The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Gets the Extended Treatment Too - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 55 Old 08-02-2013, 11:32 PM
Senior Member
 
AVTrauma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Happy to report that I (like many others) saw this coming, and will now be able to finally add this to our collections. Looking forward to meeting Smaug soon too!
(Incidently, I am doing the same thing with Avatar... got the extended version when released (it really added to the story) and did not rush out when the 3D version was finally released to the general public and buy one. I anticipate the "Super Deluxe 3D Extended Edition" of Avatar to hit the shelves just before Avatar 2 hits theaters... I'm patient, I can wait!)
AVTrauma is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 55 Old 08-03-2013, 10:48 PM
Member
 
breezy2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Ugh... thirteen more minutes? I barely made through as it was.

It's funny, though, that they held back some footage in an attempt to squeeze some extra bucks out of people,
breezy2012 is offline  
post #33 of 55 Old 08-04-2013, 06:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
Dreamwriter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kirkland, WA (Seattle area)
Posts: 767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by breezy2012 View Post

Ugh... thirteen more minutes? I barely made through as it was.

It's funny, though, that they held back some footage in an attempt to squeeze some extra bucks out of people,
They didn't hold back anything - note that this is not the "Director's Cut", it is an extended edition. Just like Lord of the Rings EE, this is not the version that Peter Jackson wanted people to see - if it was, it would have been in the theaters. Peter Jackson came up with the idea of the Extended Edition as fan service - he knew fans would want more LotR, and he had tons of extra LotR footage on the cutting room floor, so he thought it'd be cool to professionally edit some of that extra footage into the movie wherever it would fit and release a special version just for those fans. And of course the movie studios went along with it, seeing dollarsigns.

And fans expected an EE again this time, and of course the studio wanted an EE, but realize that they are getting an entire extra movie that wasn't originally planned, after filming the two movies was completed. Thus there's only 13 extra minutes, where I'd bet there was originally going to be a LOT more extra footage in the EE.

Note that it takes time and money to reinsert cut footage like that to create a real Extended Edition - they have to do the normal professional job of editing the new footage in, making sure the movie plays smoothly as if the footage was always there, and also redoing some of the soundtrack to work with the extra footage wherever it had to get edited in, So it makes sense that this wasn't on the original Blu-Ray as an extra, not as quickly as that disc was released to market.

"Playing this game is like having your eyes slit open with straight razors, filled with baby spider eggs, then re-sealed, and then being treated to the sensation of hundreds of tiny, venemous little arachnids bursting into being behind your pupils, consuming everything they can touch, and feeling...
Dreamwriter is offline  
post #34 of 55 Old 08-05-2013, 08:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
Cal68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 544
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 48
I was sorely disappointed with this movie. It should have been trimmed by at least 45 min IMHO, perhaps even as much as an hour. I'll pass on this movie both from a rental and a buy point of view. I also cannot see myself going to any of the sequels unless the reviews are overwhelmingly good and the consensus is that the sequels are infinitely superior to Part 1. I was very disappointed because of my high expectations for this movie after the LOTR trilogy.

Cal68

Cal68
Cal68 is offline  
post #35 of 55 Old 08-05-2013, 12:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
This movie was an improvement over the previous LOTR1, 2, 3 IMO. In the previous ones Tolkien stuff was turned into kind of fantasy action movies. This one is clearly a Tolkien Tale. I really like this one. A job well done smile.gif

13 minutes. Will it be worth it confused.gif
8mile13 is offline  
post #36 of 55 Old 08-05-2013, 02:02 PM
Member
 
breezy2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwriter View Post

They didn't hold back anything - note that this is not the "Director's Cut", it is an extended edition. Just like Lord of the Rings EE, this is not the version that Peter Jackson wanted people to see - if it was, it would have been in the theaters. Peter Jackson came up with the idea of the Extended Edition as fan service - he knew fans would want more LotR, and he had tons of extra LotR footage on the cutting room floor, so he thought it'd be cool to professionally edit some of that extra footage into the movie wherever it would fit and release a special version just for those fans. And of course the movie studios went along with it, seeing dollarsigns.

And fans expected an EE again this time, and of course the studio wanted an EE, but realize that they are getting an entire extra movie that wasn't originally planned, after filming the two movies was completed. Thus there's only 13 extra minutes, where I'd bet there was originally going to be a LOT more extra footage in the EE.

Note that it takes time and money to reinsert cut footage like that to create a real Extended Edition - they have to do the normal professional job of editing the new footage in, making sure the movie plays smoothly as if the footage was always there, and also redoing some of the soundtrack to work with the extra footage wherever it had to get edited in, So it makes sense that this wasn't on the original Blu-Ray as an extra, not as quickly as that disc was released to market.

I adored (and still adore) the first trilogy, I wish they had made six (or nine) films instead of three and included absolutely everything.

The films weren't perfect (tales abound of scraps of newly written screenplay being rushed to the sets), but one thing was clear to me - it was a labor of love.

I don't feel that way about the new Hobbit film in the slightest. It is, above all, a labor of money.

Smile - They're making up new stuff as they go. A lot of "The Hobbit" isn't even Tolkien. And how can you say it's not an action film?
breezy2012 is offline  
post #37 of 55 Old 08-05-2013, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
I did read the Tolkien stuff a lot. The feel of The Hobbit feels just right. Part of it, to me, is taking a lot of time to tell the story. The whole LOTR1, 2, 3 was told to quick, that was not much fun.

Another thing is that Jackson is more experienced in making a Tolkien tale movie and more energised because of the HFR (working with new exciting technology).

Also the involvement of Guillermo Del Torro, who is probably The guy for this kind of stuff, plays a part in me liking The Hobbit a lot. Officially he is a scriptwriter but i'm pretty shure that he also gave lots of advise wink.gif

What it comes down to for me is that The Hobbit is Tolkien-ish and LORT isn't.
8mile13 is offline  
post #38 of 55 Old 08-05-2013, 07:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,452
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked: 319
If it had been closer to the actual novel, The Hobbit would have had a lot more childlike wonder about Bilbo (the everyman) getting out from his comfortable hole in the ground and experiencing a grand adventure in strange new and distant lands. There was very little of that wonder in the film I saw. Instead, it was a purely tedious chore to sit through... like Jackson and Co. were brought back to Middle Earth kicking and screaming, and it showed.

Most of the stuff Jackson talks about in these blogs and interviews is the digital technology toys and 48 fps rather than the story he's telling... much like modern-day James Cameron and George Lucas. They've become technical wonks and no longer true film directors with an artist's eye for story and character. These should be of paramount importance in order to create not only an entertaining movie, but a timeless classic.
vinnie97 and breezy2012 like this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #39 of 55 Old 08-06-2013, 04:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 6,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I like An Unexpected Journey and have already purchased the theatrical release on Blu-ray which is all I want. I do hope the second and third films are better but I will be happy if the films maintain the same quality. I have the theatrical and extended editions of the LOR trilogy but I am not doing that again.
Chris Gerhard is offline  
post #40 of 55 Old 08-06-2013, 07:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Osirus23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

I'd pay $55 for the two hour version.

Ah yes. What I would give for a competently edited "Non-Self Indulgent Edition."
Osirus23 is offline  
post #41 of 55 Old 08-06-2013, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, Not as far east as Vegas
Posts: 1,322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

I did read the Tolkien stuff a lot. The feel of The Hobbit feels just right. Part of it, to me, is taking a lot of time to tell the story. The whole LOTR1, 2, 3 was told to quick, that was not much fun.

Another thing is that Jackson is more experienced in making a Tolkien tale movie and more energised because of the HFR (working with new exciting technology).

Also the involvement of Guillermo Del Torro, who is probably The guy for this kind of stuff, plays a part in me liking The Hobbit a lot. Officially he is a scriptwriter but i'm pretty shure that he also gave lots of advise wink.gif

What it comes down to for me is that The Hobbit is Tolkien-ish and LORT isn't.
It does set up the story of what is to come. It does take awhile. One needs patience. There are other movie's that are more drawn out 2001: A Space Odyssey comes to mind. I didn't think The Hobbit was long at all.

"Bring out yer dead!".."Wait I'm not dead yet!"..(Sound Austrian here) "WRONG !!" (You know what happens next..)
tenthplanet is offline  
post #42 of 55 Old 08-06-2013, 05:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet 
It does set up the story of what is to come. It does take awhile. One needs patience. There are other movie's that are more drawn out 2001: A Space Odyssey comes to mind. I didn't think The Hobbit was long at all.
. One must keep in mind that its a 6/7/8 hours movie of which The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey represents the first two and a half hours, which is more ore less 20 pages of the book.
8mile13 is offline  
post #43 of 55 Old 08-07-2013, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,452
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post

It does set up the story of what is to come. It does take awhile. One needs patience. There are other movie's that are more drawn out 2001: A Space Odyssey comes to mind. I didn't think The Hobbit was long at all.

2001 was paced in a masterful way. Kubrick was a stickler for movie making technique. The Hobbit, OTOH, seemed bloated and weighed down with superfluous story lines because Jackson was slavish in tying everything back to the previous LOTR movies and then adding material from the Silmarillion not in the original novel. The entire Radagast the Brown character story arc could have been mentioned in a couple sentences by Gandalf for as important it was to The Hobbit. Unfortunately as portrayed, Radagast was like the Jar Jar Binks of the movie. Totally unnecessary and totally annoying.
Osirus23 likes this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #44 of 55 Old 08-07-2013, 11:37 AM
Senior Member
 
fritzi93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Radagast is mentioned exactly once in the book, when Gandalf introduces himself and his companions to Beorn. (Radagast being known to Beorn, it helped allay his suspicions). I agree, as portrayed, Radagast is a travesty. (Rabbit sledge? Bird excrement in his hair?). He's also entirely unnecessary, except to pad out the story.

Then there's Azog, also mentioned once in the book. He precipitated the war between the Dwarves and the Orcs, having captured and killed Thorin's grandfather. But he was indeed slain at the battle of Nanduhirion. As portrayed, he's a one-dimensional, snarling video game character. Another travesty.

I have no problem with fleshing out the deliberations of the White Council, though it's only hinted at in the book. The LOTR appendices deal with it a little more, though at no great length.

The business in the goblin city was over-long and seemed like just an excuse for a special effects orgy.

To be fair, I think the beginning was fine. The backstory of the destruction of Erebor by Smaug and then chapter one in the book: "An Unexpected Party", (the meeting in Bilbo's hole), were faithful to the book. It went downhill from there, with the exception of the deliberations of the White Council and Bilbo's meeting with Gollum. The latter was also faithful to the book, and effective.

Really, the original is a perfectly serviceable story pretty much as-is. What PJ did to it went far to ruin it. And I don't know why people supposedly familiar with Tolkien's work are excusing it. Mind you, PJ's treatment of LOTR was far better. The changes made (and there were many), were intelligent and had ample justification. Those changes were necessary to prevent the story from being too unwieldy for film treatment. That's not what we've been given with The Hobbit movie.

You may object that all the above points are only the sort of things that would bother purists. Okay, but the movie commits one cardinal sin, that few can deny. It's way too long.
fritzi93 is offline  
post #45 of 55 Old 08-07-2013, 07:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
robnix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 257
I look forward to the final movie release so I can edit all three into the 2.5 hour unofficial "as close as I can get to the book edition". tongue.gif

Looky here!
robnix is offline  
post #46 of 55 Old 08-07-2013, 07:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
Dreamwriter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kirkland, WA (Seattle area)
Posts: 767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzi93 View Post

Radagast is mentioned exactly once in the book...

I have no problem with fleshing out the deliberations of the White Council, though it's only hinted at in the book. The LOTR appendices deal with it a little more, though at no great length.

...

Really, the original is a perfectly serviceable story pretty much as-is. What PJ did to it went far to ruin it. And I don't know why people supposedly familiar with Tolkien's work are excusing it.

Apparently you missed the fact that this is not meant to be based 100% on the children's novel, and in fact Peter Jackson hasn't hid at all the fact that the movie is intended to add quite a bit of material that wasn't in the original book. The book has been split into three movies so that Peter Jackson can fill in the gaps from the original Hobbit story, primarily concentrating on what Gandalf was doing whenever he disappeared and dealing with the discovery of the necromancer. Radagast in particular is important to this side story, as we can tell from that first movie and the trailers for the second.

This is a side story that Jackson really wanted to tell, and approached the movie studio about how to go about it - he was even willing to just have this story in the extended edition discs and not be in the theater, but of course the studio was really happy to make the two movies into three.

As for the first movie's length, I personally don't think it was too long overall, but what most people complain about is the intro's length, not about the length of the new bits you are complaining about. And I agree, they had WAY too much stuff from the first chapter in LotR in that intro, and it didn't even make sense with Bilbo forgetting that it was the day of his party. And having a mailbox in Hobbiton with apparently daily mail delivery took me out of the story, didn't seem to fit the rest of the universe.

"Playing this game is like having your eyes slit open with straight razors, filled with baby spider eggs, then re-sealed, and then being treated to the sensation of hundreds of tiny, venemous little arachnids bursting into being behind your pupils, consuming everything they can touch, and feeling...
Dreamwriter is offline  
post #47 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 07:02 AM
Senior Member
 
fritzi93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I missed nothing. I simply think PJ's alterations were unnecessary and all for the worse. Again, with the exception of the White Council. Even if this were an entirely new creation, not based on anything, the movie has serious flaws. Its pacing is poor and two characters should not have been written into the plot.

This is all the harder to accept because the LOTR movies were so very well realized. As I stated before, I have no problem with the many instances in which they vary from the books.
Osirus23 likes this.
fritzi93 is offline  
post #48 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Osirus23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 180
Self indulgent bloat.

This reminds me of throwing an awesome party and then trying to do it again by doing the same things exactly as before; it doesn't work.

Instead of making a competent, faithful rendition of The Hobbit they decided it had to be LotR all over again. The problem is that the material just isn't there and the stuff they used to fill in the gaps worked sloppier than trying to patch a dented car body with pancake batter.

The Extended Editions of the LotR movies existed because there was too much material in the story to fit into their already long 3 hour theatrical runtime. The Hobbit is the exact opposite circumstance.
Osirus23 is offline  
post #49 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 09:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,452
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osirus23 View Post

Self indulgent bloat.

This reminds me of throwing an awesome party and then trying to do it again by doing the same things exactly as before; it doesn't work.

Instead of making a competent, faithful rendition of The Hobbit they decided it had to be LotR all over again. The problem is that the material just isn't there and the stuff they used to fill in the gaps worked sloppier than trying to patch a dented car body with pancake batter.

The Extended Editions of the LotR movies existed because there was too much material in the story to fit into their already long 3 hour theatrical runtime. The Hobbit is the exact opposite circumstance.

Agreed.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #50 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Since The Hobbit is Tolkiens first book one could easily say that the LOTR is The Hobbit all over again wink.gif

Personally i believe that The Hobbit is better movie material, that is one more reason why i like An Unexpected Journey. I do not get that folks like LOTR, the movie. There is to much going on in LOTR, even Kubrick said No when asked to make a movie out of it smile.gif
8mile13 is offline  
post #51 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 07:47 PM
Member
 
breezy2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Trying to tie Kubrick and 2001: A Space Odyssey into this discussion is really not helping your case.
breezy2012 is offline  
post #52 of 55 Old 08-08-2013, 08:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,390
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 1369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osirus23 View Post

Self indulgent bloat.

This reminds me of throwing an awesome party and then trying to do it again by doing the same things exactly as before; it doesn't work.

Instead of making a competent, faithful rendition of The Hobbit they decided it had to be LotR all over again. The problem is that the material just isn't there and the stuff they used to fill in the gaps worked sloppier than trying to patch a dented car body with pancake batter.

The Extended Editions of the LotR movies existed because there was too much material in the story to fit into their already long 3 hour theatrical runtime. The Hobbit is the exact opposite circumstance.

 

I mostly agreed with this point of view, until I began to accept the Hobbit trilogy for what it is - not a faithful recreation of the book, but a series of films inspired by it. Whether or not the book had enough material to justify 3 films is essentially irrelevant - they're simply just writing new material. As much as I'd love more "legitimate" stories by Tolkien, the man has been long dead....maybe this is nothing better than fan fiction, but the real deal is never going to happen. I doubt it'll ever fully recapture the magic of the original trilogy, but for what it is, I'm enjoying them, and looking forward to the next one.

 

But seriously, the teal and orange is going way too far...that trailer looks absolutely ridiculous. I dont recall the first film being that aggressive with it.


Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is online now  
post #53 of 55 Old 08-09-2013, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by breezy2012 
Trying to tie Kubrick and 2001: A Space Odyssey into this discussion is really not helping your case.
?? Kubrick was asked to make a LOTR movie, has nothing to do with 2001. There is no ''my case'', i like The Hobbit, i do not like LOTR smile.gif btw 2001 is sooo sixties, totally outdated..
8mile13 is offline  
post #54 of 55 Old 08-09-2013, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,452
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 461 Post(s)
Liked: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

?? Kubrick was asked to make a LOTR movie, has nothing to do with 2001. There is no ''my case'', i like The Hobbit, i do not like LOTR smile.gifbtw 2001 is sooo sixties, totally outdated..

Balderdash. biggrin.gif

2001 may have a few technologies (like Bell vid phones) and older haircuts and styles that date the film in some ways, but much of the film is still relevant and many of the visual effects by Douglas Trumbull still hold up. Can't say that for a lot of sci-fi movies.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #55 of 55 Old 08-09-2013, 01:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,809
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman 

Balderdash. biggrin.gif

2001 may have a few technologies (like Bell vid phones) and older haircuts and styles that date the film in some ways, but much of the film is still relevant and many of the visual effects by Douglas Trumbull still hold up. Can't say that for a lot of sci-fi movies.


CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100
the age of aquarius smile.gif
8mile13 is offline  
Reply Latest Industry News

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off