Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Dec 19, 2014 8:42 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
How good is Skyfall? 
Author Message
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
nitrium wrote:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Skyfall is the the absolute worst "Bond" film of all time. ALL TIME!
I'll just post this "honest trailer" yet again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWfg__wKSY that touches on most of the issues. Nothing in this so called "James Bond" film has anything to do with previous "James Bond" formula, other than it has a character in it called James Bond. They should have simply created a new franchise with a character NOT called James Bond (and thus not have been needlessly compared to the ESTABLISHED definition of what a James Bond film IS), and I wouldn't have been so annoyed about the abomination that is Skyfall.

The Fleming novels define Bond, and the "formula" that came to characterize Bond after the first few movies is a massive deviation from that standard, which only worsened over time.

So there!

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:29 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 468
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Ken wrote:
nitrium wrote:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Skyfall is the the absolute worst "Bond" film of all time. ALL TIME!
I'll just post this "honest trailer" yet again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWfg__wKSY that touches on most of the issues. Nothing in this so called "James Bond" film has anything to do with previous "James Bond" formula, other than it has a character in it called James Bond. They should have simply created a new franchise with a character NOT called James Bond (and thus not have been needlessly compared to the ESTABLISHED definition of what a James Bond film IS), and I wouldn't have been so annoyed about the abomination that is Skyfall.

The Fleming novels define Bond, and the "formula" that came to characterize Bond after the first few movies is a massive deviation from that standard, which only worsened over time.

So there!


Ian Fleming's novels provide the basis or inspiration for the James Bond movies. They are the jumping-off point for the cinematic Bond. They do not define the cinematic character or the Bond movie formula. The Bond movie series is bigger than Fleming's novels. I don't have any reliable data, but I'm certain that most people, who know James Bond, know him primarily as a cinematic character rather than a literary one, at least since the mid 1960ies. I also believe that more people have seen James Bond movies than read the books, at least in non-English speaking countries.

Consequently, I think that it is wrong to measure the Bond movies on the standard of their faithfulness to the Bond novels. It doesn't make much sense either. After all, the Bond novels are clearly period pieces, in which it is of (minor) importance that Jamaica is a British colony, defectors from the Eastern Block cross an expanse of rubble into West Berlin (because the wall hadn't been built yet) and that the Soviet KGB has an subdivision of assassins called SMERSH. Simply put: Movie James Bond is his own animal. Otherwise, you would have to dismiss 'Skyfall' as rubbish on the very basis that it has nothing to do with any of the original novels' content (other than featuring an obituary and naming the parents).

nitrium is wrong, though:Of course, 'Skyfall' adheres to the Bond formula very closely. All Bond films do, they just vary the Bond-specific tropes, normally according to the then-contemporary cinematic, political and social trends as they try to remain relevant in changing times. That's one of the aspects I love about James Bond movies. So Daniel Craig's Bond is more of a bruiser, more conflicted and less of a playboy than most of his predecessors, because we like our movie heroes this way since the mid-2000s at least. Of course, it's perfectly okay not to like this interpretation, but 'Skyfall' is still very much a proper James Bond film.


Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:55 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Unke wrote:
Ian Fleming's novels provide the basis or inspiration for the James Bond movies. They are the jumping-off point for the cinematic Bond. They do not define the cinematic character or the Bond movie formula. The Bond movie series is bigger than Fleming's novels. I don't have any reliable data, but I'm certain that most people, who know James Bond, know him primarily as a cinematic character rather than a literary one, at least since the mid 1960ies. I also believe that more people have seen James Bond movies than read the books, at least in non-English speaking countries.

Consequently, I think that it is wrong to measure the Bond movies on the standard of their faithfulness to the Bond novels. It doesn't make much sense either. After all, the Bond novels are clearly period pieces, in which it is of (minor) importance that Jamaica is a British colony, defectors from the Eastern Block cross an expanse of rubble into West Berlin (because the wall hadn't been built yet) and that the Soviet KGB has an subdivision of assassins called SMERSH. Simply put: Movie James Bond is his own animal. Otherwise, you would have to dismiss 'Skyfall' as rubbish on the very basis that it has nothing to do with any of the original novels' content (other than featuring an obituary and naming the parents).

God damn it, when will you people stop mistaking my childish mockery for serious comments? I WAS ONLY MAKING FUN OF NITRIUM'S MEANINGLESS PEDANTRY. GAWD.*

-

*CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR AWESOME.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:05 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1434
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Yeah, I don't really see how one can say Nothing in this so called "James Bond" film has anything to do with previous "James Bond" formula when it is what Skyfall often addresses head on (the old formula), and in some way the film is working it way back to the Sean Connery era's dynamics throughout the running time.


Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:24 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2716
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
nitrium wrote:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Skyfall is the the absolute worst "Bond" film of all time. ALL TIME!
I'll just post this "honest trailer" yet again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWfg__wKSY that touches on most of the issues. Nothing in this so called "James Bond" film has anything to do with previous "James Bond" formula, other than it has a character in it called James Bond. They should have simply created a new franchise with a character NOT called James Bond (and thus not have been needlessly compared to the ESTABLISHED definition of what a James Bond film IS), and I wouldn't have been so annoyed about the abomination that is Skyfall.


A guy I know (who is a Bond nut) hated Casino Royale when it was released. His argument was similar to yours - "it's just not Bond" he exclaimed.

Problem is, the previous incarnation was exhausted. The campy thrills of Brosnan and Moore could no longer pull their weight. The Dalton era recognised the limited shelf-life of campy high-jinks, but jumped the gun too soon. I recently watched the final Brosnan instalment, and it looks ridiculous compared to the Craig-era. I know the context and tone is different, but even after factoring this in, I can barely watch it.

Of the recent 3 films, I actually believe Skyfall pays most respect to the heritage. Even though Casino Royale is based on, well, Casino Royale, it more-or-less openly abandons the look and feel of past Bond films. Quantum was a generic spy-film and perhaps your criticism of Skyfall would be better directed at that, but do bear in mind Quantum was made during the writers' strike and even Craig himself was penning lines for that production.

My opinion (as you may have gathered) is that Skyfall brilliantly marries the genre to some semblance of 'reality'. You have an over-the-top, megalomaniac villain, although one with a politically relevant backstory. And the general theme of "enemies not being places on a map, but individuals" is completely consistent with 50 years of Bond-making history, and also with the latter-day, post-cold-war political arena we live in.

I'm a massive fan of that film. It's acted superbly, the story is exciting and poignant. The cinematography knocks me sideways, especially the scenes in Shanghai, the abandoned island with its quaint old pop songs playing over the speaker address system, and the sight and sound of the that Aston Martin powering through the rustic Scottish countryside.

Great stuff. It's only problem for my money is 'where do you go from here?'

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:28 am
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6479
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
[quote="NotHughGrant" ]
Great stuff. It's only problem for my money is 'where do you go from here?'[/quote]

Funny. I don't like the movie as much as you do, but I am thrilled for the next one. We've got Moneypenny. We've got M. We've got an awesome Bond. They're all actors I like.

LET'S DO THIS!

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:14 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 1107
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Unke wrote:
nitrium is wrong, though.

No I'm not. It you lot who are ALL clearly wrong. Nothing you say will change my mind.
Maybe you guys got some weird Daniel Craig/Sam Mendes/Roger Deakins blinders on or have been brainwashed or been replaced by alien clones of your former selves, but none of that really excuses denying the FACT that Skyfall is simply a terrible "Bond" film. So there!


Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:22 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 806
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
To quote something I said in another movie forum...

Quote:
I think I'm more bothered by Skyfall's failures than I am of Quantum of Solace's.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:35 pm
Profile WWW
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6479
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Thief12 wrote:
To quote something I said in another movie forum...

Quote:
I think I'm more bothered by Skyfall's failures than I am of Quantum of Solace's.


Part of that comes from expectations. I heard that Skyfall was a Great movie, and found it to be a good one. I heard that Quantum of Solace was a Bad movie, and found it to be an okay one. So...

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:39 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 806
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
I agree, but one could also call it potential. I think Skyfall had the potential to be better, considering the talent involved (most notably Sam Mendes), but to me, it failed to deliver.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:58 am
Profile WWW
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 468
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Ken wrote:
Unke wrote:
Ian Fleming's novels provide the basis or inspiration for the James Bond movies. They are the jumping-off point for the cinematic Bond. They do not define the cinematic character or the Bond movie formula. The Bond movie series is bigger than Fleming's novels. I don't have any reliable data, but I'm certain that most people, who know James Bond, know him primarily as a cinematic character rather than a literary one, at least since the mid 1960ies. I also believe that more people have seen James Bond movies than read the books, at least in non-English speaking countries.

Consequently, I think that it is wrong to measure the Bond movies on the standard of their faithfulness to the Bond novels. It doesn't make much sense either. After all, the Bond novels are clearly period pieces, in which it is of (minor) importance that Jamaica is a British colony, defectors from the Eastern Block cross an expanse of rubble into West Berlin (because the wall hadn't been built yet) and that the Soviet KGB has an subdivision of assassins called SMERSH. Simply put: Movie James Bond is his own animal. Otherwise, you would have to dismiss 'Skyfall' as rubbish on the very basis that it has nothing to do with any of the original novels' content (other than featuring an obituary and naming the parents).

God damn it, when will you people stop mistaking my childish mockery for serious comments? I WAS ONLY MAKING FUN OF NITRIUM'S MEANINGLESS PEDANTRY. GAWD.*

-

*CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR AWESOME.


If it's just me who's mistaking your childish mockery for serious comment, there's no need to get all capitalised about it. I'm just a dumb guy. If your childish mockery generally gets mistaken for serious comments, I think you might want to work on your mocking childishness. ;)

Anyway. Whether you've been serious or not, there are many Bond fans who believe that the movies suffer from deviating from Ian Fleming's stories (of which there are actually less than movies, including short stories) and I found it appropriate to address that point.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 8:53 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
I will say, behind every childish mockery lies a kernel of seriousness. I do not believe that the Bond movies are necessarily inferior to the novels. Fleming had his strengths and weaknesses, just like any storyteller. I certainly don't believe that every liberty the movies took with the source material was a mistake.

I do tend to think that Fleming had a pretty good idea of what worked about Bond, and that the movies at their best share a certain raison d'etre with Fleming's stories, even if they weren't specifically based on those stories. Some of the movies are far divorced from those essential characteristics. They devolve into vessels for delivering a certain set of items that are expected to be there--gadgets, car chases, and whatnot. They reduce Bond to a checklist of fan-favorite elements. I prefer the slick spy fiction, myself.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:29 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 468
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
nitrium wrote:
Unke wrote:
nitrium is wrong, though.

No I'm not. It you lot who are ALL clearly wrong. Nothing you say will change my mind.
Maybe you guys got some weird Daniel Craig/Sam Mendes/Roger Deakins blinders on or have been brainwashed or been replaced by alien clones of your former selves, but none of that really excuses denying the FACT that Skyfall is simply a terrible "Bond" film. So there!


It would be easier to take your comments more seriously if you were actually providing arguments for your opinion or explain your point of view, rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and writing something to the effect of: "I'm right, that's a FACT, so you're all wrong and I won't listen to what you say. Na-nana-na-na!"

Now that I'm asking you to substantiate, I should first explain my point of view. You have stated that 'Skyfall' doesn't have anything to do with the established Bond formula. I say it evidently does. Let's take a look:

The structure of a Bond movie is: 1.) Gun-barrel sequence ('Skyfall' and the other Craig Bonds put it at the end of the movie, so that's a deviation, but it's still there), 2.) Pre-credit sequence showing an action scene, which is only tangentially related to the rest of the movie ('Skyfall's Istanbul chase scene), 3.) Title-sequence featuring the theme song and graphics featuring silhouettes of women and guns (check), 4.) Introduction of the villain's plot, not necessarily the villain himself (that'd be the bombing of MI6 HQ), 5.) James Bond's briefing (here expanded to include Bond's assessment of fitness for service), 6.) Bond globe-hopping to exotic locales around the world (Shanghai, Macao and, at a stretch, Scotland), 7.) grand action-packed finale (the siege of Skyfall). 'Skyfall' perfectly follows this structure.

Typical elements included in James Bond films(*), which also feature in 'Skyfall':

James Bond visits a casino. Check. (Although I concede that he doesn't gamble, but he only does that in 7 out of 10 movies, in which he visits a casino. He always wins, by the way. In 9 out of ten 10 instances, Bond visits the casino, because he hopes to find the villain, his major henchman or the villain's moll there. Check!)

James Bond is attacked by helicopters. Check.

There is a chase sequence usually involving exotic modes of transport (e.g double decker busses, moon buggies or tanks). Check (opening action sequence involving an excavator on a train).

James Bond has sex with, on average, 2.6 women. Check. It's three, actually. Note: James Bond movie sex consists of him unbuttoning a shirt, her moaning "Oh, James", some curtains flattering in the wind and Bond and his romantic interest getting up the next morning.

Bond seduced the villain's girlfriend. Check. By the way, women with red hair are immune to Bond's charms, which is important to know if you want to set up your own vilanous organisation for achieving global domination.

There is a siege situation. Check (although 'Skyfall' varies this trope by having Bond being the besieged ather than him and the royal marines, Japanese Ninjas, whatever attacking the villain's hideoutr).

Bond gets captured by the villain's organisation. Check. He escapes with the help of a device, which could have been detected by thoroughly frisking Bond. Check (Usually it's a wristwatch, though, and not a simple radio transmitter).

James Bond is facing dangerous critters (shark/piranha basin, crocodiles on a farm, rats, venomous centipedes, snakes and tarantulas). Check (the Komodo dragon pit).

The villain's hideout is located in a strange place, which is difficult to access (hollowed-out volcano, submergible artificial island, space station). That'd be the abandoned island. Check.

The villain's evilness is embodied by physical disfigurement, at the best making it necessary for him to use a prothesis. Check and check. Oh, and 6 out of 20 Bond movie villains dye their hair blond. Check!

'Syfall' seems to be a pretty formulaic movie to me, doesn't it?

(*) My wife and I once watched all (then 20) James Bond movies on successive evenings and kept statistics on Bond movie clichés. Thererefore, I have some data upon which I can rely. Did you know that in 8 out of 20 Bond movies, he is getting attacked by helicopters? And Bond's preferred champagne is Dom Perignon '55, followed by Bollinger '75, although Bond was once offered a Dom Perignon '55 by the movie's villain and answered that he personally preferred the '53 vintage.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:39 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2716
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Well bloody done!

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:08 am
Profile
Producer

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 2004
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
One possibility I'd like to bring up that no one has mentioned yet:

Were some people disappointed with Skyfall because the trailers gave too much away?

Because that's something I feel has been happening in movies for years now. Think about it. You watch the Skyfall trailers. Then you go and see the film. You go in knowing basically the entire first hour of the movie verbatim. Seriously. Make that the first 75 minutes, roughly. Sure, there's one or two surprises. The comodo dragons...and I guess you don't know exactly what happens to Severin...that's about it.

That still leaves some potential surprises during the last hour, but that's still half a movie spoiled. Because you already know which scenes are coming. The first hour can ferment some impatience because we're waiting for Silva's entrance scene which the trailer showed us in vivid detail. But Skyfall is shot and directed in such a vivid, direct, in your face, immediate manner that it's difficult for a trailer to NOT spoil things to some extent. I'll admit I was surprised by the structure, expecting the major London sequence to be before all the other stuff. Still, I felt to a large extent I had already seen the movie before I saw it.

Now compare that to Casino Royale's trailer:

- Doesn't give away the structure at all.
- Doesn't give away either Le Chiffre or Vesper at all, compared to the Skyfall trailer hyping up Silva.
- Really doesn't reveal anything about the plot. The whole airport heist scheme, Le Chiffre's relationship with his employers, the poisoning scene, the torture scene, the twist.
- It doesn't even give away the conceit of the foot chase.
- Not to mention the default advantage of the freshness of having a new Bond.

It was a very well-wrapped present of a movie, partly because of the more elliptical way Martin Campbell chose to direct it. Skyfall was more wide open well in advance. If you read any of the reviews, you pretty much knew the whole movie going in. You knew the scenes.

And of course Quantum of Solace had the same problem, only worse. You watch the Quantum trailer, you've seen the movie already.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 12:48 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
Yeah, some trailers are definitely guilty of this. DARK KNIGHT RISES was another one; it seemed hell-bent on making Bane into the hottest meme around, and indeed he became just that. Once I saw the movie, a lot of his best lines had already been let out of the bag. But I blame that on the people who cut the trailers, not the filmmakers.

Worst example I've ever seen, by far, without any shadow of a doubt, is CAST AWAY. I'm sure most of us have seen it, but I'll go ahead and put a spoiler tag anyway, just to be safe.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
They reveal that Tom Hanks gets off the island!!!! :evil:

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:05 pm
Profile
Producer

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 2004
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
KWRoss wrote:
Yeah, some trailers are definitely guilty of this. DARK KNIGHT RISES was another one; it seemed hell-bent on making Bane into the hottest meme around, and indeed he became just that. Once I saw the movie, a lot of his best lines had already been let out of the bag. But I blame that on the people who cut the trailers, not the filmmakers.

Worst example I've ever seen, by far, without any shadow of a doubt, is CAST AWAY. I'm sure most of us have seen it, but I'll go ahead and put a spoiler tag anyway, just to be safe.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
They reveal that Tom Hanks gets off the island!!!! :evil:


Yeah, man that Cast Away one is stupid. But of course the writers and directors aren't to blame, it's the execs who feel insecure and nervous about their movie. I think part of why audiences were taken with The Dark Knight was that it had a lot of surprises. Rises had almost no surprises. You know the big set pieces, you know the major lines, you have a pretty decent idea of what the structure is gonna be and how it's gonna play out. You may not know that Marion Cotillard is Talia Al Ghuul...but you know she's in the movie, that she has a significant, enigmatic role...you basically do know already.

Suspense can't just happen through sheer directing chops, not even with Hitchcock or whoever. Hitchcock still needed his audience to not know what was going to happen. No filmmaker, however masterful, can get around that. So the first hour at least of Amazing Spiderman 2 is a guaranteed slug. We've seen it already. No suspense. I don't think it's enough for just the last 30 minutes of a movie to be revelatory. The whole thing should be revelatory.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:19 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
With Big Name superhero/James Bond/franchise movies, I think it's time for a new approach to cutting trailers. The less they reveal, the better. These movies have a built-in, die-hard audience who will see them regardless. But I think the general line of thinking appears to be "if you're confident in your movie, you won't hide it."

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:37 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1530
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
The trailers for films in the 40s/50s were even worse. They revealed everything. The twists in Laura, Vertigo. geez.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 3:01 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3985
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: How good is Skyfall?
KWRoss wrote:
Yeah, some trailers are definitely guilty of this. DARK KNIGHT RISES was another one; it seemed hell-bent on making Bane into the hottest meme around, and indeed he became just that. Once I saw the movie, a lot of his best lines had already been let out of the bag. But I blame that on the people who cut the trailers, not the filmmakers.

Worst example I've ever seen, by far, without any shadow of a doubt, is CAST AWAY. I'm sure most of us have seen it, but I'll go ahead and put a spoiler tag anyway, just to be safe.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
They reveal that Tom Hanks gets off the island!!!! :evil:

That didn't bother me too much, as I could barely understand what the hell Bane was saying most of the time anyways, seriously I was begging for subtitles almost every time he spoke.

The most misleading trailer of all time would have to be Kangaroo Jack, how many kids saw that film thinking it was about a talking kangaroo? It certainly fooled me as a kid, though luckily I enjoyed the film anyways.

Disagree about Amazing Spider-man 2 though, we don't know exactly how the first hour will play it, as i'm still not sure exactly which order the scenes in the trailer occur in.


Wed Feb 26, 2014 3:05 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google [Bot], H.I. McDonough, JJoshay and 6 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