|
 Released 1981 Directed by Andrzej Żuławski Running time: 124 minutes As Possession opens, we find our lead Mark, played by Sam Neil, returning home to West Berlin after a mysterious spy mission. There he finds that his wife Anna, played by Isabelle Adjani, wants a divorce. What begins quite amicably, though obviously tautly emotional, soon descends into a spiralling inferno of depression, hysteria, mania, screaming, self-harm, abuse, infidelity, body horror, psychological horror, and cosmic horror, the likes of which has not been seen before nor since.  First, we find in Mark, a man whose career requires him to be fearless. In the opening meeting we are told as much, as he explains that as a spy he cannot fear, as it would interfere with his ability to do his job. Yet, he is a man so completely broken by the revelation of his wife’s infidelity, that he is willing to accept any level of madness, and any action no matter how unethical, just to be near her. As the film continues, this destructive co-dependence reaches increasingly surreal absurd levels, which challenges the audience to follow along, and follow we must, because Mark is our eyes throughout most of the film. His is the perspective from which all events are seen. Żuławski confirms as much in the director’s commentary, depicting Mark as a bit of a self-insert character, and not a very flattering one. Much of the early dialogue in the film is based around actual conversations Żuławski had with his ex-wife during their divorce, which adds an interesting complexion to the proceedings.  Second, the wonderful Isabelle Adjani, who is undeniably the star of the show. Can you tell I’m a fan? Her performance is breathtaking in that it taps into a deep well of inexhaustible raw emotional chaos, which ejaculates threateningly during her every moment on screen. Hers is a performance which is so raw because it is genuine, it is real, and that reality is extraordinarily uncomfortable to watch in places. The character of Anna herself is, in my opinion, purposefully a little shallow. That isn’t to say that there isn’t depth, there most certainly is, however, she is seen primarily through Mark’s eyes, and Mark is incapable of understanding her. As such, her appearances in the film ring like shots. She is there to disrupt decorum, explode emotionally, provoke a response, and depart, leaving a greater mystery than the one which preceded her.  Beyond our main pair, we find a cast of side characters who are each surreal facsimiles of real people. Some of whom are extremely clownish, like the pair of private detectives. Some are bizarre reflections of the main pair, like Helena who is also played by Adjani, and is seen by Mark as an idealised doting housewife and mother, who meekly sits at home without a question, while Mark continues his deranged campaign.  There is also Heinrich, who is described by Żuławski as the caricature of an awful guru. For me, Heinrich is again seen primarily from the perspective of Mark, who resents Heinrich for being everything Mark hates and denies for himself, as a toxic male. Heinrich is emotionally open, he listens, he cares, he’s a receptive lover, he loves his mother and lives with her, and is willing to talk out differences without resorting to violence first. When we later see Heinrich agitated, his movements become grotesque and overly animated, as if we were seeing Heinrich through Mark’s mocking eyes, quite literally. Heinrich’s ultimate fate also mirrors this, as a bizarre revenge fantasy plays out on screen, which is as absurd as it is disgusting.  The one segment of the film where I feel we receive a genuine feel for Heinrich’s character is with the final scene with his mother, where she bemoans that his soul is missing. Which potentially could be a clue as to the nature of the tentacle monster, or something else which I may not have considered, but I prefer to see it as Mark’s dawning realisation that he missed the soul of Heinrich in his telling of the story. To Heinrich’s mother, he is the genuine article, a gentle loving son, father, and husband, and a kind heart.  As Possession marches towards its conclusion with suicidal fervour, the events flow so thick and fast that it's quite a muddle to organise clearly. We have the return of the spy intrigue, which if you’re hoping for a clear resolution, I’m not sure you’re going to be satisfied. We also find the resolution of several plots which I’ve carefully attempted to dance around. The whole effect is less a catharsis, and more the ultimate and only destination for such self-destructive behaviour. I will touch on the tentacle monster here, as it morphs into the shape of Mark. For me, this is the ultimate destination for Mark’s replacement anxiety. He cannot hate his doppelganger in the way he hated Heinrich, he can no longer meekly accept the infidelity as the product of supernatural forces beyond his control, as he did with the tentacle monster. Instead, there is only his reflection, and he must acknowledge that it is his own personal flaws which have caused his relationship to fail, and with that, he dies.  Perhaps surprisingly, Possession was a quick and troubled shoot. The shoot was so emotionally exhausting for Adjani that she attempted suicide shortly afterwards, and felt the negative effects of the filming process for several years to come. The famous subway scene was filmed at 5am in bitterly cold conditions, and from listening to Żuławski, it didn’t seem like she was in the most emotionally supportive company. Carlo Rambaldi also supplied the monster effects for the film, and was quite surprised by the time restraints. His eventual work did not match the initial vision, but what we do get is incredibly iconic and disturbing, and perhaps even more successful. The choice of location, West Berlin, is also a reflection of Żuławski’s status as a political émigré, who was effectively banned from filmmaking in Poland. Possession is a film that I love. It is a work of such blinding intensity that I cannot help but marvel, and I hope you all enjoy watching it this month, and I look forward to your personal interpretations.  (Thanks to feedmyleg for posting this in the October thread!) Resources: Possession (1981) on the Internet Archive, in 1080p CW: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082933/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg Director’s Isolated Audio Commentary Track, on YouTube CW: Suicide, misogyny, racial essentialism, and some bad authorial opinions. Previous Movies of the Month More Stills:            
Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Nov 1, 2020 |
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 07:47 |
|
|
  Possession Stream, MONDAY, NOV 2ND, on the CineD Discord 1930/7:30pm EST The Night Gallery 2030/8:30pm EST Possession 2245/10:45pm EST The White Reindeer (Runtime 68m)  I stream on the CineD Discord. We chat in the "october-horror-challenge" room, and I’ll stream in the "horror director tournament" voice channel. To join a stream you just click that "live" button and it'll give you the option to watch. People have had trouble before watching streams through Firefox, so that's not recommended.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
oh hell yeah! I am there
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 18:20
|
|
|
I look forward to being utterly perplexed with you, DDD. As it should be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
A stream! Also congrats on MotM!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
Highly recommending this film that you horrorgoons have put me onto. It is currently available for free stream and download in good quality on the Internet Archive, which is where I watched it: https://archive.org/details/possession.1981.1080p.brrip.x264.aacetrg Be warned that it's a rough watch, it's... not an easy time at all. Very challenging in every way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
 Starting in an hour Debbie Does Dagon posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 00:27
|
|
|
Excellent writeup. I can't imagine what was going on during that shoot. Whether it was the director's prodding or the actor's choices, the result is an onslaught of uncomfortably unhinged behavior that is completely riveting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 06:01
|
|
|
I'm gonna have to spend some time putting together anything to say besides after seeing it a second time I liked it even more. What stood out to me the most in immediate impressions this time was how much the condition of Berlin at the time seems interwoven into the character's themselves. There are so many states, versions, and splits.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 06:20
|
|
|
For everyone who missed the stream, but would like to watch either film:Debbie Does Dagon posted:Possession (1981) on the Internet Archive, in 1080p The White Reindeer (Thank you forum user Yesterdays Piss!)
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
I just watched this last month for the October challenge and I'm already thinking about watching it again, it's extremely good. Nice write up in the OP!
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
I saw this a few years ago, and while I don't remember a ton about the events of the movie, I remember being struck by how intense and brutal the emotions were, and how buck-wild the final act is. I need to watch it again, and it's good to know it's on the internet archive!
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
This is one of the few movies I'm intimidated to write about. There's just so much to think about. Nonetheless, I plan to rewatch it very soon and try and scrape together some thoughts in this thread. I do think it's a CineD essential. It's certainly a movie I would have never heard about if it weren't for CineD's horror thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
Should the discussion in this thread assume anyone reading has seen it and doesn't need spoiler tags?
Zwabu fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Nov 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Should the discussion in this thread be should assume anyone reading has seen it and doesn't need spoiler tags? Yeah. You can still use spoiler tags if you want, but in general the idea is someone has watched the movie before reading and writing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
Alright, so I have only extremely loosely collected thoughts to offer at the moment, but I figure at the least I can put my foot in my mouth for the good of a movie that deserves it. This is the second time I've seen this, and being able to anticipate each scene as it came let me focus on some things that stood on this time, namely bisections and states. So many splits in the visuals, and from the very beginning we are shown the City, the Wall, and the title of the movie. People and states and versions abound. Seeing through Mark's gaze, his attempts to impose order on the situation, underneath is something that repulses him and he can't understand. The state reminding Mark of an obligation to the "drowning world." Even the language of the film is one imposed upon the territory in a manner of speaking. The occupied city is in effect the first instance of a "possession" that appears in the movie. With the Allies having drawn up the new maps for Berlin, a map is imposed upon the territory, much as it has across Europe and the world. So there's this forced division, this need to fill-in and account for and keep up the ordered march of a great big something. In all this, Anna seems hounded, driven, despairing of this constant drawing and redrawing of her image. as something to fill. Doppelgangers is what I want to pay attention to next time. Peacoffee fucked around with this message at 08:53 on Nov 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2020 08:44
|
|
|
The doppelgänger stuff always read to me as some form of the idealized/best versions of themselves that they could never be when together or imagined themselves being before everything went to poo poo. The honeymoon versions of themselves. I have a tough time going deeper than that unfortunately because as many times as I’ve seen it I still feel intimidated writing about Possession. I certainly feel the hell out of it but it’s tough for me to translate that to words. weekly font fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Nov 9, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
I feel like that's very close to the mark. Helena takes on the appearance of Anna because Mark projects his desire upon her, his fantasy of an idealised housewife and mother. Marcy, on the other hand, is allowed to be her own person because she is hated by Mark. Mark is able to see Marcy as a fully realised person because she is flawed in his eyes, as indicated by her broken leg. I feel like Mark's doppelganger is a more complicated case though, as it's bound up in the two sisters tale, of faith and chance. If anyone wants to take a stab at the religious angle I'd be all ears, because that is far from my background and experience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2020 07:57
|
|
|
Did someone order a long rambling mess? No? Well here’s one anyway. As the archive.org version of the film does not have subtitles and the heavy accents and constant whispering/shouting made it difficult for me to understand most of the dialogue, I used this “script” to follow along: https://subslikescript.com/movie/Possession-82933. It really helped me make a bit more sense of the narrative. I find myself, once again, having to review a film steeped in a blue-tinged malaise (and occasional orange-tinted horror). Possession is unrelentingly emotionally draining. The film starts off with a tense discussion between a man and a woman on the brink of a divorce, and the tension only ramps up from there, never to let up until the end. No one in this movie acts like a real person. Every movement is an unnatural contortion. People are constantly rocking and fidgeting, like junkies after their next fix. Every close-up features a tight jawed, bug-eyed facsimile of a human face with teeth poised to bite you right in the face. Most of the dialogue is either whispered or shouted. Mania and paranoia abound in Possession. It’s fascinating that a movie with so many phone conversations can feel so frantic. While I was enraptured by the content, I noted that I had been watching the movie with my body pulled as far back into the chair as I could muster, as if some part of my brain wanted to flee the experience. How wonderful (If it’s not clear by now, I have a masochistic streak when it comes to movies.) Both Sam Neil and Isabelle Adjani are giving performances cranked up to eleven, but Adjani is particularly devastating. The shoot was apparently incredibly physically and mentally demanding, and you can feel that in every frame. I was exhausted by the time the credits rolled. As other reviewers have mentioned, the husband, Mark, is the director’s self-insert. The fact that we’re supposed to relate to him and view him sympathetically is telling of what kind of person he is. After having returned from a long work-related absence, he arrives home to a wife who no longer loves him and a son he barely knows. Confronted with the reality of losing his family, he makes the grand gesture of foregoing his important spy work (providing vials to an increasingly greedy man with pink socks?) to focus on his family. However, his actions come far too late and appear to be unwanted. He tries to impose his presence and will on Anna, who keeps telling him (and most of the male characters in the film) to leave her alone. She tells him in no uncertain terms that it’s over between them. She has found someone new, someone better. In fact, both of them seem to have found idealized reflections of the other. Mark finds his in Bob’s teacher, who is soft and maternal. Anna asserts that her lover is better than Mark in every way during one of their conversations. He also brings her a sense of purpose and his ability to seemingly enact his will upon others also reflects a heightened version of what initially attracted her about Mark (‘From now on she'll know, how much righteous anger and sheer will she's got in her to say, "I can do as well. I can be better. I'm the best." Only in this case can she become a success. Nobody took me there. That's why I'm with you. Because you say "I" for me.’). It is interesting to note that both figures have green eyes (although fully formed Not Mark’s eyes seem to be darker, whereas half-formed Not Mark had emerald green eyes), which may symbolize the grass being greener on the other side. And yet, despite this, both characters (Mark more so than Anna, but she shows signs of being unsure) seem to cling to their failed relationship, which does not appear to be one worth fighting for. Mark shows himself to be extremely volatile (throws tantrums in public), emotionally manipulative (threatens to abandon his son) and violent (“Are you afraid I’ll get made again and beat you?”). Anna is no perfect specimen either. She is unfaithful, evasive, neglectful of her son and clearly disturbed. Mark constantly remarks about how much she has changed, something he initially attributes to the wonderfully ridiculous Heinrich. However, it is later revealed that her change was brought on by a miscarriage. The miscarriage, which she describes as being “Sister Faith,” occurs immediately following a scene where Anna seems to be looking up imploringly at a statue of Jesus (there are several allusions to religion throughout the film, but, as a disgusting heathen, my analysis will be very shallow). This does not appear to bring her solace. The aftermath, a scene so painful in its rawness, has Anna writhing in a subway as if possessed by demons. If we take into consideration her statement that “Goodness is only some kind of reflection of evil” and that Jesus is born from a virgin birth, then Anna serves as a dark reflection of Marie by shattering “mother’s milk” and miscarrying the anti-Christ. She becomes “the maker of [her] own evil.” The rest of the movie is Adjani acting like a cornered beast as she attempts to “protect her faith.” There is no elation in her murders. The act seems to horrify her, and she seems to try to avoid it when possible In the end, Mark and Anna’s toxic relationship destroys them, Bob (or maybe he’s just good at keeping his head underwater. He’s been practicing since the start of the film) and the entire world. Hurray. Notable quotes: - “That's why through the disease we can reach God.” - “Darkness is easeful. And the temptation to let go... promises so much comfort after the pain.” - "We are all the same but in different words. With different bodies, different versions, like insects. Meat! " - "It isn't normal. It wasn't even human. It was... Divine? Perhaps you met God a moment ago and you didn't even realize it." - "You know, for me, God is still under the porch, where the dog died." Yesterdays Piss fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Nov 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
The miscarriage/tunnel scene really does seem fascinating, partly as it's the only flashback within the film, so it's hard to know its place within the chronology, if it occurred at all. In the director's commentary Zulawski envisioned that the miscarriage would float to a bathtub, and eventually form into the tentacle creature. It would be fascinating if he kept that in, because it sounds almost Lynchian, which, I don't know if Zulawski was aware of Eraserhead? He did write Possession in New York, so it's possible I suppose. There's something very disturbing about maintaining a nurturing connection with a miscarried child by having sex with it, as if it spoke of a warped masculine anxiety about pregnancy, and the fetus interloping in what Mark assumes is his property.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Watched this like six months ago and I still carry many images of it in my head. Best breakup film I can think of, and an absolute must-see for fans of arthouse horror.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2020 05:22
|
|
|
I first watched Possession 2 or 3 years ago. I sought it out for years because of the hype my spook-a-doodle friends had around it and actually ended up buying and watching two other films called Possession before finally getting a Korean copy of the right movie on eBay. After all that time I found myself confused and frustrated by my viewing experience with no idea what to make of it. My hope was revisiting it with a rough memory of what happens and a decent idea of what I’m getting myself into would help me better appreciate and follow the themes and details of the film. And well… third time’s the charm? My big takeaway isn’t really a great one. The whole film feels like a fragile divorced man’s very self absorbed and sad bad coping. Maybe that’s not fair. Zulawaski seems to admit Mark is a self insert and he’s certainly not a flattering or idealized guy. But everything around him feels worse. His wife is deranged, utterly unreasonable or willing to discuss anything, neglectful and dangerous to their son, unfaithful and dishonest, and pretty much anything you’d expect a drunk divorcee to scream about is ex. The men she cheats on him with or either vaguely effeminate guys who live with their moms and represent everything toxically macho Mark probably hates, literal inhuman monsters, and ultimately a monstrous and yet “perfect” version of himself. His other love interest is a near exact copy of his wife except that she’s a nurturer who falls into his bed, reads his mind, and asks no questions nor makes any demands of him. Even the random characters around them seem like they’re seen through Mark’s toxic viewpoint like the vaguely comical gay couple that Mark thinks are coming onto him or the wacky pink sock wearing spy people rambling about dead dogs. Yes, Mark is an rear end in a top hat and if he’s supposed to be Zulawski that suggests some self awareness. But just because you hate yourself doesn’t mean you might not still be hating everything else worse. And the whole film feels like a bad therapy session in some ways. That feels harsh. And too many people I respect love this for me to dismiss it as that self indulgent and toxic. There seem like there might be other themes going on. Choosing to tell the story next to the Berlin Wall and have spies running around isn’t exactly subtle. And I was asked to watch out for religious themes, although truthfully I’m not sure I saw any besides vague ideas of being angry at fate and god. I’m not sure what that “sisters of fate and chance” thing Anna recites is or how it fits. I dunno. One of my problems with arthouse films is I feel like sometimes it can be hard to tell what’s some subtly placed subtext that we’re supposed to interpret and what’s just some random thing that people are reading too much into. I mean that’s probably the appeal for others but I just didn’t feel strongly enough about any of that stuff to really feel like thinking deeper about it. Maybe that’s my own ignorance though. You definitely have to give credit to Isabelle Adjani. I’ve not seen her in anything else and I definitely should correct that. Her performance is 110% and that even feels low. I think at times it feels a little too over the top and incoherent but that feels more about Zulawski’s choices and Mark’s perspective than anything Adjani did wrong. She seems to do what she’s asked to do in the script and she gives everything into it and probably carries the film. Its depressing to read about how much it affected her negatively and how she may have been mistreated on the set, and doesn’t help with that whole lack of sympathy I’m having towards Zulawski. But what comes of it is a pretty remarkable performance that I think feels much more natural and dynamic than Sam Neil or the rest of the cast’s over the top show. Obviously they were all directed to perform that way but Adjani transcended it. Ultimately, I still am not sure I fully grasp this film or if I like it or not. There’s elements I like. I HAVE to seek out more of Isabelle Adjani’s work. And obviously there’s a lot here that’s in my head and got me thinking. I can see giving it a 3rd watch, and I can see listening to commentaries or reviews about it. I’ve already read a bunch about it while writing this and the simple fact that I’m willing to read/listen/watch to more speaks to the fact that whether I liked it or not I definitely found it interesting. So maybe the third time through I’ll get a better grasp on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 04:41
|
|
|
Is it implied or outright stated that Mark has been unable to perform sexually with Anna for some time now? Or is it more that she is repelled/disgusted by him and refuses him? And how does that square with his apparently chaste relationship with her perfect Doppelganger? She is also perfect, in part, because she doesn't demand that of him?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:01
|
|
|
He's returned from being away when the movie starts so I didn't get the impression that their problems were of that nature. They do have sex late in the film. And its implied he sleeps with her best friend. But I guess you could interpret that as more self hate vs him not actually sleeping with his "perfect" love interest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:22
|
|
|
I really need to dig into Adjani's other work too, which seems only appropriate seeing as I'm borrowing her likeness. She's very good in her smaller role in Nosferatu the Vampyre, and as far as I understand it she's still working, so plenty to catch up with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I really need to dig into Adjani's other work too, which seems only appropriate seeing as I'm borrowing her likeness. She's very good in her smaller role in Nosferatu the Vampyre, and as far as I understand it she's still working, so plenty to catch up with. she's good in The Tenant too, but I think that's the only other thing I've seen her in
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
Oh, I've seen The Tenant! I didn't even recognise her
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
yeah she looks extremely different with the big glasses and hair, I only recognized her because I happened to watch The Tenant and Possession within two weeks of each other
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
I saw this film in probably the best way, in that I caught it from close to the beginning not really knowing anything about it. So at first it's just this domestic drama that's really oddly intense with Neill and Adjani just screaming at each other and she's leaving him for no reason and what the Hell is happening, and it's a little off-putting but compelling. And then things start to get weird. It has a certain cosmic/existential feel in that way, two people are just sorta taken over by something utterly alien to understanding. I wonder if Ari Aster has cited this one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
Between Event Horizon, this and In the Mouth of Madness, Sam Neill has some crappy luck being taken over by unknowable terrors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2020 07:35
|
|
|
Another Isabelle Adjani flick I highly recommend is Walter Hill's The Driver.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
God I love this movie. Isabelle Adjani is one hell of a physical actor, and gave a harrowing performance in this one. I should queue up a fun movie night while my wife and I eat our Thanksgiving meals... Muahaha...
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2020 23:45
|
|
|
This is a movie I've been dying to see forever. Thanks so much for the link. Watching now that the turkey is done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 00:16
|
|
|
There's a novella and another movie I love that definitely seem to take their cues from this. Can't wait to see how it plays out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:Between Event Horizon, this and In the Mouth of Madness, Sam Neill has some crappy luck being taken over by unknowable terrors. Thankfully according to his Twitter, he just hangs out at home with rescue chickens (chickens hopefully rescued from regular Earth)
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
HouseOfLeaves99 posted:Thankfully according to his Twitter, he just hangs out at home with rescue chickens (chickens hopefully rescued from regular Earth) And pigs. You can’t forget the pigs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:And pigs. You can’t forget the pigs. Still unsure if the pigs are from here, Lovecraft land, or whatever the weird Event Horizon Cronenberg world is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
So much to unpack, but if anyone wants to check out two other pieces of media this kind of reminded me of, Beast, a Danish film from 2010, and the novella Come Closer by Sara Gran.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 02:05
|
|
|
HouseOfLeaves99 posted:Beast, a Danish film from 2010 Is it this Beast? https://letterboxd.com/film/beast/
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 07:47 |
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:Is it this Beast? Yes. I thought it was better known but based on my searches it actually seems sketchy
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2020 04:23
|
|