West of Memphis

Posted on February 19, 2013 by | Leave a comment
WEST OF MEMPHIS opens at Violet Crown Cinema Feb. 22

WEST OF MEMPHIS opens at Violet Crown Cinema Feb. 22

When the bodies of 8 year-old boys Stevie Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Beyers were found in a creek with gruesome cuts and scratches all over their bodies including their genitalia  the scene was so horrific, it enraged the whole community. Collectively they asked, “who could do something like this?” Considering the strange and brutal nature of the murders, Satanic ritual seemed to be the only plausible answer, leading police to Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelly. Deemed “The West Memphis 3″ these teenage boys were aggressive, dark, and disrespectful of authority. For the prosecution, getting the guilty sentence was easy, but it was not honest. The details of what went wrong to land 3 apparently innocent young men in jail and on death row, and what went into freeing them are elegantly laid out in WEST OF MEMPHIS, Amy Berg’s (DELIVER US FROM EVIL) illuminating documentary.

WEST OF MEMPHIS owes much to PARADISE LOST, the trilogy of documentaries which played a vital role in spreading awareness of the injustice and promoted the activism that helped the West Memphis 3 win their freedom. Berg’s documentary does not echo PARADISE LOST, but rather, builds upon it and shows how it effected the key players in the story. Much like the outrage that ignited the community following the discovery of the bodies of the murdered children, WEST OF MEMPHIS shows the outrage of the millions of people involved in the “Free the West Memphis 3″ movement. However, in this story which has a lot of pain and anger, Amy Berg focuses on the overwhelming dedication and love exhibited by the West Memphis 3, their families, friends on the outside, and the countless strangers who fought for them.

The West Memphis 3. Jason Baldwin, Damien Echols, and Jessie Misskelly

The West Memphis 3. Jason Baldwin, Damien Echols, and Jessie Misskelly

Perhaps the most engaging aspect of WEST OF MEMPHIS is the way in which the ever-increasing number of people close to the WM3, including the film’s producer, Peter Jackson, get more and more energized as each piece of evidence comes to the surface and the narrative told by the prosecutors begins to unravel. Though the fight was very long and not without its share of roadblocks, their conviction and positivity is nothing short of inspiring. However, it is impossible to forget at the heart of this story is the tragic death of 3 innocent lives. With every new discovery, questions about who did not commit the crime are settled, but that only leaves us to wonder who is really responsible for the death of Stevie, Michael, and Christopher.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Love Never Dies

Posted on January 22, 2013 by | Leave a comment

 

Michael Haneke's AMOUR opens at Violet Crown Cinema January 25th

Michael Haneke’s AMOUR opens at Violet Crown Cinema January 25th

For those familiar with the films of director, Michael Haneke, devastation and intensity are to be expected. In films like CACHE and FUNNY GAMES, Haneke brutally confronts his audience with an outlook on humanity that is aggressive and sometimes difficult (albeit fascinating) to watch. Here with his second Palm D’or winning film AMOUR, he slightly diverges from what we have come to expect from him by presenting something that is devastating, yes, but is also very moving and personal.

Many people in loving, committed relationships must live through the trauma of experiencing the slow decline and death of their partner. Such is the case for Georges and Anne (names that will be very familiar to fans of Haneke), a married couple whose love for each other has been constant, even in the face of the indignity Anne (Emmanuelle Riva) suffers after a serious stroke. Learning the meaning of the words “in sickness and in health”, Georges (Jean-Louis Trintingnant) suffers as well in his inability to comfort and console his wife. Because Anne is so ashamed of her condition, Georges feels he must shield her from embarrassment and stress at the hands of her nurses, visitors and their well-meaning, but intrusive daughter. Eva (Isabelle Hupert). However, AMOUR is not without tenderness. As the title implies, the love and compassion between their family is palpable.

Perhaps it is the sublime level of humanity Haneke is able to achieve with his actors in AMOUR that makes its unflinching realism that much more savage on your emotions. Emmanuelle Riva’s beautiful performance got her an Academy Award nomination. More than just physically adopting the characteristics of a stroke victim, she is continually able to keep her character active, even if her body is not. Playing opposite her is the legendary Jean-Louis Trintignant whose portrayal of a man who is finding it increasingly difficult to be strong for his wife, is what carries the film. In an interview with Larry Rother of the New York Times Michael Haneke said, “As far back as when I was a young man, there were two actors who were my favorites: Marlon Brando and Jean-Louis Trintignant.” When watching AMOUR, it is clear to see why. Trintignant perfectly executes the kind of stoic, subtle, intensity that Haneke deals in, but brings something extra to the table. Ultimately, it is the emotional investment from the actors and the audience that makes AMOUR something special and should not be missed.

-Elizabeth Skerrett, Violet Crown Cinema

Jean-Louis Trintignant and Emmanuelle Riva.

Jean-Louis Trintignant and Emmanuelle Riva.

 

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

9 1/2 Years in 2 1/2 Hours

Posted on January 11, 2013 by | Leave a comment

ZD30News1

Zero Dark Thirty, the latest film from Academy Award winning director Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker), tells the story of Maya (Jessica Chastain), a CIA operative who led the US intelligence’s attempts to track down Osama Bin Laden.  The film opens on a black screen with the audio from 9/11 passengers calling families and loved ones from the plane, an emotional scene for any American, and from there jumps to a CIA torture room where we meet Maya in her first interrogation.

 

Bigelow spends no time establishing Maya’s backstory, choosing instead to focus entirely on what the CIA was doing post-9/11 in their attempts to track down Bin Laden.  Jessica Chastain plays the role of Maya perfectly, leading the hunt for Bin Laden all across the world, from Afghanistan to Langley, and from Pakistan to DC.   Although Maya is never given a backstory, she is given plenty of motivation for her relentless pursuit of Bin Laden throughout the film.  The more involved with CIA operations in the Middle East she gets, the more entangled she gets with her leads and her co-workers.  Maya rises from being the new kid straight out of Washington to being the agent who debriefs the president’s advisors, and the viewer sees every step of the process… including the many risks associated with being a CIA operative in the Middle East.

 

If there is one thing that Bigelow captures better than anything else, it is the adversity Maya faces in her hunt for Bin Laden.  There were a multitude of reasons why it took almost 10 years to track down Bin Laden, and Bigelow puts those issues right at the core of Zero Dark Thirty.  From captured Al Qaeda members refusing to break in torture rooms to politicians refusing to take action against Bin Laden due to high probability of failure or questionable intelligence, Maya is forced to fight battles on all fronts.  In the process she loses all of her friends in the Middle East, and becomes the lone wolf trying to finish what she was sent there to do.

ZD30News2

Throughout the entire film, the actors surrounding Chastain help provide unprecedented realism for a film about such a well-known topic.  Bigelow was able to draw excellent performances from all of the stars throughout the film including Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Mark Duplass, Chris Pratt, Mark Strong, and James Gandolfini.  Every actor, regardless of the size of his or her role, delivers a spot on performance.  The torture scenes at CIA black sites feel like torture rooms, CIA headquarters and Washington DC are uncannily tangible, and when the SEALS begin prepping for their mission, it is easy to forget that there are actors underneath all of that tactical gear.

 

When it all comes together, Bigelow has created a film that is a must see of 2013, and will definitely rack up some awards in the coming months.  Zero Dark Thirty portrays the hunt for Bin Laden so realistically that it is easy to forget that this film was made in Hollywood, and as a result might not be entirely accurate.  Although this is already causing problems with the media and the Senate Intelligence Committee, it doesn’t take anything away from the quality of the film itself, and easily exceeds the high level of expectations set by Bigelow’s earlier films.

– Andrew Butler, Violet Crown Cinema

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Letter Never Sent

Posted on November 19, 2012 by | Leave a comment

 

In traditional narrative cinema, it is rare for a film to achieve a visual expressiveness that matches – yet does not interfere- with its storytelling. By in large, visual panache is subdued in favor of narrative thrust, and moments of cinematographic flair are reserved for punctuation rather than syntax. Every so often, though, there is that perfect combination of look and feel, style and substance, director and cinematographer that imbues an entire work with the magic feeling we call “cinematic.”

Perhaps the greatest of these collaborative duos was that of director Mikhail Kalatozov and cinematographer Sergei Urusevsky whose work together produced a string of world-class motion pictures in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Some of these films have become beloved arthouse classics, such as the 1957 war epic The Cranes Are Flying or 1964’s I Am Cuba, both of which are firmly cemented in the canon of world cinema.  Equally dazzling, yet somehow criminally overlooked, is their 1959 collaboration Letter Never Sent. For reasons unclear, this astonishingly beautiful tragedy never broke through in the West like Cranes or Cuba, and has remained one of the true hidden gems of filmmaking history.

The simple story of four Soviet geologists searching for diamonds in the rugged Taiga wilderness, Letter Never Sent is an allegory of perseverance, endurance, sacrifice and survival. Adopting an unusual two-act structure, the first half of the film tracks the team’s virulent and seemingly fruitless pursuit of the precious stones. No sooner are they discovered though, than the expedition is forced to abandon camp by a raging forest fire. The latter half of the film, then, tracks the geologists’ struggle to save not only themselves, but their invaluable discovery as well.

This parable has explicitly political undertones, which fit it squarely within the tradition of Socialist Realism. Hard work and manual labor are glorified within the first half, while the personal sacrifice of the individual for the greater good is the dominant theme of the latter. Still, a more universal resonance can be found in the idea of working hard to attain something, and then working even harder to keep it. With nature as its formidable antagonist, Letter Never Sent is a testament to Man’s will to survive. With nature at center stage, Letter Never Sent is filled with an aspect at once harsh and sensuous. The epic Siberian landscape not only provides a majestic backdrop for the drama, it is presented as a character, a daunting force the mortals must constantly contend with physically and mentally. Falling over loose rocks, wading through snow and freezing waters, even ducking through burning branches, the group is constantly at the mercy of the elements. Their only defense is the sheer will to survive.

What distinguishes Letter Never Sent from other survival films, though, is no doubt the photography, which is nothing short of awe-inspiring. Utilizing the simplicity of the story and characters, Kalatozov and Urusevsky were able to create a visual language that is endemic to the film. Every shot in Letter Never Sent has been carefully conceptualized, choreographed and executed for maximum impact and visual symbolism. In the film’s very first shot, for example, the main characters are seen from the point of view of a departing helicopter. At first, their faces fill the screen, but as the camera rises and rises, they become nothing more than obscure specks on the vast landscape.

 This type of visual expressiveness had all but disappeared with the advent of talking pictures, yet Kalatozov was able to blend it seamlessly into a distinctly modern approach to filmmaking. Urusevsky’s arsenal of visual storytelling techniques is applied in consistently elegant yet experimental ways, most notably in the incredibly long, impeccably choreographed hand-held shots following the actors through dense forests. This style, which Kalatozov and Urusevsky began with The Cranes Are Flying and fully exploited with I Am Cuba, can be seen as the steppingstone between the Soviet cinema of Eisenstein and the silent era, and the Soviet cinema of Tarkovsky and the “new wave” of the 1960s and 70s. Letter Never Sent is a delight for both the connoisseur and the casual filmgoer. Its reputation is only now growing in the West, making it one of cinema’s best-kept secrets.  – Hunter Shaw, Arthouse Monthly Programmer

 

 

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Art House Monthly, At The Cinema

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Lincoln

Posted on November 15, 2012 by | Leave a comment

The country, more divided than it had ever been and in the midst of a long and bloody war, voted to reelect the president despite very vocal concerns about his ability to lead the nation. This eerily familiar setup is one of the many things that make LINCOLN, directed by Steven Speilberg, an enthralling work of cinema. Much more than just a representation of a moment in history or a reverent and ideological portrait of a president, LINCOLN is a fascinating case-study of how the American government makes policies that affect the course of history. Despite the fact that it is set in the past, nothing could be more relevant.

Anybody who went to grade school in the United States is familiar with the Civil War, the Gettysburg Address, the Emancipation Proclamation, and Lincoln's assassination. So rather than re-hashing that version of that era, Spielberg adapted Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, Doris Kearns Goodwin's, text, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, which focuses on Lincoln's struggle to get the 13th amendment passed. To do this, he needs to win the support of several Democrats who are staunchly against him while making sure that the Republican party is completely unified. Meanwhile, the Civil War, the bloodiest in our history, rages on. The scenes on the battlefield, as beautiful as they are harrowing, provide a great deal of moral conflict for Lincoln. The opening of the film shows Lincoln in a Union camp, talking to black soldiers whose contribution to the war effort was vital. He knows that the war is savage, but in order to make sure that the black men who fought did not return to the savagery of slavery, he has to risk prolonging it.

The moral dilema facing Lincoln extends to many members of his cabinet and the House of Repesentatives who each have very strong opinions on what should be prioritized. In perhaps one of the most most stand-out performances in the film, Tommy Lee Jones plays the outspoken abolitionist, Thaddeus Stevens, whose passionate and often comic speaches about the full equality of all human beings threaten to intimidate and enrage the opposing party whom Lincoln is counting on for support. In presenting such moral complexity, the film beggs the question: should elected politicians compromise on what they truly believe in their hearts to be right for the sake of making a small amount of progress as opposed to none at all? With the fiscal cliff rapidly approaching, it is a question that is just as relevant now as it was then.
If it has taken me a while to get around to Daniel Day Lewis's performance as Lincoln, it is because it is so flawless, it hardly seems like there is an actor there at all. All aspects of D.D.L. are completely lost in the awesome power of Lincoln. Even his characteristic booming voice gives way to the high-pitched, light and airy voice that Lincoln was said to have had. It is especially easy to forget you are watching an actor during the handful of scenes in the film where Lincoln is telling humerous stories from history, living in these light-weight moments, the only moments of levity he is allowed to have.
In many ways, LINCOLN is not the film one would expect. It is a political process film that is set in a war; it is about one of the most moral presidents in history making moral compromises; it complicates him and in doing so, humanizes him. Ultimately, what LINCOLN offers is an alternative view of history that is surprisingly similar to the present.
- Elizabeth Skerrett

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Masterful

Posted on October 3, 2012 by | Leave a comment

Paul Thomas Anderson, perhaps one of the greatest working American directors, is shaping up to be one of the greatest directors to make films about America. THE MASTER, his follow-up to THERE WILL BE BLOOD, is set in a post-war America that is attempting to move past the trauma and has little room for a man like Freddie Quell (Joaquin Pheonix), an alcoholic sailor suffering from extreme PTSD. Violent, and unable to be a modern, happy consumer, Freddie essentially drops out of society until he stumbles upon a collective of people who are members of what they call “The Cause.” Their leader is Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman) a writer/philosopher/physicist who is referred to as The Master. In Freddie Quell, The Master can see the perfect foundation to test his ideas about where we come from and how we can “de-hypnotize” ourselves. If he can help Freddie, he can help anybody. The film speaks to broad concepts of American identity in the conviction of belief in the face of uncertainty, in addition to picking apart what motivated these outcasts of a by-gone era. In THE MASTER, Anderson has made a film that is easy to follow, but difficult (and I would add, fun) to interpret.

The Cause is a thinly-veiled reference to the early days of Scientology, but THE MASTER is not exactly the savage take-down of Scientology that one might expect. Although, it certainly does not support the idea of a man who uses the people around him to test his theories on. Ultimately, Anderson made a film about men. Throughout the film, the relationship between Lancaster Dodd and Freddie Quell is a focal point, constantly going back to scenes between the two of them as they share deeply intimate moments. A different kind of odd couple, Freddie is erratic and simple minded whereas Dodd is unnervingly calm and domineering. Though at first their relationship is an experiment, the two cultivate an unusual and intense friendship based on mutual fascination. Their search for certainty and stability leads them to desperately need each other and simultaneously tear each other down.

P.T. Anderson’s introspective camera-work calls for an analysis of the characters. Almost everything is told in exquisitely framed close-ups allowing you to look into their eyes and study the lines of their faces. Joaquin Pheonix’s harelip scar and cavernous dimples and forehead wrinkles evoke the feeling of a man that has been worn down by life whereas Philip Seymour Hoffman’s soft round face makes him seem as if he has hardly lived it. THE MASTER is much more interested in who these people are than what they are doing. This is what makes it so fascinating.

When you are watching a film that has very little to say about  specific events, it opens the door to a wide range of interpretations making discussing the film is as enjoyable as watching it. Questions turn into theories and the more you read into it, the more you get out of it.

- Elizabeth Skerrett, Violet Crown Cinema

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , , ,

The Master

Posted on October 3, 2012 by | Leave a comment

Though THE MASTER is Paul Thomas Anderson’s most challenging film to date, it may also emerge as his most rewarding.  This is not a rehash of the director’s past successes –THERE WILL BE BLOOD’s laser-focused portrait of a man consumed by ambition or the Altman-esque ensembles of BOOGIE NIGHTS and MAGNOLIA.  THE MASTER reveals little in the way of explicit intentions or moral, yet is ripe with suggested meaning and will assuredly provide months of food for thought and conversation.

THE MASTER follows Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a veteran of WWII’s Pacific front attempting to cope with an obvious case of PTSD in a post-war America where PTSD is not yet diagnosable. Freddie’s malady manifests itself as an unhealthy sexual compulsion unfortunately coupled with one of the most brutal cases of unchecked alcoholism committed to film. Through a series of misadventures, Freddie finds himself in the company of Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), the charismatic leader of a new cult-like religion called the Cause, an ever-so-thinly veiled Scientology surrogate. Freddie provides Dodd with a creative variety of new cocktails (ingredients include rubbing alcohol and paint thinner) to feed the latter’s own rampant alcoholism, but more than that Freddie represents the ultimate challenge: Can Dodd use the techniques he has developed for the Cause to discipline Freddie and purge him of his animalistic behavior?

We are presented here with an extreme case of the blind leading the blind. Freddie is a man in severe need of help, yet the help he finds comes in the form of a delusional cult leader. Over and over again in the film, Hoffman delivers what would in any other movie be the “Oscar speech,” yet his words contain little but misguided gibberish. Much of the difficulty of THE MASTER comes from its lack of a clear end game. What defines success in this scenario, where help comes in the form of cult brainwashing but to leave Freddie alone would prove to be equally disastrous? The way Anderson refuses to comment as these two fatally flawed characters misguidedly attempt to master each other and themselves is remarkable.

The technical craft on display in the film is stunning. THE MASTER contains as great of achievements in editing, cinematography, and score as we’ve experienced all year. The film’s performances are across the board transcendent. Hoffman blows the barn doors off as Dodd, boisterous, charming, childish, fatherly, often at the same time. The highest praise, however, must be reserved for Joaquin Phoenix, who transforms himself entirely into Freddie. Not a single trace of Phoenix remains; he simply is Freddie Quell in his posture, his speech, and the way his thought process registers through his eyes. It is one of the best performances of the 21st century.

P.T. Anderson does not give easy answers to the questions he raises. There is no “I drink your milkshake” moment in THE MASTER to bring the film’s themes into perfect focus. Instead, we are left with a mess of questions about faith, sex, intelligence, delusion, self-reliance, and whether or not a man can help himself change and heal when every facet of his existence seems stacked against that change. These questions linger long after the end credits roll.

- Ben Martin, Violet Crown Cinema

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , ,

Hello I Must be Going

Posted on September 26, 2012 by | Leave a comment

Centered around Amy (Melanie Lynsky), a thirty-something recent divorce who has moved into her parents house, the HELLO I MUST BE GOING is an honest look at not just romantic relationships, but with family relationships as well. While Amy has no idea what to do with her life,  her parents’ lives are moving forward. They are remodeling their house, and her father is about to sign some very important clients, allowing him to retire and go “galavanting the globe” with is wife. When the clients come over for dinner with their 19-year-old-son, Jeremy (Christopher Abbott), the two can sense that they are in similarly embarrassing situations with their well-intentioned, but over-whelming parents and begin an affair that is as understandable as it is unconventional. However, when things inevitably get complicated Amy’s delusions about herself come sharply into focus and she is forced to either try to justify them and continue as she was, or take steps to improve her life.

HELLO I MUST BE GOING, gets its title from the song Groucho Marx sings in the classic screw-ball comedy, ANIMAL CRACKERS, which is one of the few things Amy seems interested in while in her rut of post-divorce depression. WHERE IS BOTTOM?! And much like a Marx brothers film, HELLO I MUST BE GOING is a film about misunderstandings. Although here, they serve to get to a deeper emotional truth about how people think what they want to because it is less painful, or makes them feel better about being sad in the first place.

Though the narrative-driven and is equal parts drama and  slap-stick, the film does not sacrifice character development for everyone but the two leads. The fact that you can identify with every character on screen (thanks in no small part to the enormous talent of the actors) is what makes HELLO I MUST BE GOING stand out.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in At The Cinema

Tagged , , , , , ,

Overwhelmed by Nostalgia

Posted on September 26, 2012 by | Leave a comment

Josh Randor of “How I Met Your Mother” fame wrote, directed and stars in LIBERAL ARTS, a campus comedy about Jesse (Randor) a 35 year-old man who is disillusioned by his adult life as a college admissions councilor. He looks fondly on his life in a small liberal arts college in Ohio where he felt stimulated by intellectual conversations and masterworks of literature, whereas in New York he is lonely, bored, and fed up. So when Jesse is asked to give a speech at his favorite professors’s retirement, he is more than happy to return to his old romping grounds. While he is there, he is introduced to Zibby (Elizabeth Olsen in her best performance since MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE) a vivacious and gifted 19 year-old student at he university. During their brief, but intense time together Zibby re-introduces Jesse to the life of an academic and introduces him to ways of thinking that transforms how he looks at the world.

It is no wonder that when back in New York, he cannot stop thinking about her despite the fact that she is 16 years his junior. He must go back to see her again. But this time, he is not in a haze of nostalgia and the film takes a brave and interesting turn. While back at school Jesse meets several people who challenge his pre-concieved notions of what being young was all about. One example is Nat (Zac Effron) who is the typical college hippie and provides a great deal of the film’s humor. At first he is the kind of character you roll your eyes at, but there is something really sweet and respectable about him that eventually wins you over.

LIBERAL ARTS expertly walks the line between romanticizing youth and respecting the very legitimate struggles college students have. Even though Zibby and her counterparts are in a bubble of academic idealism, they teach Jesse meaningful lessons about being open to alternative points of view. In this movie Randor brings a great deal of his personal brand of sincerity and self-awareness making it a very touching and compelling story.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Where Do We Go From Here?

Posted on August 22, 2012 by | Leave a comment

Written in part by television actress Rashida Jones who plays the title character, CELESTE AND JESSE FOREVER is a surprising romantic comedy that picks up at the end of a relationship. Unlike an overwhelming number of films which either end with a wedding or a break-up, this is “the movie that happens after the movie”, as a friend said. An insightful and sincere commentary on relationships, CELESTE AND JESSE smartly combines wit and heart, leaving you with a film that does not have the false taste of most romantic comedies, but is no less entertaining.

In the first scenes of the film we learn that Celeste and Jesse’s lives are headed in different directions. Whereas Celeste is a successful, controlling, young professional, Jesse, played by the charismatic Andy Samberg, is an unmotivated man-child who would rather be surfing than looking for a job. Therefore, they made the rational decision to give up on the idea that their marriage will work out. However, you could never tell that from the way they are acting, speaking in funny accents, playing odd games, and spending every day together, much to the confusion and bewilderment of their friends. Despite the fact that they are no longer married, Celeste and Jesse are still best friends and sincerely in love.

However, as much as they would like to think that they have their relationship under control, eventually the pair are forced to come to terms with the fact that they have put themselves in a situation that will ultimately result in a lot of pain on both ends. CELESTE AND JESSE FOREVER essentially deals with the question: How can you be sure you are doing the right thing? Though the question may be unanswerable, the journey Celeste and Jesse take in trying to figure it out makes for a very compelling and watchable story. The film navigates the depths of the drama without compromising the spark and the comedy that Jones and Samberg provide their characters.

– Elizabeth Skerrett, Violet Crown Cinema

 

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Now Playing

Tagged , , , , ,