It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:05 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
When Avatar was released here the term "Post-Narrative" was coined (or at least appeared in mainstream media for the first time) to describe it. The film has so little plot and there are so many logic gaps in the film that the film was seen as not being about plot, not being about the narrative.

When I saw the film I felt it was pretty clear. The audience was there, not to be entertained by the narrative, but to explore the world as presented by the director. The plot was minimalist while the detail in the environment was extremist. The characters spent more time describing native culture/society than the main characters spent detailing inter-personal relationships and their own goals. Here was the first film aimed at satisfying the Simulationist in everyone.

There have been plenty of big budget films with no plot -- and no purpose beyond unveiling special-effect sequences. Avatar is different to that. It offers no plot but the detail presented regarding Pandora and the flora, fauna, and cultures within it is sufficient to be entertaining in and of itself. People stayed for the full three hours in spite of the narrative and not because of it.

I can't see there being many films like Avatar. Not many directors are capable of creating a unique world so engaging that their film becomes a blockbuster regardless of the plot and the cast.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Great subject, and great analysis!

I didn’t watch Avatar in a cinema, because I had heard that the plot was lame, but I happened to be in store on the very day it was released on DVD, and so I pounced on the ridiculously low promotional single-day release price and picked it up to see what it was all about.

And I found that I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. I hadn’t heard any details about the plot, not even what the movie’s premise was, but even before Jake Sully got seperated from the his team and lost in the foest, I knew exactly what the plot would be right until the end. And while I’m no enemy of linear, predictable plots (they can have something of the Greek tragedy about them), I dislike plain stupid plots, and this one was insultingly so.

But I really savoured the wonderful pictures of this alien world, and I enjoyed being shown the Na'vi people's culture. It was all very beautiful to watch. And I’d say that was it – Avatar was in no way an interesting film, but a beautiful one. That was the totality of its appeal.

Footnote: I even gave my DVD to my mother to watch. Now mymother hates fantasy, scifi and action genres, but she’s very ecologically conscious, anti-military, pro-native-rights and an all over lover of nature. I told her to watch the movie like a beautifully-shot nature documentary of a visually appealing ecosystem and a harmonious tribal culture – and even she, who would not normally touch a movie of Avatar’s genre, enjoyed it.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
I haven't seen Avatar, but much of what you both describe remind me of Renaissance. The film is beautiful with its animation and high contrasts, but the plot sucks like a vacuum cleaner with a puffer fish on the end. In essence, the only way to really enjoy the movie is not to speak a word of French, then to get the original French version of the movie, turn off all subtitles and press play.

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
higgins wrote:
I haven't seen Avatar, but much of what you both describe remind me of Renaissance. The film is beautiful with its animation and high contrasts, but the plot sucks like a vacuum cleaner with a puffer fish on the end.

I have to shamefacedly admit to actually owning Renaissance – and to totally agree about the plot and the visuals.

But I feel that I have obscured the point of Ian’s original post – probably because he has put his case so well that nothing else needs to be said.

The main thing is that Avatar entertains not by storytelling, but by taking the audience on a ride through a theme park. That can certainly be entertaining – and in this case is for me – but it has come a very far call from prehistoric people huddling around a fire and telling stories to both entertain and to explain human existence and give meaning to it. I had not heard the term “Post-Narrative” applied to Avatar, but it is certainly a fitting one.

And I lament that this kind of post-narrativism is encroaching ever more.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 8:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Grettir wrote:
The main thing is that Avatar entertains not by storytelling, but by taking the audience on a ride through a theme park. That can certainly be entertaining...


Consider for a moment: on the one hand we have Avatar. The audience assumes there is a plot and has certain expectations of their being one or more twists in that plot that will send the tale being told in an unexpected direction. It turns out that there is no plot and therefore no unexpected direction for the story to take. Critically, though, there is no tale being told here. The twist here is that the audience's underlying assumption that there is a plot is incorrect.

Now on the other hand we have a gaming group playing a game that only supports Simulationist play. The player can only influence their character and the bulk of that influence is at character creation. In-play change is generally a refining of the character's motives. The referee creates the plot for the scenario, which involves the NPCs doing something and the PCs reacting to those events.

In addition, the referee heavily railroads game play. The scenes unfold exactly as the referee intends, exits from scenes are predetermined, and all paths through the plot end up at a set-piece finale.

To me, this is Avatar in RPG-form. In Avatar, the audience has the illusion of a plot unfolding but the reality is that the director is acting as a tour-guide through their creation. The ooohs and aaahs of the audience come about not through twists in the plot and revelations about the characters but through revelations about the creation. So too in the game-play described above. The players have the illusion that they are directing the unfolding story through the actions of their characters. The reality is that the referee is taking them on a tour of their creation and inviting them to participate in predictable set-pieces where there is only one possible outcome. The players are on a path of the referee's choosing.

In both cases the audience is entertained but also, in a sense, being mocked. You thought this was a film -- turns out it's a sight-seeing tour. You thought you were gaming -- turns out you were listening to the referee tell a story.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 7:12 pm
Posts: 67
The content of any film scarcely matters at all these days. It was once the case that a film became a blockbuster literally because people queued around the block to see it. Now people go to see films because they have been informed by the media that they are blockbusters before they are even released. Everyone I know who went to see Avatar disliked it. But they still handed over their money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
To bring back the old topic of George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire novels not following the narration principles of Aristoteles' On Poetics... is there any connection between that issue and the post-narrative one?

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
higgins wrote:
To bring back the old topic of George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire novels not following the narration principles of Aristoteles' On Poetics... is there any connection between that issue and the post-narrative one?

In the theory I’ve formed, that’s indeed all somehow connected and influencing each other.

I don’t know exactly when a certain literary trend started – maybe Lord Dunsany, E.R. Eddison and James Branch Cabell were at the forefront of it. I am referring to a certain kind proto-fantasy and proto-scifi – stories that are either fantastical in themselves or at least set in imaginary and somehow fantastical lands.

Now please mind me, the above mentioned writers were not the first to author such stories of wild and fantastical imagination; people like Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac or Loukianos of Samosata did so centuries and even milennia before them. But with the advent of the 20th century, it became a trend, a trend that really snowballed in the wake of Tolkien.

This trend I’m talking about is the trend of making the setting a main protagonist of the story, if not the main protagonist. The early fantastical writers like Lord Dunsany not only got away with it but even pulled it off most beautifully – because they had real artistic talent and brought us fresh visions of exotic places; Dunsany’s Pegana is for instance a wholly original creation and not some hackneyed pasted-and-copied pseudo-historical setting with a few unique twists thrown in, and the same holds true for the universe of Eddison’s Ouroboros.

My analysis is that the success of Tolkien changed it all. With Tolkien, the setting became the protagonist. It is well known that his literary hobby and subsequent career sprang up from his passion for inventing languages and his keen awareness that languages can’t develop – and be developed – devoid of a cultural context; to get his languages right, he needed to invent a world complete with religion, mythology, customs and a history. To my knowledge, Tolkien was the first to go to such painstaking – and for storytelling alone entirely unnecessary – detail in fleshing out his fantastical setting; earlier writers like Dunsany had merely evoked a feeling for their settings.

Now detail is in itself certainly no bad thing – but Tolkien gave a bad example. In the fantasy boom that slowly developed speed in his wake, his name was so big that it seemed to many writers necessary to emulate his detailed world creation. A whole generation of writers grew up believing that you absolutely needed to know the weather patterns of your imaginary land and the details of its calendar and holy days.

Please hold that thought for a moment.

Now enter the 70s, and enter role-playing. Now in role-playing, once it evolved pas the stage of the pure dungeon-crawl to the stage of at least wilderness adventures, it became indeed necessary to know such details as weather patterns.

Now enter the 80s and 90s. Role-playing has by now become a big hobby with many followers, and I daresay that most of the younger readers of fantasy from about that time onwards have at some time also been role-players. I’ll even claim that the crowd of reguar readers of fantasy and regular role-players overlap to a large degree. And the role-playing crowd brings certain expectations to their reading – they want the books they read to remind them of the adventures they play. They want their fantastic literature to ooze setting detail – detail that is not really needed to tell or even further the story, but that’s merely a habitual obsession of the role-playing crowd.

And now the dragon starts to devour its own tail with publishers and writers beginning to cater to the tastes of the role-playing crowd, and worse: With a good number of contemporary fantasy writers actually being role-players. The Tolkien-tradition (to take up the held thought) is finally wed to the role-playing tradition – a union most unholy.The books that get published now really read a lot like focussed role-playing campaigns – they are endlessly long, sprawling over many volumes, and they provide and parade off lots and lots of setting detail.

Now please compare contemporary fantasy for a moment with pre-Tolkien fantasy. Writers like Lord Dunsany, Clark Ashton Smith, Robert E. Howard, E.R. Eddison provided little hard and specific setting detail, but cartloads of setting flavour; which was enough to for their plots to completely work. Nowadays, we have tons and tons of setting detail, but actually surprisingly little creativity – in the modern magna opera of the likes of G.R.R. Martin and the late Robert Jordan, you can count the both flavourful and genuinely creative elements on one hand.

The sense of wonder – and thus the fantastic itself – is thus largely gone from fantasy literature. It caters to the tastes of role-players and their stale pseudo-medieval worlds with a few added twists.

And take the recent change in the understandig of the term “epic story”. Nowadays, it has become largely synonymous with “long, sweeping story” – but until very recently, it meant “addressing great and fateful themes and events”. Now this coud of course not be done in twenty pages – there never was an epic short story. But I would like people to think about why every fantasy work nowadays sems to have to sprawl over at least 2000 pages when unquestioningly epic tales like “The Worm Ouroboros” made do with a few hundred. Heck, even the original epic, Homer’s “Ilias”, shock-full of plastic and memorable characters, ripping action, great atmosphere and deeply shaking human drama, is shorter than any single one of Martin’s books!

I claim that if a writer can achieve the same impact in two paragraphs another needs three for, he is much the greater artist and his work objectively superior. Spreading your subject matter thinly over many, many pages does not make your work any better.

So, to return to the subject of the thread, and to higgins’ query: It is my firm conviction that the Tolkienesque tradition, combined with the expectations of role-players (and to some degree also with the influence of endless television series) has led to a change in story-consumption habits. Whereas people once wanted interesting, engaging and logical plots that actually got somewhere, they now increasingly expect their stories to resemble a sightseeing tour. They expect interesting settings (in the case of e.g. Avatar) or interesting characters (in the case of e.g. A Song of Ice and Fire) to be paraded in great detail for their viewing pleasure. This can indeed be called “Post-Narrative”, as the narrative, once the undoubted backbone of any story, takes a back seat. And one far back indeed.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 5
hi all

avitar lol

BRILLIANT film and when you under stand what it was about you can understand what it was meant to be.

to under stand the film you have to under stand the premise.

then change pandor for the Amazon jungle and the mega rare ore to gold.

and you have a documentary about the motive of big industry and mega corporations and there insane greed, are destroying are own world and the amazon river system.

the native people where the same primitive type of culuers that are in the jungles of the amazon and the out look and myths is the same sort of thing.

but have been added to and improved to cinematic experiences.

the plot was non existent but because the film was more a documentary/ a life study and less a story. it was more a story of self discovery and a life change decision, of some one that find them selves in the unique position of saving a way of life or totally distoying it, and the moral implications of how they felt about it. what was more important to the main char, his new life or his old and would he sacrifice all that he is for them or not?

so the ex Marin sent to gaurd the scientist learned to be one of a culture he could not under stand, yet was to him infantly more important then that of all other things. in essence a self discovery.


so it was a film explaining the plight of the real world seen by that of a layman and some one that had not views bar that of how to fight.

you learned as he learned.

and he learned that corporation are striped and destructive and the native/local indigenous people where right.

the real wonder is not the gold in the river system it is that of the jungle.

if you are but willing not learn, and work with nature you need not use gold and or any thing else as you will be far richer than you can imagine as the knowledge of the way to use thing is far more vital and useful than that of the ore under the soil.

that was why the film was about and that was what the director was tell the viewer.

it's simple when you under stand that the director is very active in protecting the amizion from the greed of the corporations.

just as he is very active about the the sea's of are world, that why he has worked on so many films that where based in the sea.

that why many believe that avatar 2 will be about the sea's of the plant pandor next.

best wishes all.
& kind regards.
dragon

_________________
an old dragon, find's a new roost... for a while at lest.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:37 pm
Posts: 205
In other words, it's what we've all be saying: a beautifully shot film that tells the exact same story as The Last Samurai, Pocahontas, A Man Called Dog, Shogun and many others; some guy gets captured by a different culture and goes native. In many of those other stories, the whole point was to point out that we in the West were actually the bad guys of the story. We do understand the premise and what it was meant to be; we simply disagree about whether it really is a brilliant film.

Incidentally, I enjoyed watching it; learning about the Navi was interesting and the action was suitable entertaining. The story, on the other hand, has been told many times before.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 11:48 pm
Posts: 5
the story could have been better, it was far to cheesy, but you could clearly see when SA where firing in key parts of the film.

you could see in parts what the SA was that was being fired.

you could also see when the chars actually changed the SA to new ones.

that was nice.

all told it one of the few film i can watch multiple time in the same week, without the film being old and tired. i can not say the same about most films.

that was i think one of the key aspects to the film.

that was due to the shear brilliance of the actors.

regards.
dragon.

_________________
an old dragon, find's a new roost... for a while at lest.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:31 am
Posts: 251
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah, US
No insights from me, I just wanted to mention that I did see Avatar in the theater and enjoyed it. I had never seen a 3D movie before, and I figured that if I was ever going to see one, Avatar would be it. The hackneyed plot didn't bother me a bit. Sure, it was predictable, but still an enjoyable spectacle. The 3D effects were incredible. This is one of the few movies I think I will own on DVD.

And regarding Grettir's theory--that totally explains why I love Martin's Song of Ice and Fire so much. I read The Lord of the Rings when I was 11, the Silmarillion when I was 12, and spent pretty much every waking moment from then on until my adult life playing Middle Earth RPGs. The setting really is an important part of a fantasy story for me. If the setting, the characters, and the writing are good enough, then I am more than happy to spend thousands of pages in that world. And Martin's writing is better than most--at least in a technical sense, if not in Grettir's sense. If the majority of fantasy fans are like me, then all I can do is feel sorry for those who disagree. :)

_________________
Ben
My blog: fantasy fiction, gaming, and progressive metal


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
Daeruin wrote:
If the majority of fantasy fans are like me, then all I can do is feel sorry for those who disagree. :)

Thanks for your kind sympathy; much appreciated by this minority here. :(

Daeruin wrote:
The setting really is an important part of a fantasy story for me. If the setting, the characters, and the writing are good enough, then I am more than happy to spend thousands of pages in that world. And Martin's writing is better than most--at least in a technical sense, if not in Grettir's sense.

Please understand that I don’t want to bash Martin – I’ve merely been replying to a direct question of higgins. I’ve said it elsewhere on this board, but I’ll repeat it for the record that I consider Martin an immaculate craftsman. He totally knows how to create and bring across many-facetted, believable and interesting characters, and his dialogues and prose are as good as any you’ll find in contemporary fantasy. It’s just that he really doesn’t know how to tell a story – or maybe he knows and just decides to cater to the very special tastes of role-players / perusers of fantastic literature; i.e. the market.

And please don’t take this as an offence, anybody. Rather, be aware how

1) modern fantastic literature is different from any other literature – and thus regular precepts of storytelling at large – in the detail lavished on describing the setting

and that

2) this is by no means a necessity of the genre deriving from the need to explain an imaginary and thus alien world but rather a development of only the last few decades, as evidenced by pretty much any fantasy published up to about the 1960s – this older fantasy reads like stories, not like sourcebooks.

Modern fantastic literature dilutes its narrative in a way that would be totally unacceptable in any other contemporary literary genre, and that was ostensibly also unacceptable for itself only a short half century ago. It is undeniable that there is a strong and probably ongoing trend away from the narrative and towards strolling around and taking in sights. It seems to me that this can with justofocation indeed been called “post-narrative”.

Now sight-seeing isn’t a bad thing; I for myself sure love reading sourcebooks for games and worlds I know I’ll never actually use. But I would like to ask you all – if I may – to for one moment think about why human beings have for millennia told stories, and enjoyed stories, and what stories have stayed with them. Simple enjoyment and passing the time has certainly always been an issue. But narratives, and especially the ones reverberating deeply with the listeners or readers, have always fulfilled the function of explaining things – originally the phenomena of the natural world, but very soon the human condition; the oldest piece of surviving literature, the Mesopotamian epic of Gilgamesh, is basically a fantasy story with the very clear theme of showcasing the ephemeral nature of human achievement in the face of our mortality. Stories explain the dilemmata all humans face by exemplifying them fictionally and allowing us to watch others trying and fail or succeed. That’s what all powerful stories are about and what gives them their deep justification – exemplifying the human condition.

This is done with the narrative, not with the setting description. If the balance does now – as it has – shift away from narrative and towards setting, this does objectively detract from the literary piece’s worth. The part of the story that is both enjoyable and actually valuable (the narrative) becomes bigger and the part that is merely enjoyable (the setting) becomes smaller. If this is not an undeniable lessening of the overall quality I don’t know what is.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
Grettir wrote:
Now please compare contemporary fantasy for a moment with pre-Tolkien fantasy. Writers like Lord Dunsany, Clark Ashton Smith, Robert E. Howard, E.R. Eddison provided little hard and specific setting detail, but cartloads of setting flavour; which was enough to for their plots to completely work. Nowadays, we have tons and tons of setting detail, but actually surprisingly little creativity – in the modern magna opera of the likes of G.R.R. Martin and the late Robert Jordan, you can count the both flavourful and genuinely creative elements on one hand.
So, in essence after reading REH&co, one can't really enter a debate on how the Hyboria works and is built, except in the most general terms, but with GRRM&co, we get a comprehensive image what Westeros is and how things work there. REH leaves much to the imagination of the reader, while GRRM leaves very little? Enjoy of reading GRRM comes from how the author filling the gaps, and enjoy of reading REH comes from filling the gaps yourself?

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avatar and the rise of Post-Narrative film.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:06 am
Posts: 1495
Location: Vienna, Austria, Europe
higgins wrote:
REH leaves much to the imagination of the reader, while GRRM leaves very little? Enjoy of reading GRRM comes from how the author filling the gaps, and enjoy of reading REH comes from filling the gaps yourself?

Not at all.

I have in this very thread said several times that enjoyment can be derived from sight-seeing, from being given a tour of the details of the world, and that I even enjoy this basically myself.

But it is undeniable that another font of enjoyment is the plot, the narrative. And, as I have explained in the previous post, the narrative has an added, intrinsic value, a value that mere sight-seeing is lacking.

The enjoyment derived from the narrative has thus a higher objective value than the enjoyment derived from exposition of the setting.

If I have two books written by identically talented craftsmen and telling the same story, a story requiring 300 pages to be told, and one does it in 300 pages plus 50 pages of enjoyable exposition, while the other does it in 300 pages plus another 300 pages of enjoyable exposition, the second book does deliver a higher overall amount of enjoyment, but the first one does deliver objectively more valuable enjoyment per reading minute. It is objectively much the better book, and the reader can use the time he would otherwise read the 250 additional pages of enjoyable exposition of the second book for reading another book of the same high calibre of the shorter one.

_________________
My real name is Michael; use it, if you like.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group              Designed by QuakeZone