Jedi Council Forums - Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?

Post Reply | Active Topic Notification | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
Quixotic-Sith Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 7/8 3:03pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Cryogenic, I invite you to review the entire history of Go-Mer-Tonic and my discussions since 2001, which will contextualize everything we've said to each other. If you're going to comment on our discussion, be aware of its history. -----signature----- Defense wins championships. "The professors are the enemy. Professors are the enemy! Write that on a blackboard 100 times and never forget it." - Nixon
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/8 7:40pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	I don't understand how our history allows you to bait me then complain that I'm baiting you. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Quixotic-Sith Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 7/8 9:38pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Go-Mer-Tonic posted: I don't understand how our history allows you to bait me then complain that I'm baiting you. Eh, I'll leave it to Strilo to decide what constitutes baiting, since he is the mod, not you or me. -----signature----- Defense wins championships. "The professors are the enemy. Professors are the enemy! Write that on a blackboard 100 times and never forget it." - Nixon
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/9 3:49am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Suit yourself. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Strilo Title: Manager: • Music • Prequel Trilogy Registered: Aug '01	Date Posted: 7/9 6:56am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	What the hell? You guys know better than this. Remember that taking the bait is as bad as the baiting and Go-Mer even if Quix was baiting, you still took the bait and added your own on top of it. Please let's just get this thread back on topic. I don't want to see anyone discuss this issue any further in this or any other threads. -----signature----- #1 on iTunes Most Played: The Killers "Human" #1 on iTunes Most Played Scores: Fellowship of the Ring "Bilbo's Ring" ---------- They will not force us. They will stop degrading us. They will not control us. We will be victorious.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/9 7:27am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong? - Date Edited: 7/9 7:34am (4 edits total) Edited By: Go-Mer-Tonic
	Quixotic-Sith posted: Go-Mer-Tonic posted: That entirely loses the purpose of the character, which is to teach the lesson that even the seemingly innane have their part to play in this existence. It's nice to know that some things never change. To this day you still confuse your own exegesis of the movies with Lucas'. After all, surely this message couldn't have been conveyed by the ewoks. Besides, this is utter B, GL didn't include any number of potential archetypes who "have their part to play in this existence", and the saga loses nothing* by taking a pratfalling, baby-pidgin speaking fool who is marginalized in the following two movies and portraying him differently. Seriously, there is next to nothing that redeems Jar Jar as he is scripted, and the idea of "outcast" is much better portrayed in TPRE. Well you would lose the pratfalling baby-pidgin fool wouldn't you? It's pretty obvious that Lucas was intending Jar-Jar to be a "don't judge a book by it's cover" lesson, in much the same way Yoda played that role in ESB before Luke realized who he really was. Quixotic-Sith posted: Go-Mer-Tonic posted: It's amazing to me that some people's reaction to Jar-Jar is that he shouldn't exist, or exist as he is. People want to "change" him into a "more respectable" character, when he is perfectly worthy of respect just the way he is. Great, then don't show the pratfalling. Let him describe his accident without having to have the ridiculousness. It's amazing to me that some people don't get that characterization can be shown subtly, and we don't need to be beaten over the head with it. You want goofy, clumsy, and immature? Look at Tonks in Order of the Phoenix - we get just enough to show her character without having to have a CGI mess of pratfalls and accidental "heroism". It's bad storytelling and character development, especially when it is never referenced again in the subsequent movies. Does Jar Jar change during this time? Sure, why not? But then why show it to excess in the first movie? Why not make this maturation off-screen and then told to Qui-Gon, to show us a more sympathetic, rather than pathetic, character? GL gains nothing with ridiculousness, except to pull audience members out of the reality of the movies and create an off-putting, polarizing character. If he is meant to be an unambiguous "good guy" who gets duped, there is no need to make him as horrifically over the top as he is. Of course you can show his characterization subtly. You can also do it over the top as Lucas has. If the point is to teach a lesson in tolerance, then why wouldn't he make Jar-Jar as annoying as possible? If he had made Jar-Jar more subtle, then everyone would have simply accepted Jar-Jar. There would have been no lesson. Lucas walked a delicate balance between making Jar-Jar as annoying as possible, yet still characterizing him as a good person at heart. The reason it was shown to excess in the first movie was because that's where his role was intended to be. Lucas told Jar-Jar's story in the first movie, and then included him in the next two as a result of the over the top reaction he got from a lot of fans. He wasn't marginalized, he was expanded upon. Quixotic-Sith posted: "Perfectly worthy of respect as he is?" Are you serious? Respect is earned, and none of the deeds (again, this is questionable) requires the nonsense. Hell, Tarpals is a much more sympathetic, brave, and worthy of respect than Jar Jar. By your logic, any character is worthy of respect, just as he is, from the lowliest Ugnaught to ROTJ Luke, which makes the term "respect" so bland as to be meaningless. Will I give him the respect due to all living things? Sure. Does that make his actions worthy of anything more? Hardly. It's poor characterization and bad storytelling. He was always trying to help his friends, that makes him worthy of respect. His good nature didn't require the nonsense, but then again it certainly didn't preclude it. The reason for the nonsense is to push those buttons that incite people to be intolerant, despite Jar-Jar's earned respect. The fact that you don't think Jar-Jar is worthy of respect shows that pretty clearly. Quixotic-Sith posted: Go-Mer-Tonic posted: It is heart breaking to see that so many are intolerant enough of Jar-Jar that they would do away with him. "In the Flesh by Roger Waters" Good. Quote Roger Waters. The man is such a malignant narcissist that it's appropriate. "Nobody gets me, the poor artist, so I'm going to alienate my wife and everyone closest to me, because they aren't worthy of basic attention." Have you seen The Wall? Do you have any idea how Waters acted towards his fans and bandmates? Literally, Pink Floyd fans would wear "Roger is a [sphincter]" t-shirts to concerts because of how much of a jerk he is. Quoting self-righteous pseudo-lyrics doesn't exactly make the point you want it to make. My point was simply to point out that the whole idea of eliminating the people or characters you are intolerant of is not a noble cause. People should accept others for who they are, especially when their worst crime is to be clumsy and hard to understand. Quixotic-Sith posted: The bottom line is that Lucas overdid what could have been a compelling, sympathetic character. This overcharacterization was fixed in other edits, which shows that while Lucas has "the vision thing", it's good when someone else reels him in, as the stories get better. Jar Jar is burnt toast - a little too much time in the characterization oven. Bottom line is you didn't agree with Lucas' vision for Jar-Jar, which is fine and dandy, but this is Lucas' story to tell. It's not up to you or anyone else to re-tell it for him. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Quixotic-Sith Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 7/9 8:16am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong? - Date Edited: 7/9 8:18am (2 edits total) Edited By: Quixotic-Sith
	Go-Mer-Tonic posted: Well you would lose the pratfalling baby-pidgin fool wouldn't you? It's pretty obvious that Lucas was intending Jar-Jar to be a "don't judge a book by it's cover" lesson, in much the same way Yoda played that role in ESB before Luke realized who he really was. And Yoda lost that goofy cover in his second scene, at which point the serene master took over, in a film most SW fans consider to be the best of the series. So the comparison falls apart right there, considering the pratfalling and baby-pidgin extended for the rest of TPM. Go-Mer-Tonic posted: Of course you can show his characterization subtly. You can also do it over the top as Lucas has. If the point is to teach a lesson in tolerance, then why wouldn't he make Jar-Jar as annoying as possible? IF the lesson is tolerance, which is your particular interpretation. And we have plenty of other characters who can teach lessons in tolerance. This ham-handed approach is bad storytelling and characterization; if the goal is to create a sympathetic character, don't create a character that polarizes, don't create a character that inspires active dislike, especially when you show all of his problems being his own fault. It's overplaying the negative qualities, and then blaming people for reacting badly. If I create a character that is clearly a racist cariacature and people object to that cariacature, then the problem lies with the person who designed the character in the first place, not with the people who object to the racism. When Jerry Lewis donned his "Japanese" character in Breakfast at Tiffany's, the problem was with the character, not with the people who found it off-putting or offensive. Same deal here. Unless, of course, you would maintain (for logical consistency), that we should accept over-the-top characterizations since they are just trying to make us more "tolerant". I'm tolerant of clumsy, I'm tolerant of immaturity, and I'm tolerant of awkwardness. I'm not tolerant of being beaten over the head with a shovel while someone shouts at me "Are you more tolerant now?! Are you more tolerant now?!" Go-Mer-Tonic posted: If he had made Jar-Jar more subtle, then everyone would have simply accepted Jar-Jar. There would have been no lesson. Lucas walked a delicate balance between making Jar-Jar as annoying as possible, yet still characterizing him as a good person at heart. See: Tonks (Order of the Phoenix and the books). Go-Mer-Tonic posted: The reason it was shown to excess in the first movie was because that's where his role was intended to be. Lucas told Jar-Jar's story in the first movie, and then included him in the next two as a result of the over the top reaction he got from a lot of fans. He wasn't marginalized, he was expanded upon. "Expanded upon" in screen time that amounts to a few lines of dialogue and a sad expression? I know you better than to ask if you are kidding, but he was shoved aside. He sets up the crucial vote in AOTC (which doesn't require him to be baby-pidgin), says "Excuse me" in ROTS and is only seen again looking sad at Padme's funeral. This is hardly a definition of "expanded upon", and more a definition of "his story arc was functionally done in the Senate scene in AOTC", and nothing in it required what we saw. Go-Mer-Tonic posted: He was always trying to help his friends, that makes him worthy of respect. So did Vader. So did Tarkin. So did the ugly guy next to Walrus Man in the Mos Eisley cantina. That doesn't make him special; alternatively, it makes all of these characters just as respectworthy as Jar Jar. Go-Mer-Tonic posted: His good nature didn't require the nonsense, but then again it certainly didn't preclude it. The reason for the nonsense is to push those buttons that incite people to be intolerant, despite Jar-Jar's earned respect. The fact that you don't think Jar-Jar is worthy of respect shows that pretty clearly. Back to making insinuations about the people with whom you disagree? Are we really back in 2001? You are honestly suggesting that people are intolerant because they find a CGI character irritating? Really? Do you have any idea about who I am, what I do, what my motivations are, how I treat people, or anything at all about my life away from these boards? There's a resounding "No" to all of these questions, Go-Mer, and you know better than that (since you've been warned about making these kind of comments for eight years now (both on these boards and the Star Wars boards)). Go-Mer-Tonic posted: My point was simply to point out that the whole idea of eliminating the people or characters you are intolerant of is not a noble cause. People should accept others for who they are, especially when their worst crime is to be clumsy and hard to understand. Then don't quote Waters' lyrics. The song itself is about Waters hatred of all things that he sees as controlling, including the sway pop culture stars like Pink have over their fans. Hell, the corresponding scene in The Wall is a fascist rally with him as the leader and the crowd enthusiastically following his orders. But the larger "accept people as they are" message is bogus, too. I'm not required to just accept people as racist, homophobic, willfully ignorant, addicts, etc., anymore than they are required to accept me for who I am. Where there are character flaws, we would expect to see efforts at improvement (or at least management), precisely because these character flaws don't simply have effects on the individual alone. We don't accept "clumsy" surgeons, engineers, etc., nor do we accept "hard to understand" interpreters, teachers, etc. Now these are specialized roles, and I'm not suggesting that Jar Jar will have any of these professions, but the very purpose of life is growth and maturity, not simply "accepting" a protracted adolesence. Additionally, I'm not even saying that Jar Jar can't have these qualities, just that it is poor characterization to set them on "11". Go-Mer-Tonic posted: Bottom line is you didn't agree with Lucas' vision for Jar-Jar, which is fine and dandy, but this is Lucas' story to tell. It's not up to you or anyone else to re-tell it for him. It's not up to us, but others have told it better. He can have the "vision thing", but his movies are better when he is helped with it. Good storytelling is a mean between extremes. EDITS: Mark-up and typos. -----signature----- Defense wins championships. "The professors are the enemy. Professors are the enemy! Write that on a blackboard 100 times and never forget it." - Nixon
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/9 10:19am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Yoda lost that goofy portrayal because he was merely acting like a goof. Jar-Jar is a goof. It's his character. He can no more change that than we can stop the suns from setting. Jar-Jar is a sympathetic character, his awkwarndess and clumsiness is not his doing, it's just who he is. He is a good-natured character who always wants to help his friends. The fact that Lucas didn't hold back on portraying Jar-Jar's nature is not bad storytelling or characterization. The goal wasn't just to create a sympathetic character, but to create an over the top sympathetic character in order to obscure Jar-Jar's worth. If he was merely sympathetic, there wouldn't have been the lesson about not judging a book by it's cover. Let's be clear here, Jar-Jar is not a racist caricature. The reason you "react badly" towards him as you say, is because he is over the top with his antics. If someone looks at Jar-Jar and assumes he is a racist character, that is a projection of the viewer, and certainly not the intention of the artist. Jar-Jar is not being beaten over your head with a shovel. He is a minor character in a movie who happens to be silly. I think it's nice that you enjoy Tonks from "Order of the Pheonix", and sure in that case they didn't make him as over the top as Jar-Jar. Again, I'm not saying Lucas -couldn't- have done Jar-Jar in a similar way, I'm just saying he didn't have to. He was perfectly within his rights to make Jar-Jar as over the top as he wanted to make him. He wasn't "wrong" for making Jar-Jar the way he did. Jar-Jar wasn't shoved aside, he was expanded upon. The prequel trilogy starts out broad and then closes in on the main characters as the story unfolds. Jar-Jar was never meant to have a larger role than he had in Episodes II and III. According to Rick McCallum, the reason they expanded his role was because of the over the top reaction he received. Sure, Vader was just trying to help his friends, but his idea of "helping" was to kill off all the Jedi and take over the galaxy. Jar-Jar was never shown to rationalize such evil deeds in his quest to help out. I don't think I'm making an insinuation to say you didn't like the way Jar-Jar was rendered in the film. I thought you were saying as much. Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you. I certainly didn't mean to imply I knew how you treated people in your every day life. I'm merely talking about how you said you feel about Jar-Jar. I thought it was pretty academic to say a lot of people didn't like Jar-Jar the way he was rendered. Also, I didn't mean to bring Roger Water's personal life into this discussion. I was merely quoting his lyrics, which dealt with the horror of people setting out to eliminate people they didn't particularly like, because I thought it sort of applied to the way many would prefer Jar-Jar be eliminated or changed to suit their tastes. I don't think it's a good idea to accept people for being racists, homophobic, willfully ignorant addicts, etc. I'm talking about accepting a good-natured character who happens to be clumsy and hard to understand. He's not a surgeon, engineer, interpreter, teacher, etc. I don't see the problem with setting his characterization at 11 either. It's merely a matter of opinion that the people who would attempt to re-tell George Lucas' story have told it better. I sincerely disagree. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
darth-sinister Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Jun '01	Date Posted: 7/9 1:38pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Yoda was testing Luke to see if he had the patience necessary to become a Jedi. Luke failed his test. YODA: "I cannot teach him. The boy has no patience." BEN: "He will learn patience." That's why Yoda acted the way he did when they met. He's watched him for two decades. Watched him grow into who he is in ANH and TESB. And sad to say, he's rather disappointed that leaving him to be raised by the Lars, has resulted in this. Jar Jar was not pretending to be accidental prone, he was that. Jar Jar isn't shoved aside, as Go-Mer noted. His role in AOTC required that he be on Coruscant. Anakin and Padme needed to be alone, without Jar Jar lurking in the background. Much less know that the two of them are about to do something that they shouldn't be. And Obi-wan was a Jedi investigating the assassination attempt. He doesn't need a Senate represenitive tagging along, since his mission does not require the assistance of one. And as I pointed out, the original goofs were pushed to the side. Threepio has far fewer scenes here than he did in the other films. Artoo disappears after the first 20 minutes and isn't seen again until Anakin goes to leave for Mustafar. And to say that TESB wasn't filled with zany moments, may I point out Threepio falling down as the Falcon takes off. Threepio being too slow to rush to the Falcon and being yanked in by Han. Chewie's meltdowns over the hyperdrive. Threepio in pieces complaining about Chewie. Artoo singing while underwater and being spit out by the creature. Artoo falling on Chewie after fixing the hyperdrive. Quixotic_Sith posted: It's not up to us, but others have told it better. He can have the "vision thing", but his movies are better when he is helped with it. Good storytelling is a mean between extremes. What others? A bunch of fans who think that they know better? They sure act like it is up to them, otherwise they wouldn't have made their edits and proclaim it as better. And who said that Lucas needed help? Again, the same fans who think that they know better. Incidently, when he asked for help, he was told with TPM to not change a word by Kasdan, I believe it was. And when he listened to other directors and changed Anakin's conversion, people still complained about it. Even after his friends said it was better the second time they saw it. The man cannot win. As I've said countless times, the fans are their own worst enemy. -----signature----- Stewie: "Oh, this is an even bigger jackpot than when the Emperor came up with the formula for great Star Wars dialouge." Palpatine: "Something, something, something. Dark side. Something, something, something complete."
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DRush76 Registered: Jan '08	Date Posted: 7/9 4:13pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	It is heart breaking to see that so many are intolerant enough of Jar-Jar that they would do away with him. It's really not that surprising to me. People have little tolerance for flaws - even in fictional characters, despite the abundance of it in this world.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Strilo Title: Manager: • Music • Prequel Trilogy Registered: Aug '01	Date Posted: 7/9 4:18pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Yeah I can imagine that there is a lot of "he can never win." But it's also important to note that it's not usually the same fans saying "he should have asked for more outside help" and then saying "he should not have listened to the outside help." As for the whole Kasdan thing, well... Kasdan is an idiot then because any filmmaker worth his salt should have been able to look at that TPM script and seen that Jar Jar was a poorly written character. The whole script just needs to be revised and reworked by a real writer, not George Lucas. Lucas knows he is not a great writer. He knows he dislikes the writing process. So when Kasdan says don't change a thing, move on to someone else. And keep going until a real high quality writer agrees to write the final draft. Period. Shop it around tirelessly until you find someone qualified who will work on it because it's for the ultimate good of the final film. -----signature----- #1 on iTunes Most Played: The Killers "Human" #1 on iTunes Most Played Scores: Fellowship of the Ring "Bilbo's Ring" ---------- They will not force us. They will stop degrading us. They will not control us. We will be victorious.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/9 11:55pm Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong? - Date Edited: 7/10 12:07am (6 edits total) Edited By: Go-Mer-Tonic
	Jar-Jar was a well written character, and I thought Lucas did a good job writing The Phantom Menace in general. Kasdan was a huge influence on Empire and Raider's scripts, the guy is not an idiot. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
LUH-3417 Registered: May '01	Date Posted: 7/10 6:46am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	well then he dropped the ball with jar jar. put simply, where there's smoke there's fire. the question wasnt whether george lucas has the right to do it his way, it's what went wrong with jar jar. i'd reasonably say that even the people who didn't 'mind' him were still taken out of the movie a little by a cartoon character right in the middle of the screen. and to gomer tonic or whoever said they didn't mind the toungue out or stepping in poop-why don't you go step in poop? it's serious, it's not funny, and it can happen anytime. -----signature----- Flavinoids Morini, the future is in Flavinoids. -Jason Murphy 'Hosehead' from Strange Brew is here, the Force is with him Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Go-Mer-Tonic Registered: Aug '99	Date Posted: 7/10 7:45am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong? - Date Edited: 7/10 8:11am (1 edits total) Edited By: Go-Mer-Tonic
	I have stepped in poop and stuck my tongue out and each time it was funny. Jar-Jar was a huge success with the target audience, it's mostly the adults who can't stand Jar-Jar. The mistake is in assuming Lucas was intending to please the adults. -----signature----- "...that’s not my job, to make people like my movies. They either like them or they don’t. That’s completely out of my hands.” -Lucas "At least I will have finished what I set out to do, and at least they will have been good to me." -Lucas
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Strilo Title: Manager: • Music • Prequel Trilogy Registered: Aug '01	Date Posted: 7/10 10:49am Subject: Jar-Jar Binks: what went wrong?
	Go-Mer-Tonic posted: Jar-Jar was a well written character, and I thought Lucas did a good job writing The Phantom Menace in general. Kasdan was a huge influence on Empire and Raider's scripts, the guy is not an idiot. People lose their way all the time. They make mistakes all the time. John Hughes wrote some of the most amazing comedy film scripts ever turned into films. But by the mid 90s, he'd lost his way and was making crap like Baby's Day Out. Kasdan is not some perfect god and in this case I think he made a huge mistake not bringing his "influence" into the TPM script to brush it up and work out the rough patches. And my entire point here was that the mistake was Lucas'. He knows he is not a great writer. He's said it. He knows he hates the writing process. He's said it. So let the people around you compensate for your weak points so that the final film is as perfect as it can be. The underlying story of TPM is solid I think. I like it. I just think it needed to be revised and refined a bit more in the script stage. -----signature----- #1 on iTunes Most Played: The Killers "Human" #1 on iTunes Most Played Scores: Fellowship of the Ring "Bilbo's Ring" ---------- They will not force us. They will stop degrading us. They will not control us. We will be victorious.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 - Previous | Next | Reload