ponds Advertisement > On local TV and magazine, there is a new advertisement > from Ponds Facial Scrub (France) with a beautiful model > wearing a turtle neck sweaters that cover her mouth. Let's try to keep things vaguely on-topic. The Moderator ______________________ If the scarf was brought up as a gag, in dispute of the no gags claim, be different. We'll sort it if intent was a gag dispute? However, I'm sick of the veil is OTM sqwacking. Anything more on veils will be ignored by me. Figure they can discuss with Brian if want it on topic. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Thursday June 19 05:42:49 2003 Veil - Matter of trust |
| What if the villain held the scarf tightly over her face.
(attempt to suffocate / gag the DID??) Is this the same method as hand gag? Later he use the scarf to strangle her. |
| Thursday June 19 11:19:53 2003 Police Story 2 - DVD |
| Record number: 922
Title: Ging chaat goo si juk jaap (1988) aka Police Story 2 Medium: Movie Actress: Maggie Cheung Description: This is a Hong Kong martial arts film staring Jackie Chan, sequel to the first POLICE STORY. Kidnappers hold Maggie tied to a chair and tape gagged. She is grabbed around the 80' mark (with commercials), and then seen bound and gagged a few minutes later. About 100' in, she's again seen in the same predicament when Jackie finds and releases her. IMPORTANT NOTE: In the letterboxed version, you get to see the entire scene, in the far more common pan & scan cut, you only briefly see her b/g on screen, as she is being held in the corner of the room and is cropped out of the picture for most of the scene. ===================================== I saw this movie on DVD wide screen version (Title: Kowloon Eyes) Description: Approx. 30 minutes before the end of the movie, May (Maggie Cheung) was kidnapped from her aunt apartment. Later Jackie Chan received call from 3 kidnappers. When he came to the villain hideout, he was beaten unconscious. When he awoke, he saw her girlfriend bound (arm behind her back) and tape gagged with silver tape, sitting on a long, chair (without armrest - some sort of wooden horse). The villain remove the tape gag. They torture her by throwing firecracker at her (still bound), to force Jackie Chan to carry bomb to Police station. Lots of screaming and struggling. She was wearing brown sweaters and white dress. Guy alert. (Tape gag / removal of tape gag scenes are cut by ordinary / non wide screen version). Approx 20 minutes before the end, She was bound to a wooden chair (arm behind her back) and tape gagged (silver tape) in a large (multi stairs) abandoned warehouse. Jackie saw her from a windows and he break into the room to rescue her. Same dress. (not cut by ordinary / non wide screen version) |
| Thursday June 19 12:07:19 2003 Re: [#922]- Police Story 2 - DVD |
| > IMPORTANT NOTE: In the letterboxed version, you get to
> see the entire scene, > I saw this movie on DVD wide screen version (Title: > Kowloon Eyes) Quite the difference. I'll work it into the entry. Thanx for the assist here. |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Thursday June 19 12:23:57 2003 Re: Veil - Matter of trust |
| > What if the villain held the scarf tightly over her
> face. > (attempt to suffocate / gag the DID??) If you feel intent was to gag the DiD, that's different. Ask in future you please stress that. Thanx |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Thursday June 19 13:34:55 2003 As the World Turns |
| This scene was just added in. It's a duplicate of Terri's first scene from 2000. There is a story on a Web site of her talking about being "bound and gagged" on the floor in a storyline, but it appears she was never gagged in what was aired. I've requested help on this one on Discussion before, asking if anyone remembers a gag in this scene and nobody has even said they saw her gagged, mush less have it recorded. She did knock herself over when tied to the chair and was on the ground. She may just have added "gagged" in the interview for whatever reason (the male sidekick was gagged in another room). Fuzz also did an ATWT caps run a couple months ago and he didn't have the scene. I didn't make the first entry, but that's exactly the way I remember the scene, but I did miss a couple early parts. Would love to be proved wrong here but don't think it's happening.
Record number: 8274 Title: As the World Turns Medium: Soap Opera Actress: Terri Colombino, aka Terri Conn Description: From the fall of 2000. Brief scene where Katie (Colombino) is bound and gagged on the floor. Guy alert. Of special note: in a Q & A transcript on her Web site, Terri mentions this as a favorite scene of hers. Record number: 2833 Title: As the World Turns Medium: Soap Opera Actress: Terri Conn Description: Early April 2000. When the real stalker catches up with her character, Katie, he tapes her wrist to the arms of a chair. The idiot keeps releasing her arms than reties them with the same piece of tape so after awhile she can pull them free and run til help arrives. No gag and there is a guy but he is hardly shown and never shares the scene with her. |
| Brian W. |
| Thursday June 19 13:51:48 2003 Re: As the World Turns |
| > This scene was just added in. It's a duplicate
> Record number: 8274 > Record number: 2833 I'll look after it, thanx for your assist here |
| Jay L |
| kdnpr@yahoo.com |
| Thursday June 19 14:13:06 2003 Re: [#922]- Police Story 2 - DVD |
|
> > IMPORTANT NOTE: In the letterboxed version, you get to > > > see the entire scene, > > > I saw this movie on DVD wide screen version (Title: > > Kowloon Eyes) > > Quite the difference. I'll work it into the entry. > Thanx for the assist here. > It's actually that light brown packing tape that's as ubiquitous in Asian scenes as silver duct tape is in the US. |
| Biff |
| Thursday June 19 14:24:17 2003 Re: [#7685]- Veils On Topic? |
| >
> Hi Biff: > > The described "cover her entire face with a blue > transparent scarf.", sounded like a veil. > > Person whom posted the entry claimed "no gags" > I didn't pick up on any claim of it being a gag. However, even it that was the intent, the fact that the scene qualifies for the DB by virtue of her being bound renders the issue moot to my mind. In other words, if faux gags are verboten when flying solo ... that's one thing. If they're paired with bonafide bondage, what's the harm in they're being mentioned? Make sense? |
| Biff |
| Thursday June 19 16:33:52 2003 Re: [#7685]- Veils On Topic? |
| >
> But in this case, the original poster claimed "no gags". > It was never called a gag, was it? I took it as just a description of her face being covered with a scarf ... and in any event, since there's bondage in the scene, I don't understand the finger-wagging. To me it's just an ancillary detail. Am I missing something? |
| Biff |
| Thursday June 19 21:35:32 2003 Re: [#7685]- Veils On Topic? |
|
> > Am I missing something? > > I think I explained myself in greater detail than this > deserved > Jay, I know what you're saying, but it doesn't seem to apply to this situation. I didn't see any challenge to the original entry ... just the addition of the detail of the scarf around her face. I didn't see any reference to it as a gag, so I don't understand how that addition in any way conflicts with the original entry. I'm really not in the mood to continue this, as it seems you're not following me. I simply saw you admonishing a poster, and didn't understand the context. Now that I do, I think your annoyance is misplaced based on the reasons above. Again ... if I missed something, point it out. You know I'm not trying to be contentious ... or you should, at any rate. |
| Biff |
|
|