|
|
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.
|
|
| Friday November 29 07:45:00 2013 Hostages 1.6 |
| OK, who replaced my detailed entry for #17205? The current one is sparse, poorly written and has no details about the damsel's bonds. Mine was entered weeks ago, in plenty of detail, was well-written and had timecomes. That version should be reinstated. |
| Sam |
| Friday November 29 08:21:34 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Sam wrote: > OK, who replaced my detailed entry for #17205? The > current one is sparse... 17205 is the original entry. Yours was a duplicate. |
| Gagster |
| Friday November 29 08:41:46 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Gagster wrote: > Sam wrote: > > OK, who replaced my detailed entry for #17205? The > > current one is sparse... > 17205 is the original entry. Yours was a duplicate. Well that's weird. When I created it, I checked & there was no entry for that scene at the time. Regardless, my gripe still stands: the current one is inadequate. My one was much more informative to the reader in terms of detail. |
| Sam |
| Friday November 29 08:49:33 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Sam wrote: > Gagster wrote: > > Sam wrote: > > > OK, who replaced my detailed entry for #17205? > The > > > current one is sparse... > > 17205 is the original entry. Yours was a > duplicate. > Well that's weird. When I created it, I checked & > there was no entry for that scene at the time. > Regardless, my gripe still stands: the current one is > inadequate. My one was much more informative to the reader in terms of detail. Your entries are always well written and full of an amazing amount of detail, but in this case, the original writer (who happens to be me) included the snark and derision the scene earned. You made the scene sound much better than I thought it deserved, so I just zapped it rather than even trying to merge them. I might have done it differently if I had finished drinking my coffee before I checked over the entries, so I'll apologize if you found my brute-force editing to be excessive. |
| Gagster |
| Friday November 29 09:11:17 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| No worries then. It's just that even with throwaway scenes (which I didn't think that one was), I try to make an effort by including as much detail as possible. As it stands for that scene, no mention whatsoever is made of her bonds, even though *I* tried to make it clear to the reader that zipties were involved, and that the damsel did a lot of emoting. And all of this without injecting too much subjectivity; "good scene", "not recommended viewing", etc. So.........I guess now I've come to learn that the dB is more like Wikipedia, in that one editor may prefer their revision over another. Guess I'll know NOT to put in much effort next time, if it only gets wiped on a whim later. *shrug* |
| Sam |
| Friday November 29 09:45:07 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Sam wrote: > So.........I guess now I've come to learn that the dB is > more like Wikipedia, in that one editor may prefer their > revision over another. Guess I'll know NOT to put in much > effort next time, if it only gets wiped on a whim later. *shrug* Wasn't trying to discourage you Sam, and I'd regret if you changed your style of writing. In this particular case, the entry was edited ONLY because it was a duplicate for an existing entry. If it had been entered before mine, I wouldn't have touched it at all. If it makes you feel better, I've made the same mistake of entering an already existing scene, only to have Jay or Brian come along and purge it. Its frustrating, but it happens. |
| Gagster |
| Friday November 29 11:41:18 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| I gather this is Sam's version: Record #17260 Title: Hostages Medium: TV Series Actress: Nina Arianda Description: Episode: "Sister's Keeper" (1.6)<br><br>At 35mins guest star Arianda is grabbed and forced to sit on a chair whilst her onscreen sister Toni Collette watches in shock; Arianda's hands are bound behind the chair with a black ziptie, ankles ziptied to the chair legs, and we can hear her (off-camera) being gagged with a strip of duct tape, and finally a thin black cloth tied over her eyes. She is terrified and mmpphhs lot, after which she is left to struggle in the chair for a few seconds whilst Collette and her captor go outside for some improptu shooting practice.<br><br>We rejoin at 38mins, with Arianda still sitting on the chair and mmpphhing/sobbing in the background whilst a bunch of dialogue takes place amongst the regular stars of the show. About a minute later her captor rips off the tape from her mouth and cuts her zipties free. |
| Brian R |
| Friday November 29 11:49:39 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Brian R wrote: > I gather this is Sam's version Sure, but I'm over it. It just caught me by surprise when I looked back at it, coz I've tried doing my part in adding entries for whatever scenes I happen to watch. As I said, I'll know to keep them basic from now on, at least for brand new scenes like that one. "Stepping on toes", etc. |
| Sam |
| Friday November 29 12:07:08 2013 Re: Hostages 1.6 |
| Sam wrote: > Brian R wrote: > > I gather this is Sam's version > "Stepping on toes", etc. Last comment on the deletion - this wasn't an attack on you Sam, or a commentary on your writing style. 17260 was deleted only because 17205 was already there. As long as Brian reposted your original text, I've edited the DB so that your work won't go to waste. |
| Gagster |
| Friday November 29 14:51:11 2013 [1152] Code of Silence (1985) |
| Bonus feature: the DiD's blouse is completely unbuttoned, and there is no sign of a bra as I recall. Nothing explicit is shown, but it comes close... |
| Tex |
| tequismequis@yahoo.com |
|
|