Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:17 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Are Movies on Their Way Out? 
Author Message
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1579
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Women have been protagonists in movies since almost the beginning of cinema, even moreso since the beginning of the sound era. It's a silly misconception that a female protagonist is somehow new. That's just plain ignorance about history.

It's just that ACTION heroes have traditionally been men, and "guy" movies became a lot more popular starting in the 60s. Many of the women in older movies are also strong women, so there's no progress being made here, at least not with Gravity.

Resourcefulness? She tries to land a ship using eenie-meanie-miney-moe. She doesn't know basic protocols of...well, anything. And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney. Not that I would accuse Cuaron of trying to say anything against the competence of women. I don't think he is. I just think he figured that a woman in distress would naturally be more compelling to an audience. And he's probably right, because this movie also takes itself from the many woman-in-distress horror films that have been made across the decades:

The Ring
The Others
The Innocents (1961)
The Haunting (1963)
Psycho
The Birds
Silence of the Lambs
Alien series
Terminator 1
Panic Room

If you want a strong female wearing looser outfits that Milla Jovovich, why not The Brave One? But any of those women arguably keep better cools than Bullock does in Gravity. On paper, she's a survivor. But we also see her spend most of the movie huffing, puffing, whining, moaning, whimpering and acting more scared than she really needs to. Meanwhile, the super-cool George Clooney never gets tired of hitting on her. Hitchcock never needed any of the above to draw sympathy for his female characters. In fact, when Grace Kelly gets in danger in Rear Window, Jimmy Stewart is the one who practically breaks down crying in fear for her.

Quote:
And she is not presented in a "Meg Ryan as a helicopter pilot"/ "Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist" way


I see no difference, except that Denise Richards complained less.

Quote:
Yes, she panics once the catastrophe starts, but she overcomes this in the course of the movie


She does panic all the way to the end of the movie.

Quote:
You're right about one thing, though--past space movies have mostly kept the humanity of the astronauts at a distance and trusted the job itself to draw in viewers. Perhaps that's not a good thing, and perhaps that's why those movies tend to strain credibility much more than the relatively realistic scenarios of Gravity do.


Silly Kubrick, what was he thinking? If only he'd had a good lecture from Cuaron, Rock Hudson might've stayed in the theater.


Fri Mar 21, 2014 4:20 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 287
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney.


No they would both be dead without the rocket pack. So by your logic the film's actually misanthropic because without technology none of it would have happened.


Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:11 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2381
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
Anyway, I still say seeing yourself in Walter White or Andy Duphraine is vain, even if only in a figurative sense. More vain still is the idea that you have to see yourself in order for the character to be interesting. It's like the scene in Nashville where every girl in the bar thinks Keith Carradine is singing specifically to her. It's not a vacuum. It's just something other than a mirror. I'm deeply interested in people who are nothing like me.


I don't always need to see myself in the characters on screen. I watch documentaries on everyone from Stephen Hawking to Mao Zedong (guys I'm probably not much like), but none of this changes the irrevocable fact that people like to empathise and fantasise with and about with the characters they see on screen. That's not vain. That's being human.

I don't watch Nashville

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Last edited by NotHughGrant on Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:44 am, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:37 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2381
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
Women have been protagonists in movies since almost the beginning of cinema, even moreso since the beginning of the sound era. It's a silly misconception that a female protagonist is somehow new. That's just plain ignorance about history.

It's just that ACTION heroes have traditionally been men, and "guy" movies became a lot more popular starting in the 60s. Many of the women in older movies are also strong women, so there's no progress being made here, at least not with Gravity.

Resourcefulness? She tries to land a ship using eenie-meanie-miney-moe. She doesn't know basic protocols of...well, anything. And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney. Not that I would accuse Cuaron of trying to say anything against the competence of women. I don't think he is. I just think he figured that a woman in distress would naturally be more compelling to an audience. And he's probably right, because this movie also takes itself from the many woman-in-distress horror films that have been made across the decades:

The Ring
The Others
The Innocents (1961)
The Haunting (1963)
Psycho
The Birds
Silence of the Lambs
Alien series
Terminator 1
Panic Room

If you want a strong female wearing looser outfits that Milla Jovovich, why not The Brave One? But any of those women arguably keep better cools than Bullock does in Gravity. On paper, she's a survivor. But we also see her spend most of the movie huffing, puffing, whining, moaning, whimpering and acting more scared than she really needs to. Meanwhile, the super-cool George Clooney never gets tired of hitting on her. Hitchcock never needed any of the above to draw sympathy for his female characters. In fact, when Grace Kelly gets in danger in Rear Window, Jimmy Stewart is the one who practically breaks down crying in fear for her.

Quote:
And she is not presented in a "Meg Ryan as a helicopter pilot"/ "Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist" way


I see no difference, except that Denise Richards complained less.

Quote:
Yes, she panics once the catastrophe starts, but she overcomes this in the course of the movie


She does panic all the way to the end of the movie.

Quote:
You're right about one thing, though--past space movies have mostly kept the humanity of the astronauts at a distance and trusted the job itself to draw in viewers. Perhaps that's not a good thing, and perhaps that's why those movies tend to strain credibility much more than the relatively realistic scenarios of Gravity do.


Silly Kubrick, what was he thinking? If only he'd had a good lecture from Cuaron, Rock Hudson might've stayed in the theater.


I've seen Gravity (albeit on a shifty copy, hence lack of review) and I think you're twisting it beyond all recognition.

The biggest fault with Bullock's character (or the only fault I can think of) is that perhaps Bullock herself is too well known a face to disappear into roles like this anymore. But I don't see any sexism or misogyny.

And you're not going to get anywhere peddling Resident Evil over it as a testament to female empowerment. A film series based on a video game with a hot, scantly-clad eastern European chick running around under her Husband's direction.

There's a stereotype that exists in the West (certainly here and France) of Eastern European girls being sex objects with great physiques. Quite a racist stereotype too, I guess. Resident Evil hardly strains to combat this.

Not that I'm bothered. Not that I want RE censored. I don't - live and let live and all that. Horny geek fodder has a market and someone will see that the marketplace is filled. But you can't lecture us about Gravity's supposed sexism whilst cheerleading RE's nerd fantasy niche.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:42 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 388
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook, you seem to be a clever guy with a lot of knowledge about and passion for movies. Yet, it is impossible to have a fruitful discussion with you, if you support your points of view by attacking arguments, which nobody has made in the discussion.

MGamesCook wrote:
Women have been protagonists in movies since almost the beginning of cinema, even moreso since the beginning of the sound era. It's a silly misconception that a female protagonist is somehow new. That's just plain ignorance about history.

It's just that ACTION heroes have traditionally been men, and "guy" movies became a lot more popular starting in the 60s. Many of the women in older movies are also strong women, so there's no progress being made here, at least not with Gravity.


Nobody has made the point that 'Gravity' features the first female protagonist in a movie or the first action heroine or that 'Gravity' marks any progress in the depiction of women in the movies. The discussion we are having is about your statement that it is a mysoginist movie, because the Sandra Bullock character is a damsel-in-distress cliché (or "scared house mum", as you put it). You are yet to provide a convincing argument to support your opinion.

MGamesCook wrote:
Resourcefulness? She tries to land a ship using eenie-meanie-miney-moe. She doesn't know basic protocols of...well, anything. And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney. Not that I would accuse Cuaron of trying to say anything against the competence of women. I don't think he is. I just think he figured that a woman in distress would naturally be more compelling to an audience. And he's probably right, because this movie also takes itself from the many woman-in-distress horror films that have been made across the decades:

The Ring
The Others
The Innocents (1961)
The Haunting (1963)
Psycho
The Birds
Silence of the Lambs
Alien series
Terminator 1
Panic Room

If you want a strong female wearing looser outfits that Milla Jovovich, why not The Brave One? But any of those women arguably keep better cools than Bullock does in Gravity. On paper, she's a survivor. But we also see her spend most of the movie huffing, puffing, whining, moaning, whimpering and acting more scared than she really needs to. Meanwhile, the super-cool George Clooney never gets tired of hitting on her. Hitchcock never needed any of the above to draw sympathy for his female characters. In fact, when Grace Kelly gets in danger in Rear Window, Jimmy Stewart is the one who practically breaks down crying in fear for her.


So your point is that it is easier for an audience to empathise with a woman in peril rather than a man in peril, ist it? That's a very interesting thought and it is relevant to the discussion of 'Gravity'. But I would leave Hitchcock out of it. The role of women in Hitchcock movies is, well, problematic and they are generally punished for being independent and assertive ('The Birds', 'Psycho',...).

By the way, Sandra Bullock's character in 'Gravity' is improvising, using sophisticated technique and ultimately manages to land the Chinese spacecraft because she kind of knew how the Russian one worked and she knew where to find a manual. I think that's resourceful. Keep in mind that she is not the trained pilot, but a scientist.

MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
And she is not presented in a "Meg Ryan as a helicopter pilot"/ "Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist" way


I see no difference, except that Denise Richards complained less.


The difference is that you actually get to see the Sandra Bullock character at work, whereas you only see Denise Richards looking at containers marked 'radioactive'.


Fri Mar 21, 2014 6:41 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 372
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
Anyway, I still say seeing yourself in Walter White or Andy Duphraine is vain, even if only in a figurative sense. More vain still is the idea that you have to see yourself in order for the character to be interesting.


Sincere question because I might have missed it, but has anyone here been saying that?

MGamesCook wrote:
What about the scene in Gravity where Bullock strips down to short shorts and tank top? Clearly meant to titillate male viewers. I don't deny there are similar scenes in the Resident Evil films. The difference seems to be that Gravitys supporters aren't willing to admit the guiltier aspects of it.


And I know no one has said that. And again, whatever your intentions, when you tell people what they aren't willing to admit, it's absolutely insulting and discussion-killing. There's a lot worth debating and discussing here, but we (not just you) have to stick to actual arguments being made to get anywhere.

MGamesCook wrote:
Bullock behaving like a normal person (non-astronaut) so that non-astronaut viewers can connect.


I agree with the relative shallowness of this, but again, Cuaron brought this from a made-up bedtime story to his kids, so simplistic characterization isn't exactly shocking, nor is the huffing. puffing, moaning, whimpering -- it's a one-woman show made to appeal in all languages and it's intentionally unsubtle in expressing her emotions. And I've heard no one praising the script.

I'm not trying to be clever here, but since you acknowledge that Cuaron is not projecting an intentionally sexist message, you're twisting your own argument a bit too tight. In real life some people act like cliches (i.e. some women whimper in fear), so in some senses you have the same problem in reverse when you demand "tough" women. You say things like "she panics until the end of the movie" as if that's inherently a problem. Criticize the characterization as storytelling problems or moral problems, but it feels like you're going halfway with both and interweaving them to the point that neither goes anywhere, and it's genuinely confusing.


Fri Mar 21, 2014 9:40 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2381
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Quote:
Sincere question because I might have missed it, but has anyone here been saying that?


I posted that some things are popular because viewers tend to see something of themselves in various characters.

White and Andy Dufresne were two examples.

Although I didn't say that you had to see yourself in characters for them to be interesting.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Fri Mar 21, 2014 10:37 am
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 982
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
One fundamental concept I cling to when it comes to movie-watching is that there's more than one way for a film to "click" with viewers. Some of them go for realism and character development while others seek to immerse you in another world with its own set of rules. How well does it accomplish what it sets out to do? I can praise one movie for reminding me of elements from my life and another for providing great escapism.

Back to the original topic, it wouldn't surprise me if TV is where more adaptations are headed. A lot of fans pissed and moaned about scenes cut from the later Harry Potter movies; a TV series featuring multiple seasons would be able to include a lot more (like Game of Thrones). Of course, therein lies the question of whether sometimes less is more.

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


Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:38 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 12:14 am
Posts: 287
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
KWRoss wrote:
One fundamental concept I cling to when it comes to movie-watching is that there's more than one way for a film to "click" with viewers. Some of them go for realism and character development while others seek to immerse you in another world with its own set of rules. How well does it accomplish what it sets out to do? I can praise one movie for reminding me of elements from my life and another for providing great escapism.

Back to the original topic, it wouldn't surprise me if TV is where more adaptations are headed. A lot of fans pissed and moaned about scenes cut from the later Harry Potter movies; a TV series featuring multiple seasons would be able to include a lot more (like Game of Thrones). Of course, therein lies the question of whether sometimes less is more.


But Harry Potter made beaucoup bucks hand over fist, so I doubt that we'll stop seeing movie adaptations. I would need to see more TV series adapted from novels before I'm willing to say that's the direction we're headed. I don't think Harry Potter or The Hunger Gameswould have been good for this treatment.


Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:22 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1579
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
My argument got a little messy and tangential, but this is the essential part that ties back into audience empathy:

Quote:
So your point is that it is easier for an audience to empathise with a woman in peril rather than a man in peril, ist it? That's a very interesting thought and it is relevant to the discussion of 'Gravity'.


Yes, I think so. Many producers have thought so anyway. Resident Evil is a male fantasy, but I think it's aware of itself. Bond is rarely truly sexist because it's openly satirical. A parody of a man's fantasy about women. I think RE has some of that same aspect. And because Gravity lacks any self-effacing aspect, its whole attitude is sketchier. Self-effacement is what that movie really lacks at its core. Is space itself a macguffin (an excuse for the experience) or is Cuaron serious? Seems like he's really serious, but then what's he trying to say?

Maybe he's not trying to say anything about gender roles, but perhaps that's the problem. Perhaps he should be trying to say something because the materials for it are right there.

I agree with a lot of the other stuff that's been said, including this:

Quote:
The biggest fault with Bullock's character is that perhaps Bullock herself is too well known a face to disappear into roles like this anymore.


It's a legitimate criticism. I always thought of her as more comedic. So many comedic actors becoming too serious.

Apart from that, I pretty much just agree with what Shade said (broad, unsubtle).

Gravity is actually essential to the OP for a more obvious reason, which is the question of how far a movie has to go now to make the trip to the theater "worth it." IMAX 3D EXPERIENCE was the selling point of the movie, the idea that you had to see it in theaters for it to have its effect. The question is, how long before this is the only way a film can adequately differentiate itself from TV. Or are we there already?


Fri Mar 21, 2014 3:44 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:38 pm
Posts: 249
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
Gravity is actually essential to the OP for a more obvious reason, which is the question of how far a movie has to go now to make the trip to the theater "worth it." IMAX 3D EXPERIENCE was the selling point of the movie, the idea that you had to see it in theaters for it to have its effect. The question is, how long before this is the only way a film can adequately differentiate itself from TV. Or are we there already?


Since the inception of TV, movies have always made extra-ordinary effort to distinguish themselves from it. That's why widescreen and panoramic widescreen movies were developed and Hollywood started producing more "epic" movies (Ten Commandments, Ben Hur, Cleopatra). it's hardly a new strategy... just basic economics with regards to substitute goods...
-Jeremy

_________________
My Blog: Queering the Closet


Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:29 pm
Profile WWW
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1579
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
I guess you're right at that. It's just this culture of vanity we live in now. Movies may not exist in a vacuum, but they also don't have to be tailor-made to the viewer as if giving them a personal massage treatment instead of showing them a movie. Movies are supposed to challenge, not pander. I don't think movies will ever die, but I think sane, rational ways of talking about them are on life support, if not dead already.

Or I suppose it's not really a question of sanity, but of eagerness. The eagerness of discussion is moving toward TV.


Sat Mar 22, 2014 4:13 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1226
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
I guess you're right at that. It's just this culture of vanity we live in now. Movies may not exist in a vacuum, but they also don't have to be tailor-made to the viewer as if giving them a personal massage treatment instead of showing them a movie. Movies are supposed to challenge, not pander. I don't think movies will ever die, but I think sane, rational ways of talking about them are on life support, if not dead already.

Or I suppose it's not really a question of sanity, but of eagerness. The eagerness of discussion is moving toward TV.

Well said. There's likely no way one could get away with doing what, say, Terrence Malick does in film on TV... so film will always have the abstraction advantage. But at the same time, the vast majority of TV shows don't have to always rely on the now oh-so-tired holy trinity of Doctors, Lawyers and Law Enforcers as the backdrops to their stories. :|


Sat Mar 22, 2014 10:50 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 2012
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
MGamesCook wrote:
And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney.


Yes, she would, and she also would be dead without her own resourcefulness.

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


Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:23 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1579
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Syd Henderson wrote:
MGamesCook wrote:
And the movie clearly demonstrates, in fact goes out of its way to demonstrate, that she would be dead without George Clooney.


Yes, she would, and she also would be dead without her own resourcefulness.


Yeah her resourcefulness as written by Jonas and Alfonso Cuaron. I'm not criticizing Ryan Stone, since Ryan Stone doesn't exist. I'm criticizing the Cuaron lazy screenwriting. Yeah she's resourceful when they feel like making her resourceful, other times they feel like making her do eenie-meanie-miney-moe. That's lazy screenwriting.


Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:30 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Cite some specific examples. I'm not sure I remember instances in the movie of her veering wildly from one extreme to another, certainly not within the bounds that someone might reasonably fall within during a survival situation.

_________________
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.


Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:14 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1579
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
It feels like nothing is at stake after Clooney dies. If she was able to surpass a massive fire in the station, getting her escape pod tangled up, running out of fuel in the escape pod, using a fire extinguisher to get to the Chinese station (admittedly a cool idea), taking off her helmet after hitting the water, I'd say she's less like a resourceful astronaut and more like a cat with 9 lives. In the eenie-miney scene, it clearly shows she recognizes parts of the manual. So why doesn't she know which button to press? I think this movie needed another direction to go in. She survives, but then what? Cuaron doesn't give the story enough of a context. However, 127 Hours had basically the same problem. And the casting feels off. Bullock has a dynamic range as an actor and this part isn't worthy of that. It's too one note, and I was painfully aware of her oft-demonstated ability to be both funny and dramatically assertive in different roles. She's never really been the vulnerable type.

Yes, we're lucky that nothing like this incident has ever happened. But that also means we have no frame of reference to compare to the terrifying experience that this movie aims to be. Kubrick more closely evokes what the human race's experience with space has been so far. While Gravity is a nightmare of a limited knowledge of space, 2001 is more like a real astronauts fever dream fantasy. Just as Contact feels like Carl Sagans fantasy. If Gravity didn't want to explain how Sandra got the assignment, it should have at least explained why she wanted to go up in space in the first place. Seriously, why is she there? Why did she want to be an astronaut? What motivates and drives her? She acts like she was drafted into NASA. What motivates Clooney? Even Clarence from It's a Wonderful Life has a greater sense of mortality than him.


Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:21 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2381
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Since we live in a world where a passenger plane has seemingly disappeared off the face of the Earth, the events of Gravity (barring a couple of scientific liberties) aren't that far-fetched.

But I think you're in danger of looking to too deep or abstract reasons for not liking a movie. Kind of like the reverse of Ken's signature. Or at least another aspect of it.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon Mar 24, 2014 6:01 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
Cook:

1. I am going to ask everyone I know who saw Gravity if they thought it needed more of a frame of reference, or if the movie did a good enough job of bringing across the fact that being in space is pretty much a constant exercise in trying not to die, even if you're not super-happy-go-lucky about your continued survival.

(So many of us aren't, and often for reasons not nearly so well-explained as those of our mission specialist.)

2. Why keep comparing it to 2001--the most atypical film of this genre by a long shot? We don't use Two Lane Blacktop as a standard metric for car movies, or The Conformist as our standard metric for political thrillers.

_________________
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.


Mon Mar 24, 2014 12:46 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 982
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Are Movies on Their Way Out?
A friendly reminder guys. I started this thread as a movies/TV comparison, and here we are once again with yet another back-and-forth regarding GRAVITY. Can we just leave that particular movie alone for a while, or at the very least discuss it somewhere else?

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


Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:47 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 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