UA-100768763-1 Jump to content

X-Men: Apocalypse Possibilities


Valo487
 Share

Recommended Posts

And yet somehow army building Ultron drones is still proving very difficult.

Yup. Like I said, not perfect. I get why they made the Iron Man-ish figure more plentiful (kids like Iron Man) but as a specialty offering, knowing collectors would want to build an army of Ultron drones, DST got it backwards in my opinion. They sold out, I'm sure, but those Iron Legion figures are gonna linger on the secondary market for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Yeah! I buy anything with a Marvel logo on it, I just prefer comic stuff to movie stuff! *Shakes fist*

I was happy to get that set though, Mystique was at the top of my list for characters in need of a re-do for years. I was so pleased to get her I didn't even really care or notice that the other three sucked. I can see it now, when I look back in hindsight objectively... but truthfully, my reaction to the set was, "OH THANK GOD FINALLY NEW MYSTIQUE! WOOHOO!"

That is honestly the only reason I got the boxset. I mean, Mystique is like 12 ... 4 pack is like 17 ... no brainer imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at those pics gotta say Jubilee is looking really good. I will buy whatever comes down the pipe minimate wise for this film. But I do wish we could get like a 10 pack of the team in there black leathers (we still dont have a movie Cyclops, Rogue or Shadowcat for cripes sake.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at those pics gotta say Jubilee is looking really good. I will buy whatever comes down the pipe minimate wise for this film. But I do wish we could get like a 10 pack of the team in there black leathers (we still dont have a movie Cyclops, Rogue or Shadowcat for cripes sake.)

Ok first off this is a different continuity than the original 3 X Movies. Basically they didn't happen. So we have to kind of forget the rest of things similar to the Star Trek movies. I hope they do a basic uniform for a guy and a girl and then give us multiple heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at those pics gotta say Jubilee is looking really good. I will buy whatever comes down the pipe minimate wise for this film. But I do wish we could get like a 10 pack of the team in there black leathers (we still dont have a movie Cyclops, Rogue or Shadowcat for cripes sake.)

Ok first off this is a different continuity than the original 3 X Movies. Basically they didn't happen. So we have to kind of forget the rest of things similar to the Star Trek movies. I hope they do a basic uniform for a guy and a girl and then give us multiple heads.

Below is quoted from an e-mail I wrote to my best friend griping and complaining about this movie:

(Please note, no insults are directed or aimed at you specifically, I wrote this over a week ago, before you even made your post, I'm just copy/pasting it because it illustrates my feelings on this matter.)

What annoys me is internet nerds trying to explain away the fact that an older Jubilee and Psylocke are appearing in the past of this movie, when a younger Psylocke and Jubilee have already appeared in the future of X2 and X3, with, “DOFP reset the timeline, so in this new timeline, they’ve been born earlier than before.”

That’s a ****ing stupid nerd-splanation. They're essentially saying, “Time-Traveling Wolverine altered the past, so their parents banged 2 decades earlier, I guess… because Butterfly Effect!” … that’s not a good explanation. Not that the movie will even bother to give an explanation, I’m sure. Other than yes, “Convoluted Time Travel Nonsense!”

There’s using time-travel/alternate timelines as a logical plot device to tell a story (like say, Back to the Future, or… the good Terminator movies), and there’s using it as a bullsh*t excuse to brush “a wizard did it” plot holes under the rug, and this is the latter.

Jubilee and Psylocke (AND possibly Angel, AND possibly other characters) appearing the same age or older in the 80s than they are in the present day previous X-Men movies they already appeared in, makes no damn sense, whether the past has been altered or not. I will not accept "Altering the past in DOFP forced their parents to bang and conceive them 30 years earlier, for unexplained reasons" as a plausible explanation. The parents are theoretically 30 years younger too. Would Jubilee's parents even be of banging age?

Frankly, for the age they are in Apocalypse, wouldn't their parents have to have conceived and birthed them BEFORE DOFP? I mean they're all fairly grown young adults in Apocalypse? How many years before Apocalypse does DOFP take place? Quicksilver, Magneto, Mystique, Beast and Xavier all look exactly the same, so it can't be many. For as little sense as it makes assuming their alternate birth is a result of the altered timeline, it makes ZERO sense for these characters to have been conceived BEFORE DOFP, because up to DOFP, the past should have been unaltered. These characters would NOT have been born already before Wolverine mucked with things.

There's a completely alternate reality, where anything goes, and then there's altering the past of a reality that already exists. This is the latter, not the former. It shouldn't be SO drastically different that characters are born three whole decades earlier. I could accept that certain events change, but that several characters parents would conceive them WELL before they should have been conceived, "Because reasons!" is not plausible, and poorly told. Even if DOFP did muck with the past.

PS. And I can't wait to see what kind of plot holes that new Colossus in Deadpool who seems to look completely different, and be of a different age at a different time than Cudmore's Colossus creates. (Though he does already look 10x better than Cudmore's Colossus, I admit).

Edited by Gillbob316
Link to comment
Share on other sites

goodpost.gif

I've actually given some thought about revisiting the X-films to come up with some graphic illustrating the timeline(s) but every time I consider it, I decide I don't need the nosebleed.

Bottom line: It's fucked up and Singer didn't make it any better. Only Marvel Studios can fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well nearly any movie or movie series can be picked apart at some level (Arnold as the "infiltrator" Terminator makes no sense at all, for example). The question is, how much is too much to annoy viewer X. I think most fans of the X-franchise are able to just roll with what Singer et al. are doing. I am. The primary objective is not (or at least has not, to this point been) the same as Marvel Studios--to make a fairly cohesive series of movies that all build very carefully and logically off the others. Days of Future Past was Singer using the reset button, so that he and the writers involved could tell the kinds of stories that they wanted to. And so far they're doing a fantastic job of it IMO. But I don't try to find a logical explanation for everything, because there just doesn't seem to be one. You can't have Mystique as a teen in 1963 and then as a 25 year old in 1999, etc. But comics retcon all the time. Why can't movies do the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a really good friend who is 'meh' towards Marvel Studios, and drools over Fox's X-Men universe. It makes for interesting conversations since he and I are somewhat inverted on that front. I like that diversity of interests, because his perspective has helped me level out my feelings towards what I feel is a lot of missed opportunities by Fox. There are things to love about the existing X-Men films if you can overlook the plot holes... That being said, even my friend agrees with me that DoFP fell short of giving the franchise the shot in the arm it really needed. Yes, it regained a foothold in the box office, and showed audiences that its time is not up yet... but it didn't move the series forward enough. In fact, it did quite the opposite, as Singer firmly rooted it in the memory of the stories he told more than a decade ago.

Apocalypse seems to be shaping up to push the franchise in fresh directions, but that future will always be limited by the cherry-picked continuity that is now bleeding through from past films. It needed a harder reset. Instead, we are stuck with problems like the aforementioned displaced birth of Jubilee, etc.

What gets me is thinking about how Singer made a big deal over meeting with James Cameron to discuss time travel mechanics - and then seeing how that still resulted in the mangled continuity we're all getting headaches from.

I'm going to avoid using phrases like 'nuke it from space' and just sit over here in the corner with my fond memories of the 90's X-Men cartoon and Marvel trading cards and that ignorantly blissful feeling I had as an 8 year old who couldn't wait to see how cool Jim Lee was going to make the X-Men look when the next issue came out whistling.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were Jubiliee and Psylocke actually *named* in dialogue onscreen in previous appearances? I thought they were thrown in as easter eggs at the time. In which case, appearing as full fledged characters at a different point in time is ok with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad example. She can appear any age she wants. You picked the one nit I actually don't have a problem with.

Not unless another, unspoken mutant power of hers is not to age. Remember that in X3 she lost her power and was, what, 35 or something? But of course there are several other examples. Edited by karamazov80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were Jubiliee and Psylocke actually *named* in dialogue onscreen in previous appearances? I thought they were thrown in as easter eggs at the time. In which case, appearing as full fledged characters at a different point in time is ok with me.

I think that's the idea. They were sorta background characters in their initial appearances (in fact, most people I've talked with wouldn't even have known that Mei Melançon was playing Psylocke if she wasn't named so in the credits), so I guess the hope is that nobody will notice.

Bad example. She can appear any age she wants. You picked the one nit I actually don't have a problem with.

Not unless another, unspoken mutant power of hers is not to age. Remember that in X3 she lost her power and was, what, 35 or something? But of course there are several other examples.

Didn't Beast explain to her in First Class that her mutant ability slowed down her natural aging? So it makes sense (at least to me) that she would only begin aging at a normal rate after her powers were nullified...

Edited by Donny B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a really good friend who is 'meh' towards Marvel Studios, and drools over Fox's X-Men universe. It makes for interesting conversations since he and I are somewhat inverted on that front. I like that diversity of interests, because his perspective has helped me level out my feelings towards what I feel is a lot of missed opportunities by Fox. There are things to love about the existing X-Men films if you can overlook the plot holes... That being said, even my friend agrees with me that DoFP fell short of giving the franchise the shot in the arm it really needed. Yes, it regained a foothold in the box office, and showed audiences that its time is not up yet... but it didn't move the series forward enough. In fact, it did quite the opposite, as Singer firmly rooted it in the memory of the stories he told more than a decade ago.

Apocalypse seems to be shaping up to push the franchise in fresh directions, but that future will always be limited by the cherry-picked continuity that is now bleeding through from past films. It needed a harder reset. Instead, we are stuck with problems like the aforementioned displaced birth of Jubilee, etc.

What gets me is thinking about how Singer made a big deal over meeting with James Cameron to discuss time travel mechanics - and then seeing how that still resulted in the mangled continuity we're all getting headaches from.

I'm going to avoid using phrases like 'nuke it from space' and just sit over here in the corner with my fond memories of the 90's X-Men cartoon and Marvel trading cards and that ignorantly blissful feeling I had as an 8 year old who couldn't wait to see how cool Jim Lee was going to make the X-Men look when the next issue came out whistling.gif

I'm also a bigger X-film fan, on balance, than I am of Marvel Studios, and I would say that one of the primary differences in the approach between these "studios," if you can call them that (though in the X-verse it's not the studio so much as Singer and Vaughn specifically), is that in my view, the X-films prioritize dramatic storytelling, while the Marvel Studios films prioritize the spectacle. That isn't to say that First Class doesn't have good action or humor or that Guardians of the Galaxy doesn't have good drama, but I feel they each make tradeoffs and that each "franchise" has its strengths and deficiencies overall.

You mention moving the franchise forward, but in DOFP, we saw very significant character developments with Mystique, Professor X, and Magneto. We also saw a change in events, so that there is a greater possibility for peace between mutants and humans than would otherwise have been the case. To me, that's a pretty major series of changes, in fact, more than you see in the typical Marvel Studios film. But perhaps it is, again, focused more on moving characters forward at the expense of discrete "events." Admittedly, the Singer films aren't spending as much energy trying to forecast future movies by inserting Easter eggs like Wakanda, cameos like Thanos and Warlock's cocoon, etc. I doubt seriously that they think that far ahead, and suspect that the Apocalypse cameo was intentionally very vague.

Didn't Beast explain to her in First Class that her mutant ability slowed down her natural aging? So it makes sense (at least to me) that she would only begin aging at a normal rate after her powers were nullified...

If so it was obviously a retroactive explanation, similar to any others they might try to use to justify Jubilee, Psylocke, Moira, etc. But ultimately I'm agreeing with the naysayers on this issue laugh.png I'm just saying that it doesn't matter to me. Edited by karamazov80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were Jubiliee and Psylocke actually *named* in dialogue onscreen in previous appearances? I thought they were thrown in as easter eggs at the time. In which case, appearing as full fledged characters at a different point in time is ok with me.

Jubilee was named on-screen. Storm calls out to her at some point during X-2 (I believe when the young mutants are being rescued from Stryker's facility. Psylocke wasn't, and frankly I'm a little more accepting of her for that reason (because the X3 Psylocke sucked). But Jubilee, while minor, was specifically pointed out.

It irks me that people like to give a lot of crap to X-Men Origins for such inconsistencies and mistreated characters, when the quote unquote "good" X-Men movies are frankly, just as guilty of such problems. First Class butchered just as many characters as Origins did say Deadpool. Frankly the entire Xavier, Mystique & Magneto triangle that the two movies hinge on is entirely non-existent in the source material, which as a hardcore X-Geek, bugs me just as much as a mistreated Gambit. I'll grant you, First Class felt like a much better -movie- than Origins, but as an adaptation it's just as bad, if not worse. It's X-Men in name and basic premise only.

This entire franchise just screams of... pulling a bunch of familiar characters and basic premises out of a hat randomly, and continuing to make *one more movie* out of them so that they can make some more money and keep the rights. And each time there's less and less stuff in the hat to be pulled, so they've started throwing some names back in, even though they've been used up already... cheating and hoping we don't notice.

And what's worse is no, I don't think they were originally planning a well-thought out and intricate franchise in the same way Marvel did with their cinematic universe, clearly... the problem is now they're trying to make it SEEM like they were to compete with Marvel's cinematic universe. They're trying to patch together a mess to make it look like there's as much world crafting going on in the X-Men franchise as there is in the MCU, the problem is the patchwork doesn't hold up nearly as well when you examine the stitches. I don't even know why they bothered striking Origins from the continuity, half the world doesn't even realize they did, and it's not like it fits any worse than most other examples in the franchise.

I was happy that DOFP looked like it was trying to at least set things back on track... fix some of what was broken about the franchise on the whole... but it seems like Apocalypse is just undoing everything positive I had to say about DOFP, so I'm just pissed about it, lol.

What blows is this franchise really COULD rival the MCU. The X-Men have enough characters, enough splinter teams, side stories, villains, and just main members that they COULD make several different movies, seperate but interwoven, that could be just as expansive and awesome as the MCU. But they're trying to piece it together too late in the game, and building on a rocky foundation. I know I, and several others out there wish that if they aren't letting go of the rights (and why would they?) That they'd at least do a hard reboot and... take some cues from the MCU at crafting a cohesive franchise.

Edited by Gillbob316
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Beast explain to her in First Class that her mutant ability slowed down her natural aging? So it makes sense (at least to me) that she would only begin aging at a normal rate after her powers were nullified...

If so it was obviously a retroactive explanation, similar to any others they might try to use to justify Jubilee, Psylocke, Moira, etc. But ultimately I'm agreeing with the naysayers on this issue laugh.png I'm just saying that it doesn't matter to me.

My point is that someone else tried cleaning up Singer's mess and then he shit all over the rug again. Someone needs to rub his nose in it but I suspect that wouldn't be a deterrant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a really good friend who is 'meh' towards Marvel Studios, and drools over Fox's X-Men universe. It makes for interesting conversations since he and I are somewhat inverted on that front. I like that diversity of interests, because his perspective has helped me level out my feelings towards what I feel is a lot of missed opportunities by Fox. There are things to love about the existing X-Men films if you can overlook the plot holes... That being said, even my friend agrees with me that DoFP fell short of giving the franchise the shot in the arm it really needed. Yes, it regained a foothold in the box office, and showed audiences that its time is not up yet... but it didn't move the series forward enough. In fact, it did quite the opposite, as Singer firmly rooted it in the memory of the stories he told more than a decade ago.

Apocalypse seems to be shaping up to push the franchise in fresh directions, but that future will always be limited by the cherry-picked continuity that is now bleeding through from past films. It needed a harder reset. Instead, we are stuck with problems like the aforementioned displaced birth of Jubilee, etc.

What gets me is thinking about how Singer made a big deal over meeting with James Cameron to discuss time travel mechanics - and then seeing how that still resulted in the mangled continuity we're all getting headaches from.

I'm going to avoid using phrases like 'nuke it from space' and just sit over here in the corner with my fond memories of the 90's X-Men cartoon and Marvel trading cards and that ignorantly blissful feeling I had as an 8 year old who couldn't wait to see how cool Jim Lee was going to make the X-Men look when the next issue came out whistling.gif

I'm also a bigger X-film fan, on balance, than I am of Marvel Studios, and I would say that one of the primary differences in the approach between these "studios," if you can call them that (though in the X-verse it's not the studio so much as Singer and Vaughn specifically), is that in my view, the X-films prioritize dramatic storytelling, while the Marvel Studios films prioritize the spectacle. That isn't to say that First Class doesn't have good action or humor or that Guardians of the Galaxy doesn't have good drama, but I feel they each make tradeoffs and that each "franchise" has its strengths and deficiencies overall.

You mention moving the franchise forward, but in DOFP, we saw very significant character developments with Mystique, Professor X, and Magneto. We also saw a change in events, so that there is a greater possibility for peace between mutants and humans than would otherwise have been the case. To me, that's a pretty major series of changes, in fact, more than you see in the typical Marvel Studios film. But perhaps it is, again, focused more on moving characters forward at the expense of discrete "events." Admittedly, the Singer films aren't spending as much energy trying to forecast future movies by inserting Easter eggs like Wakanda, cameos like Thanos and Warlock's cocoon, etc. I doubt seriously that they think that far ahead, and that the Apocalypse cameo was intentionally very vague.

>>Didn't Beast explain to her in First Class that her mutant ability slowed down her natural aging? So it makes sense (at least to me) that she would only begin aging at a normal rate after her powers were nullified...

If so it was obviously a retroactive explanation, similar to any others they might try to use to justify Jubilee, Psylocke, Moira, etc. But ultimately I'm agreeing with the naysayers on this issue laugh.png I'm just saying that it doesn't matter to me.

All great points, and things that I have considered myself.

One of the things I find value in with the X-Men films is its difference in tone when compared to the MCU. It helps to keep audiences from feeling over-saturated with comic book movies when there is such tonal diversity. Granted, I'm not a huge fan of the particular tone applied in the X-Men films, but that's besides the point wink.png

My comment about the franchise moving forward is directed mainly at the fact that we're still seeing the same core characters dealing with essentially the same types of situations (generally speaking).

The original trilogy focused heavily on Wolverine, Prof X, Magneto and Mystique. Those same characters were again re-established as the main focal point in First Class and subsequently in DoFP (with Wolverine having his own solo film in between, to offset his absence in First Class). They will be taking a bit of a backseat in Apocalypse, from what I understand - Singer has been making comments that the new cast of Cyclops, Jean, Storm, etc will be the future of the franchise. But up until DoFP, we were seeing the same familiar characters in settings that just kept reminding me of the old stories. Contrast that with how Marvel Studios is keeping things 'fresh' with things like the inclusion of space-based stories in a very science-fictiony setting (GotG), the elimination of the MCU's connective tissue via the destruction of SHIELD in a political thriller setting (Winter Soldier), and the upcoming Civil War that will further change the face of Marvel's Cinematic Universe... Not that I'm toting Marvel Studios as the perfect Hollywood machine or anything (they have a lot to criticize themselves), but I feel like the MCU is a more fresh experience in a shorter period of time than the X-Men films. When DoFP was over, I felt like I was right back at the end of X2 (granted, I know that was kinda the intent. Still, it shouldn't remind me of a previous movie in a stagnant way).

Even for all its flaws, when Age of Ultron was over, I wasn't thinking about 2008's Iron Man. I was thinking about what may lie ahead for this new roster of Avengers. I was thinking about how organic this world was feeling, with the old guard beginning the transition of stepping back to make way for the new.

Not that I felt like we needed such a heavy hand pushing us to anticipate future films - but the overall narrative felt like it was progressing. I felt the opposite with DoFP. It was like we were retreading old ground, just with some superficial differences.

Bear in mind that this is all from the perspective of someone who finds the whole of the X-Men films less than enticing. So perhaps what I am looking at as a weakness in storytelling, others might view as a strength.

What blows is this franchise really COULD rival the MCU. The X-Men have enough characters, enough splinter teams, side stories, villains, and just main members that they COULD make several different movies, seperate but interwoven, that could be just as expansive and awesome as the MCU. But they're trying to piece it together too late in the game, and building on a rocky foundation. I know I, and several others out there wish that if they aren't letting go of the rights (and why would they?) That they'd at least do a hard reboot and... take some cues from the MCU at crafting a cohesive franchise.

I think this sums it up well. The X-Men films have great potential, but it feels like Fox just wants to keep spinning its tires without moving the vehicle to new roads...

Edited by Donny B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be hard to argue that the X-franchise wasn't trying, in some fashion, to piggyback on the "universe building" that Marvel Studios did, if for no other reason than we're seeing Deadpool, Gambit, and New Mutants on the horizon. But putting that stuff aside, I don't think the Singer/Vaughn films have been aping that approach. Rather, for better or worse (again depending on your point of view), they're focusing mostly on sequels to a single franchise thus far, not even always knowing if the same creative team would be attached from film to film, while the Marvel Studios stuff is all over the place, in outer space, in Asgard, in Africa, in the city, in the country, under the sea, etc. biggrin.png

I do hear a number of Fox critics saying that this franchise should revert to Marvel, who will do it justice, etc. And my response is what you point out--these are franchises that are handled differently, but putting aside any parochial geek opinions, they are both successful franchises financially and critically. They appeal to different kinds of audiences in some ways, and I think that's a good thing.

Say the X-Men did revert to Marvel Studios, what would happen then? It would have to compete for release slots with all the other franchises being juggled there. Which means fewer X-stories on the screen. Secondly, Feige would insist on those films fitting into the larger narrative, and that would mean less creative freedom on the part of directors and writers, and again, more of the focus on "spectacle" at the expense of other goals. And third, the tone would very likely change (I think Daredevil is a major aberration because it's on TV, and on Netflix, otherwise I suspect it wouldn't be allowed to do the great things it does so well). And long-time readers of comics know that the X-Men isn't the same as other Marvel stuff, and should be darker and edgier. I like that these films are that to some extent.

So, too bad that not everyone can have their way--I would love to see competing X-films from both companies! But ultimately, I am glad things are the way they are for now. Both companies succeed in their respective ways, and on balance the fans are getting whatever they could really ask for, either from Marvel Studios, Fox, or WB.

This entire franchise just screams of... pulling a bunch of familiar characters and basic premises out of a hat randomly, and continuing to make *one more movie* out of them so that they can make some more money and keep the rights. And each time there's less and less stuff in the hat to be pulled, so they've started throwing some names back in, even though they've been used up already... cheating and hoping we don't notice.

I think it's more that the the guys at Fox have historically thought in shorter time horizons than Feige has, than a superficial scheme to keep the rights on their side. As a result, they included characters as throwaways (like White Queen in Origins) who probably shouldn't have been put in that role, and later had to do an about-face. It's also probably the lack of an overall plan guiding all the various franchises. But as I pointed out before, I think there are pros and cons. Several filmmakers have become frustrated working in the Marvel Studios framework and walked (Favreau, Wright, Whedon), apparently in part because they felt too hamstrung by the overall "vision" their films had to fit into. Maybe this makes for better films in the eyes of some, but I think there's something to be said for allowing filmmakers like Vaughn and Singer more free reign. If the Apocalypse film was only being seen as one more stepping stone toward Infinity War, how much threat would you really feel toward Apocalypse? Of course, this is a criticism levied toward Age of Ultron, which felt very by the numbers and anticlimactic to many, given these kinds of contstraints.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with Marvel getting back the mutants and the F4 back is how much they've burned through already in an effort to compensate a whole universe without them, along with downplaying them as much as possible in merchandise and attempting to push them to the side in the comics.

At this point, while i know that marvel could do better justice to the F4, the X-men will stay with Fox for as much as I care. X1, X2, and DoFP are great superhero films to me, and First Class is okay.

Most of these films were created with a single franchise in mind. By the time we were 4 films into X-men, there was no such thing as a cohesive universe. So there was no idea that former characters that someone could want to use later down the line. At this point, you either roll with the retcon punches, or just move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, and I agree about the FF. Unlike the X-Men, we haven't seen a good FF movie yet from Fox, and I'm skeptical that we'll see one anytime soon. But I'll hope for the best. If nothing else though, the Marvel Studios "tone" is much better suited to the FF than X-Men IMO. Further, the FF is one discrete team (or at least, should be), not a sprawling series of teams/characters like X-Men, meaning one FF team every 4 years or so, and crossovers with others here and there would be a more logical way of handling it. So, if they were to go back to Marvel Studios I wouldn't be upset at all.

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


×
×
  • Create New...