Movies under the loop, bondage in movies, Shu Qi in bondage, pantyhose on Shu Qi

How often when you watch a film do you exclaim mentally:”Do they think that we are idiots? They have no idea what they are talking about! Why didn’t they hire a consultant or at least looked in the school books? What an ignorance… Oh, my… Just look at that!!! Do they believe that we will just eat it and ask for more???”.

Errmmm… I think they do, and I think we will… In some cases Mythbusters return the general public back to the sanity proving that the absurd we see is indeed absurd and cannot happen in real life. Usually it goes about the special effects the duo is more than familiar with, but absurd can be find not in just special effects…

I saw the picture on the left many years ago, but did not see the film. The photo always kept troubling my mind. Ridiculously “bound” girl in thin sheer shiny pantyhose. Both things were banging my head with question marks:

Is she indeed wearing pantyhose in the film?
Is this kind of bondage considered by Hollywood inescapable enough ?

The photo was obviously made specially for promotion, and supposed to be “fake”. But I need to watch the film first, don’t I?

And it happened last night. Here’s what I’ve found out

Tight tape gag. Almost no sound can escape her mouth

Why did he make a hole in the gag, when he could simply undo the tape?

Shu Qi’s low lip escape the unescapable gag. The pantyhose are quite thick.

The lip is back under the tape. The pantyhose do reflect some light. They are still not as shiny as on the promotional photo

Her legs are bound. We can’t see her wrists, though. Statham is preparing a leash.

and put the leash over her neck. “The Pro” (Statham) is sure she won’t be able to take it off.

Of course, she could. Look – no rope marks on her arms after hours of being bound

Looks like she (or a stunt man) is wearing professional tights.

Undestroyable professional pantyhose. They are indeed that strong and can survive severe falls.

Next episode. Shu Qi is tied down to an office chair. Let’s see here …

There’s a rope going from the chair to her ankles

The “link” rope disappears along with pantyhose

She’s can leave the chair, because she’s bound to it

But the wrists are mercilessly bound together so the rope needs to be cut off

As I guessed – the photo was made separately. There is no such moment in the film. And the pantyhose are different.

C’mon guys, please be reasonable…

Nevertheless, I like Jason Statham and adore Shu Qi 😉

One thought on “Movies under the loop, bondage in movies,
Shu Qi in bondage, pantyhose on Shu Qi”

I worked in movies before, and pantyhose are worn by a lot of actresses to do certain scenes. PH are worn for the same reason they put make up on people’s face, it has a lot to do with lighting. PHs show a better glare than bare legs, otherwise you would have to tap some powder on womens legs.

If you watch movies, there are many times women are in bed, and they keep there feet under the blanket. That is usually a scene where they are wearing hose.

I’m not sure why they do not acknowledge PHs being worn, as they usually hide it.

It’s also funny that actresses will wear PHs throughout filming, but will be wearing stockings in sex scenes.

You are correct. The last photo you mention is not in the film is actually a publicity shot taken on set that is used for promotional purposes.