Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:41 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 288 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 15  Next
Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World 
Author Message
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
neco82 wrote:
5) Any Superman film that gets made WILL NOT make any reference whatsoever to the Richard Donner film, will have a villain other than Lex Luthor and will feature Supes actually fighting someone, rather than lifting giant rocks.


So, what did you think of Superman Returns? ;)


Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:58 pm
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
neco82 wrote:
Ok, this required a bit of brainstorming...

1) A film has to be at least ten years old before being remade.
2) James Cameron is forbidden from quoting his own films.
3) A ban on adapting young fantasy books in a desperate bid to find the next Harry Potter (especially Star Wars ripoffs written by fifteen year olds)
4) Comic book franchises are given at least five films to flesh out their story and characters, instead of rebooting to the same origin story time and time again (if crappy low-rent slasher series can get 10 sequels, why not a superhero film?)
5) Any Superman film that gets made WILL NOT make any reference whatsoever to the Richard Donner film, will have a villain other than Lex Luthor and will feature Supes actually fighting someone, rather than lifting giant rocks.
6) Any filmmaker that "envisions a trilogy" from their initial film gets shot on the spot. In fact, any mention of "trilogies" is outlawed.
7) Comedic performances will be considered for awards.
8) Walt Becker is never allowed near a camera again.
9) Movies based on board games are finally recognized as the stupidest idea ever (with Clue being the sole exception).
10) Nerdy/Weirdo filmmakers are forbidden from casting their own hot girlfriends/wives repeatedly in their films as a means of showing them off: Tim Burton, Kevin Smith, Judd Apatow, etc.
11) George Lucas is forbidden from writing his own scripts.
12) Harrison Ford is forced to really act again, and actually enjoy it.
13) "I Will Survive" is never used in a film again, no matter what the version.

I agree on 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 11, i'm pretty indifferent 3, 4, 10, but I definitley don't agree with 8 as there's WAAAYYYYYYYY worse directors then Walt Becker, i'd say if anyone should be forbidden from directing ever again-it's Shyamalan(hell Becker's films look like Oscar winners compared to his films), that guy is the biggest ego-maniac among all film directors and is nothing but a talentless hack, same goes for Richard Kelly, he is NEVER going to achieve the height he once did with Donnie Darko, also I don't agree on 12 I think Ford still acts pretty good and looks like he's enjoying himself for the most part.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:16 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Vexer wrote:
neco82 wrote:
Ok, this required a bit of brainstorming...

1) A film has to be at least ten years old before being remade.
2) James Cameron is forbidden from quoting his own films.
3) A ban on adapting young fantasy books in a desperate bid to find the next Harry Potter (especially Star Wars ripoffs written by fifteen year olds)
4) Comic book franchises are given at least five films to flesh out their story and characters, instead of rebooting to the same origin story time and time again (if crappy low-rent slasher series can get 10 sequels, why not a superhero film?)
5) Any Superman film that gets made WILL NOT make any reference whatsoever to the Richard Donner film, will have a villain other than Lex Luthor and will feature Supes actually fighting someone, rather than lifting giant rocks.
6) Any filmmaker that "envisions a trilogy" from their initial film gets shot on the spot. In fact, any mention of "trilogies" is outlawed.
7) Comedic performances will be considered for awards.
8) Walt Becker is never allowed near a camera again.
9) Movies based on board games are finally recognized as the stupidest idea ever (with Clue being the sole exception).
10) Nerdy/Weirdo filmmakers are forbidden from casting their own hot girlfriends/wives repeatedly in their films as a means of showing them off: Tim Burton, Kevin Smith, Judd Apatow, etc.
11) George Lucas is forbidden from writing his own scripts.
12) Harrison Ford is forced to really act again, and actually enjoy it.
13) "I Will Survive" is never used in a film again, no matter what the version.

I agree on 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 11, i'm pretty indifferent 3, 4, 10, but I definitley don't agree with 8 as there's WAAAYYYYYYYY worse directors then Walt Becker, i'd say if anyone should be forbidden from directing ever again-it's Shyamalan(hell Becker's films look like Oscar winners compared to his films), that guy is the biggest ego-maniac among all film directors and is nothing but a talentless hack, same goes for Richard Kelly, he is NEVER going to achieve the height he once did with Donnie Darko, also I don't agree on 12 I think Ford still acts pretty good and looks like he's enjoying himself for the most part.



Hold on
Shyamalan is a hero of mine, even while he is currently lost.
How many directors wish they had made 6th Sense, Unbreakbale and Signs?
Many for sure!
Rob


Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:42 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Robert Holloway wrote:
Vexer wrote:
neco82 wrote:
Ok, this required a bit of brainstorming...

1) A film has to be at least ten years old before being remade.
2) James Cameron is forbidden from quoting his own films.
3) A ban on adapting young fantasy books in a desperate bid to find the next Harry Potter (especially Star Wars ripoffs written by fifteen year olds)
4) Comic book franchises are given at least five films to flesh out their story and characters, instead of rebooting to the same origin story time and time again (if crappy low-rent slasher series can get 10 sequels, why not a superhero film?)
5) Any Superman film that gets made WILL NOT make any reference whatsoever to the Richard Donner film, will have a villain other than Lex Luthor and will feature Supes actually fighting someone, rather than lifting giant rocks.
6) Any filmmaker that "envisions a trilogy" from their initial film gets shot on the spot. In fact, any mention of "trilogies" is outlawed.
7) Comedic performances will be considered for awards.
8) Walt Becker is never allowed near a camera again.
9) Movies based on board games are finally recognized as the stupidest idea ever (with Clue being the sole exception).
10) Nerdy/Weirdo filmmakers are forbidden from casting their own hot girlfriends/wives repeatedly in their films as a means of showing them off: Tim Burton, Kevin Smith, Judd Apatow, etc.
11) George Lucas is forbidden from writing his own scripts.
12) Harrison Ford is forced to really act again, and actually enjoy it.
13) "I Will Survive" is never used in a film again, no matter what the version.

I agree on 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 11, i'm pretty indifferent 3, 4, 10, but I definitley don't agree with 8 as there's WAAAYYYYYYYY worse directors then Walt Becker, i'd say if anyone should be forbidden from directing ever again-it's Shyamalan(hell Becker's films look like Oscar winners compared to his films), that guy is the biggest ego-maniac among all film directors and is nothing but a talentless hack, same goes for Richard Kelly, he is NEVER going to achieve the height he once did with Donnie Darko, also I don't agree on 12 I think Ford still acts pretty good and looks like he's enjoying himself for the most part.



Hold on
Shyamalan is a hero of mine, even while he is currently lost.
How many directors wish they had made 6th Sense, Unbreakbale and Signs?
Many for sure!
Rob
Yeah, i'll bet other directors wish they would've made those films if they knew how easily the audience fall for them despite them both having many plot holes and lame twist endings and being completely univolving, i'm completely dumbfounded as to how Shyamalan was ever famous for anything, and i'll bet no director on Earth wishes they had directed a self-indulgant piece of shit like Lady In The Water.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:30 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Vexer wrote:
but I definitley don't agree with 8 as there's WAAAYYYYYYYY worse directors then Walt Becker, i'd say if anyone should be forbidden from directing ever again-it's Shyamalan(hell Becker's films look like Oscar winners compared to his films), that guy is the biggest ego-maniac among all film directors and is nothing but a talentless hack, same goes for Richard Kelly, he is NEVER going to achieve the height he once did with Donnie Darko, also I don't agree on 12 I think Ford still acts pretty good and looks like he's enjoying himself for the most part.


You lose a bit of credibility here when you say that Walt effin' Becker is more talented than Shyamalan. Old Dogs and Wild Hogs are two of the absolute worst feature films of all time. Not a worthwhile millisecond in either of them. Those two alone place Becker very high on the worst-directors-ever list. Shyamalan is far from perfect, but he shows bits of talent in some shots and storytelling techniques (even though many of his stories are lousy). Becker's work honestly makes me feel like he's trying to make the shittiest movie ever made. Not once does he even pretend to do anything interesting. An orangutan would have directed those films more competently.

That said, I do agree with you about Kelly, although I would go further because I think Donnie Darko is terrible also.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:52 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Vexer wrote:
Hold on
Shyamalan is a hero of mine, even while he is currently lost.
How many directors wish they had made 6th Sense, Unbreakbale and Signs?
Many for sure!
Rob
Yeah, i'll bet other directors wish they would've made those films if they knew how easily the audience fall for them despite them both having many plot holes and lame twist endings and being completely univolving, i'm completely dumbfounded as to how Shyamalan was ever famous for anything, and i'll bet no director on Earth wishes they had directed a self-indulgant piece of shit like Lady In The Water.[/quote]

I think Unbreakable is a great movie and clearly Shyamalan's best work.

You think it's crap?

Rob


Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:19 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Shade wrote:
Vexer wrote:
but I definitley don't agree with 8 as there's WAAAYYYYYYYY worse directors then Walt Becker, i'd say if anyone should be forbidden from directing ever again-it's Shyamalan(hell Becker's films look like Oscar winners compared to his films), that guy is the biggest ego-maniac among all film directors and is nothing but a talentless hack, same goes for Richard Kelly, he is NEVER going to achieve the height he once did with Donnie Darko, also I don't agree on 12 I think Ford still acts pretty good and looks like he's enjoying himself for the most part.


You lose a bit of credibility here when you say that Walt effin' Becker is more talented than Shyamalan. Old Dogs and Wild Hogs are two of the absolute worst feature films of all time. Not a worthwhile millisecond in either of them. Those two alone place Becker very high on the worst-directors-ever list. Shyamalan is far from perfect, but he shows bits of talent in some shots and storytelling techniques (even though many of his stories are lousy). Becker's work honestly makes me feel like he's trying to make the shittiest movie ever made. Not once does he even pretend to do anything interesting. An orangutan would have directed those films more competently.

That said, I do agree with you about Kelly, although I would go further because I think Donnie Darko is terrible also.

I never said Becker was more talented, I just said I prefered watching his films, his films make me laugh, and would you consider him a worse director then Uwe Boll or Seltzer and Friedberg? Shyamalan's films do look nice and have decent directing, but his writing is so terrible that it hardly matters, his horrible storytelling and godawful dialogue have a way of making talented actors like Bruce Willis, Samuel L Jackson, and Mark Wahlberg look foolish, it always feels like he's trying to piss me off as much as humanely possible in every single film he's ever made, say what you will about Becker, but at least he dosen't have an ego the size of the sun like Shyamaln does :roll: and Rob, I can understand people liking Unbreakable, but it was torture for me to sit through as I didn't fin the characters the least bit compelling and thought the script was pretty thin.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:29 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
JamesKunz wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Ha! Great story Ken. Gotta love Los Angeles man...

JamesKunz wrote:
+ Unless there's some legitimate reason (that has to be expressed to me personally) every movie must show its title before the film/during the first 20 minutes. I'm sick of how Avatar and The Dark Knight and a lot of other movies these days arbitrarily decide not to show the title. It's okay if you're Paranormal Activity and are trying to build an illusion that this is "found" footage, but for a normal movie, show your damn title.


Curious why you feel this way KunnieBear. I mean, don't you know the title of the movie you're watching? For me, I think its refreshing when a movie just starts...what do they call that, a cold start?

EDIT: I was off. A cold open it's called.


Can you imagine if a book didn't have the title written anywhere? The title is a damn important part of a movie, and it should be displayed during the film.


The film is in advertisements, on the marquee, on the DVD cover, etc. If you honestly don't know what film you are watching, why are you there? After doing a quick, informal inventory of my brain (very quick process, actually), with no actual films coming to mind, I get the impression that I enjoy a far greater proportion of films that do not include the title at the beginning than those that do.

I'm still waiting for a good argument WHY the title needs to be there. "Because books do it" doesn't cut it for me.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:46 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
MunichMan wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
Can you imagine if a book didn't have the title written anywhere? The title is a damn important part of a movie, and it should be displayed during the film.


The film is in advertisements, on the marquee, on the DVD cover, etc. If you honestly don't know what film you are watching, why are you there? After doing a quick, informal inventory of my brain (very quick process, actually), with no actual films coming to mind, I get the impression that I enjoy a far greater proportion of films that do not include the title at the beginning than those that do.

I'm still waiting for a good argument WHY the title needs to be there. "Because books do it" doesn't cut it for me.


I'm a fan of great title sequences. The 60s were filled with these. Catch me if you can brilliantly hommages these. Of course some were irritatingly long. I can't remember where it started but films began having the titles and opening credits written while the action is underway, which is annoying when there is dialog at the same time (I'm a bloke and not good at multitasking). So I find myself often being like: "c'mon bring on "directed by...." - so this annoying shit is over. And so I think the next step - for some "clever" people - was elimiating the opening title and credit sequence altogether.
I am still a fan of great opening credits and title. It is part of the movie magic. They can be worked into a scene whith no dialog or with the dialog in between titles (Silence of the Lambs where Clarice Starling was jogging comes to mind - great opening credits where the story/action is already in motion).

I'll "allow" for the occasional exception (say Apocalypse Now) but to be honest, I prefer the opposite approach a la The Deer Hunter (opens with white lettering over plain black - this demands attention!) not to mention the fantastic classic Superman openings. Sure it depends on the style of the movie, but 'no title' feels pretty empty for me. If a director feels, a title might be cheezy or distracting - ask Ridley Scott, he came up with the fantastic ALIEN opening title.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:51 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
How do we feel when films substitute a logo for the title (Ghostbusters II, Batman Begins)?


Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:51 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
I think back to the 40's when often times you had the credits front-loaded (like Threeperf mentions) and then nothing at the end except a "The End" card. I believe Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon are examples? That can be useful to make a dramatic exit as much as a stark (or lack of) opening credit can make a dramatic entrance. Of course, credit lists are much longer now than they were back then.

I think the Monty Python guys got it right with Holy Grail in handling opening title sequences. :D


Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:25 am
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
ShrunkenHead wrote:
How do we feel when films substitute a logo for the title (Ghostbusters II, Batman Begins)?


Fine with me - if the logo (without lettering) is clearly recognizeable from somewhere before. The name 'screams' in our heads then. I am unable to draw the exact line between a lettering especially designed for a title and a logo anyway. O.K. if it's a Warner Bros -ish shield like Superman, it's clearly a logo. But how about Star Wars? The lettering is so important, I'd say it's still a logo.
BTW: what would the 007 franchise be without those outstanding title sequences (started back in the 60s, there we go).


Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:54 pm
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
johnny larue wrote:
I think back to the 40's when often times you had the credits front-loaded (like Threeperf mentions) and then nothing at the end except a "The End" card. I believe Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon are examples? That can be useful to make a dramatic exit as much as a stark (or lack of) opening credit can make a dramatic entrance. Of course, credit lists are much longer now than they were back then.

I think the Monty Python guys got it right with Holy Grail in handling opening title sequences. :D


Yep, those front loaded title sequences like "The Wizard of Oz" in glorious 3:4 (well roughly) academy aspect ratio and dramatic old school film music (like Max Steiner) . I think those can be traced back to opera overtures. In some cases the music over these even plays like an overture with melody snippets (or variations thereof) from themes which will be played in full later.
Nowadays the end titles seem to make sure everything is written carefully to prevent any form of lawsuit (additional grips, catering, we wish to thank the city of "FillIn"..... no animals were harmed......) - as opposed to being read by anyone except lawyers..... oh well....


Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:05 pm
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
neco82 wrote:
5) Any Superman film that gets made WILL NOT make any reference whatsoever to the Richard Donner film, will have a villain other than Lex Luthor and will feature Supes actually fighting someone, rather than lifting giant rocks.
The Donner film, which features Lex Luthor and in which Superman does not physically fight someone, is far and away the best Superman feature yet made, and it is unsurprising that many other Superman media adaptations have tried to incorporate elements of it--some to good effect, some not so much.

It's also funny that people think a Super-brawl is the key to a good Superman story. I can think of several excellent Superman stories off the top of my head in which no punches are thrown, and I can think of far too many mediocre ones in which many punches are thrown. Superman is a fighter, but he's so many more things than that. In a genre that is defined almost exclusively by hero/villain fisticuffs, I think a Super-brawl is the last thing these movies need. For christ's sake, these people can come up with a better, more novel idea than that.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7260
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
MunichMan wrote:
The film is in advertisements, on the marquee, on the DVD cover, etc. If you honestly don't know what film you are watching, why are you there? After doing a quick, informal inventory of my brain (very quick process, actually), with no actual films coming to mind, I get the impression that I enjoy a far greater proportion of films that do not include the title at the beginning than those that do.

I'm still waiting for a good argument WHY the title needs to be there. "Because books do it" doesn't cut it for me.


Why are you being dismissive and reductive, Munich? The point of the title isn't to tell the ignorant what movie they're watching, and you know it. Also, my argument wasn't "because books do it," but rather than it's impossible to imagine a book without a title on it because titles are integral to books, as they should be with films.

The title is part of the film. Advertising has nothing to do with the film. Advertising is about commerce. But I view films as, well, not to put a pretentious point on it, art. I don't give a shit about how many TV spots told people about the movie's title: the title is an integral aspect of the film. It should be shown.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:59 pm
Profile
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Nolan's reasoning for withholding the title of Batman Begins until the end was because that's when Batman (wait for it...) was truly beginning. I can dig that.

I will agree with Kunz in the sense that Nolan's reasoning for doing the same thing in The Dark Knight was a bit more puzzling. Formal continuity? The bat at the beginning speaks for itself? He didn't truly become The Dark Knight until the end? It's a little shakier.

This is actually similar to my gripe about his use of Greengrass-style visual techniques. In Begins, when Batman ambushes the drug runners in the warehouse, it's entirely justified. It has a purpose. Its use everywhere else, not quite so much. It makes me wonder if the scant moments where these techniques actually work aren't inspired, so much as the result of throwing enough crap at the wall to get some of it to stick.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:06 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7260
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
Ken wrote:
Nolan's reasoning for withholding the title of Batman Begins until the end was because that's when Batman (wait for it...) was truly beginning. I can dig that.

I will agree with Kunz in the sense that Nolan's reasoning for doing the same thing in The Dark Knight was a bit more puzzling. Formal continuity? The bat at the beginning speaks for itself? He didn't truly become The Dark Knight until the end? It's a little shakier.

This is actually similar to my gripe about his use of Greengrass-style visual techniques. In Begins, when Batman ambushes the drug runners in the warehouse, it's entirely justified. It has a purpose. Its use everywhere else, not quite so much. It makes me wonder if the scant moments where these techniques actually work aren't inspired, so much as the result of throwing enough crap at the wall to get some of it to stick.


I like your reasoning here Ken. I felt the same way about Casino Royale holding off on the Bond music until the end.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Wed Sep 15, 2010 4:13 pm
Profile
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
1. Hang Jean Luc Godard.

2. Force Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu to send screenplays to at least 3 of the most respected scribes in the country, to be approved by a 2/3 vote before his latest film is greenlighted. If the film promises to aimlessly toy with chronology, feature tangentially related over-lapping storylines or reads like a Guatemalan soap opera, then the entire work is to be torched and begun anew after a three month probation period.

3. Lavish the BBC with funds under the proviso that additional funds go directly into the film process at all levels and commitment to film quality is maintained under personal discretion.

4. Ban non-film promotions/ads before films, and basically fire/train all but the most experienced and effective trailer-makers in the business, using amazing previews such as the one for 'Up In The Air' as the industry standard.

5. Have the MPAA re-built from the ground up to have consistent standards for films. The NC-17 rating will be ignored with only extreme exceptions, and will be granted the same marketing/theater capabilities as an 'R' or 'PG-13' rated film would. Oh, and on-screen ejaculations? R-rating.

6. Dictate remakes to be submitted to the same process as the Innaritu Act in point #2. A rotating cast of screenwriters will be enlisted here, since there will obviously be a multitude of remake ideas/plans and therefore a greater need for a diverse and frequently available staff.

7. Require 3D projects to request special funding apart from 2D projects, not as add-ons; they will be expected to stand fully well on their own, with only the most exclusive two-format exceptions.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:44 pm
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
JamesKunz wrote:
MunichMan wrote:
The film is in advertisements, on the marquee, on the DVD cover, etc. If you honestly don't know what film you are watching, why are you there? After doing a quick, informal inventory of my brain (very quick process, actually), with no actual films coming to mind, I get the impression that I enjoy a far greater proportion of films that do not include the title at the beginning than those that do.

I'm still waiting for a good argument WHY the title needs to be there. "Because books do it" doesn't cut it for me.


Why are you being dismissive and reductive, Munich? The point of the title isn't to tell the ignorant what movie they're watching, and you know it. Also, my argument wasn't "because books do it," but rather than it's impossible to imagine a book without a title on it because titles are integral to books, as they should be with films.

The title is part of the film. Advertising has nothing to do with the film. Advertising is about commerce. But I view films as, well, not to put a pretentious point on it, art. I don't give a shit about how many TV spots told people about the movie's title: the title is an integral aspect of the film. It should be shown.


I was going to mention some of the same things MunichTheMan pointed out up here. Yeah, the film title is everywhere...you know the title of the film. But I like what you said there Kunz, and you're probably right...the title is part of the film.

I guess I had issue with the "within the first 20 minutes" part of your statement. But I guess, there can be exceptions...eh King?


Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:48 pm
Post Re: Rules You Would Make If You Were King of the Movie World
JamesKunz wrote:
I like your reasoning here Ken. I felt the same way about Casino Royale holding off on the Bond music until the end.


Good one! Didn't like that too. It's such a great theme. I'm pretty sure the explanation is: the director (or the producer) thougjht it sounds old fashioned. Sure the original recordings with that twangy spaghetti western guitar and the somehow thin sounding horn section sounds dated to people who have ears like Simon Cowell (or only good for an artsy-trashy-trendy David Holmes remix), but the new recording at the end of Casino Royale is awesome! The composition is timeless.

Darn, I always get carried away when I talk music...... sorry.....

On topic: If I was King of the movie world, I'd fire all idiots who have no spine, go the easy route and shit in their pants when they hear any music which does not sound exactly like any other current interchangeable pop/rock crapola.


Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:49 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 288 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 15  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [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