Whedonesque : Comments on 4690 : David Boreanaz TV Guide interview.

Funny, they say "Four" and I think Fantastic Four, not Indiana Jones 4. Guess that shows where my mind is at.

I don't know about David in IJ4. I've always thought its a really dumb idea to bring back Indy.

See i can't argue with DB here. He has played the same character for EIGHT years and that is not what an actor neccessarily sets out to do in his career.

This isn't about him having a problem with the character, just the format in which he wants to see Angel return. Like he says, new challenges.

Having said that, i've always understood Sarah's point of view as well, hopefully we won't see that kind of unneccessary fan backlash against David if the WB make it look like it was his fault the telemovies didn't happen.

The Watcher | August 18, 12:57 CET

hopefully we won't see that kind of unneccessary fan backlash against David if the WB make it look like it was his fault the telemovies didn't happen.

But thats the thing, the telemovies don't need David. Like Joss said, theres like 10 characters from both shows you could base one on. If WB are holding their breath waiting for David, they're going to be another color other than green.

[ edited by eddy on 2004-08-18 11:03 ]

eddy | August 18, 13:03 CET

Exactly my thinking too Eddy. My only worry is that the WB seem to want David involved and without him on board Joss thinks the telemovies would be a harder sell. We all know that we would be there for a Spike movie, Willow movie, Giles movie, hell, even an Andrew movie if it came to it, but would the WB want to risk it without the accepted star?

My gut is telling me that the WB know David won't come back and so are using him as a scapegoat for the telemovies not happening. They are good at that kind of thing!

On the plus side though Joss recently said that the WB are not the only option for the telemovies so that is promising.

The Watcher | August 18, 13:19 CET

Whilst I was shopping in the rain earlier I was thinking about they could set a TV movie after 'Not Fade Away'.

So forgive me as I indulge myself here.

Recap of the events leading up to the battle in the alleyway

Half an hour into the battle

Gunn's body lies in the alley way. We see Angel staked from behind by a demon and he shatters into dust

Spike: Noooooooo

Flashback to Illyria after killing she kills Vail, we see her gathering mystical energy from his corpse

Cut to present

Illyria opens a portal and drags Spike in with her

Another dimension

Spike falls to his knees a la the end of 'The Gift' and breaks down in tears. Illyria looks on not knowing how to react

Spike: We need them to bring Angel back.
Illyria: We need who?
Spike: Giles... Giles and Willow. We have to find them

And then we have a series of TV movies with Spike and Illyria trying to find a way to bring Angel back and they meet various Buffyverse characters on the way. At the end, they discover Angel is at peace now and leave him be.

Simon | August 18, 13:25 CET

I like it!

The only small alteration i would make is that i'd bring Angel back in the end. Ultimately this would be a great way to explain his temporary absence from the televised slayerverse but DB will be needed for any big screen adventures should they happen. For that reason he would need to be restored.

Other than that minor point it's a really good idea. Contact Mutant Enemy immediately ;)

The Watcher | August 18, 13:38 CET

They could have Angel in the first act, played by his stunt double, be taken off by the Dragon. Begin a new story with Spike et al, then pick up Angel's story again in a movie.

One thing I don't understand. Boreanaz wants to up the bar. A TV movie IS a bar up from the TV show. The new Farscape TV Movies are set to be awesome. According to the cast and crew it was like shooting a movie.

The Host | August 18, 15:00 CET

Your average tv movie isn't a higher bar. The budget would probably be lower(we're talking The WB here..) and you wouldn't be able to tell as much story. I'm personally not looking forward to any telemovies out of fear that they'll (to be blunt) look like low budget horror movies.

eddy | August 18, 15:05 CET

Does it necessarily have to be on The WB? What would stop 20th Century Fox from putting the TV movie into syndication (or showing it on FX or TNT) and then releasing it on DVD? They know the fans would buy it and perhaps could justify a higher budget that way.

Simon | August 18, 15:21 CET

Simon, Joss has said recently (in the Scifiwire article that was posted here i think) that any telemovies that happen are not neccessarily destined to appear on the WB as there are other options, although he did not elaborate on what these were.

This is something i am very pleased about if i'm honest as i'm very wary about giving the WB another chance to screw Joss and us over.

The Watcher | August 18, 15:39 CET

Well, I always said David looks like Harrison Ford sometimes... but I guess that's not the role he meant.

Elo | August 18, 16:36 CET

FANTASTIC FOUR most likely

SeanValen | August 18, 16:44 CET

The main characters in FF are already casted though. Who would he be? Doom minion #4?

eddy | August 18, 16:48 CET

Could be Nick Fury? If he's in the movie.

papa lazarou | August 18, 16:56 CET

Well there was that Fantastic Four rumour associated with him from last month.

Simon | August 18, 17:08 CET

Please don't get me wrong, I do like DB, but it irritaes me to no end when he keeps downplaying the TV movies. As far as I'm concerned, I don't really care if Angel reprises his role in the films. I'm not even that worried about Buffy not being present either. As Joss has said, THERE ARE at least 10 other characters well worthy of a movie , maybe even a new show. I vote for proceeding on with the actors that ARE interested in these TV films if they are available. Spike will draw fans in, that's already been proven, and other characters, such as Illyria, Dana, Giles, even Willow and Andrew can hold the fans interest. With a bit of creative writing, Angel's absence can be explained, and the movies can perhaps feed into each other plotwise. I think it can be done, but I would hate for the networks to hold off waiting for DB, when there are plenty of other characters the fans are more than willing to watch. Hopefully the WB or better yet FOX and ME will get the hint.

kathylovesspike | August 18, 17:18 CET

I'd guess Fantastic Four as well, which brings us back to... have they cast any of the baddies yet?

I don't really see why we'd even need a visual reference for Angel's absence in any Buffyverse movies. Whoever's starring, if an Angel cast member, can simply note that the surviving characters went their separate ways after the alley, and that's that. (Personally, I think the best intro to whatever Buffyverse project is next would be to open on Spike in a bar, slightly soused, going on to all who will listen -- including the audience -- about the fight after "Not Fade Away"...)

RambleOn623 | August 18, 17:49 CET

Perfect RambleOn623, that would actually be a great lead in for the film. Just say Angel decided to go take that island vacation with Nina and LOTS of sunscreen. There are so many ways they can get around DB not being there. Just hope they get their act together, while the fans are still interested.

kathylovesspike | August 18, 18:00 CET

Hmmm...I don't think Spike would be gung ho to bring back Angel. And not because he doesn't like him, but because he knows the guy might be at peace finally. Spike knows that Buffy was miserable when they brought her back. He knows that HE was miserable when HE was brought back. I think he would let him stay gone.

And let's give DB a few years for his movie star career to not take off and maybe tv movies won't look so bad for him. I, for one, think he's using the 'only big screen movies' as an excuse because he knows the chances are not big. So he doesn't have to come out and say, "I'm done, I don't want to do it anymore."

Rogue Slayer | August 18, 18:08 CET

I instantly thought Fantastic Four also...not Indy...I mean, come on, he stressed "FOUR"..."BIGGER"...I'm going with FF too!

I feel like I am the only one, and very well may be, that posts on Whedonesque who wants so badly for the return of Buffy and Angel (characters). Don't get me wrong...I will be sooo excited for other movies with other characters...but my heart lies with their story. I feel completely robbed by the endings of both shows. I have watched from the very beginning of Buffy and Angel...have been totally addicted...and I really, really want the "movies"...whether theatrical or tele...to have those charcters too. I understand that they are moving on...and that is great for them...but I'm still hanging on to NFA and wondering how this will resolve itself and keep "my favorite characters" in the mix.

I guess I'm getting (and this may be too strong of a word) annoyed at all the "we don't need them" talk. If I allow myself to be rational I know that what you are saying is true...but some fans, including myself, are holding out hope that there will indeed be a more flushed out resolution to my characters arc...the one that was offered up does not do it for me.

As I read over all that I have written, believe me, I know that I'm just venting...because...as we all know...they don't want to do it...but again...venting.

Coll | August 18, 18:08 CET

Oh i don't know Rogue Slayer, David must know how hard it was for Joss to get Serenity into production based only on a show that was cancelled after half a season and compared to that getting Fox to have faith in a Buffy/Angel movie should be childs play.

I actually do think that he would be more than happy with the exposure a big screen Buffy/Angel movie would bring his career.

The Watcher | August 18, 18:17 CET

Given his comments in the past about loyalty, they might even be able to talk DB into a brief (1 day shot) cameo for the TV movies. He hasn't ruled that out, he just ruled out doing entire TV movies.

As for a big screen version of Angel, it is too problematic. Big screen movies take time to get moving. Years. And our favorite immortal vampires are played by mortal actors. If you look at season 1 and 2 of Buffy and season 5 of Angel, our immortal vampires friends look older. It was a slow change, so we didn't notice it too much. But if you suddenly have a gap of three years between the end of Angel and a movie, the changes will be dramatic. They'd have to be explained (Shanshu) or they'd stick out like a sore thumb. Beyond just time, the difference between TV and the big screen in the appearance of age can be huge as well ... a lot more pixels to show those wrinkles. :-)

I wouldn't count out a few Buffyverse tv movies with second tier characters, but I doubt we'll ever see SMG or DB return to their signature roles.

jgsugden | August 18, 18:19 CET

Jgsugden, i don't know about that either. Serenity has hardly taken years to get moving. A slayerverse cinematic release could move equally fast and be in production in no more than two years.

I doubt either DB or JM will have changed that drastically.

The Watcher | August 18, 18:26 CET

This is my first post here, but I've been lurking for quite a while... I just love this site!

Anyway, I also pine for the return of Buffy and Angel, so Coll, you're not the only one. I do hope that DB & SMG change their minds. I understand their desire to want to do other things, but I also want to know more of what happened to their characters after the shows ended. Don't get me wrong, I will be happy to watch anything Joss puts out -- the man is a genius; but I really miss Buffy & Angel and want more.

jewel | August 18, 18:29 CET

If they do film a film, film a trilogy, and get it over and out the way, instead of filming a sequel 2 years later,etc, if they do come together for a film, film it like lord of the rings, 3 films as one big thing, so no more waiting year after year, tell the story and be done with it, no more worrying about actors aging, tell the story of a big fight.

I don't think were gonna see DB or JM playing their characters after 5 years, then that's getting too late.

Unless they make Angel and Spike human sometime after 5 years, and change their place in the stories, and introduce new characters. Because as we know, the fight never stops.

[ edited by SeanValen on 2004-08-18 16:33 ]

SeanValen | August 18, 18:32 CET

Plus, I think it can all (the ageing) be explained if the writers just say that "hey, having a soul will do that to ya..."

Willowy | August 18, 18:36 CET

I'm also one of those few who would be happier with Buffy (SMG) and Angel (DB) in a Buffy/ANgel telemovie and or Big Screen movie. My thinking is, although each show had it's ensemble cast, the shows themselves is about Buffy and Angel and the accompanying characters only add to the story of Buffy (on BtvS) and Angel (on AtS). And although I'm interested in what became of Illyria and Gunn... and there's Spike, I hardly doubt either character's sole story is in the least interesting or can carry a movie without the focus on the main character.

Secondly, ur sporadic type viewers hardly know much about ur secondary characters. Most, more than likely don't even know the names of the character, and if that's the case, why would they care to waste 1/2 hours on a character they hardly know.

nychick | August 18, 18:50 CET

I think the majority of the fanbase who know Buffy and Angel well enough to come back for any kind of movie will be invested in the whole cast.

Personally i don't know anybody that doesn't know Spike, Willow or Giles at least as well as they know Buffy or Angel.

The way i see it there was a time when Angel himself was just an accompanying character and his getting the spotlight turned out to be the right move despite many at the time saying that Angel was "just Buffy's boyfriend". Who is to say that the other characters won't be equally as successful in a lead role.

The Watcher | August 18, 19:02 CET

I didn't watch Buffy or Angel solely for the lead characters. Now that they've had time for their stories to be told, it would be nice for the focus to shift on the other characters I love because their stories are just as important to me. Don't get me wrong, seeing the characters of Buffy and Angel on screen again would be nice. However, they simply aren't mission critical to me. Remember, in the beginning Angel wasn't the main/lead character yet he managed to carry his own series. The other actors on the show are quite capable of holding their own in a tv movie or a new series. While some of you may find it annoying to see people say that Buffy and Angel aren't necessary, I find it equally annoying to suggest that the other characters aren't worthy of having their own stories told or that they aren't suitable to play a leading role.

killinj | August 18, 19:06 CET

Have loved Angel and, especially, Buffy as characters. Like DB and love SMG as actors. (Initially was compelled, in fact, to watch Buffy for the main character - I found SMG's characterization absolutely startling). Would love Angel and, especially, Buffy to reappear, in major role, in supporting role, at least in interesting cameo in future projects.

But I have to agree that the minds of Joss Whedon and the other writers hold many more wonderful stories involving the other existing characters of Spike, Willow, Illyria, Giles, um Wes?, as well as many more delightful characters who have yet to emerge from the hive-mind. If it's written by Joss et al., it could be about the crazy love between Parker and Veruca and I'd rush to see it. My bottom-line is that the story arcs of both Buffy and Angel were brought to a place of fulfillment for those characters - Buffy no longer has to be the Chosen *One*, and Angel has (possibly) shanshu-d through his son. It would be no bad thing to allow the stories of others to reach that same point.

Now realistically we probably want some big name attraction, but that could be a new young talent who would jump at the chance of being involved in a Whedon production. ("Look, words that you won't actually be embarrassed about saying!")

[ edited by SoddingNancyTribe on 2004-08-18 17:52 ]

SoddingNancyTribe | August 18, 19:26 CET

"[It's great] not being tied down to a series for nine months out of the year. It really is refreshing to see myself going into another arena."

I understand his need for a change and a challenge, but if he’s ‘also in talks to co-star in a high-profile franchise flick’, wouldn’t that just be playing the same character in a (possible) number of movies? I guess it’s the movie “level” that makes the difference.
I know he worked really hard as a lead character for five years. I know he’s probably feeling a little burnt out. I know he probably wants to spend more time with his family. It’s just the ‘I want to be movie star’ thing that gripes me a little bit. I’m sure it’s his ambition and not an agent pushing him, but the movies are not necessarily better. They’re just bigger.
Of course anything on the silver screen that evolved from Buffyverse would be bigger and better!

bloodflowers | August 18, 19:47 CET

If a big screen movie comes first, I would like to see Buffy and Angel playing
significant roles in it. Hopefully, success of such a movie can be a vehicle
to bring a new Buffyverse series which will concentrate on other characters
waiting their stories to be told.

I love Buffy as a character. That's why I would like her be happily retired :))

Lince | August 18, 19:54 CET

I'm a big fan of both Buffy and Angel and so would very much like to see more of both of them. However I'm a bigger fan of Joss and so will be more than happy with whatever he turns his hand to next (unless it's a stage musical, because it's somewhat financially impractical for me to fly over to the US just to watch a musical, even if it is writen/directed by the great man)

EDIT to correct typo

[ edited by Paul_Rocks on 2004-08-18 17:59 ]

Paul_Rocks | August 18, 19:59 CET

I really wish that there would be a Buffy or Angel movie.I'd love to see the cast of both shows, one more time.

TheSlayer246 | August 18, 20:01 CET

"While some of you may find it annoying to see people say that Buffy and Angel aren't necessary, I find it equally annoying to suggest that the other characters aren't worthy of having their own stories told or that they aren't suitable to play a leading role." ---Killinj

I never said that I didn't think the other characters were not worthy. I LOVE every character in the Verse. I did say that I would be sooo excited to see movies with other characters. I am on the edge waiting for anything Buffyverse. I just said that my heart lies with the story of Buffy and Angel. I was just stating how important "to me" that their story not be over. Everyone was talking about how we didn't need them...and maybe "we" don't...my statement was just saying that there are some of us who long for them to be included.

Coll | August 18, 20:47 CET

Coll - my comments weren't directed at you, but were a reaction to a general sense that some in the fandom want to have both Buffy and Angel or nothing at all.

killinj | August 18, 21:36 CET

I think too much emphasis is being put on the age factor. In Star Trek, Spock's species live much longer lives than humans therefore he shouldn't age at the same rate as the humans yet he did look his true human age in the films but no one cared about it because we know he's not really a Vulcan in real life. If there ever is a big screen movie for the Buffyverse the audience will be filled with us fans who will just be thrilled to see our beloved characters brought back to life and we won't care if they look a little older than they did before. Also, with big movie budgets they can do wonders to make people look younger than they are.

My opinion is this, if there is a big screen movie, it has to have at least Buffy in it and Angel would be great too. For the small screen, any of the other supporting characters could certainly carry a plot all their own. And if that is a huge success, they could also possibly headline a big screen movie.

I think ideally, if Joss can get DB for a television movie, he'd prefer that but if DB isn't interested Joss can definitely make a great story with any of the other main characters. Also, DB may be saying he's not interested in a television movie but that also could just be a lot of talk to get more money offered to him. Joss indicated that Fox was interested and they know the potential dvd sales that could follow so they may be willing to offer more money (and produce a way better movie) than the WB could.

Firefly Flanatic | August 18, 22:17 CET

I don't think most of us are trying to imply that we don't want DB or SMG in the movies. I for one would love to see them in films again, BUT, quite honestly I am far more vested in Spike's story and where he goes from here. Do I think that Angel and Buffy are part of his story....yes I do, but I also think that a movie or series for Spike could do just fine with perhaps only casual mention of either one of them.There are a lot of other characters that in combination with him could make for some interesting veiwing.If there was to be a S6 for Angel it was apparent that they were going to have Spike and Angel moving on from Buffy, so her presence was not a factor.
I think the most upsetting thing to me, is that the networks seem to be hung up on the DB and SMG factor, and that doesn't make them as open to movies for the other characters. I would hate to think that the chances of seeing the stories of some of the most interesting characters in the Verse could be limited to whether DB or SMG see fit to make an appearence .

kathylovesspike | August 18, 22:22 CET

Well spoken, blwessels. I agree they need B or A for the silver screen. Imagine "Andrew, the Motion Picture?" HAR HAR! Three people would go.

But the small screen is quite suitable for our Scoobies, and scooby-wanna-bes. I'm planning on watching them all, because I know they will be plural.

When Joss does return to series tv, I hope HBO sends him a sweet little "come see us" package. What he could DO on that network! My imagination runs overtime.

Willowy | August 18, 22:26 CET

That is certainly true for me Blwessels. In my opinion we choose to watch a series based upon characters that are fantasy based and therefore are willing to suspend our disbelief at least that far.

Is it really so hard to stretch that a little further and ignore the minor effects of aging we see in David, James and the other longterm vampire characters?

For me, as long as they aren't going around in wheelchairs or on zimmerframes, i'll be able to turn a blind eye ;)

The Watcher | August 18, 22:26 CET

Oh and as for what you said about needing Buffy and Angel for a cinematic release but using the other characters for telemovies, as i posted earlier, could not agree more :)

The Watcher | August 18, 22:28 CET

"For me, as long as they aren't going around in wheelchairs or on zimmerframes, i'll be able to turn a blind eye ;)" - Demonic

Well, Spike did have that time period when he was in a wheelchair... ;-)

Firefly Flanatic | August 18, 22:38 CET

Hehe, yeah that's a point, thankfully i didn't give up on the slayerverse back in season 2 of Buffy because of the fact :)

The Watcher | August 18, 22:44 CET

Hmmm... how could you justify a movie about an aging archeologist?

Maybe Indy is suprised to learn has a now adult aged son with an over-arching forehead as a result of one of the miriad love affairs he's had while galavanting around the globe???? Kinda full circle from the last one. Indy has tried to retire, but his son is in trouble and hijinks ensue...

David could fit that part I think.

I like Simon's idea too for a telemovie. And the climax might be that they bring Angel back in a way similar to Darla and then he'd be human. Then perhaps all you'd need DB for is one day of shooting and maybe her could be coaxed into that.

Doc

Doctor_Evil | August 18, 23:43 CET

Not to tick off any DB fans but I think he's an average actor at best. Only time will tell if he can carry the lead in a movie.

As for Indy 4. I always wondered, since he drank from the Holy Grail, isn't he immortal?

IMMORTAL | August 19, 00:49 CET

Have to agree with those who feel the B/A 'verse experience wouldn't seem complete without Buffy or Angel ... on the wide screen.

However, AFA boob tubeage goes, I don't need the presence of either Slayer prime or original-souled-vamp to get my Joss jones fix. Spike'll do just fine, as would Wes (sure they can bring him back), Illyria and either Giles or Willow. I'm content to pick up the threads of the missing players from the other character's comments, which I feel sure Joss would be careful to include if neither DB or SMG can be coaxed on board a TV vehicle.

Money or no money, I can imagine both are enjoying the expanded perspective that a little physical and psychological distance from their long tenures on both shows is providing them now, and as the months roll on I feel certain they'll both come to appreciate even more greatly what a magickal thing it was being involved in the Jossverse for as long as they were, on a career as well as a personal level. When they're ready to be re-challenged by superior writing and committment to character development in a wider-screen format, hopefully Joss will be available, time-wise, to help make that happen for all of us.

For TV movies, I'm satisfied with the idea of the focus resting on some of the lesser, and grievously overlooked or underdeveloped characters. It saddens me that Gunn is alleged by Joss to have died for sure, since he's the one member of the latter-day FG we really know the least about. We even got to meet Lorne's 'mom', yet not a glimpse was given of Gunn's earlier homelife. Sad that it's an opportunity probably lost for good. Still, exploring Illyria more thoroughly would be fascinating, and both Spike and Wes would fit well with her evolving story (as would hers if either of them were the focus of a TV movie).

Plus, I think it can all (the ageing) be explained if the writers just say that "hey, having a soul will do that to ya..."

I've been thinking this for years, Willowy. The burden of having a soul would no doubt wreak havoc on the vampire complexion, typically so unused to the stress of concern over bad deeds done. It makes perfect sense to me that both Angel and Spike both would manifest the ravages of their guilt and self-recriminations on their faces as a reflection of the humility in their human souls.

In Star Trek, Spock's species live much longer lives than humans therefore he shouldn't age at the same rate as the humans yet he did look his true human age in the films but no one cared about it because we know he's not really a Vulcan in real life.

True. But then, Spock is only half-Vulcan. Apparently his mother's side predominates genetically, at least when it comes to the visual signs of aging. Coming from a desert planet, it's a shame he never learned to moisturize. ;)

Wiseblood | August 19, 01:52 CET

With the 4 reference maybe he is talking about Jurassic Park 4. There was a link on AICN which talked about how they may try to resurrect the series.

I would love if DB and SMG would come back to work on a series of TV movies but if they dont want to do it I can understand that too.

I would love to see a continuation of the Not Fade Away story line which can be done without DB or just a small cameo appearance. I have heard many people say it so please anyone don't feel slighted if I am not giving credit to where i first heard this hypothetical continuation. All they have to do is have Angel scooped up by the Dragon and taken away. Then we can have Spike and Illyria searching high and low for him and along the way they can run into/enlist the help of some other Slayerverse characters. Then if they are able to get a big screen movie you can have them find Angel and continue from there. In the mean time they can also develop new charachters who can continue the Slayerverse after these sets of actors either become to good for TV or want a change. I wouldn't mind seeing Conor's charachter developed a little more either.

I am sure anything Joss would come up with would be much better but there is a way to do it without DB or SMG.

[ edited by krall the conqueror on 2004-08-19 01:18 ]

Krall the Conqueror | August 19, 02:49 CET

It's Fantastic Four. I know some people who were kinda involved in the casting the film and DB certainly fits the type of actor (low-to-medium star level) that they were looking ofr. Plus, the whole emphasis on 4 is a dead giveaway. Yeah, everyone on FF has been cast so I am assuming he didn't ge the part he was hoping for & that this interview was probably a couple of weeks old which explains the time dislocation.

Unitas | August 19, 04:16 CET

Unitas! Good to see you, where ya been?

Willowy | August 19, 04:57 CET

Nice to be missed.

Haven't really been anywhere. Guess I am just going through a bit of a quiet phase.

Unitas | August 19, 08:25 CET

Well Buffy and Angel as characters have had their spotlight for years now. And for both shows the side characters as a whole have been tremendously important. One of the sad things has always been for me that due to time, there's so many characters I've always wanted to see more of. So I think TV movies are perfect for those guys.

In the meantime, Joss can get clout in Hollywood with Serenity (fingers crossed) and get a BtVS/AtS out later. Poifect.

As for that possible movie, I don't know. Part of me wants to see everyone of BtVS and AtS in there, but another part knows what happens to movies with too many characters. It was the one weak spot of X2 for me that with so many 'leads' time is just spread too thin between them.

On a side note, what would a Buffyverse movie be called? Not Buffy I tell you that much. Let's not have people remember the first one and think this is a remake or something. Joss renamed Firefly, so this should be renamed too especially if it's as much an AtS movie as a BtVS movie. Any ideas on what that could be called? 'Slayer(s)'?

EdDantes | August 19, 11:56 CET

August 18 2004