Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:33 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16017 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 691, 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697 ... 801  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 705
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
With the risk of sounding like a sourpuss, I have to say I rewatched Airplane! last night after several years, and I was surprised by how less funny it seemed compared to how I remembered it to be. I mean, I laughed but it was not even close to how hilarious I remembered it to be. The best parts are the ones with the veteran actors, Leslie Nielsen, Robert Stack, Peter Graves, and Lloyd Bridges. Oh, and Johnny! But a lot of the physical comedy fell flat this time. Grade: B

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:12 am
Profile WWW
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1694
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
nitrium wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Evil Dead (the remake)
Do you like blood and guts? Then you may like this. However, all it is is blood and guts. This remake of The Evil Dead has the same premise but none of the horror or humor of the original films. Furthermore, the end is unbelievably stupid, even by horror movie standards. I'm dumber for having watched this; it's one of the worst films of the year.

I have to strongly disagree with you here, I thought it was a great remake and nowhere near one of the worst films of the year(certainly not worse then Witch Hunters) and I thought the ending was pretty good, how exactly was it "stupid"?

Erm, I don't know if maybe I'm going crazy, but again I'm totally with you here Vexer. There is NOTHING wrong with the Evil Dead remake - other than it borrows the name of a cult horror classic. Imo it did more than enough differently from the original to avoid a direct comparison (the original probably is better, although I haven't seen that in a very long time). While pretty forgettable, Evil Dead (2013) was good fun. To call it one of the worst of the year suggests Sexual Chocolate might not have seen very many truly bad films this year... which is a good thing to be sure. I wish I could say the same <cough> Ghost Shark <cough>.


Spoilers for the Evil Dead follow, so heads up:

There are many ways in which the ending of the film is idiotic. First, it doesn't even follow it's own rules; the hipster dude was never bitten by a demon, yet he becomes one. But that's small stuff. The one guy resurrects his sister with a car battery, and then she walks around like nothing ever happened.

Now I've seen a lot of horror movies, and plenty that strain their own internal logic, but jump-starting someone witha car battery? That right there was the moment where the film nuked the fridge. But it's not all. When the girl fights the last demon (complete with one-liners), she has her arm ripped off. At film's end, she walks away, triumphant, despite the fact HER ARM WAS JUST RIPPED OFF. That's a rather important detail I think.

It isn't the worst film I've seen this year. I saw half of Movie 43, and then I couldn't bear any more. That was bad, excruciatingly bad. Anyone who liked that...I question their taste and their sanity.

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


Sat Dec 28, 2013 3:38 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
I don't really see the issue with walking away triumphant in spite of her arm being torn off, the car battery thing is a little far-fetched yeah, but I wouldn't call it "nuking the fridge" as i've seen far more implausible stuff in films then that so I guess that's why I was forgiving then you.

Also you can call me insane as I sat through all of Movie 43 and found parts of it funny(the truth or dare segment with Halle Berry being my favorite) but you were probably questioning my taste and sanity before I mentioned this anyways.


Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:26 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Edward Scissorhands

I feel like I've already went over a lot of the points here (geddit?) the last couple times this movie has been mentioned, so I'll be brief. This is visually and sonically a beautiful movie with some sharp (geddit?) satire of gossipy, workaday, homogenized suburban life. I dig that very much. What I don't dig is the simplistic plot wherein an incorruptibly innocent character is introduced into a world of flawed characters, and, rather than inspire them toward something better, he mostly just illuminates how shitty they are. This kind of story can be told if the characters are sufficiently interesting and the complexity of morality is handled with a delicate touch (GEDDIT?), but that's not this movie. Also, the lonely man with scissors for hands is a fascinating metaphor, but the character as depicted does not live up to that fascination. ~FIN~

_________________
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.


Sat Dec 28, 2013 6:09 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7383
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Thief12 wrote:
With the risk of sounding like a sourpuss, I have to say I rewatched Airplane! last night after several years, and I was surprised by how less funny it seemed compared to how I remembered it to be. I mean, I laughed but it was not even close to how hilarious I remembered it to be. The best parts are the ones with the veteran actors, Leslie Nielsen, Robert Stack, Peter Graves, and Lloyd Bridges. Oh, and Johnny! But a lot of the physical comedy fell flat this time. Grade: B


NO!!!!! NEVER GROW UP!

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sat Dec 28, 2013 9:41 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 705
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Dr. No Rewatched this with the intention of catching up with all of James Bond films. This is a solid film although I couldn't help but feel how dated it is. Some juvenile bits like Bond singing to Honey, and the typical sexism of Bond films. I wish the film had more scenes like the cold encounter between Bond and Professor Dent "It's a Smith & Wesson. And you've had your six" Great line and great scene. I also was a bit bothered by how unremarkable Dr. No was as a villain. But overall, a fun watch. Grade: somewhere between a C+ or a B-

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sat Dec 28, 2013 9:55 pm
Profile WWW
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Thief12 wrote:
Dr. No Rewatched this with the intention of catching up with all of James Bond films. This is a solid film although I couldn't help but feel how dated it is. Some juvenile bits like Bond singing to Honey, and the typical sexism of Bond films. I wish the film had more scenes like the cold encounter between Bond and Professor Dent "It's a Smith & Wesson. And you've had your six" Great line and great scene. I also was a bit bothered by how unremarkable Dr. No was as a villain. But overall, a fun watch. Grade: somewhere between a C+ or a B-

Dr. No may seem dated compared to later Bond flicks, and very dated compared to the bounty of cutting-edge adventure films that came along in the 1970s that largely defined what it meant to be a classic in that genre for subsequent generations. But, considering that Dr. No was made in 1962, I find myself easily forgetting just how old this film is. Its place in film history doesn't feel as early as it actually is, at least not to me. Temporally, it's much closer to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Gunfight at the OK Corral than it is to Jaws and Indiana Jones.

_________________
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.


Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:14 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Dr. No Rewatched this with the intention of catching up with all of James Bond films. This is a solid film although I couldn't help but feel how dated it is. Some juvenile bits like Bond singing to Honey, and the typical sexism of Bond films. I wish the film had more scenes like the cold encounter between Bond and Professor Dent "It's a Smith & Wesson. And you've had your six" Great line and great scene. I also was a bit bothered by how unremarkable Dr. No was as a villain. But overall, a fun watch. Grade: somewhere between a C+ or a B-

Dr. No may seem dated compared to later Bond flicks, and very dated compared to the bounty of cutting-edge adventure films that came along in the 1970s that largely defined what it meant to be a classic in that genre for subsequent generations. But, considering that Dr. No was made in 1962, I find myself easily forgetting just how old this film is. Its place in film history doesn't feel as early as it actually is, at least not to me. Temporally, it's much closer to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Gunfight at the OK Corral than it is to Jaws and Indiana Jones.

To me the film feels very old with scenes like Bond expecting the black guy to fetch his shoes, that sort of thing just screams 1960s, i'll admit to not liking a lot of the Connery Bond films because of the stereotypes and Bond slapping women(dosen't help that Connery kind of condoned that sort of thing in real life), that just made those films very hard for me to watch, those outdated approaches just don't fly well with people like myself.


Sat Dec 28, 2013 10:39 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7383
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Dr. No Rewatched this with the intention of catching up with all of James Bond films. This is a solid film although I couldn't help but feel how dated it is. Some juvenile bits like Bond singing to Honey, and the typical sexism of Bond films. I wish the film had more scenes like the cold encounter between Bond and Professor Dent "It's a Smith & Wesson. And you've had your six" Great line and great scene. I also was a bit bothered by how unremarkable Dr. No was as a villain. But overall, a fun watch. Grade: somewhere between a C+ or a B-

Dr. No may seem dated compared to later Bond flicks, and very dated compared to the bounty of cutting-edge adventure films that came along in the 1970s that largely defined what it meant to be a classic in that genre for subsequent generations. But, considering that Dr. No was made in 1962, I find myself easily forgetting just how old this film is. Its place in film history doesn't feel as early as it actually is, at least not to me. Temporally, it's much closer to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Gunfight at the OK Corral than it is to Jaws and Indiana Jones.


Great point. And not only in literally time. The difference between the early 60s and the late 60s/early 70s in filmmaking is gigantic

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sat Dec 28, 2013 11:43 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 705
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
Ken wrote:
Thief12 wrote:
Dr. No Rewatched this with the intention of catching up with all of James Bond films. This is a solid film although I couldn't help but feel how dated it is. Some juvenile bits like Bond singing to Honey, and the typical sexism of Bond films. I wish the film had more scenes like the cold encounter between Bond and Professor Dent "It's a Smith & Wesson. And you've had your six" Great line and great scene. I also was a bit bothered by how unremarkable Dr. No was as a villain. But overall, a fun watch. Grade: somewhere between a C+ or a B-

Dr. No may seem dated compared to later Bond flicks, and very dated compared to the bounty of cutting-edge adventure films that came along in the 1970s that largely defined what it meant to be a classic in that genre for subsequent generations. But, considering that Dr. No was made in 1962, I find myself easily forgetting just how old this film is. Its place in film history doesn't feel as early as it actually is, at least not to me. Temporally, it's much closer to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Gunfight at the OK Corral than it is to Jaws and Indiana Jones.

To me the film feels very old with scenes like Bond expecting the black guy to fetch his shoes, that sort of thing just screams 1960s, i'll admit to not liking a lot of the Connery Bond films because of the stereotypes and Bond slapping women(dosen't help that Connery kind of condoned that sort of thing in real life), that just made those films very hard for me to watch, those outdated approaches just don't fly well with people like myself.


Thanks for mentioning it. That bit also rubbed me the wrong way, moreover because it came after a similar scene where they arrive and he just tells Quarrel "cover that!" while he goes to sleep.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:15 am
Profile WWW
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
The film was not just made in 1962, but presumably also takes place in 1962. Should not the state of race and gender relations be portrayed accurately for the time?

_________________
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.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:29 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
The film was not just made in 1962, but presumably also takes place in 1962. Should not the state of race and gender relations be portrayed accurately for the time?
I don't care if it's "realistic" or not, it dates the film very badly.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:57 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
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) 3.5/4

Scorsese examines the American Dream through the morally vague avenues of capitalism, creating a work that echoes the spirit and form of Casino. Of course Casino is stylistically different from The Wolf of Wall Street, but both films are vested in worlds and structures that are built on the greying of lines. These lines are the very ones that are sometimes weaved into the very ideology of the so called American Dream (i.e. "by any means necessary")--the lines born out of the bending of criminal codes in order to gain prosperity through illegitimate means. With this slight mirroring of Casino, viewers are able to consume many of the same themes and commentary of Scorsese past---which is arguably a little more fresh/modern in WOWS. However, with this similarity to Casino, The Wolf of Wall Street conveys similar character arcs that become a little too noticeable, thus creating a deep seated sense of predictability. Even with familiar arcs, kudos to Scorsese for always concentrating on our main character and not becoming too concentrated on the sub-plottings of law enforcement entities running around within the narrative. In turn, we are able to firmly grasp the inner workings of these vibrant characters.

Also, I have to mention the lunch scene with DiCaprio and McConaughey--on top of being a great scene, it nicely sets up this world that the film is capturing and keenly presents the shallowness that seems to ooze out of its inhabitants.

Seconds (1966) 3.5/4

Bold science fiction filmmaking--That's one of the first thoughts I had after watching this utterly riveting film about identity, socialization, and one man's journey to find some sort of meaning to it all. Not only does Frankenheimer's Seconds produce stark commentary on a quickly changing world, he gives audiences a protagonist that is REAL. Frankenheimer brilliantly conveys our main character's mindset during the first act in which an emphasis on quietness and confusion seems to be the utmost priority. Yet, even more impressive is the film's ability to convey a sense of longing that isn't necessarily directed at any one thing. Here, at this moment in time, we are confronted with a man who doesn't know what he wants out of life. These feelings are expounded upon throughout the course of the film, letting the aspects of human condition to run rampant. Ultimately, Seconds, on the surface, seems to be a film directed at the middle aged man who hasn't accomplished all that he had once dreamed. Though thats only on the surface; Seconds is a film that evokes the feeling of standing at a crossroads not knowing where to go or what route to take. Many of us have been at that crossroads, but Seconds picks up after a path is chosen and a decision finally made.

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


Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:07 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1686
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Quote:
To me the film feels very old with scenes like Bond expecting the black guy to fetch his shoes, that sort of thing just screams 1960s, i'll admit to not liking a lot of the Connery Bond films because of the stereotypes and Bond slapping women(dosen't help that Connery kind of condoned that sort of thing in real life), that just made those films very hard for me to watch, those outdated approaches just don't fly well with people like myself.


I've found that women respond much better to the Moores and later entries. Before Bond became a self-conscious cultural icon, he was mainly a white-male fantasy. That Bond was ultimately able to move past that over the years makes the early ones okay for me.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:14 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1405
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Out of the Furnace (2013)

The languorous pacing and too-blunt script are made watchable and semi-compelling by excellent performances and a great sense of place. 6.5/10

Cutie and the Boxer (2013)

There have been quite a few movies this year that touch on the topic of how love evolves over time (Before Midnight, Stories We Tell). The same goes with this documentary about the boxing painter Ushio Shinohara. At first the film seems poised to be about his biography and art, but then as it progresses, the spotlight turns to his marriage and long-suffering wife, Noriko. Also an artist, she must set asides her ambition when she met Ushio 40 years ago and got pregnant.

It hasn't been the smoothest of marriage, with him being twice her age and a dependent alcoholic. The tension and resentment of living with him and raising a child in such household only manifest itself later, with a series of semi-autobiographical cartoon, where he is "Bullie". But even though the film depicts many of their difficulties, it also shows that amidst the bickering, there is a certain kind of love that has made the marriage last for so long. In the end, the film might not have captured a full picture of their lives or arts, but its depiction of how love can erode and sustain over time stays with me. 7.5/10


Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:36 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Vexer wrote:
I don't care if it's "realistic" or not, it dates the film very badly.

It doesn't. A movie being honest about how something works in its time and place is not wrong for doing so. In addition to many other things, a movie is a snapshot of the time in which it was made, both socially and in the filmmaking traditions. Perhaps if Dr. No was trying to depict some other time period and still kept the social norms of 1962, it could be faulted for not seeing past 1962's view of the world, but it didn't do that. If Dr. No had been made today and were set in 1962, it would be absolutely right for capturing the race and gender relations and politics of the period.

If you're that worried about race and gender in the movies, perhaps your energy is better spent thinking about how the film industry's use of female and nonwhite talent today hasn't reflected the progress we've made since 1962. It ought to bother the hell out of you that nearly every field in the business is as dominated by white men as it's ever been. 1962 being 1962 is fine. 2013 still pretty much being 1962 is not.

_________________
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.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 8:26 am
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7383
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
Vexer wrote:
I don't care if it's "realistic" or not, it dates the film very badly.

It doesn't. A movie being honest about how something works in its time and place is not wrong for doing so. In addition to many other things, a movie is a snapshot of the time in which it was made, both socially and in the filmmaking traditions. Perhaps if Dr. No was trying to depict some other time period and still kept the social norms of 1962, it could be faulted for not seeing past 1962's view of the world, but it didn't do that. If Dr. No had been made today and were set in 1962, it would be absolutely right for capturing the race and gender relations and politics of the period.

If you're that worried about race and gender in the movies, perhaps your energy is better spent thinking about how the film industry's use of female and nonwhite talent today hasn't reflected the progress we've made since 1962. It ought to bother the hell out of you that nearly every field in the business is as dominated by white men as it's ever been. 1962 being 1962 is fine. 2013 still pretty much being 1962 is not.


I agree largely. You can praise a movie for being progressive, but not criticize it for not being so.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:14 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1558
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
You have to wonder how many really bad movies people have seen, when a flawed but entertaining movie gets tagged with the reputation as the worst of the summer. You have to wonder how much people think about what it really means to them when they say a movie is bad--what they really dislike about bad movies and what they really like about good ones.

I think The Lone Ranger got punished more for being mismarketed and a poor moneymaker than for its intrinsic qualities. It tends to happen. But I do think it's weird and maybe even harmful when people gossip about box office figures nearly as much as they discuss the movies themselves. It's mostly irrelevant unless you're someone in charge of getting movies made, and it's an indication at least some of the time that people are conflating financial success with the movie's merit as art and entertainment.


Indeed. That's how I view Depp's previous failure Dark Shadows. It was heavily flawed but also quite entertaining. I think the general negative to indifferent reaction to it and The Lone Ranger might be more the result of its supposed reputation than its actual quality.

Both DS and TLR suffered by coming out at a point when the whole Pirate thing had worn out its welcome with the general public. For a while, people more or less forgot that Depp can do comedy as opposed to just playing a quirky character. They forgot that he can play serious dramatic roles. For a while in the mid 2000s it seemed to be that if he wasn't selling Pirates, the public wasn't buying. By 2012 it seemed that even then they're not interested. The haunting reality for him is that Jack Sparrow has led to him being typecast. His attempts at breaking free from that straitjacket have been met with indifference (The Tourist, The Rum Diary, Public Enemies). It's a catch 22.

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:37 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 705
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
The film was not just made in 1962, but presumably also takes place in 1962. Should not the state of race and gender relations be portrayed accurately for the time?


I really don't know how to describe it, but to me, it isn't necessarily about race (although that might play a part in it). But I think it's more on how the character played out unlike most of the Bond characterizations I'm familiar with (90's and so on) where, women aside, Bond is more independent in his missions. To see him with a lackey-like character, telling him "fetch me this" or "do that", as well as other things like seeing him playfully singing (like I mentioned in my initial review) or being naively drugged with a coffee, are just some things that made Dr. No feel awkward to a certain extent.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun Dec 29, 2013 12:36 pm
Profile WWW
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:26 am
Posts: 235
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Ken wrote:
It doesn't. A movie being honest about how something works in its time and place is not wrong for doing so. In addition to many other things, a movie is a snapshot of the time in which it was made, both socially and in the filmmaking traditions. Perhaps if Dr. No was trying to depict some other time period and still kept the social norms of 1962, it could be faulted for not seeing past 1962's view of the world, but it didn't do that. If Dr. No had been made today and were set in 1962, it would be absolutely right for capturing the race and gender relations and politics of the period.


Bond is a reflection of the time he is in, whether it be in type or goals of villains, gadgetry, mannerisms, missions, clothing (pale blue $%^&ing leisure suits), women, even in music. Are they dated? Oh, hell yes. Is that a problem? That's up to the viewer.

In some ways Bond was a response to the heroes needed in the world at the time, to combat whatever "enemy" -real or perceived- existed. In other ways it was a response to what other movies were doing at the time. Example; Sheriff, J.W. Pepper, as much a comedic send-up of Strother Martin Cool Hand Luke sheriff as he was the origins of Buford T. Justice. Many movies are more appreciable when viewed as they would've been in their time. Some fail. Others succeed.

_________________
______________________________
Specializing in rodent behavior modification.
-Watch me pull a habit out of rat.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:09 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16017 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 691, 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697 ... 801  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