Jump to content

Netflix Recommendations

kevwun

By kevwun
in Movies and TV

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Caver60
Caver60

Here it is, in short. I would need to cross check some things to make sure it is all correct, but this is the story in brief: Some time in March, 1944, the 45th was moving into Germany in near co

Stringer
Stringer

You’re mad that a service you weren’t paying for got turned off?

aggie08
aggie08

Posted Images

Native Horn

Native Horn 3491

Posted
Posted

Designated Survivor Season 3 dropped on the 7th.  It's the first season exclusively on Netflix.  Kind of a guilty pleasure for me.  And Maggie Q is hot, along with a couple of other attractive actresses.  Have only seen episode 1 thus far, but it starts off with lots of plot movement.

Spoiler

And, there's a new Chief of Staff for the Prez - Anthony Edwards.  Talk to me Goose!

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted

On the topic of “When They See Us” and Linda Fairstein (Felicity Huffman’s role) - it’s a really good lesson about advocacy turning into zealotry. Fairstein was actually a pioneer in prosecuting sex crimes and violence against women and did a lot of good in her career. She changed thinking and actual laws surrounding those crimes.

And then she became a zealot and she couldn’t see past anything but those crimes.

I’m sure that happens to lots of cops and prosecutors. Justice becomes war and everyone loses.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deej

Deej 76564

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, VABuckeye said:

I tend to bounce around on shows.  I started When They See Us tonight. I won’t be bouncing off of it until I finish it. Holy shit. 

That last episode was something else. Just numb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpiralOut

SpiralOut 1809

Posted
Posted
On 6/6/2019 at 4:53 PM, Drew said:

It's not surprising, but I kinda dig The 100.  I'll agree it lost it's footing around season 4...but came back strong the last season and a half IMO.  If you like the first season, stick it out.  If not, bail.

I enjoyed it until they started trying to convince us that these soft as baby shit, 20 year old hotties are stone-cold killers.  Like at least get the actresses to work out a bit and get a little muscle definition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottsins

scottsins 1953

Posted
Posted
The Chef Show is really good.  We burned through half the episodes today.  I've never been crazy about Roy Choi on tv before this one, but he's good in it.


LOVED this show. Binged all of it in 2 days.

The two episodes with Aaron Franklin are kickass television. They geek the fuck out on brisket trimming/prep.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CDAK

CDAK 216

Posted
Posted

The detective played by Felicity Huffman in When They See Us wrote an op-ed in the WSJ.  Unsurprisingly, she disputes some of the info presented in the show.  There is some interesting info in her op-ed, but she agrees with the decision to vacate the convictions.  So, still a tragedy even if the writer/director took some factual liberties. https://www.wsj.com/articles/netflixs-false-story-of-the-central-park-five-11560207823

 

Spoiler

At about 9 p.m. April 19, 1989, a large group of young men gathered on the corner of 110th Street and Fifth Avenue for the purpose of robbing and beating innocent people in Central Park. There were more than 30 rioters, and the woman known as the “Central Park jogger,” Trisha Meili, was not their only victim. Eight others were attacked, including two men who were beaten so savagely that they required hospitalization for head injuries.

Reporters and filmmakers have explored this story countless times from numerous perspectives, almost always focusing on five attackers and one female jogger. But each has missed the larger picture of that terrible night: a riot in the dark that resulted in the apprehension of more than 15 teenagers who set upon multiple victims. That a sociopath named Matias Reyes confessed in 2002 to the rape of Ms. Meili, and that the district attorney consequently vacated the charges against the five after they had served their sentences, has led some of these reporters and filmmakers to assume the prosecution had no basis on which to charge the five suspects in 1989. So it is with filmmaker Ava DuVernay in the Netflix miniseries “When They See Us,” a series so full of distortions and falsehoods as to be an outright fabrication.

It shouldn’t have been hard for Ms. DuVernay to discover the truth. The facts of the original case are documented in a 117-page decision by New York State Supreme Court Justice Thomas Galligan, in sworn testimony given in two trials and affirmed by two appellate courts, and in sworn depositions of more than 95 witnesses—including the five themselves. Instead she has written an utterly false narrative involving an evil mastermind (me) and the falsely accused (the five).

I was one of the supervisors who oversaw the team that prosecuted the teenagers apprehended after that horrific night of violence. Ms. DuVernay’s film attempts to portray me as an overzealous prosecutor and a bigot, the police as incompetent or worse, and the five suspects as innocent of all charges against them. None of this is true.

Consider the film’s most egregious falsehoods. “When They See Us” repeatedly portrays the suspects as being held without food, deprived of their parents’ company and advice, and not even allowed to use the bathroom. If that had been true, surely they would have brought those issues up and prevailed in pretrial hearings on the voluntariness of their statements, as well as in their lawsuit against the city. They didn’t, because it never happened.

In the first episode, the film portrays me at the precinct station house before dawn on April 20, the day after the attacks, unethically engineering the police investigation and making racist remarks. In reality, I didn’t arrive until 8 p.m., 22 hours after the police investigation began, did not run the investigation, and never made any of the comments the screenwriter attributes to me.

Ms. DuVernay depicts suspects Yusef Salaam and Korey Wise being arrested on the street. In fact, two detectives went to the door of the Salaam apartment on the night of the 20th because both had been named by other rioters as attackers in multiple assaults.

 

The film claims that when Mr. Salaam’s mother arrived and told police her son was only 15—meaning they could not question him without a parent in the room—I tried to stop her, demanding to see a birth certificate. The truth is that Mr. Salaam himself claimed to be 16 and even had a forged bus pass to “prove” it. When I heard his mother say he was 15, I immediately halted his questioning. This is all supported by sworn testimony.

Ms. DuVernay would have you believe the only evidence against the suspects was their allegedly forced confessions. That is not true. There is, for example, the African-American woman who testified at the trial—and again during the 2002 re-investigation—that when Korey Wise called her brother, he told her that he had held the jogger down and felt her breasts while others attacked her. There were blood stains and dirt on clothing of some of the five. And then there are the statements of more than a dozen of the other kids who participated in the park rampage. Although none of the others admitted joining in the rape of Trisha Meili, they admitted attacking male victims and a couple on a tandem bike, and each of them named some or all of the five as joining them.

Nor does the film note that Mr. Salaam took the stand at his trial, represented by a lawyer chosen and paid for by his mother, and testified that he had gone into the park carrying a 14-inch metal pipe—the same type of weapon that was used to bludgeon both a male schoolteacher and Ms. Meili. Mr. Reyes’s confession changed none of this. He admitted being the man whose DNA had been left in the jogger’s body and on her clothing, but the two juries that heard those facts knew the main assailant in the rape had not been caught. The five were charged as accomplices, as persons “acting in concert” with each other and with the then-unknown man who raped the jogger, not as those who actually performed the act. In their original confessions—later recanted—they admitted to grabbing her breasts and legs, and two of them admitted to climbing on top of her and simulating intercourse. Semen was found on the inside of their clothing, corroborating those confessions.

Mr. Reyes’s confession, DNA match and claim that he acted alone required that the rape charges against the five be vacated. I agreed with that decision, and still do. But the other charges, for crimes against other victims, should not have been vacated. Nothing Mr. Reyes said exonerated these five of those attacks. And there was certainly more than enough evidence to support those convictions of first-degree assault, robbery, riot and other charges.

It is a wonderful thing that these five men have taken themselves to responsible positions and community respect. That Ms. DuVernay ignored so much of the truth about the gang of 30 and about the suffering of their victims—and that her film includes so many falsehoods—is nonetheless an outrage.

Ms. DuVernay does not define me, and her film does not speak the truth.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, CDAK said:

Consider the film’s most egregious falsehoods. “When They See Us” repeatedly portrays the suspects as being held without food, deprived of their parents’ company and advice, and not even allowed to use the bathroom. If that had been true, surely they would have brought those issues up and prevailed in pretrial hearings on the voluntariness of their statements, as well as in their lawsuit against the city. They didn’t, because it never happened.

Because they didn’t file a motion about it, it never happened. Rigggghhht

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 6/9/2019 at 2:06 PM, Bama Chick said:

On the topic of “When They See Us” and Linda Fairstein (Felicity Huffman’s role) - it’s a really good lesson about advocacy turning into zealotry. Fairstein was actually a pioneer in prosecuting sex crimes and violence against women and did a lot of good in her career. She changed thinking and actual laws surrounding those crimes.

And then she became a zealot and she couldn’t see past anything but those crimes.

I’m sure that happens to lots of cops and prosecutors. Justice becomes war and everyone loses.

As I often say, they become convinced that they are doing God's work and that nasty little things like the Constitution shouldn't get in their way.  All trial lawyers have a tendency to see things in terms of W-L record, but it can go way too far.

But, there is a current tendency to force facts to fit conclusions when they really don't, even if the conclusion is mostly correct. 

I imagine the truth is somewhere in between.  The Central Park 5 doc mentioned upthread was fairly uphauling, but it sounds like this has gone overboard.  I don't think I'm going to watch it.  I'm already outraged with the CJ system, I don't need to be fed fabrications.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89422

Posted
Posted
On 6/9/2019 at 11:54 PM, pyrohornIII said:

One thing about When They See Us that bothered me was how the press accepted the cops story and didn't really do any investigation of their own.  Were more about the sensationalism of it than the truth. 

It was the 80s.  New Yorkers were flipping out about crime.  This was only 4-5 years after Bernard Goetz.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rockethorn1978

Rockethorn1978 6061

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

It was the 80s.  New Yorkers were flipping out about crime.  This was only 4-5 years after Bernard Goetz.  

Yea one thing that's bothering me is how everyone that is watching it is watching it through the lens of 2019 and forgetting the Crime in NYC was at a all time high(the reason rudy gulliani was elected) in the 80's and 90's. I am not surprised when it's young kids watching it but I am surprised when grown adults that were alive for the 80's and 90's high crime era say stuff. 

I don't have the numbers but I would guess that rapes and muggings in  NYC were at a all time high and very common which is why you saw the media and even trump come out so quickly and viciously against it. They were tired of the all the rapes and muggings and murder in Central Park and in the City. Plus the 80's in NYC was the peak of dirty cops in NYC that dated back 20+ years and ultimately started to improve by the mid 90's and nothing like today, sure there are still bad, dirty cops but not on a such a wide scale like back then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
Posted (edited)

i watched "Devil at the Crossroads" or whatever it's called last night. documentary about Robert Johnson. didn't like it all that much. thought the subject matter had a ton of potential, but the whole doc was oddly paced, disjointed, and didn't really tell us all that much about Johnson. I dunno. it was totally "meh" for me.

Edited by Goo Punch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, CDAK said:

The detective played by Felicity Huffman in When They See Us wrote an op-ed in the WSJ.  Unsurprisingly, she disputes some of the info presented in the show.  There is some interesting info in her op-ed, but she agrees with the decision to vacate the convictions.  So, still a tragedy even if the writer/director took some factual liberties. https://www.wsj.com/articles/netflixs-false-story-of-the-central-park-five-11560207823

 

  Reveal hidden contents

At about 9 p.m. April 19, 1989, a large group of young men gathered on the corner of 110th Street and Fifth Avenue for the purpose of robbing and beating innocent people in Central Park. There were more than 30 rioters, and the woman known as the “Central Park jogger,” Trisha Meili, was not their only victim. Eight others were attacked, including two men who were beaten so savagely that they required hospitalization for head injuries.

Reporters and filmmakers have explored this story countless times from numerous perspectives, almost always focusing on five attackers and one female jogger. But each has missed the larger picture of that terrible night: a riot in the dark that resulted in the apprehension of more than 15 teenagers who set upon multiple victims. That a sociopath named Matias Reyes confessed in 2002 to the rape of Ms. Meili, and that the district attorney consequently vacated the charges against the five after they had served their sentences, has led some of these reporters and filmmakers to assume the prosecution had no basis on which to charge the five suspects in 1989. So it is with filmmaker Ava DuVernay in the Netflix miniseries “When They See Us,” a series so full of distortions and falsehoods as to be an outright fabrication.

It shouldn’t have been hard for Ms. DuVernay to discover the truth. The facts of the original case are documented in a 117-page decision by New York State Supreme Court Justice Thomas Galligan, in sworn testimony given in two trials and affirmed by two appellate courts, and in sworn depositions of more than 95 witnesses—including the five themselves. Instead she has written an utterly false narrative involving an evil mastermind (me) and the falsely accused (the five).

I was one of the supervisors who oversaw the team that prosecuted the teenagers apprehended after that horrific night of violence. Ms. DuVernay’s film attempts to portray me as an overzealous prosecutor and a bigot, the police as incompetent or worse, and the five suspects as innocent of all charges against them. None of this is true.

Consider the film’s most egregious falsehoods. “When They See Us” repeatedly portrays the suspects as being held without food, deprived of their parents’ company and advice, and not even allowed to use the bathroom. If that had been true, surely they would have brought those issues up and prevailed in pretrial hearings on the voluntariness of their statements, as well as in their lawsuit against the city. They didn’t, because it never happened.

In the first episode, the film portrays me at the precinct station house before dawn on April 20, the day after the attacks, unethically engineering the police investigation and making racist remarks. In reality, I didn’t arrive until 8 p.m., 22 hours after the police investigation began, did not run the investigation, and never made any of the comments the screenwriter attributes to me.

Ms. DuVernay depicts suspects Yusef Salaam and Korey Wise being arrested on the street. In fact, two detectives went to the door of the Salaam apartment on the night of the 20th because both had been named by other rioters as attackers in multiple assaults.

 

The film claims that when Mr. Salaam’s mother arrived and told police her son was only 15—meaning they could not question him without a parent in the room—I tried to stop her, demanding to see a birth certificate. The truth is that Mr. Salaam himself claimed to be 16 and even had a forged bus pass to “prove” it. When I heard his mother say he was 15, I immediately halted his questioning. This is all supported by sworn testimony.

Ms. DuVernay would have you believe the only evidence against the suspects was their allegedly forced confessions. That is not true. There is, for example, the African-American woman who testified at the trial—and again during the 2002 re-investigation—that when Korey Wise called her brother, he told her that he had held the jogger down and felt her breasts while others attacked her. There were blood stains and dirt on clothing of some of the five. And then there are the statements of more than a dozen of the other kids who participated in the park rampage. Although none of the others admitted joining in the rape of Trisha Meili, they admitted attacking male victims and a couple on a tandem bike, and each of them named some or all of the five as joining them.

Nor does the film note that Mr. Salaam took the stand at his trial, represented by a lawyer chosen and paid for by his mother, and testified that he had gone into the park carrying a 14-inch metal pipe—the same type of weapon that was used to bludgeon both a male schoolteacher and Ms. Meili. Mr. Reyes’s confession changed none of this. He admitted being the man whose DNA had been left in the jogger’s body and on her clothing, but the two juries that heard those facts knew the main assailant in the rape had not been caught. The five were charged as accomplices, as persons “acting in concert” with each other and with the then-unknown man who raped the jogger, not as those who actually performed the act. In their original confessions—later recanted—they admitted to grabbing her breasts and legs, and two of them admitted to climbing on top of her and simulating intercourse. Semen was found on the inside of their clothing, corroborating those confessions.

Mr. Reyes’s confession, DNA match and claim that he acted alone required that the rape charges against the five be vacated. I agreed with that decision, and still do. But the other charges, for crimes against other victims, should not have been vacated. Nothing Mr. Reyes said exonerated these five of those attacks. And there was certainly more than enough evidence to support those convictions of first-degree assault, robbery, riot and other charges.

It is a wonderful thing that these five men have taken themselves to responsible positions and community respect. That Ms. DuVernay ignored so much of the truth about the gang of 30 and about the suffering of their victims—and that her film includes so many falsehoods—is nonetheless an outrage.

Ms. DuVernay does not define me, and her film does not speak the truth.

 

Christ, I would hope so.  They were cleared by DNA evidence, and someone else, and someone else confessed to the rape, corroborated by DNA evidence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted
Christ, I would hope so.  They were cleared by DNA evidence, and someone else, and someone else confessed to the rape, corroborated by DNA evidence.


And the DA at the time of the exonerations wrote a scathing report outlining everything wrong with the original investigation, including specific instances of the rush to judgment and lack of any investigation into anything beyond the kids already in their custody.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89422

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

i watched "Devil at the Crossroads" or whatever it's called last night. documentary about Robert Johnson. didn't like it all that much. thought the subject matter had a ton of potential, but the whole doc was oddly paced, disjointed, and didn't really tell us all that much about Johnson. I dunno. it was totally "meh" for me.

I really wanted to like it.  If you took out all of the celebrity cameos fawning over him, and some of the other stuff that wasn’t specifically about him (at least stuff about him while he was alive), you’re left with probably 10-15 minutes, since so little is known about him.   

Which I guess adds to the mystique.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nueces River Rat

Nueces River Rat 5529

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

Yea one thing that's bothering me is how everyone that is watching it is watching it through the lens of 2019 and forgetting the Crime in NYC was at a all time high(the reason rudy gulliani was elected) in the 80's and 90's. I am not surprised when it's young kids watching it but I am surprised when grown adults that were alive for the 80's and 90's high crime era say stuff. 

I don't have the numbers but I would guess that rapes and muggings in  NYC were at a all time high and very common which is why you saw the media and even trump come out so quickly and viciously against it. They were tired of the all the rapes and muggings and murder in Central Park and in the City. Plus the 80's in NYC was the peak of dirty cops in NYC that dated back 20+ years and ultimately started to improve by the mid 90's and nothing like today, sure there are still bad, dirty cops but not on a such a wide scale like back then. 

NYC was indeed a dump back then and this goes back to the 70's.    Other than the tourist areas and places where the 1% lived, worked, and shopped, it was a no go zone and that included Time Square.  And you certainly didn't go even to some of the safer places at night.   It made the modern day big city problems  of homeless(San Francisco) and murder (Chicago) look like child's play.  You had crime, the mob, corrupt police, and politicans and if if someone would have not stepped in when they did, NYC would be another Detroit  today.   Or worse. Plus other cites who took their cue from NYC on how to fix their problems would be in the shitter as well.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89422

Posted
Posted

Boy, can’t wait to sit down and watch this one with the wife.  

Quote

Pihu

A two-year-old must fend for herself when her mother suddenly passes away while her father is gone for a conference, leaving her prone to danger.

Thankfully, there’s a Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston movie that’s even more cringe-inducing 

Quote

Murder Mystery

On a long-awaited trip to Europe, a New York City cop and his hairdresser wife scramble to solve a baffling murder aboard a billionaire's yacht.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wutang75

wutang75 434

Posted
Posted
Boy, can’t wait to sit down and watch this one with the wife.  

Pihu

A two-year-old must fend for herself when her mother suddenly passes away while her father is gone for a conference, leaving her prone to danger.

Thankfully, there’s a Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston movie that’s even more cringe-inducing 

Murder Mystery

On a long-awaited trip to Europe, a New York City cop and his hairdresser wife scramble to solve a baffling murder aboard a billionaire's yacht.

 

 

 

I thought Murder Mystery was fun. There, I said it. If a terrible movie knows it’s terrible I typically have no issue.

 

Also - Aniston finally looks like she aged a little (still looks great and they probably had to use makeup to make her look old).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85108

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, wutang75 said:

Thankfully, there’s a Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston movie that’s even more cringe-inducing 

 

 

 

 

I thought Murder Mystery was fun. There, I said it. If a terrible movie knows it’s terrible I typically have no issue.

 

Also - Aniston finally looks like she aged a little (still looks great and they probably had to use makeup to make her look old).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It was fun. People just hate Sandler 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mileslong

Mileslong 4714

Posted
Posted
Boy, can’t wait to sit down and watch this one with the wife.  
Pihu
A two-year-old must fend for herself when her mother suddenly passes away while her father is gone for a conference, leaving her prone to danger.
Thankfully, there’s a Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston movie that’s even more cringe-inducing 
Murder Mystery
On a long-awaited trip to Europe, a New York City cop and his hairdresser wife scramble to solve a baffling murder aboard a billionaire's yacht.
 

Adam Sandler needs to go away from my TV screen forever. Did he talk in his funny baby voice again???!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4809

Posted
Posted
On 6/9/2019 at 12:38 PM, Native Horn said:

Designated Survivor Season 3 dropped on the 7th.  It's the first season exclusively on Netflix.  Kind of a guilty pleasure for me.  And Maggie Q is hot, along with a couple of other attractive actresses.  Have only seen episode 1 thus far, but it starts off with lots of plot movement.

  Hide contents

And, there's a new Chief of Staff for the Prez - Anthony Edwards.  Talk to me Goose!

 

 

Yeah, my son got me interested in this show.  I'm enjoying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14871

Posted
Posted
On 6/16/2019 at 3:05 PM, Mileslong said:

Thankfully, there’s a Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston movie that’s even more cringe-inducing 
 

Adam Sandler needs to go away from my TV screen forever. Did he talk in his funny baby voice again???!!!!

I'm pretty much of the same opinion but did you see his latest Netflix stand up special? It is surprisingly funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trza-hawk

trza-hawk 269

Posted
Posted

I was watching some bbc documentaries and while watching World's Busiest Cities I couldn't stop looking at Anita Rani. I looked up her name and she co-hosts a educational show about a train station in Mumbai that is also on Netflix, Mumbai Railway. Anyway, I couldn't get enough of Anita Rani and I looked up her appearances on other bbc shows and the interviews she did after that "Who are you" show where she shares a story about Partition of India. The Netflix algorithm then dug up more documentaries about trains in India for me to watch now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mileslong

Mileslong 4714

Posted
Posted
Just finished The Bodyguard, starting The King of the North, not Whitney, and enjoyed it.  Very tense, action packed, and a good story. A little too quick of a bow at the end, but otherwise very good. 

Also liked it, and the congresswoman he was protecting was hot and wood...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85108

Posted
Posted
On 6/18/2019 at 1:22 PM, PilotsError said:

Everyone said Black Summer was a smarter Walking Dead.  Fuck those people.  This is the stupidest fucking show I've seen in a while.  Bailed after three episodes.  

You ain't wrong. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...