Posts
Panel Discussion: STATE OF THE MOVIE INDUSTRY = Report # 15 on the 45th CHICAGO INT'L FILM FESTIVAL in 2009
… The Panel discussion was held in the elegantly-appointed screening room (with cushion lounge chairs) at theWIT hotel, & was basically aimed at “accredited industry members” rather than the general public (& thus this may be the ONLY “accounting” you will see about the event!)...
… The audience consisted mainly of people involved with the 45th Film Festival in Chicago (both staff & special guests including from films being shown at the Fest), & was made possible by a special grant from the Consulate General of the Federative Republic of BRAZIL…
… Paula commented on how she feels Chicago is “a WONDERFUL Festival, & I’ve been coming for many, many years” because she considers it to be one of the “most pristine” of the fests in film circles. She thanked the Brazilian government for its help with today’s Panel, & introduced the 3 other Panel members:
… CRAIG EMANUEL was introduced as someone who’s head of the West Coast offices of Loeb & Loeb, which represents well-known entertainment clients such as Tom Hanks, Gary Oldman, directors such as Robert Rodriguez & Tony Gilroy, + also producers & writers. She spoke of how Craig (from Australia) has been involved with the licensing of Distribution Management, and represented advertising from clients such as BMW, thus “marrying film and BRANDED products”. Also, he frequently works with young INDIE filmmakers, & helps finds ways to FINANCE films in creative ways. He’s a legal counsel to the Sundance Institute & is on the advisory board for the Los Angeles Film Festival…
… Next, she introduced RICHARD FAY: He’s President of the Domestic Theatrical distribution for SUMMIT ENTERTAINMENT which backed & represents the “TWILIGHT” franchise of films which had already generated a $ 380 million gross from the first film in the series. Mr. Fay has more than 35 years of experience in the movie industry, including being Sr. VP for SONY PICTURES RELEASING, head film buyer for UNITED ARTISTS THEATERS, President of AMC Film Marketing (responsible for buying & in-theater marketing of films), & head of his own FAY ENTERPRISES…
… Finally, she introduced RICK NICITA: He’s COO & Co-Chairman of MORGAN CREEK PRODUCTIONS, &, “The next important title is, he happens to be my HUSBAND—” for the past 25 years! As she said, “I ‘snagged’ him, & I am thrilled” about that fact!… In the past, he also worked at CREATIVE ARTISTS, where he headed the talent department & represented clients such as Tom Cruise [= her brother!], Nicole Kidman, Al Pacino, Jeff Bridges, Anthony Hopkins, Kevin Costner, Kurt Russell, Garry Marshall, Rob Reiner and others. As a flyer given out to attendees says, he’s “been listed as one of the most INFLUENTIAL people in Hollywood by Premiere Magazine and Entertainment Weekly.”… And, she added proudly that she & Rick have “2 wonderful sons”…
… To start the discussion of “where is the industry GOING” in the future, Paula pointed out about the business that “it’s always TRANSFORMING”, & feels we’re at “a threshold of CHANGE”. She wondered, “Are we paying too much attention to TECHNOLOGY?”, & are MARKETING costs too high for films nowadays?… “What does the future hold for TALENT?… Who are the new movie stars?…”
… CRAIG offered his feeling that, “The ‘STAR’ system will always drive the industry to some degree—”, witness the “High School Musical” series of films. In the past, producers felt you could use a “big” star & be assured that your film would be a hit to some level, but that’s CHANGED somewhat in the recent period, in that some films with big names have done much more poorly than expected. Nowadays, audience members use SOCIAL NETWORKS [“Facebook”, MySpace”, “Twitter”, etc.], & those can affect films “immediately” as to how they do in the marketplace…
… He feels there are only a SMALL number of stars, such as Will Smith & Tom Hanks, who can THEMSELVES assure that a film will be at least a bit of a “hit”… But, large UPFRONT fees to stars make “little SENSE” nowadays. He feels CONCEPTS are more important aspects of films, as are “brands”…
… RICK offered the thought that he DOESN’T see any death of the industry, & feels people want to be in THEATERS (rather than just at home) to have the movie-going experience for the most part… It’s his opinion that, if filmmakers wisely go WITH technology (rather than trying to fight what’s new), “it’ll be EVER-EXPANDING” as an industry…
… He spoke of having been an AGENT for talent in the past. Today, there are so MANY (so-called) stars & “you KNOW too much about them” from the numerous tabloids & [gossip-style] TV shows, that you regularly can “see” them at everyday places like Starbucks to the point that the star “mystique is GONE” from them… In the 1940’s, if a star did something unwise or fell down, those events were kept “HIDDEN”-- but, the opposite is true today..
… Rick feels that, “There’s a great ADVANTAGE to stars—” in certain roles, especially in that “you can get a certain opacity” from some. In his opinion, “ATTENTION will be paid” to films by major stars, because, if you’re utilizing someone like MERYL STREEP, people have come to feel it’s likely that “you’ll get a great performance” from such people, no matter the subject of the film in question [& thus that’ll at least initially drive people to such movies]…
… Paula asked RICHARD (whom she usually referred to as “Richie”), how has the distribution marketplace CHANGED in recent years? He replied that, “I see stars as an ‘INSURANCE policy’—” in many ways, even if they are “up-&-down” type stars like Bruce Willis…
… He revealed that he had [by early October] fielded a bunch of calls from exhibitors about the ORIGINAL “TWILIGHT” film [from 2008], wanting him to RE-RELEASE it on November 19th, the day before the 2nd film in the series (“NEW MOON”) opens, seeing it as a “social engagement” before the new release. He advised that they WILL be doing that for them [as they indeed did do]…
… Richie felt that the overall box office for films has been very good this year. It seems that, even with the bad economy, people want to find a way to RELAX-- & films help them do that, which is why the income from films has held up. He joked, maybe people feel that, even if it’s hard paying things like the rent, if need be, “you can move into the BUCKET” of popcorn if things get even worse!…
… He said, he’s been around in the industry since 1970. He remembers (-- as do I --) how the film industry initially felt that CABLE TV would be bad for them, & that Betamax & VCRs would be horrible for them as would DVDs-- but, instead, all those things ended up FEEDING & EXPANDING the industry! He feels that, going to films at movie theaters gets people out of the house which people need, & he believes that the industry “will be GREAT” in the long run…
… Paula wondered, what will things like INTERNET distribution do to the industry? How will it likely affect it?… Richard volunteered that, while there’s a “piracy” potential to such distribution & “it’s got to be MANAGED”, he feels that it will be handled in time. Right now, he strongly believes that the movie-going audience wants to get OUT of the house far more than it wants to see it on computers or small screens like iPods…
… Richie feels certain films made for super-large screens like James Cameron’s “AVATAR” are going to drive people to theaters that can show them that way [with upgraded technology like 3-D]. As to Cameron, he said, “He believes in the process & in you, the audience—”, & it’s his personal opinion that such attitudes will resonate with the public…
… RICK weighed in with his feeling that, “You’ll have more & more CHOICE of platforms—” in the future, including the possibility that certain low-budget films will be made with the thought that, even if they don’t see a wide theatrical release, they could be made because it’d be expected that they “may play better on a SMALL screen” [such as watching it via a DVD on a TV at home]…
… CRAIG volunteered his opinion that, [to keep the industry healthy], it’s best that the public have an especially COMFORTABLE theater in which to see films. He feels certain films (such as “indies”) might have a purposely LIMITED theatrical release, with the idea that they’ll likely do better when released onto VIDEO or to NETFLIX or the like…
… In his opinion, overall, “You’ve got to make the movie-going experience BETTER than at HOME—” for a film to do really well-- via using things like “reserved” seating (as done in his native Australia & certain places here). In general, in the U.S. today, “The ‘ART HOUSE’ experience is often NOT pleasant—” in most U.S. theaters. He feels that, as in Australia, it’s often helpful to have some LUXURY-type theaters, since “it adds” to the movie-going experience for the public [as something ‘special” that can’t be duplicated at home]…
… RICK pointed out that, unlike in certain other countries, movie producers in the U.S. CAN’T OWN movie theaters where their films might play… RICHIE pointed out that, while a LOT of Art Houses are fairly run-down here, that’s being improved in certain locations of AMC & REGAL & others that are striving to play “smaller” films in “a quality way”. He agreed that such films need to be “promoted” by such chains, & that’s being done by devoting certain specific well-kept-up screens in their multiplexes to such films…
… Richie feels that it’s unfeasible to have, say, an 18-year-old kid trying to do it “all” in showing Art House type films, like starting the film on an “automatic” machine & then going down to sell popcorn & tickets: it’s “frustrating” that certain small theaters are at times “cutting things to the bone” rather than showing “art house” films in a Quality way. For example, [the highly-regarded-by-critics film] “HURT LOCKER” plays to a comparatively “small” audience, but it’s a movie that “needs to play on a LARGE screen” [such as in a modern multiplex] to be properly appreciated…
… PAULA posed the question, are we focusing TOO MUCH on platforms rather than on the CONTENT in films?… CRAIG felt that, “people CARE” about the content of films, or else you’ll see “a large dropoff” in attendance due to the quick “words” spread by people using social networks shortly after films open. He feels, “We still need to make GOOD films—“, altho NOT ALL need to be released “theatrically”, as certain “smaller” ones might be better-served by being targeted for direct-to-VIDEO release and the like…
… He tells filmmakers that, “they need to have as many EYEBALLS” as possible view what they create, whether that be by theatrical release or NETFLIX or some other venue. Even if there’s not a huge number of people seeing what’s made, by putting the film “out there”, “you’ll have a larger audience” for a FUTURE film you can make…
… RICK offered his thoughts that, ECONOMICS very much control film-making nowadays, & “MARKETING costs are huge” -- but, you still “have to CREATE” that marketing to properly sell a film in today’s market… He offered that, in some circles, there’s a “FEAR that the movie may LOSE money”, to the point that some filmmakers may try to make a “SAFER” type film than they might personally like. But, he feels that, “Great movies, like great art, come from taking CHANCES—”, & he’d like to see people take such chances in general-- altho today’s financial situation make that HARDER to do…
… PAULA wondered, did the panel think there were TOO MANY movies being made now, especially in that film-makers are in-effect being given just “2 weeks to ‘PROVE’ yourself” in the marketplace?… RICHIE said, he feels that exhibitors today very much pay ATTENTION to things said on FACEBOOK & TWITTER & the like, in that it causes them to make quick decisions on whether to “hold over” a film to show the public. They feel that they can promptly “judge” how a film will do by simply looking at the first day’s matinee gross out of New York…
… He feels that, if an exhibitor is buying a film for 1500 screens he represents, if a film comes in at “10th place” during a given week, it’s likely that “you’re OUT” of being held-over for another week. He personally DOESN’T LIKE that, as certain films “don’t have a chance to ‘breathe’ & GROW—” as certain good ones need to do: It’s almost ‘IMPULSE’ buying… and that’s NOT good for the industry” in general…
… RICK commented on how various publications & media outlets announce the “Top 10” grossing films nowadays, which didn’t use to be the case in the not-distant past. In his opinion, “that’s DETRIMENTAL to the industry” in that, when a film is described as coming in at “a disappointing 10th place”, it’s very “frustrating” that certain distributors will then AVOID such a movie, altho it may be a FINE film that could grow to reach a much larger public if given time and a chance…
… CRAIG remarked that, he finds it sad that it’s HARD to find distributors for smaller “INDIE” films today: If a film costs like $ 10 million to make, they’re often lucky to sell it for $ 5 million [up-front]. Such filmmakers will often take their film to various FESTIVALS such as Sundance or Toronto, hoping to sell the film there. However, there are maybe 300 films being shown at such venues, & 200 of them are “available” for sale to distributors there. But, with today’s economy, actual SALES there can be counted “on 1 hand” nowadays. Thus, “You can’t COUNT” on much from attending such festivals” in the form of actual sales…
… He said that, “you can only cut salaries just so low” in order to try to reduce your costs in the first place; thus you’re limited in what can be done to try to make your production more economically feasible. He expects that film-makers will have to in-effect “SHARE the RISK” with studios and distributors as to the “P&A” (Prints & Advertising) costs of films…
… And, he expects that filmmakers will increasingly need to carefully try to hone-in on who their “TARGET” audience is. For example, the makers of the “BROTHERS AT WAR” documentary found a MILITARY audience would be likely to back the concept of their film, & they did indeed support the movie by their attendance. He feels that “People are going to have to be CREATIVE—” in how they go about making & distributing their films. PAULA agreed, saying, “Creativity is in greater DEMAND than ever—” re making & promoting films in today’s tough economy…
… PAULA asked RICK a question, pointing out how his MORGAN CREEK is in an unusual position via the way “you’re producers with MONEY”, in that they SELF-FINANCE films they want to make. He agreed, saying, it’s an “old-fashioned” way of doing such things, by financing their OWN movies, including the full P&A costs, as was done with “ACE VENTURA”, “ROBIN HOOD” & others. They’re able to use “old-fashioned BANK credit lines”, & he’s fortunate to have a partner who’s personally wealthy & willing to “take GAMBLES” on things they believe in. They distribute thru Universal, but, “The huge risk & huge reward is OURS—” if things turn out well…
… PAULA spoke to RICHIE about the EFFICIENCY utilized by his SUMMIT company, in the way they process data & statistics. He agreed that they were among the FIRST companies to widely use data from modern sources: He gathered together a bunch of comparatively “young people” who have a strong knowledge of “technical systems” for using & tracking marketing for their projects…
… He spoke of how, in 1971, he remembers how a company he was with used 6 people to get grosses for films via making direct individual phone calls to many exhibitors and the like around the country…. But, nowadays, his people use modern tools like Blackberries & Cell phones to gather details on the position of specific films at megaplexes on a Sunday nite, using super SPEED to gather & extrapolate their data for upcoming marketing and the like…
… Richie recalled how, when a “HARRY POTTER” film was moved BACK as to its scheduled opening, his people quickly moved their “TWILIGHT” film into the in-effect “vacated” time period in November [of ’08, from a planned December opening], which worked out tremendously well: “we’re NIMBLE, we’re QUICK—”, & that type of effort has paid-off well for them. His staff consists of just 16 people, but major companies use “3 times” as many people as they do to deal with films having smaller grosses & locations. His people helped to quickly get 6000 prints of their film into 4000 locations, which vastly helped the eventual success they enjoyed…
… PAULA asked CRAIG his feelings about the future of INTERNATIONAL marketing & the financing of U.S. “INDIE” films… He said, he feels that a potential FOREIGN market is “critical in FINANCING” indie films nowadays. He cited how Richie’s SUMMIT has a GREAT foreign marketing setup for films, sometimes concentrating on just a LOCAL “niche” market for certain films made overseas, in some cases marketing movies that don’t even open in the U.S. at all…
… Craig feels that getting U.S. distribution is “important” for most films, especially nowadays: it used to be that Japan would account for like 10% of a worldwide gross of a film. But, things have changed so much with the economy today that, you couldn’t rely on ANY percentage from Japan [& other foreign places] at Cannes, & thus sales of films to distributors there were way DOWN this year… Today, you can only likely rely on getting “30-40%” of your overall gross from foreign distribution. Since so much is unknown in today’s economic situation, the ability to sell a film based on potential foreign income is “very CHALLENGING”…
… Craig feels SUMMIT is handling things in an especially smart way-- looking at “small SEGMENTS of a country”. For example, while it’s hard for most U.S. films to go over very well in CHINA, their own local Chinese films generate huge grosses due to the massive size of the movie-going population. Also, certain other countries like France & Germany have locally-produced films that draw large grosses in their HOME countries, & SUMMIT has worked wisely in buying rights to certain “local” films [for possible foreign distribution] & also helping promote such films in their local markets…
… PAULA asked her husband RICK about the potential “power shift” in the industry… He commented that, in the 1980’s it was the talent AGENCIES that held the power in putting together ‘deals” based on their stable of well-known actor clients, but that didn’t last very long. Nowadays, most studios are owned by “CONGLOMERATES”-- of which the studios are usually comparatively SMALL divisions [with little real power to “push thru” projects they want]…
… Rick said that, FOREIGN grosses used to be an “afterthought” to the studios. But then, a number of pictures started to have larger FOREIGN grosses than domestic ones, & that view changed. Nowadays, economics has “STOPPED” a lot of planned projects. He personally feels that, “CREATIVE talent will be the power” in the future, with those creative people being the ones studios go “after” to get films from, & the studios will mainly just serve as DISTRIBUTION centers for such products that OTHER film-making people will provide…
… Richie said, his company wants film-makers to give them a PERCENTAGE [of the gross] for distributing films they have faith in… Paula pointed out how, in that regard, “You made ‘Twilight’ HAPPEN—”…
… CRAIG offered his thoughts that, acting talent will have to CHANGE from a “pay me to show up” attitude, to one of being part of a “truly COLLABORATIVE” effort. In other words, with a reduced number of films being made, actors CAN’T expect to get ridiculously-high advances of “20 against 20 anymore”-- altho agents, naturally, don’t want to TELL their clients that fact of life!…
… It’s his feeling that, ALL involved in the film-making need to have a “VESTED interest in the FUTURE” of the industry, for the good of all involved. He observed that talent will likely start to CUT their fees, since that’s NEEDED for the industry to SURVIVE [& hopefully prosper]…
… PAULA commented on how the panel had covered “a little about a LOT of things”, & then opened up the floor to a Q&A session with the audience… A guy commented on how a lot of RESEARCH seems to be done nowadays before a film is projected to go ahead. He wondered, do the conglomerates owning studios LEVERAGE DATA properly to reduce risk and increase the likely return on film projects? One panel member commented on how the big studios have often accepted “ABSURD fees” by talent [& that’s not very realistic]…
… To a question about marketing certain films in “ADVANCE” [& how to be more successful in film-making], Richie Fay remarked that, as has been said before, “The PLAY’S the thing… You start with a GOOD STORY—” as a basis for making a worthy film, & then you utilize people you feel can make the story “WORK”…
… He said, you can study how certain past films have grossed [as a plan for the future], but you can easily “MIS-READ” things that way. He cited an example: COCA-COLA was amazingly successful at marketing its products, & decided at one point to buy COLUMBIA studios because they’d had a lot of recent film successes. They then “studied” things, hired someone who was supposedly the best Director at the time, hired the best Actor at the time-- & promptly made the film “ISHTAR”!…
… To a question posed by the audience, RICK said, as to the idea of reading SCRIPTS submitted by 3rd parties, “It’s a business of the GUT—”, & he feels you need to trust in things you YOURSELF would like to see made… Regarding a question about “BRANDING”, he said, “Is there something WRONG with being paid for ‘PERFORMANCE’--?” Not necessarily… CRAIG commented, you might be able to have a certain successful “branding” by basing a film on a successful BOOK or VIDEO game or the like…
… Craig spoke of how, at times, certain directors purposely “LEAK” tidbits of what they’re doing, citing how the director of the NBC TV series “GLEE” made songs from the show available to the public on iTUNES before the show was widely seen, & “BUILT an audience” for it that way, having 3 songs in the Top 20. Creative branding efforts like that were “driving people to WATCH the show”…
… A lady spoke of the TAX CREDITS being offered for film productions, such as the 30% from the State of Illinois. The panel felt that’s very IMPORTANT to where & how certain films are made nowadays. RICK cited how Drew Barrymore’s film “WHIP IT!” was set in Texas, but actually filmed in Michigan because of the high tax credit it provided… PAULA pointed out how certain filmmakers at times even change the SETTING of a planned film, depending on where they feel they get the best deal to make it…
… Sitting to my left, film producer JAMES CHOI stood up & asked a question. He spoke of he was the producer of the Festival entry film “MADE IN CHINA”, & spoke of the difficulty in getting DISTRIBUTION of certain films, especially independent ones such as his. He wondered if going to Festivals -- which he’d done – might not only help in the SALE of such a film to distributors, but possibly to a larger company buying it with the plan to RE-MAKE it with bigger “stars” or the like?…
… RICK said, it’s always POSSIBLE that might happen from going to a Festival. But, sometimes, buyers see a film they like that they find best to NOT remake. He cited the example of “PARANORMAL ACTIVITY”, which, according to many who’d seen it, has “seemingly NO production values”, but which was acquired to be distributed “AS-IS”, feeling the low-budget feel of the film would -- like the “BLAIR WITCH PROJECT” -- be a “SELLING” point in itself to the public. And, that’s exactly what’s happened with it!…
… CRAIG offered his opinion that, Fests are very IMPORTANT to the potential sales of films, especially ‘small” indie ones. He feels, it always HELPS a potential sale if a film can get a WIN at some major Festival-- but, “sadly, it’s not necessarily ENOUGH” in many cases re helping MARKET your film for distribution…
… His feeling is, while “decision-making” buyers go to most major film Fests, some also go to smaller ones like Seattle, New York & Palm Springs because they’re known to be “very GOOD” ones for seeing creative work. Also, “there’s a Fest going on somewhere ALL the time”. But, it’s important to not OVER-play your film by putting it in too many different Fests. Overall, he feels that, Fests are a GOOD platform to get “VISIBILITY”, not just for the current film but for potential FUTURE films you might make…
… I then asked a question (as Paula indicated they were working to END the panel discussion): I cited how I’d recently commented in a film review that there seemed to be a big increase in recent films utilizing what I called “GRATUITOUSLY GRAPHIC pointlessly VICIOUS VIOLENCE”, such as in “LAW ABIDING CITIZEN”, & in “ANTICHRIST” that was scheduled for this year’s Chicago Fest. I’d commented on that to a reviewer friend, & asked if he felt that was being done in hopes of making their films “STAND-OUT” to the public in a “SENSATIONALIST” way, to try to be “noticed” in a glut of other film releases. My friend agreed that was LIKELY the case, & I wondered what THEIR thoughts were on that…
… RICK & RICHIE commented (“back & forth”) that, they feel films are being made to “REFLECT” what they feel the public WANTS to see, that filmmakers are NOT trying to ‘encourage” violence so much as to give the filmgoers what they’ve shown they “WANT” to see, to thus try to increase the returns from their movies… They sort of implied they MIGHT be purposely sensationalistic, but didn’t DIRECTLY address that point…
… Since it had been made clear they wanted to END things in the panel, & since the 2 others on the panel didn’t offer ANY thoughts on the matter, I “dropped” the subject-- tho I’d been sincerely “tempted” to point out, what’s to say the film-makers were “RIGHT” in what they thought the public “wanted” to see (“down the road” when their film would be released)?… And, why couldn’t the film-makers endeavor to do things in a more “CREATIVE” way than simply going for the “easy” choice of “GORE” and / or BRUTALITY?!…
… Paula said, to wrap up, she wondered what the panel might want to offer as some “final” thoughts. RICK said, he wants “to see more RISK-TAKING” in the making of films, rather than the makers “using the lowest common denominator” in movies… RICHIE said, he’d like to see “an opening of the CREATIVE purse-strings” in film-making…
… PAULA offered thanks to the Festival’s founder MICHAEL J. KUTZA (who’d spoken to the crowd at one point earlier), & commented on how she’d known him for “a LONG time” during the 45 years the Festival has been around…
… After the closing of the main discussion, I commented to producer JAMES CHOI on how much I’d LIKED his film; he was surprised -- & pleased -- to hear I’d already seen it, at an ADVANCE screening the Fest had held for the Press [on October 2nd]. We discussed his movie a bit, & I wished him well with the 3 screenings of it scheduled during the Fest…
… I then went down & talked to the PANEL members (including RICK) at one point, remarking on how I’d enjoyed the talk. They agreeably posed for some individual PHOTOS I’d asked for (planned for eventual posting on the ITalkFilm.com web-site)… I commented to Paula on how I’d “almost” met [her brother] TOM when he was honored by the Festival [in 1993], & also got a photo of her with Mr. KUTZA (who I’ve myself known for many years)…
… I spoke to RICHARD FAY about how I chanced to be carrying a promotional green-screened “TWILIGHT” photo featuring me “talking” to its star Robert Pattinson, as given out by the AMC chain at a recent convention. He held up that item for the photo (a copy of which I promised to send him), & I wished him well with the upcoming November 20th release of the 2nd (“NEW MOON”) picture in the franchise…
… To CRAIG, I commented on how I’d recently attended one of the “luxury” type theaters he’d talked about, namely Gold Class Cinemas owned by the Australian company Village Roadshow, & commented on how I & those with me had been very favorably impressed with the experience, finding it even more “impressive” than the film itself we were seeing [namely, “Surrogates”]!… He was familiar with them, & knew how they were to open a location in the L.A. area, & we discussed things about the concept…
… All in all, I felt it was a fascinating discussion from some important, WELL-VERSED industry people (& I hope you found it interesting to read)!…
... MY RATING: 9.00 of 10 stars
[ NOTE: You can easily SHARE this Posting with your friends or family by sending them an automatic e-Mail LINK via clicking on the “M” button in the lower left-hand corner under “VOICE OF SILENCE” below... ]
(o_
/\
/\
= = = … ( <> ^ <> ) ...
No comments:
Post a Comment