|
|
Welcome to the Discussion page. This forum is for discussing scenes from mainstream sources, primarily TV shows and movies, but we venture off into newspaper and magazine articles, stage plays, and other areas. Please do not post regarding commercial videos.
|
|
| Friday April 23 00:01:27 2004 Striperella pops |
| Good night for toon bondage, I guess. Striperella just popped with a scenes of Stripperella in costume with ehr hands cuffed behind her back and a tape gag over her mouth, about to be sawed in half by a crazed magician. Brief but nice and includes a scene where Striperella is so mad she forgets to remove her gag after freeing herself.
|
| Pat Powers |
| Friday April 23 00:19:36 2004 24 |
| Somebody posted a while back about Elisha Cuthbert's character Kim, getting knocked out and taken hostage in a college by the Jane Saunders character on an episode that's supposed to air in May. But on Tuesday's episode, it seemed like the opposite, as Jane was KO'd at the college and replaced by Kim. Jane is currently handcuffed to a chair and is going to get sent back to CTU. Was this a mistake, or is Kim still going to get snatched in an upcoming episode. If she and Rieko Aylesworth both get the full treatment, this will turn out to be the best ending for a 24 season yet. |
| Friday April 23 00:35:13 2004 Re: 24 |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> Somebody posted a while back about Elisha Cuthbert's > character Kim, getting knocked out and taken hostage in a > college by the Jane Saunders character on an episode > that's supposed to air in May. But on Tuesday's episode, > it seemed like the opposite, as Jane was KO'd at the > college and replaced by Kim. Jane is currently > handcuffed to a chair and is going to get sent back to > CTU. Was this a mistake, or is Kim still going to get > snatched in an upcoming episode. No mistake. The reports have been perfectly consistent: Jane was due for the treatment this week, which happened, and Kim's still due in May. I will now blather some more to make the script happy, since I think all of the context that I've quoted would be important for someone just dropping in...there, that should do it... |
| Raffish |
| Friday April 23 02:10:58 2004 Re: SPyMaster |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> Maybe it was a re-run...but Spymaster tonight had all of > the contestant plati-cuffed and hooded for a fair part of > the show. The scenes were kinda broken up, but they were > ok. It originally ran Tuesday on TLC, I'm putting together a DB entry for it. It should run again Sunday afternoon. Unfortunately, one of the best-looking women was knocked out with an injury right before the capture exercise. |
| Brian R |
| Friday April 23 02:15:59 2004 Re: 24 |
| Raffish wrote:
> I will now blather some more to make the script happy, > since I think all of the context that I've quoted would > be important for someone just dropping in...there, that > should do it... I don't like this, and it's grounds for having your post deleted. If you need to add more, add more RELEVANT commentary. Also, don't apologize for duplicate posts, that just adds work for me. |
| The Moderator |
| Friday April 23 03:16:55 2004 Re: 24 |
| The Moderator wrote:
> I don't like this, and it's grounds for having your post > deleted. If you need to add more, add more RELEVANT > commentary. And if you need to delete my post, delete my post. I promise to feel bad about it, because I truly don't want to make more work for you. I know I was out of line to some degree, but I also believe that I have a valid point in that the value of a post can't always be determined algorithmically according to the ratio of quote to response. I quoted the absolute minimum that I felt would be necessary to grant appropriate context for a reader who had just dropped in, and I wrote succinctly because I'm not under the illusion that anyone really wants to see me blather. Your script didn't like that, and I poked minor fun at it. It's not personal, it's not because I haven't been in a similar position as you, and it's not because I don't see why you've coded as you have. At the same time, we can't all be long-winded all the time. > Also, don't apologize for duplicate posts, that just > adds work for me. Okay, Brian. I'd apologize for apologizing, but you've kinda put me in a no-win position in that respect, so I'll just walk away. |
| Raffish |
| Friday April 23 10:15:24 2004 Hope He Has Cute Daughters |
| "HARRISON FORD will be playing the good guy once again in the thriller The Wrong Element, Variety reports. In the film, Ford takes on the role of a security chief of a global bank whose family is kidnapped. He has to break through his own security safeguards to steal $37 million from the bank for his family's release." |
| Friday April 23 10:30:24 2004 MUTANT X episode "Lit Fuse" |
| Still waiting for a proper review.It's on May 3rd on The MYSTERY Channel. |
| Friday April 23 10:31:39 2004 Re: Passions |
| Tapemaster wrote:
> > bondage that wouldn't incapacitate any damsel > > I have a real problem with "directors" who tie a girls hand in front and put a gag on her. It's just stupid. It makes the damsel look like an idiot who isn't smart enough to take her own gag off. Therefore, she looks like an actress and not a damsel. That said, her facial expressions were very nice. |
| doug |
| doug5759@yahoo.com |
| Friday April 23 12:47:46 2004 Re: Passions |
| doug wrote:
> Tapemaster wrote: > > > > bondage that wouldn't incapacitate any damsel > > > > > I have a real problem with "directors" who tie > a girls hand in front and put a gag on her. It's just > stupid. It makes the damsel look like an idiot who isn't > smart enough to take her own gag off. It's a mystery we'll never solve unless someone actually works on a set as to why they do it. In this case, they totally wrapped the white tape around her feet extra thick. Why not just have the damsel place her hands behind her back and fake it, not actually show them? That said, doesn't really bother me, but I do like seeing the actress with the hands tightly tied behind the back, especially with a struggle scene. |
| Friday April 23 13:16:15 2004 Can anyone help me about a seems-to-be 1970s film |
| I am looking for one episode from a 1970s-1980s film .I am from non-English speaking country so I can not remember the movie's English name.But the name seems to be translated as "kidnap" or so.The episode is quite long and there is at least two part in it.--I am not sure as I do not watched it throughly but just the first 30 minutes of it.(but at least 10 min of gag and bound scenery).
The film is about one nurse who is kidnapped by one of the patients who she took care of when he is in hospital. When the nurse went home the patient,who has just been out of the hospital invited her to take his car home.Then the patient,who seems to be a bound/gag lover, drived her home and hit her. When the nurse came to herself ,she found herself very very well thick tape-gaged and handcuffed to a bed. The bad man(patient) came in and took several photo of her ,bound and gagged and sent it to the hosptial she worked~!!!! Then the bad man went home and took her gag then re-gagged her... then my electricity was gone off and I do not see the remaining film! So,is anyone here has the data of this film(it seems to be a forgotten one),the nurse is a pretty blonde young woman .I have remembered this for several years but yet not found the data. If anyone can help me I thank him/her very much... |
| serbia |
| Friday April 23 13:21:55 2004 Re: Hands in frony |
| doug wrote:
> I have a real problem with "directors" who tie > a girls hand in front and put a gag on her... I saw a cute little scene in a Mexican movie last week that typified this stupidity (sorry I didn't catch the title). It was a comedy, and the bad guys grab this cute little blonde in a minidress and heels, tie her hand and foot and put a detective gag on her. At one point she reaches up, pulls down the gag and sticks her tongue out at them. I thought it would've been funnier if she'd then pulled the gag back up, but oh well. |
| MexiFan |
| Friday April 23 13:37:24 2004 Re: Can anyone help me about a seems-to-be 1970s film |
| serbia wrote:
"who has just been out of the hospital invited her to take his car home.Then the patient,who seems to be a bound/gag lover, drived her home and hit her. When the nurse came to herself ,she found herself very very well thick tape-gaged and handcuffed to a bed. The bad man(patient) came in and took several photo of her ,bound and gagged and sent it to the hosptial she worked~!!!! Then the bad man went home and took her gag then re-gagged her" _________________ Serbia, Sounds like Ärztin In Angst See homepage link for pictures from it. |
| Jay L |
| http://www.abductor.com/raffish/canuck/ArztinInAngst-Part1/ |
| Friday April 23 13:44:06 2004 Re: Serbia's Post |
| Here's the main link Serbia,
as my buddy Raffish has Ärztin In Angst in 3 parts. Likely the 2nd & 3rd part is what you missed when the power went off? |
| Jay L |
| http://www.abductor.com/raffish/canuck/ |
| Friday April 23 14:08:31 2004 Video clearance sale at local store |
|
This post was moved to Anything Goes. Poster: Michael Dean Reason: Off-topic. |
| The Moderator |
| Friday April 23 14:14:46 2004 Re: Can anyone help me about a seems-to-be 1970s film |
| Jay L wrote:
> > Serbia, > Sounds like Ärztin In Angst > See homepage link for pictures from it. Which is one of my all time favorite scenes, period. And one I would have likely never viewed if not for this site and Raffish |
| doug |
| doug5759@yahoo.com |
| Friday April 23 14:36:01 2004 Re: 24 |
| Raffish wrote:
> The Moderator wrote: > > > If you need to add more, add more RELEVANT > > commentary. > > And if you need to delete my post, delete my post. I have deleted posts for that in the past. When I make a decision on such things, I take into account many things. These include the utility of the post in question and the past contributions and demeanor of the person involved. When I decide not to delete, I also reserve the right to issue a warning, so that everyone (not just the particular person) understands that this was borderline behavior and they need to avoid it if at all possible. > I quoted the absolute minimum that I felt would be > necessary to grant appropriate context for a reader who > had just dropped in, and I wrote succinctly because I'm > not under the illusion that anyone really wants to see me > blather. Ok, that's a good start. > Your script didn't like that, and I poked minor > fun at it. What you consider minor fun I consider a deliberate flouting of the rules in this case. Again, I wasn't upset enough to do anything more than issue a warning. > It's not personal, Likewise. > it's not because I haven't > been in a similar position as you, and it's not because I > don't see why you've coded as you have. At the same > time, we can't all be long-winded all the time. However, you were in a position where a bit more text was needed. You couldn't come up with ANY commentary? When I devised this system, I could have made it so the rules didn't apply to me, but I didn't. So I have to maintain the same ration in my posts as everyone. However, only 25% new material is pretty generous. > > Also, don't apologize for duplicate posts, that just > > adds work for me. > > Okay, Brian. I'd apologize for apologizing I take it for granted that no one intends to post duplicates and are sorry that it happened. If you wish to post about it to give me information as to what happened, then that's fine, but a general "sorry" isn't necessary. I will clean up duplicates silently when I see them and so will need to delete the apology posts as well. Again, this is meant as a general instruction to the group. It would be a good idea for everyone to review FAQ 2.2. See link below. |
| The Moderator |
| http://brianspage.com/faq.html#faq_2.2 |
| Friday April 23 15:15:48 2004 Re: Hands in frony |
| MexiFan wrote:
> I saw a cute little scene in a Mexican movie last week > that typified this stupidity (sorry I didn't catch the > title). Does anyone know what movie this is? It sounds interesting, and I'd like to see caps, if anyone knows what it is and has them. |
| Spanky |
| Friday April 23 16:17:33 2004 Re: Can anyone help me about a seems-to-be 1970s film |
| > > Sounds like Ärztin In Angst
> > See homepage link for pictures from it. > > Which is one of my all time favorite scenes, period. And > one I would have likely never viewed if not for this site > and Raffish > Very similiar to You Have My Family's Trust, a German film wgere a Fraulein is kept B&G throughout the movie. The Germans are very good with these extended scenes. |
| http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/?uc_full_date=20040418 |
| Friday April 23 16:52:35 2004 The Saint TV scenes |
| I see BBC America will be showing season 3 of The Saint series (with Roger Moore) starting April 26 Monday thru Friday at 4 PM EST - I'm sure there are some scenes there but none are listed in the database - specifics, anyone? |
| crysbyl |
| Friday April 23 17:16:45 2004 Re: Passions |
| >Why not just have the damsel place her hands
> behind her back and fake it, not actually show them? I would MUCH rather see the damsel's hands bound in front than have her place her hands behind her back and fake it. Am I the only person who thought it was a GREAT scene? |
| Tapemaster |
| km574@yahoo.com |
| Friday April 23 18:13:17 2004 Re: 24 |
| The Moderator wrote:
> However, you were in a position where a bit more text > was needed. You couldn't come up with ANY commentary? Well, that's the crux of it. I probably could have, but I was also capturing/editing/converting literally half a dozen clips at the time -- so I basically wanted to get in, answer the question because I thought it would be helpful, and get out without taking up any more space on your page or time out of my schedule than it took to do so. I suppose I could add "Look at the gag on THAT chick!" to my posts by default, and it would probably even be relevant to the actual content of my posts more often than not. But would it make any entity apart from your script actually happier? At any rate, it certainly wasn't "a deliberate flouting of the rules." As you mention with regard to the secondary double-post issue, I would never deliberately flout rules set by someone I respect. I guess I'm just wondering why it's perfectly fine for me to say on this forum, "This rule has its occasional flaws," but not fine for me to imply the same thing via (admittedly not all that inspired, because I didn't actually intend it as anything but an aside) humor. Your response makes perfect sense, and I appreciate it. Just wanted to raise this single point before we both move on. |
| Raffish |
| Friday April 23 18:54:39 2004 Troy (2004) |
| "Troy" (with Brad Pitt as Achilles) hits theaters May 14. While it's unlikely there will be a scene for Diane Kruger's Helen of Troy, the recent USA Network "Helen of Troy" version did envision a nice onscreen gagging & over-the-shoulder abduction -- so there's always a chance... |
| Kinky-napper |
| Friday April 23 20:38:00 2004 Re: 24 |
| Raffish wrote:
> I suppose I could add "Look at the gag on THAT > chick!" to my posts by default, and it would > probably even be relevant to the actual content of my > posts more often than not. But would it make any entity > apart from your script actually happier? The reason this "feature" was implemented was because of people failing to trim posts properly. If I allow one person to just fill it up with irrelevant material, then I can hardly complain about others putting 10 lines of "blah blah blah" in order to fill up space for their one-line comment. Equal enforcement and all that. > I guess I'm just wondering why it's perfectly fine for me > to say on this forum, "This rule has its occasional > flaws," but not fine for me to imply the same thing > via (admittedly not all that inspired, because I didn't > actually intend it as anything but an aside) humor. Think of it as the difference in going to a city council meeting to complain that the speed limit on a road is too low, and just driving fast down it while shouting that fact at a passing cop. As you should know, I am always willing to listen to reasonable complaints about the service. It's all about reaching the compromise the works best for all, me included. I'd prefer not to have had to implement the various restrictions, but I also didn't like when people failed to listen to me and we got way too many "me too" posts. |
| The Moderator |
| Friday April 23 21:41:13 2004 Re: Passions |
| > It's a mystery we'll never solve unless someone actually
> works on a set as to why they do it. In this case, they Seriously. Many directors erquire th actual bondage just in case the camera catches that angle and so that there is no risk of the hands being moved in a way that they could not be and no one noticing till after the movie is released. |
| Friday April 23 22:18:40 2004 Re: Passions |
| Tapemaster wrote:
> Am I the only person who thought it was a GREAT scene? Well, it is PASSIONS, right ? Just about anything to do with that show makes shit ( yes, real fecal matter ) look good by comparison. |
| C |
|
|