Friday, April 22, 2011
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
SCREAM 4
SCREAM 4
DIRECTOR: Wes Craven
WRITER: Kevin Williamson (with rumored rewrites by Ehren Kruger and others)
CAST: Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Erik Knudsen, Anthony Anderson, Marley Shelton, Mary McDonnel, Anna Paquin, Kristen Bell
*NOTE* Review contains very minor spoilers**
To be blunt, there is absolutely no reason for Scream 4 to ever have been made. Sure, it's a reasonably fun and slightly above-average teen slasher. It isn't terrible. But it just pales in comparison to the first three movies (yes even the much-maligned Scream 3).
Here's the thing: remember how the first three Scream movies were innovative, were full of fun characters and witty banter, and usually had some surprises up their sleeves? Well, kiss all that goodbye! Scream 4 is rather dull, by the numbers, and just has a "been-there-done-that" feel to it. Nothing that happens in this movie will surprise you. Even the eventual revealing of the killers' identities feels routine...because by now it IS routine. This is the 4th movie in this series. You would think that Wes Craven & Kevin Williamson, being as 'horror savvy' as they are, would realize that in order to be reverent (or even to justify it's existence), Scream 4 needed to mix things up a little. Nope!
To keep things simple (which matches the spirit of the movie), I'll just list the major reasons why Scream 4 doesn't really work.
1. Scream 4 has nothing new to say...about horror movies, or anything else.
The first Scream deconstructed slasher movie cliches. Scream 2 played with sequel cliches. Scream 3 targeted movie trilogy cliches.
So what's the target in Scream 4? Well, it's supposed to be remakes...which is a great idea! The endless procession of (mostly) subpar horror remakes have been the bane of film geeks' existence for some time now. Unfortunately, Scream 4 never really has anything clever or insightful to say about remakes. Characters will occasionally make an offhand remark about horror remakes, and that's about it. Really, the "remake" angle is just an excuse for the new string of murders in Woodsboro.
And another thing: the movie's tagline is "New Decade. New Rules". Okay...so what are the new rules? Well, there really aren't any! Aside from one of the 'movie geek' characters saying "The unexpected is the new cliche", there isn't even any discussion of any "new rules".
Towards the end, the movie attempts to make a half-heated statement about the new generation's obsession with celebrity...but just like the 'remake' angle, it doesn't really go anywhere.
2. The characters are dull.
The three returning stars (Campbell, Arquette, and Cox) all slide easily back into their characters, but none of them is really given anything to do and none of their characters are expanded upon at all. Of the three, only Cox's Gale Weathers is given any good lines or scenes.
As for the new characters, Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) is the ONLY one who leaves any impression at all. She's funny and very, very sexy.
All the others are just dull. The other Scream sequels (again, even Part 3) were filled with fun supporting characters; not the case here. The teen boyfriend was completely generic, and the two 'movie geek' guys were a piss-poor replacement for Randy Meeks. The one who's constantly recording everything (Erik Knudsen) was annoying as hell - Randy wouldn't have even hung out with this guy.
Anthony Anderson and Mary McDonnell are completely wasted, and Marley Shelton was pretty awful, sad to say. Her character is the kind of smokin' hot female cop that only exits in movies, and she's made into such an obvious red herring that it's ridiculous.
3. Scream 4 plays things WAY too safe, and offers no surprises.
As expressed earlier, Scream 4 is completely lacking in the fun twists and turns of the original movies. The whole thing just feels dull, uninspired, and kind of clunky.
Even the kills are completely telegraphed. In the first three Screams, the kills were usually always pretty sudden and unexpected. In Scream 4, you can see each death scene coming from a mile away. A woman walks into a dark, deserted parking garage? Yep, she's about to die. A couple of inconsequential supporting characters are sitting in a car talking? Can you tell they're about to get attacked by Ghostface? Come on! What happened to the Scream movies being fresh and innovative?
Also, without trying to spoil anything, let's just say that at about the halfway point in the movie, it becomes pretty obvious that some of the characters (about three of them, to be exact) will always be "safe". No matter what....no matter how many other people are getting slaughtered around them....these characters will always survive Ghostface's attacks and will never die. Pretty effective way to kill the tension in the movie, Craven & Williamson! Again, this is the 4th movie in this series. In order for the movie to feel fresh, chances needed to be taken, and things needed to be mixed up a little. Sadly, nothing of the sort happens here.
So we eventually get the now-obligatory "killers reveal themselves" scene, and even that feels perfunctory. The killers' motivation seemed a little flimsy to me at first, but really it's no more implausible than the motivations of past Scream killers. (NOTE: Yes there is more than one killer. Is that really a "spoiler" at this point in the series?)
To be fair, things actually pick up a little after the killers reveal themselves - mostly because one of them goes completely batshit crazy! The whole last sequence with this character is actually pretty fun; it could've been enough to almost save the movie IF a more capable actor/actress had played the part.
When all is said and done, Scream 4 is a slightly above-average modern teen slasher. If it were not a Scream sequel, that would be fine. The problem is, the Scream name has a certain pedigree of quality attached to it, and Scream 4 sadly does not live up to the name.
DIRECTOR: Wes Craven
WRITER: Kevin Williamson (with rumored rewrites by Ehren Kruger and others)
CAST: Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Erik Knudsen, Anthony Anderson, Marley Shelton, Mary McDonnel, Anna Paquin, Kristen Bell
*NOTE* Review contains very minor spoilers**
To be blunt, there is absolutely no reason for Scream 4 to ever have been made. Sure, it's a reasonably fun and slightly above-average teen slasher. It isn't terrible. But it just pales in comparison to the first three movies (yes even the much-maligned Scream 3).
Here's the thing: remember how the first three Scream movies were innovative, were full of fun characters and witty banter, and usually had some surprises up their sleeves? Well, kiss all that goodbye! Scream 4 is rather dull, by the numbers, and just has a "been-there-done-that" feel to it. Nothing that happens in this movie will surprise you. Even the eventual revealing of the killers' identities feels routine...because by now it IS routine. This is the 4th movie in this series. You would think that Wes Craven & Kevin Williamson, being as 'horror savvy' as they are, would realize that in order to be reverent (or even to justify it's existence), Scream 4 needed to mix things up a little. Nope!
To keep things simple (which matches the spirit of the movie), I'll just list the major reasons why Scream 4 doesn't really work.
1. Scream 4 has nothing new to say...about horror movies, or anything else.
The first Scream deconstructed slasher movie cliches. Scream 2 played with sequel cliches. Scream 3 targeted movie trilogy cliches.
So what's the target in Scream 4? Well, it's supposed to be remakes...which is a great idea! The endless procession of (mostly) subpar horror remakes have been the bane of film geeks' existence for some time now. Unfortunately, Scream 4 never really has anything clever or insightful to say about remakes. Characters will occasionally make an offhand remark about horror remakes, and that's about it. Really, the "remake" angle is just an excuse for the new string of murders in Woodsboro.
And another thing: the movie's tagline is "New Decade. New Rules". Okay...so what are the new rules? Well, there really aren't any! Aside from one of the 'movie geek' characters saying "The unexpected is the new cliche", there isn't even any discussion of any "new rules".
Towards the end, the movie attempts to make a half-heated statement about the new generation's obsession with celebrity...but just like the 'remake' angle, it doesn't really go anywhere.
2. The characters are dull.
The three returning stars (Campbell, Arquette, and Cox) all slide easily back into their characters, but none of them is really given anything to do and none of their characters are expanded upon at all. Of the three, only Cox's Gale Weathers is given any good lines or scenes.
As for the new characters, Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) is the ONLY one who leaves any impression at all. She's funny and very, very sexy.
All the others are just dull. The other Scream sequels (again, even Part 3) were filled with fun supporting characters; not the case here. The teen boyfriend was completely generic, and the two 'movie geek' guys were a piss-poor replacement for Randy Meeks. The one who's constantly recording everything (Erik Knudsen) was annoying as hell - Randy wouldn't have even hung out with this guy.
Anthony Anderson and Mary McDonnell are completely wasted, and Marley Shelton was pretty awful, sad to say. Her character is the kind of smokin' hot female cop that only exits in movies, and she's made into such an obvious red herring that it's ridiculous.
3. Scream 4 plays things WAY too safe, and offers no surprises.
As expressed earlier, Scream 4 is completely lacking in the fun twists and turns of the original movies. The whole thing just feels dull, uninspired, and kind of clunky.
Even the kills are completely telegraphed. In the first three Screams, the kills were usually always pretty sudden and unexpected. In Scream 4, you can see each death scene coming from a mile away. A woman walks into a dark, deserted parking garage? Yep, she's about to die. A couple of inconsequential supporting characters are sitting in a car talking? Can you tell they're about to get attacked by Ghostface? Come on! What happened to the Scream movies being fresh and innovative?
Also, without trying to spoil anything, let's just say that at about the halfway point in the movie, it becomes pretty obvious that some of the characters (about three of them, to be exact) will always be "safe". No matter what....no matter how many other people are getting slaughtered around them....these characters will always survive Ghostface's attacks and will never die. Pretty effective way to kill the tension in the movie, Craven & Williamson! Again, this is the 4th movie in this series. In order for the movie to feel fresh, chances needed to be taken, and things needed to be mixed up a little. Sadly, nothing of the sort happens here.
So we eventually get the now-obligatory "killers reveal themselves" scene, and even that feels perfunctory. The killers' motivation seemed a little flimsy to me at first, but really it's no more implausible than the motivations of past Scream killers. (NOTE: Yes there is more than one killer. Is that really a "spoiler" at this point in the series?)
To be fair, things actually pick up a little after the killers reveal themselves - mostly because one of them goes completely batshit crazy! The whole last sequence with this character is actually pretty fun; it could've been enough to almost save the movie IF a more capable actor/actress had played the part.
When all is said and done, Scream 4 is a slightly above-average modern teen slasher. If it were not a Scream sequel, that would be fine. The problem is, the Scream name has a certain pedigree of quality attached to it, and Scream 4 sadly does not live up to the name.
Friday, April 15, 2011
PUNISHER: WAR ZONE (2008)
PUNISHER: WAR ZONE (2008)
DIRECTOR: Lexi Alexander
CAST: Ray Stevenson, Dominic West, Doug Hutchison, Julie Benz, Wayne Knight, Colin Salmon, Dash Mihok
This is the third damn time that Hollywood has attempted a movie adaption of the Marvel Comics vigilante character (he's not really a 'superhero') The Punisher.
First there was the 1989 Dolph Lundgren version, which I admit I haven't seen in its entirety but based on the bits and pieces I have seen, looks pretty much like your average late '80s low-budget action flick except that the hero happens to be wearing the Punisher emblem on his shirt.
Then there was the 2004 version starring Thomas Jane, who was surprisingly effective in the role. To be fair, the Thomas Jane Punisher really wasn't bad....as a noir-ish revenge drama. The problem is, it wasn't much of a Punisher movie. It was hampered by too slow a pace, an incredibly non-threatening villain in John Travolta, and a complete lack of action. The Punisher didn't really get down to any "punishing" until the last 15 minutes of the movie, and by then it was too little too late.
Which brings us to 2008's Punisher: War Zone. So what's the verdict?
Well, the good news is this is definitely the balls-out Punisher flick that we didn't get in the Thomas Jane version. There's plenty of bone-crunching, blood-splattering action and carnage here. In fact, it almost rivals a slasher flick in terms of brutal violence.
The bad news is there's WAY too much emphasis on goofy comic relief, and it really ruins would could have been the first bonafide kick-ass Punisher movie.
First off, Ray Stevenson (HBO's "Rome", The Other Guys, The Book Of Eli, and most recently another Marvel adaption, Thor) is pretty good as Frank Castle/The Punisher. He doesn't give the character the pathos that Thomas Jane did, but he fits the bill just fine. It's not like this is a very demanding role or anything. Unlike the Jane version, The Punisher here is a gruff, one-note killing machine, which in fairness to Stevenson doesn't give him much opportunity to add much in the way of memorable touches. But he still gives his own spin on the character mainly through physical acting. I love how he just nonchalantly snaps his nose back into place after it's dislocated by a bad guy.
And the action and violence...MY LORD! There is LOADS of action in this flick, and I can honestly say without exaggeration or hyperbole, that Punisher: War Zone is the most ridiculously violent mainstream movie since Paul Verhoeven's RoboCop or Total Recall. Honestly, the Punisher puts Jason Voorhees to shame in this flick. Say what you will about War Zone, but nobody can complain that this Punisher isn't violent enough! Some of the onscreen carnage almost veers into jaw-dropping Troma territory. There's a scene where an old lady gets half her head blown off for God's sake!
So where does the movie go wrong? The villains, that's where. Dominic West as the disfigured gangster Jigsaw actually seems like a pretty cool baddie at first. In fact, when Jigsaw is first introduced, I was really psyched that on top of a decent Punisher and balls-to-the-wall action, this Punisher was also going to have a kick-ass bad guy.
But then something happens. Immediately after introducing Jigsaw, the movie then introduces another villain: Jigsaw's brother Loony Bin Jim (Doug Hutchison; The Green Mile, The Burrowers). And this, ladies and gentlemen, is where War Zone completely derails and heads full-speed into goofball territory. From this point on, the movie begins spending way too much time on these two, and in every damn scene featuring the two of them, I swear West and Hutchison are literally competing with each other to see who can act more annoyingly over-the-top and mug for the camera more.
Imagine you're watching RoboCop and all of sudden two wacky villains from one of Joel Schumacher's Batman movies wander in and start yukking it up. That's exactly what this is like. And, sorry to say, it's enough to completely kill the vibe the movie previously had going, and ruins the whole thing.
There's one scene where Jigsaw and Loony Bin Jim gather up all the city's criminals to rally against the Punisher, and I swear to God it felt like something from "Family Guy" or "Robot Chicken". Not cool.
As if the two of them weren't enough, there's also an eye-rollingly stupid comic-relief detective (Dash Mihok) to stink the place up even further.
Actually, the whole sub-plot with the detectives (Mihok as the 'funny' one and the cool Colin Salmon as the 'serious' one) is completely pointless, boring, and is obviously just here to pad-out the running time.
The detectives want to figure out who the Punisher is and what he'll do next. Who the fuck CARES?!? The audience already knows damn well who the Punisher is and what's going on, why the hell do we need to keep wasting time with these two guys?
Rounding out the cast are Julie Benz (Rambo) who is completely wasted as the damsel in distress, and Wayne Knight ("Seinfeld", Jurassic Park) who is surprisingly good as the Punisher's 'sidekick' of sorts Microchip.
In the end, Punisher: War Zone is another missed opportunity. It has it's good aspects but the negatives outweigh the positive. Director Lexi Alexander does a great job with the action scenes and there's some stylish shots here and there, but for God's sake figure out what kind of tone you want and stick to it next time. And for crying out loud if you ever work with Dominic West or Doug Hutchison again put a damn leash on 'em.
DIRECTOR: Lexi Alexander
CAST: Ray Stevenson, Dominic West, Doug Hutchison, Julie Benz, Wayne Knight, Colin Salmon, Dash Mihok
This is the third damn time that Hollywood has attempted a movie adaption of the Marvel Comics vigilante character (he's not really a 'superhero') The Punisher.
First there was the 1989 Dolph Lundgren version, which I admit I haven't seen in its entirety but based on the bits and pieces I have seen, looks pretty much like your average late '80s low-budget action flick except that the hero happens to be wearing the Punisher emblem on his shirt.
Then there was the 2004 version starring Thomas Jane, who was surprisingly effective in the role. To be fair, the Thomas Jane Punisher really wasn't bad....as a noir-ish revenge drama. The problem is, it wasn't much of a Punisher movie. It was hampered by too slow a pace, an incredibly non-threatening villain in John Travolta, and a complete lack of action. The Punisher didn't really get down to any "punishing" until the last 15 minutes of the movie, and by then it was too little too late.
Which brings us to 2008's Punisher: War Zone. So what's the verdict?
Well, the good news is this is definitely the balls-out Punisher flick that we didn't get in the Thomas Jane version. There's plenty of bone-crunching, blood-splattering action and carnage here. In fact, it almost rivals a slasher flick in terms of brutal violence.
The bad news is there's WAY too much emphasis on goofy comic relief, and it really ruins would could have been the first bonafide kick-ass Punisher movie.
First off, Ray Stevenson (HBO's "Rome", The Other Guys, The Book Of Eli, and most recently another Marvel adaption, Thor) is pretty good as Frank Castle/The Punisher. He doesn't give the character the pathos that Thomas Jane did, but he fits the bill just fine. It's not like this is a very demanding role or anything. Unlike the Jane version, The Punisher here is a gruff, one-note killing machine, which in fairness to Stevenson doesn't give him much opportunity to add much in the way of memorable touches. But he still gives his own spin on the character mainly through physical acting. I love how he just nonchalantly snaps his nose back into place after it's dislocated by a bad guy.
And the action and violence...MY LORD! There is LOADS of action in this flick, and I can honestly say without exaggeration or hyperbole, that Punisher: War Zone is the most ridiculously violent mainstream movie since Paul Verhoeven's RoboCop or Total Recall. Honestly, the Punisher puts Jason Voorhees to shame in this flick. Say what you will about War Zone, but nobody can complain that this Punisher isn't violent enough! Some of the onscreen carnage almost veers into jaw-dropping Troma territory. There's a scene where an old lady gets half her head blown off for God's sake!
So where does the movie go wrong? The villains, that's where. Dominic West as the disfigured gangster Jigsaw actually seems like a pretty cool baddie at first. In fact, when Jigsaw is first introduced, I was really psyched that on top of a decent Punisher and balls-to-the-wall action, this Punisher was also going to have a kick-ass bad guy.
But then something happens. Immediately after introducing Jigsaw, the movie then introduces another villain: Jigsaw's brother Loony Bin Jim (Doug Hutchison; The Green Mile, The Burrowers). And this, ladies and gentlemen, is where War Zone completely derails and heads full-speed into goofball territory. From this point on, the movie begins spending way too much time on these two, and in every damn scene featuring the two of them, I swear West and Hutchison are literally competing with each other to see who can act more annoyingly over-the-top and mug for the camera more.
Imagine you're watching RoboCop and all of sudden two wacky villains from one of Joel Schumacher's Batman movies wander in and start yukking it up. That's exactly what this is like. And, sorry to say, it's enough to completely kill the vibe the movie previously had going, and ruins the whole thing.
There's one scene where Jigsaw and Loony Bin Jim gather up all the city's criminals to rally against the Punisher, and I swear to God it felt like something from "Family Guy" or "Robot Chicken". Not cool.
As if the two of them weren't enough, there's also an eye-rollingly stupid comic-relief detective (Dash Mihok) to stink the place up even further.
Actually, the whole sub-plot with the detectives (Mihok as the 'funny' one and the cool Colin Salmon as the 'serious' one) is completely pointless, boring, and is obviously just here to pad-out the running time.
The detectives want to figure out who the Punisher is and what he'll do next. Who the fuck CARES?!? The audience already knows damn well who the Punisher is and what's going on, why the hell do we need to keep wasting time with these two guys?
Rounding out the cast are Julie Benz (Rambo) who is completely wasted as the damsel in distress, and Wayne Knight ("Seinfeld", Jurassic Park) who is surprisingly good as the Punisher's 'sidekick' of sorts Microchip.
In the end, Punisher: War Zone is another missed opportunity. It has it's good aspects but the negatives outweigh the positive. Director Lexi Alexander does a great job with the action scenes and there's some stylish shots here and there, but for God's sake figure out what kind of tone you want and stick to it next time. And for crying out loud if you ever work with Dominic West or Doug Hutchison again put a damn leash on 'em.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Jennifer's Body (2009)
Jennifer's Body (2009)
DIRECTOR: Karyn Kusama
WRITER: Diablo Cody
CAST: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Adam Brody, Johnny Simmons, Kyle Gallner, J.K. Simmons, Amy Sedaris
Jennifer's Body is like a horror-infused take on the nasty '80s high-school satire Heathers. It's also rather similar to the Canadian cult classic Ginger Snaps. I'm not saying the movie overtly copies either of the older films; but you will definitely be reminded of both while watching it.
The story involves teen BFFs Needy (Amanda Seyfried) and Jennifer (Megan Fox). Jennifer is popular and promiscuous, where Needy is more the reserved, nerdy, insecure type. One night at an emo-rock show at a local dive, something terrible happens, and Jennifer is transformed into a blood-thirsty predator. Needy is torn between concern for her friend and fearing that she needs to be stopped (are you getting the Ginger Snaps similarities yet?).
I wanted to like this movie, but a couple things kept me from really being able to enjoy it.
Number One: Jennifer, as a character, is pretty unlikable. She's a shallow, conceited, and self-absorbed bitch....and this is before she becomes a monster! Because of this, it was hard for me to care about Needy's attempts to try to save her from her monstrous predicament. It doesn't help that Megan Fox, while obviously attractive, is rather flat as an actress. Her performance as Jennifer pretty much just alternates between "ditzy" and "bitchy".
Number Two: The script by Diablo Cody, of Juno fame, is a double-edged sword. While Cody's sharp teenage banter can be amusing and definitely elevates Jennifer's Body above a typical horror film (or even a typical high-school film), it also becomes a little grating after a while. The cutting banter is fun at first, and there are plenty of quotable lines here, but about 40 minutes into the movie, I was getting really tired of lines like "You need to totally move on dot org" and "You give me such a wetty".
Number Three: About two-thirds of the way into the movie, there is a 'plot twist' involving the douchey emo-rock band from the disaster at the beginning. I won't go into it, but suffice to say after this it's pretty hard to take the movie seriously from that point on. Although I will say Adam Brody is funny as the dickhead singer of the band.
So when all is said and done, Jennifer's Body isn't bad, but the aforementioned problems kept me from really liking it. Amanda Seyfried gives a good performance, and the movie's realistic presentation of it's teen characters was refreshing. Also, watch for small parts by J.K. Simmons (the dad in Juno; J. Jonah Jameson in the Spiderman movies), Amy Sedaris (Strangers With Candy) and genre vet Lance Henriksen.
Oh. And they used the wrong Hole song during the end credits.
DIRECTOR: Karyn Kusama
WRITER: Diablo Cody
CAST: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Adam Brody, Johnny Simmons, Kyle Gallner, J.K. Simmons, Amy Sedaris
Jennifer's Body is like a horror-infused take on the nasty '80s high-school satire Heathers. It's also rather similar to the Canadian cult classic Ginger Snaps. I'm not saying the movie overtly copies either of the older films; but you will definitely be reminded of both while watching it.
The story involves teen BFFs Needy (Amanda Seyfried) and Jennifer (Megan Fox). Jennifer is popular and promiscuous, where Needy is more the reserved, nerdy, insecure type. One night at an emo-rock show at a local dive, something terrible happens, and Jennifer is transformed into a blood-thirsty predator. Needy is torn between concern for her friend and fearing that she needs to be stopped (are you getting the Ginger Snaps similarities yet?).
I wanted to like this movie, but a couple things kept me from really being able to enjoy it.
Number One: Jennifer, as a character, is pretty unlikable. She's a shallow, conceited, and self-absorbed bitch....and this is before she becomes a monster! Because of this, it was hard for me to care about Needy's attempts to try to save her from her monstrous predicament. It doesn't help that Megan Fox, while obviously attractive, is rather flat as an actress. Her performance as Jennifer pretty much just alternates between "ditzy" and "bitchy".
Number Two: The script by Diablo Cody, of Juno fame, is a double-edged sword. While Cody's sharp teenage banter can be amusing and definitely elevates Jennifer's Body above a typical horror film (or even a typical high-school film), it also becomes a little grating after a while. The cutting banter is fun at first, and there are plenty of quotable lines here, but about 40 minutes into the movie, I was getting really tired of lines like "You need to totally move on dot org" and "You give me such a wetty".
Number Three: About two-thirds of the way into the movie, there is a 'plot twist' involving the douchey emo-rock band from the disaster at the beginning. I won't go into it, but suffice to say after this it's pretty hard to take the movie seriously from that point on. Although I will say Adam Brody is funny as the dickhead singer of the band.
So when all is said and done, Jennifer's Body isn't bad, but the aforementioned problems kept me from really liking it. Amanda Seyfried gives a good performance, and the movie's realistic presentation of it's teen characters was refreshing. Also, watch for small parts by J.K. Simmons (the dad in Juno; J. Jonah Jameson in the Spiderman movies), Amy Sedaris (Strangers With Candy) and genre vet Lance Henriksen.
Oh. And they used the wrong Hole song during the end credits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)