Where did I say that? Nowhere. You certainly are doing a lot of projecting when you respond to my posts. Maybe you should focus harder on what I actually say.
All I’m saying is, the bondage should appear to be well done enough to serve whatever its dramatic purpose is. In some cases, prop master have ropes that appear to be tight bonds, but which are just ropes glued together and cut in half, and then fastened together with velcro, so the woman isn’t really tied up at all, she JUST appears to be. Or sometimes prop masters (or whomever, it’s often the prop master who’s responsible for the bondage rigging for a scene) will line the inside of a supposed tape gag with a thin layer of cloth so the actress doesn’t get glue all over her lips. These are both fine with me, as long as the bonds appear to be tight enough to serve their dramatic purpose. They don’t have to really be tight or effective bonds to serve their purpose, they just have to look that way, most of the time.
In some cases bonds need to be loose or sloppy to serve their dramatic purposes, mostly in comedies. For example, in “The Painter” Bebe Neuwirth is tied up by the male lead, who’s not supposed to be a terribly smart guy, with one hand tied to an overhead pipe and one hand tied to the handle of a kitchen drawer. Well, as soon as the guy leaves the room Neuwirth slides the drawer out of its slot and reaches up to untie her hand from the overhead pipe, clearly amazed that her captor could have been so dumb. It’s sloppy bondage but it adds to the comedy and reinforces the lead guy’s dumbness.
Or in “Plump Fiction” a parody of “Pulp Fiction” Julie Brown and a male partner both wear enormous ball gags, but they’re worn almost entirely outside their mouths, which is a good thing for them because the balls were way too big, but of course, that’s not the way to wear a ball gag. Point is, the dramatic point of the gags was to make the leads look foolish and silly, and they both worked the foolishness of the look pretty well. It was sloppy bondage but dramatically successful, and I’m OK with that.
Most of the time, though, what you get is supposed criminal masterminds and whatnot tying up damsels in bonds they could escape for in five minutes of not too strenuous effort. And it doesn’t take a bondage fetishist to see that bondage like this (link is safe for work, but my site has been declared a pornsite by SDMB just because it has lots of nudity and sex, so I have to disable links on all pages, even if they don’t contain nudity):
http://www.bondagerotica.com/articles/acting.html
just isn 't going to hold anybody very long.
No, not safety, most of the time, comfort is more of a consideration, and a fair one. For example Annabella Sciorra (IIRC) complained that she had to spend long hours bound in a very uncomfortable hogtie for a scene in “Whispers in the Dark” which became quite painful to her because they didn’t untie her between takes. I would have been just as happy if they’d untied her between takes, or rigged it so she could easily slip out of the hogtie if things got painful. I don’t know why they didn’t. I imagine some actresses would use painful bondage to make their scenes more authentic, but apparently that wasn’t the case with Ms. Sciorra. Point is, I’m all for the actress being comfortable, as long as she LOOKS appropriate for her scene, which in most cases in dramatic scenes, would be uncomfortable.
And that’s my real problem with comfy chair ties, they don’t LOOK uncomfortable. They look comfortable. And most of the time, that conflicts with the dramatic intent of the scene. There are some chair ties that DO look uncomfortable, like Rosanne Dawson in “The Last Innocent Man,” in which her blindfold and gag are both tied to the back of the chair she’s in, so that her head is pulled back and exposed for her captor’s knife. Very effective, very uncomfortable-looking, and probably very uncomfortabe as well. But it’s not the actual discomfort that makes the scene, it’s the look.