|
|
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.
|
|
| Monday June 28 00:01:36 2004 Re: Clip |
| Graham wrote:
> does anyone have a clip of charlotte rampling in caravan > to vaccares? it is a rare scene... I don't have the clip, but as I recall the scene was dark and the ropework was a loosie, so you're not missing much in the way of a rigorous scene. On the other hand Rampling is one of the most beautiful women ever to grace the silver screen.... |
| Eric |
| Monday June 28 00:06:30 2004 Re: Db entries |
| Kerhop wrote:
> > I suggest that rather than pulling suspect entries, add: > > "This entry under investigation by the Editing Team, > I like this idea. Agreed. It'll solve both problems easily. |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 00:48:49 2004 Re: Db entries |
| Brian R wrote:
"I suggest that rather than pulling suspect entries, add: "This entry under investigation by the Editing Team, be advised that this may be erroneous and subject to future deletion." __________________ Sure |
| Jay L |
| Monday June 28 06:28:34 2004 Database Suggestion/Question |
| I would like to see some sort of "checkbox" system added to the DB entry form to separate the scenes with gags from those that don't.
I realize this is a selfish thing for us gag-snobs, but it doesn't seem like it would be THAT much trouble and you could also add a few others such as chloro, bare feet, chains, whatever, for those who prefer that sort of thing. |
| The Greyman |
| greymanspage@yahoo.com |
| Monday June 28 07:31:17 2004 Re: Database Suggestion/Question |
| > I would like to see some sort of "checkbox"
That would be cool, BUT I think that would be a pain in the ass for Brian / the DB admin to add now - The DB has over 10,000 entries, which is, well, a lot to go through and check the appropriate boxes. That wouldn't happen without a lot of people working on it, and I don't think we have that many people willing to put in the time. The fields wouldn't be very useful if the majority of the entries weren't accurate. It would also be a minor pain to add the fields to the db. |
| AsbestosFilter |
| AsbestosFilter@yahoo.com |
| Monday June 28 10:23:00 2004 Re: boots |
| Lisa Stahl in 'Pacific Blue' (a nice hog-tie) |
| Monday June 28 10:35:47 2004 The curse of the near gag |
| Just do it, already |
 |
 |
| Monday June 28 11:01:12 2004 Re: Database Suggestion/Question |
| The Greyman wrote:
> I would like to see some sort of "checkbox" > system added to the DB entry form to separate the scenes > with gags from those that don't. > The entries themselves really should describe the scenes in as much detail as possible anyway. Don't most of them already mention if a scene has a gag or not? What annoys me is that a number of them say things like "tied and cleave-gagged with a bandanna" without bothering to describe just how she is tied. Are you saying you want to just be able to tell at a glance if a scene has a gag, without having to read the description (which as I mentioned, should say it anyway if it's well-written)? |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 11:05:21 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> Just do it, already > Here's one from Head Above Water. Three nice tie-up scenes, first one has a gag. Second one, the guy is talked out of it (you'd have to see the movie). |
 |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 11:35:08 2004 Re: Paper Dolls Returns!!! |
| > Soapnet has picked up the short lived series "Paper
> Dolls" and will begin airing it Saturday nights in > July. The package includes all 12 episodes. That means > the unaired episode(s) with Terry Farrell getting > abducted will FINALLY see the light of day. I remember watching that show only because Terry Farrell's character was being stalked. There was another kidnapping but it involved a heavily pregnant character (played by Mimi Rogers) and she's only seen on a bed writhing around while her abductors wonder what to do. There may be no unaired episodes anyway. The last episode was a cliffhanger involving a plane crash and the guide at the link says it was episode 14. BTW, Jennifer Miller was the main writer. So what? She wrote 'Deadly Lessons' which also had a subplot about a cutie being stalked (and we know how that turned out). |
| http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/EpisodeGuideSummary/showid-60/Paper_Dolls/ |
| Monday June 28 11:43:43 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Lindsay Lohan in 'Freaky Friday' |
| http://www.starletrealm.com/0073/293.jpg |
| Monday June 28 14:48:08 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> Lindsay Lohan in 'Freaky Friday' > http://www.starletrealm.com/0073/293.jpg That one's far worse, since it's also a case of the "near tying". Someone who saw an earlier version said that she was actually duct-taped up and taken away by her friends. However it was removed from the theatrical version. Now that just plain sucks. |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 14:54:11 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Jazz411 wrote:
> (unsigned poster) wrote: > > > Just do it, already > > > Here's one from Head Above Water. Three nice tie-up > scenes, first one has a gag. Second one, the guy is > talked out of it (you'd have to see the movie). There were two gag scenes in this movie, as I recall. In addition to the cleave gag pictured, Cameron Diaz receieved an over-the-mouth gag with packing. As for near-gag scenes, there was one in "Charlie's Angels" in which Kate Jackson has been caught snooping by the villains. Her hands are loosely tied to the armrests of a chair and she is blindfolded and is about to be gagged, but the head villain says "No, don't go that far". |
| Hadji |
| Monday June 28 15:18:56 2004 ATWT alert |
| Molly was grabbed by thugs (not shown) in the final minutes and will be held hostage this week. Tuesday's preview showed her getting dragged away and protesting verbally. Molly is still being played at the moment by Lesli Kay, who has already started on "GH" as Lois. I think Kay is on ATWT only until the end of this week. Hopefully, we'll see her tied and gagged, and then the new Molly will also get tied and gagged.
Lucy was shown Monday and tried to convince the hot young lady cop to go easy on Dusty. Possible Lucy could KO the cop and run off with Dusty. Maybe the cop's handcuffs will come to good use. |
| Monday June 28 15:44:04 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Hadji wrote:
> There were two gag scenes in this movie, as I recall. In > addition to the cleave gag pictured, Cameron Diaz > receieved an over-the-mouth gag with packing. > The cleave didn't amount to anything, which is the point I was trying to make. He started to put it on, but was talked out of it. Therefore, one gag scene (since the second was incomplete). |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 16:01:56 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Happened to Marcia Gay Harden in 'Fever' when the captor told her to open up for the gag but she said she couldn't breathe with it in her mouth. Luckily she tasted the cloth again later in the movie.
|
| Monday June 28 16:05:04 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Jazz411 wrote:
> Hadji wrote: > Cameron Diaz > > receieved an over-the-mouth gag with packing. > > > The cleave didn't amount to anything, which is the point > I was trying to make. He started to put it on, but was > talked out of it. Therefore, one gag scene (since the > second was incomplete). Technically, you are correct, but IMO the first gag scene was a really superb one, so if another one in the same movie didn't come through, I would hardly call that a curse. |
| Peter de K |
| Monday June 28 16:33:40 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Jazz411 wrote:
> (unsigned poster) wrote: > > > Lindsay Lohan in 'Freaky Friday' > > http://www.starletrealm.com/0073/293.jpg > > That one's far worse, since it's also a case of the > "near tying". Someone who saw an earlier > version said that she was actually duct-taped up and > taken away by her friends. However it was removed from > the theatrical version. Now that just plain sucks. If thats really the case it DOES suck I guess I'm kinda suspicious) If she got duct taped and taken away there should be some major deleted scenes on the DVD (but I've yet to hear of any) |
| Snowcat |
| Monday June 28 18:06:25 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Snowcat wrote:
> Jazz411 wrote: > > > (unsigned poster) wrote: > > > > > Lindsay Lohan in 'Freaky Friday' > > > http://www.starletrealm.com/0073/293.jpg > > > > That one's far worse, since it's also a case of the > > "near tying". Someone who saw an earlier > > version said that she was actually duct-taped up and > > taken away by her friends. However it was removed from > > the theatrical version. Now that just plain sucks. > > If thats really the case it DOES suck I guess I'm kinda > suspicious. If she got duct taped and taken away there > should be some major deleted scenes on the DVD (but I've > yet to hear of any) I seem to recall an old post about such a duct tape scene in the "Freaky Friday" *SCREENPLAY*. Only the near gag made it to the screen. Remember Van's First Law: It's not about the bondage; it's about the story. The only people making bondage movies are the "commercial" people Brian doesn't want us to talk about. :-) The "Freaky Friday" remake is a good movie (in a House-of-Mouse sort of way.) Would that it had been a non-stop bondage romp featuring LL *&* Jamie Lee Curtis B&G'd in every way imaginable... but that wasn't the story. |
| Van |
| vvvan@earthlink.net |
| http://www.restrainedtastes.com/van/ |
| Monday June 28 18:20:27 2004 A.T.W.T. |
| Re: Lucy storyline...there may be more to come yet. One of the bad guys was sitting in the restaurant listening to the cops discussing the efforts to find Lucy/Dusty. |
| zinger |
| Monday June 28 19:46:21 2004 Re: Paper Dolls Returns!!! |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> > Soapnet has picked up the short lived series "Paper > > Dolls" and will begin airing it Saturday nights in > > July. The package includes all 12 episodes. That means > > the unaired episode(s) with Terry Farrell getting > > abducted will FINALLY see the light of day. > > > I remember watching that show only because Terry > Farrell's character was being stalked. There was another > kidnapping but it involved a heavily pregnant character > (played by Mimi Rogers) and she's only seen on a bed > writhing around while her abductors wonder what to do. > > There may be no unaired episodes anyway. The last > episode was a cliffhanger involving a plane crash and the > guide at the link says it was episode 14. > > BTW, Jennifer Miller was the main writer. So what? She > wrote 'Deadly Lessons' which also had a subplot about a > cutie being stalked (and we know how that turned out). > http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/EpisodeGuideSummary/showid-60/Paper_Dolls/ I missed "Paper Dolls" completely when it first aired. Didn't someone post that there was an on-air preview or promotion that showed Terry's character tape-gagged? Productions seldom film anything *just* for spots & promos, so the odds are there *ARE* unaired episode(s). The question is, did it(they) get saved? Let's all hope they did & we'll get to see it(them). I don't get Soapnet, so I'll have to rely on others for caps *if* a Terry Farrell DiD-scene materializes... but then... I've *always* depended on the kindness of strangers. :-) |
| Van |
| vvvan@earthlink.net |
| http://www.restrainedtastes.com/van/ |
| Monday June 28 20:22:04 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Snowcat wrote:
> Jazz411 wrote: > > Someone who saw an earlier > > version said that she was actually duct-taped up and > > taken away by her friends. However it was removed from > > the theatrical version. Now that just plain sucks. That wasn't the case. Someone reported a description from a spoiler website, no one saw anything. Quite likely the spoiler site was working off a version of the script. We know how that goes so often. > If she got duct taped and taken away there should be some > major deleted scenes on the DVD (but I've yet to hear of > any) I don't think any were ever filmed. I suspect the scene went away before filming. |
| Brian R |
| Monday June 28 20:30:57 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
|
This post was deleted. Poster: (unsigned poster) Reason: Abusive. |
| The Moderator |
| Monday June 28 20:49:34 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Brian R wrote:
> That wasn't the case. Someone reported a description > from a spoiler website, no one saw anything. Quite > likely the spoiler site was working off a version > of the script. We know how that goes so often. > To be honest, I had no idea that themoviespoiler.com went from screenplays. I had gotten the impression that the reviewer/spoiler had seen the movie itself. You're definitely right about the whole script thing. I once read a screenplay of this one movie, and then later rented the movie itself, and discovered a surprising amount of discrepancies (mostly minor dialog changes, but some scene deletions as well). |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 21:43:40 2004 The Division - tonight |
| on tonight's 2-hr season finale of The Division on Lifetime, Amy Jo Johnson gets taken hostage and is shown blindfolded at around the 60-min mark. Nothing else for her after she removes the blindfold. About 10-15 min later, a cute teen is shown tied and gagged in a closet. Her legs are shown rope tied and she sports a duct tape gag. Her hands are not shown. Very short scene. |
| chubby |
| Monday June 28 21:44:56 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| about the deleted scenes there was only one and it sucked, cudos for taking it out. I sat through half an hour of bonus materials patiently and was rewarded with nothing but the feeling of being a huge loser. To add insult to injury, she appears later holding the gag-sized duct tape strip, rope and *mouth packing*...ouch. Outlook on her is still positive with the kinds of movies she is making though. I give her odds on a scnene within two years. |
| Nad |
| Monday June 28 22:05:04 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Van wrote:
> Remember Van's First Law: It's not about the bondage; > it's about the story. The only people making bondage > movies are the "commercial" people Brian > doesn't want us to talk about. :-) The "Freaky > Friday" remake is a good movie (in a House-of-Mouse > sort of way.) Would that it had been a non-stop bondage > romp featuring LL *&* Jamie Lee Curtis B&G'd in > every way imaginable... but that wasn't the story. http://www.restrainedtastes.com/van/ actually Van I don't think they are necessarily mutually exclusive in fact I think Good bondage actually is a great aid to good storytelling.. the tie up thing (done right)produces many different possibilities for dramatic and comedic "colors" running the gamut from "black and white" ie real horror to all the subtle nuances that become apparent when a "damsel" is "captured" and restricted of movement. Think of how amazingly entertaining Nancy Drew stories have been for decades of girls |
| Snowcat |
| Monday June 28 22:28:23 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| > Van wrote:
> > > Remember Van's First Law: It's not about the bondage; > > it's about the story. Snowcat wrote: > in fact I think Good bondage actually is a great aid to > good storytelling.. Possibly. It depends on the context. Imagine the following scenario: Someone is grabbed and has her hands tied before being put in the back of a car. While the car drives along a road on a hill, the damsel manages to open the door with her bound hands and jump out, landing on and rolling down the hill before managing to cut her bonds with a sharp rock she finds nearby. Now, I'd love to see something like that for its dramatic purposes as well as its bondage. The bondage would be very light (hands only!) since it would fit the story, but it would make a great dramatic scene, as well as increasing the enjoyment of the bondage itself by drawing attention to it. If on the other hand the damsel were completely bound at every possible junction, the scene would be impossible and couldn't happen. The bondage would be great, but the otherwise excellent dramatic scene couldn't be done. Sometimes less is more, and that pertains to a lot of things. > Think of how amazingly entertaining Nancy Drew stories > have been for decades of girls Definitely. I think the danger and adventure were huge parts of it, and bondage - particularly played up as a story element - is a part of that. |
| Jazz411 |
| jazz411@ptd.net |
| Monday June 28 22:31:59 2004 Peyton List caps |
| Has anyone posted caps of the Peyton List scene yet? |
| Monday June 28 23:13:19 2004 Re: The curse of the near gag |
| Snowcat wrote:
> Van wrote: > > > > Remember Van's First Law: It's not about the bondage; > > it's about the story. The only people making bondage > > movies are the "commercial" people Brian > > doesn't want us to talk about. :-) The "Freaky > > Friday" remake is a good movie (in a House-of-Mouse > > sort of way.) Would that it had been a non-stop bondage > > romp featuring LL *&* Jamie Lee Curtis B&G'd in > > every way imaginable... but that wasn't the story. > http://www.restrainedtastes.com/van/ > > actually Van I don't think they are necessarily mutually exclusive > in fact I think Good bondage actually is a great aid to > good storytelling.. > the tie up thing (done right)produces many different > possibilities for dramatic and comedic "colors" > running the gamut from "black and white" ie > real horror to all the subtle nuances that become > apparent when a "damsel" is > "captured" and restricted of movement. Think of how amazingly entertaining Nancy Drew stories have been for decades of girls I'm beginning to regret bringing this up. As usual, we're all talking past each other. :-) My point is we shouldn't waste our energy wringing our hands whenever a DiD scene is "botched" or "missing." By "it's about the story" I mean the writers/producers/directors are trying to tell a story which may or may not have a DiD component, but the DiD element is an *element*... *That's* my point. It could be CAR CHASES, or PONY RIDES, or BALLROOM DANCING, *or* BONDAGE; but whatever floats your boat is *probably* not central to *their* movie. There are exceptions: "The Fast & the Furious" *is* about car chases; "Bound" *is* about bondage (sort of... it's a central theme & key to the action.); etc. I very much wish movie people would do DiD stuff better, but it's *usually* not fair to call them on the carpet for not doing bondage when it's either *very* peripheral or even unrelated to their plot, style, what they're trying to say... to *their* story. :-) |
| Van |
| vvvan@earthlink.net |
| http://www.restrainedtastes.com/ |
| Monday June 28 23:21:01 2004 Van's First Law |
| > > Remember Van's First Law: It's not about the bondage; it's about the story.
> > > > actually Van I don't think they are necessarily mutually exclusive in fact I think Good bondage actually is a great aid to good storytelling.. the tie up thing (done right) produces many different possibilities for dramatic and comedic "colors" running the gamut from "black and white" ie real horror to all the subtle nuances that become apparent when a "damsel" is "captured" and restricted of movement. Think of how amazingly entertaining Nancy Drew stories have been for decades of girls ---- Another example would be the James Bond movies, where moviegoers have the expectation that James Bond and/or the Bond babe will face some kind of villainish deathtrap (sometimes bound together) -- As parodied in "Austin Powers International Man of Mystery": an "overly elaborate, yet easily escapable" deathtrap. "Good-BYE, Mr. Bond." |
| Kinky-napper |
|
|
