|
Yeah not that a lot of the comic hasn't been cringeworthy and not that a lot of it hasn't been boring, but I think a lot of people miss that the comic is about a young privledged person discovering the concept of social justice and deciding they want to save the world, told through their eyes. Of course a lot of the events are seen as blunt and without nuance - the main character is 20, 20 year olds will see the world bluntly and with less nuance because they're learning from their mistakes, while flipping between seeing themselves as the only person in the world who "gets" it and as a complete fuckup who can't do anything right. I think they've been doing a decent job of authentically presenting the way an altruistic but naive and egocentric college kid would act and perceive themselves. Because the characters feel a certain way doesn't mean the authors are endorsing that view as correct, they've been pretty clear that their characters are all basically dumb kids who are loving up in their own special ways. That being said, the story is just as boring and uninteresting and hard to tolerate as listening to actual Socially Concious college kids since they seem to have put the "hunt for shadowy illuminati group killing superheroes that could really cause social upheaval" subplot on the eternal back burner. RolandTower fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Sep 25, 2016 |
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
It reminds me of when some politician declares that there should be a public discussion about some issue. Of course, the discussion will change nothing, and the idea is to control discourse. The driving impulse is to project an image of egalitarianism and legitimacy without being challenged. SFP is the same - the comic emphasizes discussion and egalitarianism, but it excludes any true dissent. The image of equal discourse is just an image, it never escapes the mindset of millenial college fantasies. Really challenging characters are always relegated to the sidelines, if not just done away with like the abusive patriarchal judge or Furnace. Hell, even Rat gets showed in a trash can when the comic was fresh and brimming with potential - the signs were always there. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Hell, even Rat gets showed in a trash can when the comic was fresh and brimming with potential - the signs were always there. Come to think of it, the lack of rat during the ADA segment was a huge miss, I felt. That was a gun sitting on the mantlepiece that could easily have been fired. Going back through the comic to make sure my memory of Rat being a dynamorph made me remember how much potential this had, and how many interesting storylines they've abandoned  Also, Rat says word is Menace is coming back. So uh... what happened to that? Did they switch writers after the first chapter or two?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Sure, and I agree with you. The point is, though, that her torturing people is uncomfortably close to, say, Batman beating them bloody and unconscious. The only reason we accept some superheroes as heroes in the first place is that they manage to never kill anyone, and some don't even hold to that restriction. And the comics don't generally show the bodies getting cleaned up afterward, but more on that in a second. I don't see how you can equate Batman (or at least, pretty much every incarnation of him except Zack Snyder's awful bullshit) to how Mary was shown and how she behaved. Punisher is closer but even he is not presented as enjoying himself killing bad guys, and torture isn't really his thing. Also he routinely gets told off by other people in the setting, put in prison, and pretty much hates himself a whole bunch. quote:Everyone looks super happy there, right? The hover test on that first one is literally "The amount of blood on this page is courtesy of a very unhappy google research session." The aftermath of her murders is always represented as horrific. The comic explains WHY these people are being murdered (in retaliation for being rapists), but it does not then go on to say "and that makes it okay that they were murdered". Okay, but then Mary gloats extensively over the merc team, tortures them, and kills them. Doctor Rapestatistics goes right to the edge of opening endorsing Mary's killings. Patrick (admittedly he's an amoral villainous scumbag but still) tells Alison that he won't help her. Even when the judge gets murdered nobody objects at all except Furnace. And yeah this guy:  What I'm saying is that the author tried pretty drat hard to present this as some sort of challenging moral quandary and it really isn't. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:And Allison's motive to confront Mary was always that it made her look bad because she had been connected to Miles by the media I have no idea how you got this from the comic. It seemed pretty clear to me that Alison's motive was to find out if Mary, her friend and former teammate, could really be behind these murders. It's why she proceeds so carefully - she has to be sure before she casts any suspicion on Mary. Flesh Forge posted:I don't see how you can equate Batman (or at least, pretty much every incarnation of him except Zack Snyder's awful bullshit) to how Mary was shown and how she behaved.  Not written by Zack Snyder. quote:Punisher is closer but even he is not presented as enjoying himself killing bad guys, and torture isn't really his thing. Also he routinely gets told off by other people in the setting, put in prison, and pretty much hates himself a whole bunch. 1) Mary very well might hate herself. It would make sense if she did. It hasn't been established explicitly, but that's okay because... 2) The Punisher has had thousands of pages of material written and drawn about him to establish his personality in all is ugly depths. How many pages did it take to get to the self-loathing bits? 3) The Punisher tortures, whether you're talking about cinematic Punisher, 616 Punisher, or Max Punisher. You might have a point with Punisher 2099, I haven't really read any of that version.  
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Can you show me either of those characters simply torturing somebody, with no particular goal to obtain time sensitive information (not that I agree with that) and gloating about it, apparently enjoying it? I feel like yes, what you're showing above is fundamentally very different from what Mary did.Falstaff posted:1) Mary very well might hate herself. It would make sense if she did. It hasn't been established explicitly, but that's okay because... There is no hint of this at all in SFP but it's a recurring thing in Punisher's comics. She says more than once she regrets nothing. e: I should have been more specific about this earlier, that was poor of me. Flesh Forge fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Also I'm pretty sure Punisher 2099 is not meant to be taken seriously
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Generally superheroes stay away from murder because that's where the fun and games of violence and concussions quickly turns into creepy murderporn revenge fantasies. The comics code prohibited blood, gore, and murder, and even though it loosened up over time, that started a trend that continues to this day. Nothing but consequence-free violence. Real-world vigilantism trends more towards creepy murder revenge
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:Can you show me either of those characters simply torturing somebody, with no particular goal to obtain time sensitive information (not that I agree with that) and gloating about it, apparently enjoying it? I feel like yes, what you're showing above is fundamentally very different from what Mary did. I disagree with you, but I can see your point. Regardless, you've narrowed me down to Max (might be something in an old War Journal, but that would require a deeper dig than I care to make. It definitely rules out Batman, though.)  quote:There is no hint of this at all in SFP but it's a recurring thing in Punisher's comics. She says more than once she regrets nothing. Funny you should mention that.  This seems pretty far afield from the original point, though. I guess I was just nonplussed that you'd suggest Mary has crossed lines that even Punisher doesn't cross.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Falstaff posted:I disagree with you, but I can see your point. Regardless, you've narrowed me down to Max (might be something in an old War Journal, but that would require a deeper dig than I care to make. It definitely rules out Batman, though.) I'm not exactly disagreeing with you here, he definitely gave that character a bad time before he killed her, and yeah that's pretty clearly torture to no purpose. The MAX line is very far over from any of the mainstream portrayals though, it's signature Garth Ennis, and yet - even in that version he's not depicted as enjoying it or gloating. He's also pretty clear iirc that he does not view himself as one of the good guys. FYI - this doesn't take away from what Falstaff is saying, just showing these pages for context - what he's saying to Vera (the woman he's killing) is a pretty direct echo of what she herself had done earlier:     e: Here's a really good post with a string of examples from Punisher MAX that express this much better than I could. Flesh Forge fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Thing is, neither the Punisher nor Mary nor, for that matter, Batman are hurting people for no purpose. I'm actually going to stick with Batman; the Punisher is too easy, because he basically is Mary already, but he's almost unique, whereas Batman is a classic superhero with countless imitators. He's rather the father of the modern vigilante superhero. (I mean, he himself is following in the footsteps of the Shadow, but most people are imitating him rather than good old Mr. Cranston.) Mary, like Batman, is a terrorist; that is, a person who uses fear and threats of violence as a means of trying to attain a political or social end. Can anyone have possibly forgotten the "superstitious, cowardly lot" speech? Batman doesn't just use minimum force to capture people, he dresses up as a giant bat and beats the poo poo out of them specifically to frighten them. The hope is that this will give him an advantage in fights, because people will be afraid of him, and that maybe someone considering committing a crime in Gotham will calculate their odds of having their bones broken by the terrifying night monster and consider doing something else instead. And God help you if Batman is being written by Frank Miller that issue. This is the reason Mary tortures that soldier. (The only real instance of torture, incidentally; everyone else we see is killed relatively cleanly.) It's the same reason she's murdering people. Not just to save their future victims, but to give other potential rapists a moment's pause. "Do I really want to do this,' they might think, "considering that it's possible an invisible demon might carve me into pieces and then kill me?" She's trying to make people too damned terrified to rape anyone. That's what she means when she refers to her work as "teaching". And she'd probably say that if it deters even one rapist, it was worth doing. She doesn't consider the life of a rapist to be worth anything, so if one of them has to get hurt to save a woman from being raped later, she's okay making that trade. Batman, once he's beaten up the bad guys, leaves them to the standard court system to deal with, along with (generally) ample evidence of their crimes. Mary doesn't have that option, because the people she's attacking are, universally, people that the civilian authorities have taken a pass on doing anything about. That's as much a part of her criteria as them being rapists. Batman is always pretty certain that the people he beats have done something wrong; he often interrupts them right in the middle of doing it, which does make things simpler. So's Mary; she spends a ridiculous amount of time researching each case; note that the comic doesn't even say she is right every time, it says she is SURE every time, that she has evidence. It doesn't show her being wrong, but we don't have any confirmation that she's right, either, except her word. Batman, of course, never kills anyone. (Let's ignore the silly movie version and some of the early appearances before the canon had really settled.) That's mostly the CCA, but in-universe, his reasoning is that it's a line he doesn't think he can cross. But even in the comics, people have challenged him on this; the Joker is always the principal example here. He turns the Joker over to authorities he knows have no power to hold him, and who will never actually execute him for his crimes. The Joker is a homicidal maniac. He's killed thousands or maybe even tens of thousands of people. How many lives would Batman have saved by just killing the guy? The comics can bend that question around as much as they want (Kingdom Come had an interesting take on it, for instance), but ultimately it's hard to defend beating the Joker up and letting him live as a better decision. Mary is, simply, a Batman who is willing to kill the Joker. She doesn't have any other real options if she wants to do this vigilante biz. She's got no prison of her own to put people in, after all. What else is she to do with her Joker? Now, I personally don't agree with Mary's plan. I mean, Christ, I don't even want the State to have the power to execute people. Random vigilantes offing them in the streets is not to be considered. But pretending she's just a psycho with no meaningful agenda is ignoring a large part of the actual comic, and missing out on one of the actually interesting things it is trying to point out. Superheroes are fantasy characters. We WANT someone who will just cut through the bullshit and take out nasty people and keep them from committing crimes. That's what Mary is doing, it's just that it's not represented as a fun fantasy, and suddenly everything is pretty uncomfortable. Which it SHOULD be, because that fantasy is kind of horrible if examined in this way. We can accept Batman doing what he does, because Batman is magic and never gets it wrong and never kills people by accident. (If anyone real had beaten up as many people as Batman, the accidental homicides would probably be in the triple digits by now, at least.) Take away that magic and what he's doing is pretty goddamned horrible, and that's what Mary is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
quote:Mary is, simply, a Batman who is willing to kill the Joker. The glaring flaw with your take on this is her smug enjoyment when she carves up and kills the lead merc, as well as her defense of her actions to Alison at the end of the chapter. It's really night and day different from any presentation of Batman I'm familiar with (again, ignoring Snyder's version). I'm not being dismissive of your opinion and if Mary were not so drat Whedonesque-witty in that set of pages I'd be a lot more willing to see it your way. quote:We WANT someone who will just cut through the bullshit and take out nasty people and keep them from committing crimes. That's what Mary is doing, it's just that it's not represented as a fun fantasy, and suddenly everything is pretty uncomfortable. Which it SHOULD be, because that fantasy is kind of horrible if examined in this way. We can accept Batman doing what he does, because Batman is magic and never gets it wrong and never kills people by accident. (If anyone real had beaten up as many people as Batman, the accidental homicides would probably be in the triple digits by now, at least.) Take away that magic and what he's doing is pretty goddamned horrible, and that's what Mary is. You and I see this matter profoundly differently, if the comic is trying to deconstruct the basic comic book vigilante tropes and really examine them it should probably pay closer attention to how they actually work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Oct 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
Clone Mary.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Why terrorize people you're about to kill when there are no witnesses? That's not a political act. That's not propaganda. That's just sadism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 08:23
|
|
|
You could say "because she left him strung up on a tree with those words carved into his body" but yeah she intentionally did it while he was alive so like Max that doesn't really fly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
"Because he was hung up in a tree with words carved on him" is correct. You don't think an ME can tell whether those words were carved on him while he was still alive or not? That's going to be part of the reporting, because every media outlet wants to have the most details on stuff like this. If she burned or hid his body or something, sure, there wouldn't have been any point in torturing him first, but she didn't do that, she put him out there for everyone to see. It's a clear message: "all you fuckers better watch out, because this could be you." All her actions then and later make it much easier to believe that it's a piece of theater. She doesn't just want to kill rapists, she wants rapists to be TERRIFIED of getting a visit from her. If Alison hadn't revealed her identity when she did, the murders probably would have gotten even more elaborate. We know it's escalating; she mentions that she used to conceal them before realizing that wasn't going to change the world. This is part of why it's easier to believe this stuff is intended for a specific purpose; she flat-out tells us that it is, at length. Her exact words: "The truth serum, the camera, all the trouble I went to, is not for you or me or even Furnace, it's for all the pigs watching at home. You read me? The judge, the soldiers, that kid from your school. I'm trying to send a message. I'm trying to be a loving superhero." And this is right after she tries to save Furnace from the dam, because she wanted to make super sure he was guilty before murdering him. The text provides no real reason to believe that she's doing this for any reason other than the one she stated.Flesh Forge posted:The glaring flaw with your take on this is her smug enjoyment when she carves up and kills the lead merc, as well as her defense of her actions to Alison at the end of the chapter. It's really night and day different from any presentation of Batman I'm familiar with (again, ignoring Snyder's version). I'm not being dismissive of your opinion and if Mary were not so drat Whedonesque-witty in that set of pages I'd be a lot more willing to see it your way. Now, having said what I said above, I'm pretty sure she still would have enjoyed it. Fight banter is another superhero staple, and to her this is just another superhero fight. She says as much to Alison when they finally have their confrontation at the end. She doesn't see this as any different than when she was fighting supervillains, apart from the fact that she knows she's more likely to get put in jail for it and that she thinks it's more likely to have a long-term positive effect on the world. From her perspective, she's been doing this since she was a teenager, and she's good at it, and both doing something you're good at and getting revenge on evildoers for the evil they do are things most people find enjoyable, or at least satisfying. But there's a vast difference between enjoying it and doing it only because she enjoys it. If she were just going out cutting up any old random person for fun, it'd be a very different situation than what we actually got. I would also not feel better about her actions if she were doing it out of rote duty and found them incredibly distasteful. I mean, that's an interesting take on it, but I'd certainly feel like morally she was in exactly the same ballpark.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
idonotlikepeas posted:Thing is, neither the Punisher nor Mary nor, for that matter, Batman are hurting people for no purpose. I'm actually going to stick with Batman; the Punisher is too easy, because he basically is Mary already, but he's almost unique, whereas Batman is a classic superhero with countless imitators. He's rather the father of the modern vigilante superhero. (I mean, he himself is following in the footsteps of the Shadow, but most people are imitating him rather than good old Mr. Cranston.) Also unlike Batman who is willing to leave villains alive because of his personal code, The Punisher has no such obligation and his solution to a problem is to hit back as hard as possible and leave a message for potential future criminals, again the same as Mary. quote:We can accept Batman doing what he does, because Batman is magic and never gets it wrong and never kills people by accident. (If anyone real had beaten up as many people as Batman, the accidental homicides would probably be in the triple digits by now, at least.) Take away that magic and what he's doing is pretty goddamned horrible, and that's what Mary is. "See high profile crime on news" > "Approach victim and ask for permission to carry out vengeance" > "Find person and kill them" >"Optional: Kill anyone related to crime that empowered the rapist or helped them get away with crime" > "repeat" She didn't switch that up until the end of the chapter. And even then trying to coerce a confession while under extreme duress and chemical suggestion is pretty dubious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
loving lol at trope-based criticism. "Fight banter is a superhero stable", "the Punisher is still a closer relative to the type of archetype that Mary presents". Of course the liberal-Millenial fantasy of patriarchal abusers and US soldiers getting murdered goes unquestioned. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Sep 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Is it insane that the thing that makes me most angry about that is that she brought high explosives in to a loving dam? Jesus, that thing took hundreds of people years to make, it provided power for thousands more, and blowing it caused a massive catastrophe of flooding and power shortages... The murders are more morally abhorrent but the bringing explosives on to the dam is so loving thoughtless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:loving lol at trope-based criticism. "Fight banter is a superhero stable", "the Punisher is still a closer relative to the type of archetype that Mary presents". Yeah I'm going to stop talking about this if I can resist it because holy poo poo some people interpret morality in fictional characters very differently from how I do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:loving lol at trope-based criticism. "Fight banter is a superhero stable", "the Punisher is still a closer relative to the type of archetype that Mary presents". Let's not pretend that most of these characters are deep enough to go beyond generalizations in some cases. And we've already spent months talking about her victims and whether or not her actions were in any way right so excuse me for not wanting to focus on that this time around.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:Is it insane that the thing that makes me most angry about that is that she brought high explosives in to a loving dam? Jesus, that thing took hundreds of people years to make, it provided power for thousands more, and blowing it caused a massive catastrophe of flooding and power shortages... The murders are more morally abhorrent but the bringing explosives on to the dam is so loving thoughtless. No, it's okay, it's a dam that was built in the middle of loving nowhere for no reason at all. There was absolutely no reason to bring Furnace to a dam instead of, say, an abandoned fishing hut. The entire point of the dam was to have some Michael Bayesque dramatic backdrop for the chapter's climax. Completely gratuitous and irrelevant; made absolutely no sense in-story. It's purely there out of a blockbuster/video game logic. So of course they had to make the destruction of the dam be consequence-free. And that's a completely stupid turn for the comic, given that it started showing the consequences of thoughtless blockbuster heroism, what with the old teacher's husband who was killed in the hospital by Allison tossing a robot through a building. You can't go from "superheroics cause collateral damage" to "let's blow up a dam and have it be no big deal" without being a complete hack.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:There was absolutely no reason to bring Furnace to a dam instead of, say, an abandoned fishing hut. The entire point of the dam was to have some Michael Bayesque dramatic backdrop for the chapter's climax. Completely gratuitous and irrelevant; made absolutely no sense in-story. It's purely there out of a blockbuster/video game logic. So of course they had to make the destruction of the dam be consequence-free. I thought the point of bringing Furnace to a dam was to limit how he could use his powers, or he'd risk blowing it up? And it just didn't work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Tenebrais posted:I thought the point of bringing Furnace to a dam was to limit how he could use his powers, or he'd risk blowing it up? And it just didn't work. Yeah, that was the idea, and I think it was a nice touch that it didn't work because surprise, dude's too drugged up and pissed off to be rational. Where the writing completely falls on its face is making the whole thing consequence free, given the established themes of the comic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Nice, the comments crew is equating Max to an MMO support character:quote:I'm reminded of the old MMO, City Of Heroes, and the Defender archetype, which was specifically the class designed around supporting your teammates, and which got powerful buffs and debuffs as their primary powerset. Poor Max relegated to buffbot status, man that sux quote:I didn't play many MMOs, but when I did play support in City of Heroes, well . . . let's just say, on teams with heavily tweaked toons, I rarely felt like my support abilities mattered. Everyone was already nigh-invincible, and by the time I finished throwing out a good debuff, most of the mobs would be lying on the floor. (Buffs would be different, since I could cast those whenever they were ready, but once they were cast, well, what else did I have to do?) In a world where everyone* has the perfect minmaxed powers and gear, Max's gameplay is not very good  *I mean ignoring all the low level scrubs with their garbage gear and dumb builds lol gently caress them
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
This would be much more effective if we knew just what she wants him to do and how his powers work in detail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
It's simple: Alison has realized that if she can get him to power her up, she'll finally be able to punch hard enough to solve the really hard problems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
I don't think Alison is very good at this negotiation stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 21:28
|
|
"Help me" "No" "Stop being an rear end in a top hat, help me". No means no, lady  . So how long until he caves in and helps anyway? I bet two pages. One for her to walk away and one for him to come running after her saying he'll help.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
I am pretty sure she is going to resort to outright threats here. She did it to the protester crowd after someone tried to kill Feral. She did it to Patrick. The difference here is that she would be definitely in the wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
If you take out last friday's page and just read it as "why haven't I heard about you" , "My mom's in congress" it's a much better exchange. I actually like this page even though both characters are acting like children.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
I'd sure like to know what his power does exactly that would help Allison with whatever it is she wants to do. Even assuming he can just permanently empower random people and boost already powered people even further, I don't see how that would fix the systemic problems she's trying to address.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
He can make Feral regenerate faster so she can donate three times as many organs!
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
He could maybe make teleporter dude able to transport large volumes and address food logistics problems, moving resources directly to the end user and bypassing corrupt infrastructures
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
He could make Moonshadow so invisible her arc would vanish from memory.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:He can make Feral regenerate faster so she can donate three times as many organs! So full of healthy organs!
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
I guess I'll point it out but with everyone's powers getting stronger I kind of wonder if this is gonna end up with Alison losing her powers to him. Cause that'd be actually really great to see Alison try and stop someone who stole her powers. edit: Uh... wait a second. Maybe he's the one actually increasing everyones powers he just doesn't know it. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Sep 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
"Losing your powers" is a rite of passage for basically all superheroes and I'd be interested to see that here, but mmmm yeah I doubt Mulligan would ever do that in the foreseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Man, Allison's a jerk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 05:25
|
|