Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:16 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16388 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704 ... 820  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2533
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
It's extremely difficult to know for sure if 300 is a parody or not.

I suspect yes, but it toes the line well

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:23 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 1036
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Carrie (2013)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1939659/
I don't carry much baggage regarding the previous film (that I have seen, but over 25 years ago) or the book on which it is based (although I have read a lot of Steven King's novels), so don't care if or how it differs from either. As a pure bit of entertainment I thought the remake worked surprisingly well up to a point (more on that later). Chloë Grace Moretz was imo by and large highly effective in the title role. She's potentially a very good actress waiting for a very good role. Carrie, unfortunately wasn't it. Everything up to the prom scene I thought was pretty good - however all the good will built up during the first 2/3rds falls apart during the prom, and this is supposed to be the highlight! I'm not sure if it was Moretz who was at fault, but the whole scene seemed almost laughable - her facial expressions and hand actions etc just didn't work. The prom scene would also have benefited from gratuitous gore imo - an R-rating would have helped Carrie immeasurably. It's ok to a point, but could have been so much better.
6.5/10.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:31 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 724
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
NotHughGrant wrote:
It's extremely difficult to know for sure if 300 is a parody or not.

I suspect yes, but it toes the line well


What makes you think it's an intentional parody? I was more or less debating semantics with Ken, but I'm genuinely curious to know what makes you see it this way.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:44 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2533
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
I'm not saying it's all-out parody. But tongue in cheek, yes

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon Jan 06, 2014 4:51 pm
Profile
Online
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1806
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
NotHughGrant wrote:
I'm not saying it's all-out parody. But tongue in cheek, yes


It's just that it doesn't take itself that seriously. Just good fun.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:02 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1746
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
American Psycho

I hadn't seen this in a long time, and it holds up well as satire. Christian Bale's performance as a homicidal Wall Street executive is one of the finest of his career, and those who have read the novel will know how closely he nails the character.

Granted, as the film deviates from the book near the end it loses it's way slightly. But an accurate adaptation of American Psycho would not have been possible, so I cut the filmmakers a little slack here.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 5:28 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 806
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
I'm a fan of American Psycho. Such a relentlessly wicked film.


Today I rewatched A History of Violence. Hadn't seen it in a couple of years, but I absolutely love this film. Great performances from Viggo and Maria Bello, and some wonderful supporting turns from Ed Harris and William Hurt. Grade: A

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Mon Jan 06, 2014 9:59 pm
Profile WWW
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1494
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Quote:
The prom scene would also have benefited from gratuitous gore imo - an R-rating would have helped Carrie immeasurably


It got an R rating in the US.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 10:04 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3741
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
calvero wrote:
Quote:
The prom scene would also have benefited from gratuitous gore imo - an R-rating would have helped Carrie immeasurably


It got an R rating in the US.

So it didn't get the U.S, equivalent of an R-rating overseas eh? That's interesting to know. Anyways I enjoyed the film more then the original(which I don't feel is one of De Palma's better efforts) though I too felt like the prom scene should've been more violent in order to give it more of an impact, I was hoping it would be more like the party scene in Carrie 2: The Rage.


Mon Jan 06, 2014 10:10 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 1036
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
calvero wrote:
Quote:
The prom scene would also have benefited from gratuitous gore imo - an R-rating would have helped Carrie immeasurably

It got an R rating in the US.

So it didn't get the U.S, equivalent of an R-rating overseas eh? That's interesting to know. Anyways I enjoyed the film more then the original(which I don't feel is one of De Palma's better efforts) though I too felt like the prom scene should've been more violent in order to give it more of an impact, I was hoping it would be more like the party scene in Carrie 2: The Rage.

Really? Jebus, it's true. I'm very surprised that it was R-rated in the US. I have to admit I only ASSUMED it was a PG-13 horror, cos there is NOTHING imo to lift it beyond that. The violence was extremely subdued imo (not a patch on the Evil Dead remake or Cabin in the Woods for example) and it had no sex/nudity whatsoever! It was actually R16 here in NZ now I see. I'm completely confounded.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:13 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:56 pm
Posts: 226
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.

_________________
Never take a forum signature too seriously, even this one.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:35 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3741
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JJoshay wrote:
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.

I mostly agree with your review, though if I was using your rating system i'd give it two starts. It had some good moments, but like you said the plot twist was unnecessary(though I kinda saw it coming), the film's overall message didn't really work for me, there were one too many plot holes for my liking, and overall it just wasn't that suspenseful, the good performances were ultimately the reason why I didn't give up on the film.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:25 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:51 pm
Posts: 426
Location: Durham, NC
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
there were one too many plot holes for my liking.


Could you expand here, Vex?

_________________
"I have now come to claim that satisfaction."


Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:37 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:22 am
Posts: 424
Location: Chennai, India
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The problem with a whodunit like Prisoners is that the culprit always has to be one of the characters already introduced to us. And with such a small number of characters in the film, it is always going to be easy to figure out the mystery portion. That being said, I still found the twist satisfying. Out of the two or three possible suspects I had in my mind, the big reveal turned out to be a nice surprise.

I had difficulty swallowing the reasoning behind the character's doing though. The problem there being the monologue he/she delivers wasn't as satisfying as the reveal itself. I may have to watch it a second time to see whether that remains the case.

As for the needlessly "open" finale, it would've pissed me off very much, and had me dropping a half star were it not for:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
They show Jake Gyllenhall hearing the sound coming from the whistle. Being the optimistic person that I am, I get a feeling Hugh Jackman would be saved.

_________________
Balajithots - Last Updated 21-Jan - Frozen (2013)
This list... is an absolute good. The list is life. All around its margins lies the gulf.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:58 am
Profile WWW
Online
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1806
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JJoshay wrote:
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.


It's just really damn long.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:07 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 1:43 pm
Posts: 383
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Balaji Sivaraman wrote:
The problem with a whodunit like Prisoners is that the culprit always has to be one of the characters already introduced to us. And with such a small number of characters in the film, it is always going to be easy to figure out the mystery portion. That being said, I still found the twist satisfying. Out of the two or three possible suspects I had in my mind, the big reveal turned out to be a nice surprise.

I had difficulty swallowing the reasoning behind the character's doing though. The problem there being the monologue he/she delivers wasn't as satisfying as the reveal itself. I may have to watch it a second time to see whether that remains the case.

As for the needlessly "open" finale, it would've pissed me off very much, and had me dropping a half star were it not for:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
They show Jake Gyllenhall hearing the sound coming from the whistle. Being the optimistic person that I am, I get a feeling Hugh Jackman would be saved.


I think for me, Prisoners wasn't so much about what I saw, but what I didn't. To me the reveal wasn't as important as the monologue. In a thriller like this it doesn't really matter who did it. It's generally more important why they did it. I know there's a bit of disagreement on the significance of that particular scene around here, but I still think it was really powerful.

Similarly, the "open" finale works for me because of what transpires before it, and then what I didn't see after it. Before the finale we see
[Reveal] Spoiler:
a fairly ambiguous conversation between Detective Loki and Grace Dover about what will happen to Keller if he returns/is found. I thought that added another layer to the ending. It isn't just about whether Keller is found, but what consequences may or may not lie ahead of him.

_________________
Sometimes I think I have felt everything I'm ever gonna feel, and from here on out I'm not gonna feel anything new. Just lesser versions of what I've already felt.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 3:36 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 435
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011)
A traumatised young woman named Martha (brilliantly played by Elizabeth Olsen) escapes from a sinister commune, where she has been called Marcy May, and joins her sister. She struggles with her experiences in the cult and cannot open up to either her sister or her sister's husband. She also struggles with her identity, which has been thoroughly destroyed by the charismatic cult leader Patrick (John Hawkes) and can't distinguish hallucinations and reality. Is she really pursued by the members of the cult or is she severely paranoid?
It is hard to believe that this outstanding movie has been made by a first-time director. The compositions and transitions between past and present, reality and hallucination are handled in a very confident manner, sometimes deliberately blurring the lines. Stylistically, the movie resembles the work of European arthouse movies by the likes of Michael Haneke or Steve McQueen, which I mean as a compliment. A lot of background is implied and hinted at, but never shown. I also liked how the movie contrasts her life in the two "families" of sorts, recogising that Martha/Marcy May feels constraints in both situations, albeit of a different kind. 'Martha Marcy May Marlene' doesn't just work as a character study, it is also a superb psychological thriller. Unfortunately, the very ending is a mistake:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
I think it is a correct choice to end on an ambiguous note. The movie's impact would be diminished a lot if we would see Patrick led away in handcuffs and Martha/Marcy May happily playing with her sister's daughter on the lakeside. (Just to make up a ludicrous happy ending.) That being said, the movie should have ended with Martha/Marcy May swimming in the lake on the morning of her departure to a mental insitution, half way between her sister's house and the stranger (a member of the cult or perhaps a hallucination?) sitting on the other shore of the lake. Instead, there is an additional suspense scene in the car, which is actually very good, if taken in isolation, but demands a payoff, in my opinion.


Because the ending is a little unsatisfactory, 'Martha Marcy May Marlene' isn't quite a msterpiece, but still a very good film. 8/10

Stage Fright (1950)
An aspiring actress (Jane Wyman) tries to help her friend to prove his innocence after he is sought for the murder of his lover's (Marlene Dietrich) husband. Wyman's character suspects that Dietrich's character - a very successful actress and singer - has framed him for murder ad hopes that clearing his name will make him realise that she is in love with him.
I'm a big fan of Alfred Hitchcock's movies and, by my count, this is the 32nd Hitchcock film I've seen. Therefore, I'm confident to say that this is a decidedly lightweight, minor work despite of the involvement of Marlene Dietrich, who is an extraordinary screen presence. There are only a few moments, which show Hitchcock's inventiveness and mastery of the medium, and there are massive problems, which I will address in the spoiler tag below. On a positive note, there are nice individual moments, generally of a comedic nature and mostly involving Jane Wyman's characters's father. I'd rate it 4/10, which is bad for a Hitchcock movie and means it is for completists only. Well, he didn't like 'Stage Fright' himself, although his benchmark for measuring the success of a movie was its commercal success rather than its artistic merit - and 'Stage Fright' was a flop. When I read up on Htchcock's comments about 'Stage Fright' in the excellent interview book "Hitchcock/Trufaut", I got very angry about him, though:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Hitchcock puts the blame for the movie's failure squarely on the actors, particularly Jane Wyman, who he accuses of trying to compete with Marlene Dietrich's glamour although the role doesn't call for it, and the British character actor Alastair Sim, who plays her father. No, Hitch, they are both fine in this movie and particularly good in the comedic scenes, which are about the only scenes which work well. It's you, who has messed up. First, the movie starts with a false flashback - the innocent on the run relates how he was framed, but he actually is the murderer. When Hitchcock asks why it shouldn't be okay to have a false flashback when unreliable narrators are generally accepted as a stylistic tool, he isn't wrong. (Consider how it works in 'The Usual Suspects', for instance.) But you cannot base a murder mystery on this premise, because it means you are blatantly cheating the audience. Second, halfway through the movie, Jane Wyman's character falls in love with the detective, who is pursuing the murderer. Now she doesn't have any motive whatsoever anymore to help an accused murderer, who is definitively in love with somebody else and actually sabotages her efforts to clear his name, and to not only put herself in danger, but also her loving father, who is close to being financially ruined in process. These are the unsurmountable problems which sink the movie, not the acting.


Curling King (2011)
Truls Pålsen is the captain of a successful curling team, but his attention to detail turns into a severe case of OCD, resulting in his hospitalization in a psychiatric ward for years. When his old mentor is diagnosed with lung cancer and only expensive surgery would help him, Pålsen reassembles his old team in order to win the national curling championship and claim the prize money.
A Norwegian comedy about curling doesn’t really sound like a recipe for success and, admittedly, it is quite formulaic and a bit derivative. It is pretty funny, though. As a reviewer put it, living in darkness for half a year must do something to the human brain, otherwise the sheer eccentricity of this movie couldn’t be explained. That’s a nice witticism, but factually incorrect, because most Norwegians actually live on about the latitude of Anchorage, Alaska, which is still quite some way south of the polar circle. But I digress. ‘Curling King’ should appeal to anybody who loved ‘Kingpin’, ‘Dodgeball’ and/or the bowling scenes in ‘The Big Lebowski’. 6/10


Tue Jan 07, 2014 6:42 am
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7490
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JJoshay wrote:
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.


I don't think any movie this dark could ever be considered Oscarbait

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:25 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 2117
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
JJoshay wrote:
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.


I don't think any movie this dark could ever be considered Oscarbait


Although it may get some nominations anyway. Viola Davis does enough that she may get one. You didn't mention Jake Gyllenhaal, who I thought was really good.

_________________
Evil does not wear a bonnet!--Mr. Tinkles


Tue Jan 07, 2014 9:24 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 724
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
JJoshay wrote:
*dusts off keyboard* ahem.

'Prisoners' (Villeneuve, 2013) **.5 out of ****
What Prisoners does well it does extraordinarily well; the performances are uniformly excellent, Deakins' brings perfection to everything he touches and the sense doom and helplessness permeate through the screen like a black cloud. The problem with Prisoners is its lack of focus over the sprawling (see excessive) two point five hour running length which leaves vital characters sorely underdeveloped and confuscates any real theme or point it's attempting to address. What begins as a dark realization and evaluation of a tragic nightmare morphs into a sort of thriller, neglecting the considerable talents of Bello, Davis, Howard, Leo and Dano in the process. An unnecessary late game plot twist and needlessly "open" finale further bring into question the films intent, standing in tonal contrast to the generally wrenching first two-thirds of the film and solidifying Prisoners as an exceptionally well made feel bad Oscarbaiting potboiler.


I don't think any movie this dark could ever be considered Oscarbait


Agreed.

Also, I recommend giving it a second viewing. There's a whole lot of thematic stuff to digest in the film. I'll just say that the title of the film is referring more to the adults than it is to the kidnapped children.

Unke wrote:
Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011)
A traumatised young woman named Martha (brilliantly played by Elizabeth Olsen) escapes from a sinister commune, where she has been called Marcy May, and joins her sister. She struggles with her experiences in the cult and cannot open up to either her sister or her sister's husband. She also struggles with her identity, which has been thoroughly destroyed by the charismatic cult leader Patrick (John Hawkes) and can't distinguish hallucinations and reality. Is she really pursued by the members of the cult or is she severely paranoid?
It is hard to believe that this outstanding movie has been made by a first-time director. The compositions and transitions between past and present, reality and hallucination are handled in a very confident manner, sometimes deliberately blurring the lines. Stylistically, the movie resembles the work of European arthouse movies by the likes of Michael Haneke or Steve McQueen, which I mean as a compliment. A lot of background is implied and hinted at, but never shown. I also liked how the movie contrasts her life in the two "families" of sorts, recogising that Martha/Marcy May feels constraints in both situations, albeit of a different kind. 'Martha Marcy May Marlene' doesn't just work as a character study, it is also a superb psychological thriller. Unfortunately, the very ending is a mistake:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
I think it is a correct choice to end on an ambiguous note. The movie's impact would be diminished a lot if we would see Patrick led away in handcuffs and Martha/Marcy May happily playing with her sister's daughter on the lakeside. (Just to make up a ludicrous happy ending.) That being said, the movie should have ended with Martha/Marcy May swimming in the lake on the morning of her departure to a mental insitution, half way between her sister's house and the stranger (a member of the cult or perhaps a hallucination?) sitting on the other shore of the lake. Instead, there is an additional suspense scene in the car, which is actually very good, if taken in isolation, but demands a payoff, in my opinion.


Because the ending is a little unsatisfactory, 'Martha Marcy May Marlene' isn't quite a msterpiece, but still a very good film. 8/10


Man oh man, do I love this movie. One of the best of the decade, I think. An 8/10 from Unke is like a 10/10 from just about anyone else, so I'll take it.

As for the ending:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
I like it. Granted, your proposed ending makes the same point - that Martha will be living the rest of her life quite literally looking over her shoulder - but I think it fits better with her sister and brother-in-law there as opposed to her by herself. One of the large points the film makes is how victims of trauma need an almost unconditional type of support in order to get better. Some may find Ted and Lucy's decision to place Martha in professional care justified, and some may see it as abandonment. I think the movie falls firmly in the latter, however. To make this point, I think it's essential to end the film the way Durkin did. By placing Martha with her family, and having the real/hallucinated stalker still approaching, it drives home Durkin's point. I don't think we get that if Martha is swimming alone in the lake.


Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:09 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16388 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704 ... 820  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], MGamesCook and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr