Reviews

18 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Rain!
21 December 2009
Great fun. Great fight scenes, nice shots of arcing blood, emotionally believable.

A little after-school-specially in the take away message ("bonsai is cruel to orphans") but very well executed.

There's a whole lot of blood, and a whole lot of severed . . . bits. The violence is cartoony enough that it's not too disturbing, but I did have to look away a few times. If you're squeamish about viscera, this might not be the movie for you.

The dialog wasn't all it could be, but it was well delivered and the actors inhabited those roles. Especially Stephen Colbert's nemesis, Rain.

And Rain is very, very, very pretty.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pathfinder (2007)
6/10
Ghost is just this guy, you know?
22 March 2009
I normally enjoy Karl Urban films way out of proportion to their reviews. Here, he was acting his heart out. I believed in him. He was defending a stunningly beautiful land. Props to the cinematographer. But the dialog was cringeworthy. The Vikings were unrecognizable. Don't get me wrong; that side of the family was a rapacious bunch. But they didn't "purify" lands. Simple pragmatism: there wouldn't be anyone to raid.

I was amused by the Native Americans speaking English and the Vikings speaking . .. Icelandic? something that sounded like Old English. Good times.

That said, the dialog needed a final hard edit. I'm wondering if Russell Means had some sort of dialog approval, because all his stuff was just fine.

Some quality violence. It was fine. I'm a girl who loved Doom, so it's not like my standards are all that high, at least if Karl Urban's in the film, but . . . man. The good guys are too good (with a few glaring exceptions) and the bad guys are too bad.

I did like that our hero listened to Russell Means. People should.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Babylon A.D. (2008)
9/10
I saw tarot in there.
31 August 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Just saw Babylon A.D. It was a whole lot better than I feared; not quite as good as I hoped.

The big thing that tickled me – I'm a sucker for the mythic narrative, and I'm a sucker for doubling. I know Diesel knows his tarot, and there was tarot imagery undergirding that movie hard core. One of the Major Arcana cards is Key 7, The Chariot. One of the many meanings of The Chariot; it's the vehicle or the urge that drives or pulls or yanks us out of the garden, out of childhood, out of a previous state of being. It's closely related to Key 16, The Tower. It shows a tower being blown apart by lightening. Again, the end of one order, the radical rupture with the previous world; the beginning of a new.

So what happens in this movie? Toorop is in his home, and he's ripped out of it – rides off in a limo tank. Gets in a car that flies to a convent in Mongolia. An idyllic garden of a place. He becomes the charioteer at last at this point, driving the car. He takes two people from the garden into a world full of broken towers. They drive, they take the train, they take a sub, they walk, they fly, they run, they go into a world full of towers, some of which need a little blowing up. Toorop and Sister Rebecka and Aurora are all playing The Chariot, all ferrying their burdens from one world to another. Even Aurora's father is something of a Charioteer. Taking Toorop from death to life, from life to death, from death to life again.

And something switches. The penultimate act, we see Toorop's childhood home. Destroyed as if it was blown apart by metaphoric lightening. The girl, the ultimate charioteer, is waiting there. Once they are reunited, it's back to the road. Ultimately, the girl delivers her burden and dies. Toorop rebuilds his home and raises the little girl. There's a storm coming; there are towers that may come down, but it's a sweet place to stop.

I like Toorop. He's got style and he may be mercenary but he's got a line he won't cross. If it turns out the girl is a weapon, he'll kill her and burn her body to stop that from happening. That's a good line. I loved Sister Rebecka's character. There simply needs to be more nun- mercenary buddy movies where the nun kicks ass.

There were some weaknesses. I don't quite buy Toorop's conversion. He takes a shower, sees the girl, they almost kiss, and all of a sudden he's gone from mercenary who's basic limit is being used to destroy a city to literally willing to die to save this girl he barely knows. It felt like a bunch of character development got deleted. I don't get why evil mom stopped trying to get her daughter back just because a couple of cars got run off the road.

But I love the fact that, as in all Vin Diesel movies I really like, the women really call the shots. I love the fact he became the solar hero, going dark and light again and again, despite himself; I like the way that I see more in this the more I think about it. Two thumbs up. And I shall eagerly await the director's cut. Eagerly.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Beowulf (2007)
9/10
Brilliant
17 November 2007
OH MY GOD. wonderful. Just wonderful. Fun movie on the action/gore stand point. Great exploration of acceptable sacrifices for great power. Go see it. In 3D if possible.

I re-read Beowulf two days before I saw the movie. Like so many of those pre-Shakespeare stories, it lacks the . . . interior dimension. There's no discussion of how anyone is thinking. That's the movie's biggest departure from the poem; we know how people are feeling. We know who's willing to make deals with the devil. Well, with with a naked Angelina Jolie. Um. We know why people are willing to make deals with the devil. With a naked Angelina Jolie. Um.

And then there's the dragon.

And naked Angelina Jolie has a very powerful tail.

Gaiman's Beowulf is a fascinating re-telling of the first extant story told in English. The oldest stab we have in English on what it means to be a hero. What it means to stand between the firelight and the darkness and wipe the blood of something inhuman from a sword.

On what it means to be a member of a civilization.

And Angelia Jolie rises from the old archetypal waters.

Go see it. Drink Mead with your friends Boast of your heroic deeds. Shiver at what lurks in the deals for power, in those old archetypal waters.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
D.E.B.S. (2004)
7/10
The perils of the SAT
8 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
A friend of mine gave me this for my birthday. I viewed it with some suspicion ("this doesn't look like science fiction," thought I), but it was a fine, fine film. Very much in the tradition of "But I'm a Cheerleader!" A coming of age film cum Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

In this case, we learn the government is using the SAT to pick girls for special ops teams. The state seems to be making very little effort to foster any sort of moral growth in these girls, instead preferring to use peer pressure and intermittent parental approval to mold them into Super Solders. With, as near as I can tell, large clothing budgets. Subtly transgressive; these girls are essentially sorority pledges who didn't even know they were rushing. Or whatever they call it. One falls hard for the improbably named Lucy Diamond, a supervillain, who falls hard right back. The story of their love is a sweet love story in an otherwise ironic take on the way society molds us to serve its needs.

If you don't have patience for parody of the standard tropes, or you don't like Buffy, you won't like this film. I thought it was great fun.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Doom (2005)
7/10
Forbidden Planet alert!
18 March 2007
A surprisingly good movie. I was fully expecting to be entertained, but it was good enough that I may watch it again sober. I was expecting to be entertained by the screen apotheosis of the idea of the First Person Shooter Game (I thought it was The Rock! As the First Person Shooter! Meaning I got to be The Rock! That rocks!). But turns out it's quite a competent update of Forbidden Planet. Once Again, Man (broadly defined) tries to Make People Better. And Once Again, Things Happen. Literally. By things, I mean monsters with mucus.

I was also charmed because the big moral moment in the movie is not the cliché I was expecting. I was expecting The Rock to be A Space Marine Who Doesn't Play By The Rules, and save the universe. But as it turns out, everyone was trying to obey the rules. Just some of our space marines thought that meant stepping between the monsters and the darkness, and some thought that meant pulling a Lt. Calley on the innocent victims huddling in the darkness. Just In Case.

Serenity's a better update of Forbidden Planet, but I think this is worth watching. Though if and when I watch it sober, I may update that.

I've decided that Karl Urban is a mark of a movie I will enjoy.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
There were snakes on that plane
18 August 2006
I saw an advanced showing of Snakes on a Plane last night at Cinerama. I can report:

There were snakes. On a plane.

There was Samuel L. Jackson.

There was Samuel L. Jackson harpooning a snake.

There was Samuel L. Jackson tasering snakes.

There was Samuel L. Jackson having to say the word "Teal."

There was Samuel L. Jackson and his merry band fighting snakes with sticks.

There was snake cam.

There was (swoon) THE LINE.

There was heroism. There was cowardice. There was a little dog.

Someone asked me if this is a stupid movie. It's not "Battlefield Earth" or "The Phantom Menace" stupid. Nor is it a smart movie, like Donnie Darko or Serenity or Apocalypse Now. No increasing levels of nuance and complexity or deep engagement with the issues of our time or mythic history appear to emerge as one engages Snakes on a Plane. No, it is Snakes on a Plane, all the way down. It's monkeys winging their way through the firmament while struggling with the ancient enemy. Yup. What's in the title is in the movie. Nothing more.

A story of snakes. Hyper aggressive aroused snakes. On a plane. With Samuel L. Jackson.
8 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The Last Stand was fine.
29 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
But The Last Stand should have been great.

It has a great premise. Suddenly, the moral question of whether you assimilate, tolerate, or separate is presented starkly, and no one is ready for it, not even the Secretary of Mutant Affairs. And we find out that it's not just the charismatic anti-hero, the Holocaust survivor Magneto, who has been making moral decisions for other people, it's our pure hearted leader Charles Xavier. The special effects are fun, the actors great, and Ian McKellen rocks the house.

But the movie is disappointing. They wave at the big question, they never grapple with it. Give me more of Rogue's anguish; this incredibly powerful woman who can not shake hands or kiss or bear a child. Give me more of McCoy's loss; this man who was a research scientist who can no longer manipulate the lab equipment. Talk to me about the fact that the cure will kill Logan.

And there were strange continuity problems. Xavier unleashes at Wolverine for doing "something," when we just saw him do nothing. Magneto steps over the body of the woman he loves and sends devoted followers to their apparent deaths with barely a shrug. Magneto plays for keeps, but he's always had the grace to regret it before. Storm's in charge, but Wolverine's giving orders? These things didn't work for me.

There were some wonderful bits. The actors were great, especially Sir Ian. That man owned that film, and any scene with him in it was delicious. Some nicely brutal fight scenes. Kitty Pride's fight with Juggernaut was just about perfect. The slight (unintentional?) political commentary of sending a great big blue ape to the UN made me laugh. And the last scene, while not as good as Magneto quoting Malcolm X from the first film, was still nice.

But I was irritated at what it could have been. The other two movies are great; a fun surface romp with depths that go deep. This was all surface.

Worth seeing. But I don't think I'll be buying the DVD. Don't think it'll bear re-watching.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boston Legal (2004–2008)
7/10
Denny Crane!
7 May 2006
I'm a lawyer, and I normally avoid law shows. I like science fiction. But this has . . . Denny Crane. Or rather, this has Captain Kirk, William Shatner, as an old, demented, republican, gun totting, ego-maniacal unenlightened, philandering, unethical, sexist, homophobic anti- environmentalist powerful attorney, and it is absolutely frelling hysterical. When they let Shatner, Candice Bergman, and James Spader do their thing, this show is gold. The rest of the regularly appearing cast is fairly good.

Sure not modeling good behavior, mind, and sometimes the legal errors go far beyond what is necessary for the plot. I think they could loose some of the younger lawyers, who really don't add anything to the mix that I can tell but seem to be regarded as necessary for demographic reasons. Once in a while it falls flat. But for the most part, this show is great.
84 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fantastic Four (I) (2005)
5/10
Very disappointing.
7 May 2006
This should have great. The Fantastic Four aren't the X-Men, but they still have a respectable mythology to draw from. They have the power of the four elements! Together, they can make anything! And there was a space ship! Instead, the script just didn't pop.

The acting was spotty, at best. Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis did a fine job; both very believable as sudden superheroes. But Alba and Gruffudd were just phoning it in, and McMahon didn't seem to have a coherent idea of his character.

It had some moments, especially when they let the special effects people do their thing. But it should have been the story of how a villain and a team of superheroes become who they are. While the situation is fantastic, the emotional reality is utterly real. In these days of lone heroes and anti-heroes, telling the story of the creation team gives a film maker an opportunity to explore something relatively fresh. Instead, it was about five people more or less randomly walking through life.

Did like the Stan Lee walk on.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
King Arthur (2004)
5/10
Not my Arthur
24 March 2006
What I learned from this movie: Arthur, "demystified" was not the Ur-defender of Britain, he was a prescient Champion of Freedom.

Alrighty, that was moderately annoying.

Full disclosure: I have a stake in Arthur. Not a big sake. But I was raised in England, and there is a part of me below my rational brain that believes Arthur will return. That Arthur did return, in the person of Elizabeth I and the storms that drove back the Spanish Armada. That Arthur did return, in the person of Winston Churchill and the RAF driving back the Nazis. That he will return to protect London from the rising waters. I get all misty eyed.

But this guy? Not that Arthur. Not one of the avatars of that Arthur. Okay, based on one of the seven plus figures from history or myth that I have read might lurk in the Arthur matrix; a Roman soldier who stayed behind to protect his mother's people from hoards of . . . well, I'm not sure. From the movie, it appeared to be proto-Nazis. Racially pure "Saxons," intent on maintaining their ethic purity as they invaded new lands. Right.

This Arthur was a champion of contemporary American values; freedom, religious and ethnic diversity, gender equality, blah blah blah.

I mean, I am too. And so is Captain Kirk and John Crichton, and I love Captain Kirk and John Crichton. But thrusting those values back on Arthur . . . disconcerting. And not necessary for any reason I could tell.

What unites all of the Arthurs was the bedrock fact that They Defended Britain. That's who Arthur is. He is the Defender of Britain, and he's every hero who prevented the night from falling for the space of his generation. Even my atheist flesh is all tingly at the thought.

This Arthur? Not so much. For no good reason I could see.

That said, this movie was gorgeous. The scenes, the fights, the actors . . . sumptuous. Full of the pretty. Even the torture scene. Again with the disconcerting.

Was this a good movie? I didn't think so.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
X2 (2003)
8/10
What I learned from this movie: be kind to people with glowing eyes.
5 March 2006
A wonderful movie about exclusion and alienation. With kick ass fight scenes.

I'm a sucker for superheroes, and this move is crammed with them. And some of the best actors out there: Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen . . . man, I believed.

The kick ass fight scenes did not hurt.

The thing that is so marvelous about the X-Men is how redemptive it is. Many of us who were ever bullied as a child, all of us who have ever been oppressed and exploited want to rise up; want them to crawl at our feet.

But it's not just about revenge fantasies, though the revenge fantasy was a major, major, component of this story. It's surprising subtle story about the line between revenge fantasies and building a just society.

There was a whole lot of stuff going on. I'm no X-Men fangirl, but I've read a comic book now and again (at least the ones written by Joss Whedon) (everyone should read every thing ever written by Joss Whedon, btw) and I'm not sure I would have tracked what happened but for that.

I work for a politician, and I love him. But man, I bought the venality of these political men.

The metaphor of the dam finally breaking . . . wonderful. Cathartic, but also frighteningly Brechtian. The dam has broken, the long leashed waters unloosed, and we all have to live after the flood. Innocent or not. We still have to live in the world created by our ancestors.

One of the best popular major motion pictures ever. Go see it. See it again. Go build a better world afterward.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
What I have learned from this movie: Vin Diesel, even shirtless
5 March 2006
does not a movie make.

Oh, it had it's moments. There was certainly talent in this movie. And one of the bestest exploding cars ever. And Diesel has a certain . . . charisma, even when I don't quite get the game.

But I just didn't get it. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of the genre. Maybe if I was, it would have seemed more coherent, instead of a of "day in the life" mojo.

There were too many characters, too many wandering subplots, too many moments where I was going "huh?" And then not really caring.

I did like that the two major female characters weren't ditzes or helpless. The girlfriend even throws one of the best punches in the film, even though her apparent age did get close to my squick line. But good grief, you've got Vin Diesel, and the only real fight scene he's in, he's hitting someone who's already down? Maybe it's 'cause I know him through Pitch Black/ Chronicles of Riddick, but I want superhero (okay, super anti-hero) stuff. I want him in real fights. I want preternatural.

The movie might have been better if it had been more violent, more sexual. Or it might have been better if it had had a tighter plot. Or it might have been better with more things blowing up. Mmm, explosions. As it was, it was fine. But I don't think I'll be watching it again.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
What I learned from this movie:
4 March 2006
Always carry a bowie knife if you've got a feathered tail.

This movie had moments. The woman who does the voice of Riley and Huey Freeman reluctantly portraying Tina Turner, with Sandra Bullock behind her moving her arms in a Tina-eque fashion – nice. The metatextualism of folks commenting on the Shatner's singing – nice. There was even a visual shout out to Star Trek's "The Voyage Home" that I found quite charming. The frantic car chase to save the victims with a dancer's feathered headdress streaming out of the skylight; good fun. I'm a sucker for a costume drama that involves fights and shiny things. And I do like the way Sandra snorts.

But . . . it just didn't cohere. It couldn't decide if it was supposed to be slapstick or comic drama; couldn't decide if it was absurdist or plausible. The lead's transformation into a glamor queen just wasn't psychologically or dramatically convincing.

There was true talent in this film. Real charisma. But it was lazy. One more hard edit of the script, and I think this could have been a fine film. But someone started filming before they had that final edit, and no one made up for it anywhere along the line.
12 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Alexander (2004)
8/10
Good work
15 January 2006
I liked this. I do think it needed a hard edit. But it's one of the only historical epics I've seen that wasn't teeming with errors, and the overarching story was great. Alexander became a god. He deified his horse. He was both well versed in the mythic traditions of his people, and in the hard, rational traditions. He was one of the greatest strategists ever. He changed what it meant to be a king. And this movie actually makes a nuanced exploration of these things. With some perky social commentary, which does a great job of showing power expressing itself in predictable tropes.

I loved the use of the cave paintings to give mythic exposition, and the use of flashbacks to them to tie the story to the myth as the movie unfolded. The use of Alexander's deified horse to represent his own shadow; the Hellenic Golden Boy who could integrate his own shadow.

There were some sour notes. The "freedom" thing was a distracting anachronism. Alexander was fighting for a lot of things: power, security, to best his father, to please his mother, to get away from his mother, to become a new Achilles, to bring a new organizing principle to the world . . . but not freedom as we mean it today. Colin Farrell spends entirely too much of the movie looking like he's wandered in from a re-make of Spinal Tap. And there was too much exposition, though it softened the blow that Anthony Hopkins was the one giving it.

I understand why the movie isn't widely loved. It's a very hard film. The family drama, the extremely graphic violence, the Oedipal undertones (overtones?), the explicit bisexuality, the sheer number of characters (I finally had to bring up Wikipedia to track them all), the non- linear story telling, the lack of a standard story arc, the disturbing parallels to the current situation in Central Europe, the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan, all make it a hard movie to follow and sometimes even to watch. But it's quality film-making that completely blows Troy out of the water. Well worth watching.
3 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Batman Begins (2005)
8/10
Pretty good. The best of the Batman films, absolutely.
30 October 2005
Batman is dark. They accepted that darkness, and didn't protect us with camp. It is the tale of a man who decides that it's his business who's good and who's bad. That makes him a superman in the Nietzschean sense. We haven't had a good history with that. A man who was "to the manor born," our age old natural betters.

Nolan and company tackled that head on in this origin story, and I'm glad. This Batman knows that there is no morally pure choice. He spends considerable time naval starring.

They also accepted just how Freudian the whole Batman story is. This is a man who is stuck, unable to move beyond a tragic, bloody, defining event; a moment when his parents, powerful in their own realm, were shown as absolutely impotent in the shadow side. His rage at that moment fuels him; his inability to move beyond it freezes him. The very weapon the bad guys plan to use to accomplish their nefarious ends harks back to that.

Not a perfect film. The big reveal at the end was a little too pat, and I could have done without the supermodels. But a loving retelling of the irreducible core of the most human of superheroes.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I, Robot (2004)
6/10
Okay
16 October 2005
Not very science-fictiony, but I did like the Naked Will Smith bit. A nice follow up to his work in Independence Day, one of the first science fiction movies where the black guy survived. Here, we have one of the first science fiction movies where we see naked male bodies, not naked female. But -- in both cases -- there just didn't seem to be any there there, story wise. Nothing new, nothing interesting, nothing especially moving. Just a competently packaged retelling of classic themes. With, again, a naked Will Smith. No bad there.

It was fun, well acted, well shot, but hardly worthy of the Asimov shout out. There is a deep and disturbing story lurking in the I Robot tale, and they didn't get close to it.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Just about the perfect movie
5 September 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Been a long time since I saw a movie I enjoyed that much. A wonderful, whimsical, weird exploration of the conflict between the Old Night (with both its bloodiness and its potential for grace) and The Enlightenment (with both its bloodiness and its potential for liberation). With an affectionate nod towards the Catholic Church and its syncretic traditions.

I really loved what Gillian did with the historical characters, the Brothers Grimm. They were linguists who were part of the creation of the modern Germany. They were both forward looking and deeply backwards looking. Utterly modern, utterly not. Here we have two brothers who pierced the veil; saw through the myth and manipulated it for their own purposes, until the myth stepped up and snatched them back into the dark forest, and not even the flames of the Enlightenment could liberate them. Only thinking through the stories.

There were literal flames licking those forests. Napoleon's General (John Pryce; wonderful villain) tried to burn down the forest where demons lurked. Was going to burn the stories, burn the brothers, as well. But they were saved by an Angel – Angelica; the love interest; the tracker; the one who had been in the forest. Whose father was all the way into the story. She had the same twinned vision; an educated woman who knew the old stories. They too were educated men who knew the stories. And it isolated them both.

The only other person who knew the stories was the general's torturer; the Italian dude. Who saves the stories. Syncretic, like the Catholic Church, pulling the old stories into its own matrix.

It also had the oldest magic in the world; calendar magic. 12 crypts with 12 girls, their blood mingled to make a youth restoring elixir for an immortal queen who none the less aged. I'm a sucker for calendar magic. Months and moons and eclipses, oh my.

The Empress sent her champion, the Emperor, (the huntsman; the wolf man, the man who eats his own children like time eats his own children) to collect the girls. He actually gets 13, but one is rescued by our heroes. 13 moons. 13 months in the lunar year. Contrasted with the 12 months of the solar year.

The Brothers were both avatars of the archetypal Magician. The Magician as thief, story teller, and con man. They found a guide in archetypal High Priestess – in this case, a woman with a bow who guided them in and out of the trackless forest of the intuition; of the mythic imagination. The Empress was the Queen in the Tower – a dark reflection of the Queen of Heaven; the womb and the tomb. The Huntsman was also the Hanged Man, serving the Empress. And the General he General; the avatar of imperial authority. At last, it was a comedy, order restored with a kiss, even though there didn't need to be one.

And it was so meta! The story tellers were con men, using stories to trick ignorant villagers out of money. Gilliam is a story teller, using stories to trick us into going to the movie. But the story tellers save the day because they hear the story behind the con, and know how to end it.

And the number of fairy tales they wove in. Some were just tiny visual motifs, some were the entire thing. Cinderella (scrubbing floors, glass slippers on the girls in the crypts) Sleeping Beauty (pricked fingers) Little Red Ridding Hood (wandering through the forest, being eaten by a wolf); Hansel and Gretel (searching in the forest, trail of bread crumbs) . . . And older. Crows were everywhere. The Morrigan.

Having Isabella Rossellini as the queen who won immortality but not eternal youth was wonderful. The allure and the horror of the timeless stories; forever young; forever retold.

It begins "Once upon a time," and it ends "They lived happily ever after. Or maybe not."

I loved it. My kinda film.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed