No Time To Die: Production Diary

13983994014034042507

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @ToTheRight, when the thread title's headline changes is when we have real news. Going by the number of new posts the thread has doesn't have a bearing on breaking revelations; I've found out the hard way.
  • Posts: 4,622
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    They offered it to Dalton before Brosnan. Dalton was unavailable so they signed Brosnan. Brosnan's Remingston Steele contract clause precludes him from playing the role, by this point Dalton is finishing Brenda Starr and is available.

    I'm pretty sure that's not right. I was in the cutting rooms back then and knew, and still know very well, many of the Bond editing team at that time and all I ever heard was Brosnan was everyone's top choice. I never heard Dalton mentioned once until Brosnan had to pull out. I firmly remember Tony Wade, then the Bond LP, stopping to chat with John Shirley (editor of Chitty, LALD and TMWTGG) who I was working with and lunching in the pub garden at the time, and Tony Wade said Brosnan was Bond, and this was pretty deep into pre-production on TLD but before an official announcement.
    Yes this all fits. Dalts if I recall was considered and on the radar when he was in his '20s but declined any further consideration because he considered himself too young.
    Circa post-Rog. Broz was the man until Rem Steele killed it for him.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited September 2016 Posts: 6,281
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    They offered it to Dalton before Brosnan. Dalton was unavailable so they signed Brosnan. Brosnan's Remingston Steele contract clause precludes him from playing the role, by this point Dalton is finishing Brenda Starr and is available.

    I'm pretty sure that's not right. I was in the cutting rooms back then and knew, and still know very well, many of the Bond editing team at that time and all I ever heard was Brosnan was everyone's top choice. I never heard Dalton mentioned once until Brosnan had to pull out. I firmly remember Tony Wade, then the Bond LP, stopping to chat with John Shirley (editor of Chitty, LALD and TMWTGG) who I was working with and lunching in the pub garden at the time, and Tony Wade said Brosnan was Bond, and this was pretty deep into pre-production on TLD but before an official announcement.

    I think you are right. It sounds too much like after-the-fact spin that they offered TLD to Dalton first.

    In 1986 it was pretty obvious--at least in the US--that Brosnan was the frontrunner to replace Moore. That's why NBC un-cancelled Remington Steele (the ratings were poor, but the opportunity to hold onto the new Bond was too tempting). I sure hope Brosnan fired his publicist.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Can't really hold on to the new Bond if you're the big reason he never got his shot at it when he was meant to.

    And wasn't Remington Steele cancelled not long after anyway, with only one season more turned out before the axe came cracking down?
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,399
    I disagree on your second paragraph. That's the narrative the Brosnan detractors want to believe, that they decided they had to ditch Pierce and go back to square one. But Brosnan was still in the frame for CR. He said in that interview that he'd heard from the studio that they didn't know what they were doing, and Purvis and Wade have said before that they originally wrote (or started to write, dunno what stage in the proccess they were before they went for the reboot angle) CR for Brosnan. But people act like DAD was the end of the line and EON finally snapped out of it and all this when I think it's clear, from various bits of information, that it wasn't the case at all and that Brosnan returning was a possibility right up until Craig was cast.

    you can disagree with it - but what i was saying, came straight from the mouth of MGW during an interview on one of the DVDs for CR... if your talking about them wanting Pierce to do a non-rebooted version of CR, then this is the first time i have ever heard of it.... from what i recall MGW saying was, they had just acquired the rights to CR either during, or shortly after production on DAD - and both he and Babs were keen on doing the film - but if they did it, they wanted to do the story right and have it with a James Bond just starting his 007 career... but... they were also keen on bringing back Pierce to do a 5th film ((because i don't know if you glossed over it, i did mention that DAD was a box office success, and Broz was still a very popular Bond.)).. so as MGW says, they reached a point where they had to make a decision - do they keep on going and bring back Pierce for a 5th film, and possibly carry on in the same fashion as DAD (which was a box office success).. or do they take a risk, kind of blow everything up and start from the ground up again - and it was in this decision making process of electing to start things over again in CR, to go with a more stripped down adventure (ie: FRWL, which MGW often pointed to as inspiration for the production of CR), because he felt like they needed to get back to Fleming, and that the series was starting to lose some of that.

    the decision to let Pierce go, and then hire Craig was not a quick turn around.. he was let go (or stepped down, depending on your view) in Feb. 2004... Craig wasn't announced as Bond until Oct. 2005.

    and for the record, i am not a Brosnan detractor - i merely recounting to the best of my ability what i remember watching, and reading during that time period and after..
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited September 2016 Posts: 4,399
    bondjames wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    If i recall Brozza was not favoured by Cubby Broccoli! I think its in John Glens book, that he and Michael Wilson had to persuade Cubby that he was suitable!
    I'm very curious to have some confirmation on this. I'm sure Cubby probably favoured one of them during the 1986 casting choice to replace Moore, and MGM also probably had a point of view.

    well, i believe he probably favored Pierce, as according to Broz, everything had been settled between his agent and Cubby about becoming Bond - but at the last minute, the TV Network people came swooping in with a new Remington Steele contract, and he couldn't get out of it - so Dalton ended up being their fallback option.... this was talked about in the "Everything Or Nothing" documentary..... Pierce even said that everything was pretty much a 'go', a deal had been made, and the only thing left to do was cross the T's and dot the I's - and he was literally on his way out the door to do so, when his agent called and gave him the bad news about Remington Steele being re-up'd..

    it's funny, the same thing happened 6 years earlier with Raiders Of The Lost Ark.. Tom Selleck was chosen for the role of Indiana Jones (after Lucas passed on having Ford, who was Speilberg's first choice).. but his show Magnum P.I. had been re-up'd, meaning he couldn't film Raiders, so he had to drop out - so they called Harrison to replace him... and the rest is history.
  • Posts: 5,767
    19 new comments in this thread. 'Oh', thinks I, 'perhaps there's something interesting in there?'

    But no just an ever more desperate kicking of heels until an official announcement.
    You should know better by now. I saw 45 new comments and knew instantly that´s not enough to indicate news.

  • Just be patient people :-). Patience is a lost human virtue these days. Such a pity.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Just be patient people :-). Patience is a lost human virtue these days. Such a pity.

    100% Agreed.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
  • edited September 2016 Posts: 12,837
    @haserot I think that's the narrative they'd want people to believe because it makes it seem like they had a clear direction in mind, etc, but imo it was much more complicated than that and until Craig signed on it was all up in the air.

    This very site reported that they'd heard Brosnan was the top candidate for CR as late as 2005, due to the lack of a clear alternative (I think how the producers and Campbell were disagreeing about casting, he wanted Cavill they didn't etc, makes this believeable, as Brosnan would've been a safe pair of hands)

    https://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/bond_21_brosnan_back.php3?t=bond21&s=bond21&id=0915

    And I'm sure Purvis and Wade said in a radio interview or something not too long ago that they started writing the script under the assumption Brosnan would be back too. I can't find it right now and ought to get back to work tbh but I'll have a look later.

    Anyway here's an idea if they want to continue on from SP: Swann dies of natural causes? Some sort of disease? Open with her funeral or whatever, then news of Blofeld's escape and exile in some foreign enemy territory (maybe Russia? Play up the current tensions between them and the US, say things have escalated), who refuse to hand him over (because he's working on some scheme for them). Bond realises that life's too short, that for all his skills and experience he couldn't save Madeline from cancer or whatever she died of, decides that since he's eventually going to die anyway why not in service of his country. Goes back to MI6, taking on what essentially amounts to a suicide mission (go in with no backup, if he's caught he's disavowed, to kill Blofeld).. Bit contrived but despite my desire for a YOLT adaptation, I would rather have something more original than "Blofeld escapes and kills Swann, Bond is out for revenge".
  • How about Blofeld escape, and Bond realises that he was wrong to not shoot him and realises the necessity of licence to kill. He blames Swann for persuading him otherwise and he leaves her.
  • I want SPECTRE to be..............secret and effective again! Guys, let's not forget that SPECTRE and Blofeld have been entirely compromised by now! That's very clear from the finale of SPECTRE. MI6 must have loads, bucket loads of information now to dismantle EVERY scheme or operation SPECTRE has a finger in.

    I'm surprised NO one is really addressing that. So to actually give SPECTRE a future in future films, the crime syndicate needs to be both effective and entirely secret again. Obviously, the organization needs to be a modern interpretation again of the 1960's SPECTRE. More of a Bilderberg-esque secret brotherhood as designed by Sam Mendes, and less of the cheesy Ken Adam-style syndicate. But again, it needs to be hiding in complete secrecy again, just like in "FRWL" and "TB". And obviously, James Bond should not be able to compromise SPECTRE again, like he did in Rome.

    The same goes for its head, Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Blofeld is NOT like "The Dark Knight"s The Joker. He's the secret head of counter-espionage syndicate SPECTRE, just like 'M' is the secret head of MI6. Letting Blofeld escape, or letting him being on the run constantly only destroys the mystique of the character. Blofeld therefore needs to hide in secrecy again in Bond #25. Let him....disappear. There are many interesting story ideas to let this happen. But please don't make an entire movie about Blofeld's escape.

    Best thing IMO is to let him escape in a neat, clean, typical Blofeld-esque way. No 'The Joker' stuff please. And all of this during the first 20 to 30 min's of the film. So that during the rest of the film Bond can do a plain, solid, secret mission again! No more personal backgrounds, instead more secrecy!

    "From Russia With Love" IMO could still serve as the best template on how to make SPECTRE and Blofeld become secret again.

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    How about Bond starts setting the trend again and stops following the post-9/11 atmosphere cliches? That template has become heavily tiresome. And please, no molehunt.
  • How about Bond starts setting the trend again and stops following the post-9/11 atmosphere cliches? That template has become heavily tiresome. And please, no molehunt.

    Well, I think my above post shows that in great detail no? NOT looking to post-9/11 atmosphere clichés, but instead move again to Ian Fleming's interpretation of SPECTRE. That template can never be tiresome, because it's Bond...
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    How about Bond starts setting the trend again and stops following the post-9/11 atmosphere cliches? That template has become heavily tiresome. And please, no molehunt.

    Well, I think my above post shows that in great detail no? NOT looking to post-9/11 atmosphere clichés, but instead move again to Ian Fleming's interpretation of SPECTRE. That template can never be tiresome, because it's Bond...
    Didn't see it at first. But, yes. I definitely agree with your post above. They should stop following this Dark Knight trend or whatever standards Christopher Nolan or Bourne has set for the cinema. It's time to reinvent the wheel properly, this time. Do their own thing rather than being "inspired" by someone else's work.
  • How about Bond starts setting the trend again and stops following the post-9/11 atmosphere cliches? That template has become heavily tiresome. And please, no molehunt.

    Well, I think my above post shows that in great detail no? NOT looking to post-9/11 atmosphere clichés, but instead move again to Ian Fleming's interpretation of SPECTRE. That template can never be tiresome, because it's Bond...
    Didn't see it at first. But, yes. I definitely agree with your post above. They should stop following this Dark Knight trend or whatever standards Christopher Nolan or Bourne has set for the cinema. It's time to reinvent the wheel properly, this time. Do their own thing rather than being "inspired" by someone else's work.

    You like my idea of...making Blofeld and SPECTRE entirely secret again :-)?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    How about Bond starts setting the trend again and stops following the post-9/11 atmosphere cliches? That template has become heavily tiresome. And please, no molehunt.

    Well, I think my above post shows that in great detail no? NOT looking to post-9/11 atmosphere clichés, but instead move again to Ian Fleming's interpretation of SPECTRE. That template can never be tiresome, because it's Bond...
    Didn't see it at first. But, yes. I definitely agree with your post above. They should stop following this Dark Knight trend or whatever standards Christopher Nolan or Bourne has set for the cinema. It's time to reinvent the wheel properly, this time. Do their own thing rather than being "inspired" by someone else's work.

    You like my idea of...making Blofeld and SPECTRE entirely secret again :-)?
    Yep. And adding to that, I'd make SPECTRE horrifyingly monstrous and scary, as well. Precisely what we were promised in the first trailer of Spectre. Shadowy and villainous in their literal forms.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Gustav_Graves, I'm sorry, but EON aren't just going to let Blofeld hide away again, especially with how much Waltz would cost them.

    If Blofeld is back in a Craig-starring Bond 25, it's going to be a full-out conflict between the two, in a film that holds nothing back and pulls no stops. There's no reason not to throw everything and the kitchen sink at this thing since EON have already used up a modern interpretation of SPECTRE at the tail end of Dan's era. They started it, now they must finish it.

    It would've been far more interesting to see SPECTRE develop throughout a new actor's era as they did with Connery back at the very start, but they've blown their chances of that now and have to make due with what they've got.


    It's a shame Marvel got to the idea first, but it would have been interesting to see SPECTRE infecting MI6 from the inside as hidden in plain sight sleeper agents gaining control in secret for decades working in the same headquarters as their enemies in each major nation's intelligence services.
  • @Gustav_Graves, I'm sorry, but EON aren't just going to let Blofeld hide away again, especially with how much Waltz would cost them.

    If Blofeld is back in a Craig-starring Bond 25, it's going to be a full-out conflict between the two, in a film that holds nothing back and pulls no stops. There's no reason not to throw everything and the kitchen sink at this thing since EON have already used up a modern interpretation of SPECTRE at the tail end of Dan's era. They started it, now they must finish it.

    It would've been far more interesting to see SPECTRE develop throughout a new actor's era as they did with Connery back at the very start, but they've blown their chances of that now and have to make due with what they've got.

    Nah, don't be too negative. I honestly think you can give Blofeld lots of screentime, while he still is very much hiding somewhere. Also, I think it's a bit over-the-top to say EON is f**c-ing everyone up. I do think SPECTRE and Blofeld were pretty much nicely introduced in "SPECTRE". In a way that's very reminiscent of "FRWL".

    So it's a bit of a pity that people in here think EON only follows Marvel, while at the same time Marvel is actually following Ian Fleming's Bond as well. It's a mutual cross-pollination so to say :-). And even if it won't be happening, then we Bond fans should set the right example.like I do :-). And come up with good ideas.
  • Posts: 4,325
    HASEROT wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    If i recall Brozza was not favoured by Cubby Broccoli! I think its in John Glens book, that he and Michael Wilson had to persuade Cubby that he was suitable!
    I'm very curious to have some confirmation on this. I'm sure Cubby probably favoured one of them during the 1986 casting choice to replace Moore, and MGM also probably had a point of view.

    well, i believe he probably favored Pierce, as according to Broz, everything had been settled between his agent and Cubby about becoming Bond - but at the last minute, the TV Network people came swooping in with a new Remington Steele contract, and he couldn't get out of it - so Dalton ended up being their fallback option.... this was talked about in the "Everything Or Nothing" documentary..... Pierce even said that everything was pretty much a 'go', a deal had been made, and the only thing left to do was cross the T's and dot the I's - and he was literally on his way out the door to do so, when his agent called and gave him the bad news about Remington Steele being re-up'd..

    it's funny, the same thing happened 6 years earlier with Raiders Of The Lost Ark.. Tom Selleck was chosen for the role of Indiana Jones (after Lucas passed on having Ford, who was Speilberg's first choice).. but his show Magnum P.I. had been re-up'd, meaning he couldn't film Raiders, so he had to drop out - so they called Harrison to replace him... and the rest is history.

    They offered the role to Dalton first, his schedule meant he wasn't in a position to accept, then they offered and signed Brosnan to the role.
  • Posts: 19,339
    in service of his country. Goes back to MI6, taking on what essentially amounts to a suicide mission (go in with no backup, if he's caught he's disavowed, to kill Blofeld).. Bit contrived but despite my desire for a YOLT adaptation, I would rather have something more original than "Blofeld escapes and kills Swann, Bond is out for revenge".

    If we get ANOTHER revenge Bond flick then I give up...just give him a stand-alone mission ffs !!!

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Dalton was in the talks even for OHMSS. So no surprise he was on the agenda again for TLD. But it was Brosnan who Cubby wanted and only because of stupid tv network execs the deal didn't work out. Those execs thought they can cash in with the new popularity of Brosnan who was constantly in the media then. And so they didn't cancel RS only to cancel it anyway half a year later, those idiots.

    Still, I'm glad it all turned out that way, as Dalton was perfect for the two Bond movies he got.

  • So to actually give SPECTRE a future in future films, the crime syndicate needs to be both effective and entirely secret again. Obviously, the organization needs to be a modern interpretation again of the 1960's SPECTRE. . .

    . . . So that during the rest of the film Bond can do a plain, solid, secret mission again! No more personal backgrounds, instead more secrecy!

    Good in theory, but EON have wrong-footed themselves here, haven't they? By creating the 'family' relationship between Bond and Blofeld, now everything is personal. Once you create the "foster brother/author of all your pain" connection, it's impossible to send Bond on a mission that isn't personal, unless it's a mission that doesn't involve Spectre at all.

    Unless of course you want to reboot again.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Dalton was in the talks even for OHMSS. So no surprise he was on the agenda again for TLD. But it was Brosnan who Cubby wanted and only because of stupid tv network execs the deal didn't work out. Those execs thought they can cash in with the new popularity of Brosnan who was constantly in the media then. And so they didn't cancel RS only to cancel it anyway half a year later, those idiots.

    Still, I'm glad it all turned out that way, as Dalton was perfect for the two Bond movies he got.

    So why did they offer it to Dalton first?
  • octofinger wrote: »

    So to actually give SPECTRE a future in future films, the crime syndicate needs to be both effective and entirely secret again. Obviously, the organization needs to be a modern interpretation again of the 1960's SPECTRE. . .

    . . . So that during the rest of the film Bond can do a plain, solid, secret mission again! No more personal backgrounds, instead more secrecy!

    Good in theory, but EON have wrong-footed themselves here, haven't they? By creating the 'family' relationship between Bond and Blofeld, now everything is personal. Once you create the "foster brother/author of all your pain" connection, it's impossible to send Bond on a mission that isn't personal, unless it's a mission that doesn't involve Spectre at all.

    Unless of course you want to reboot again.

    Nonsense :-). If you are very creative, while at the same time maintaining some realism, you actually can bring back SPECTRE in a way I just laid out.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Dalton was in the talks even for OHMSS. So no surprise he was on the agenda again for TLD. But it was Brosnan who Cubby wanted and only because of stupid tv network execs the deal didn't work out. Those execs thought they can cash in with the new popularity of Brosnan who was constantly in the media then. And so they didn't cancel RS only to cancel it anyway half a year later, those idiots.

    Still, I'm glad it all turned out that way, as Dalton was perfect for the two Bond movies he got.

    So why did they offer it to Dalton first?

    Because Cubby was a gentlemen and loyalty was one of his virtues. Of course he would offer it to Dalton first, he would have offered it to Dalton again in 1994 if Brosnan had gotten the role in 1987.

    It's also clear that Cubby never would have treated Brosnan they way he got treated by BB and MGW in 2004. Cubby would have talked with Brosnan face to face and struck a deal for a last fifth or found a graceful way to part with Brosnan.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Gustav_Graves, I'm sorry, but EON aren't just going to let Blofeld hide away again, especially with how much Waltz would cost them.

    If Blofeld is back in a Craig-starring Bond 25, it's going to be a full-out conflict between the two, in a film that holds nothing back and pulls no stops. There's no reason not to throw everything and the kitchen sink at this thing since EON have already used up a modern interpretation of SPECTRE at the tail end of Dan's era. They started it, now they must finish it.

    It would've been far more interesting to see SPECTRE develop throughout a new actor's era as they did with Connery back at the very start, but they've blown their chances of that now and have to make due with what they've got.

    Nah, don't be too negative. I honestly think you can give Blofeld lots of screentime, while he still is very much hiding somewhere. Also, I think it's a bit over-the-top to say EON is f**c-ing everyone up. I do think SPECTRE and Blofeld were pretty much nicely introduced in "SPECTRE". In a way that's very reminiscent of "FRWL".

    So it's a bit of a pity that people in here think EON only follows Marvel, while at the same time Marvel is actually following Ian Fleming's Bond as well. It's a mutual cross-pollination so to say :-). And even if it won't be happening, then we Bond fans should set the right example.like I do :-). And come up with good ideas.

    I didn't say EON were "f@#$ing up" as that's rather undignified. I think most will agree though that the rights to Blofeld and SPECTRE should've been saved for a new era of films where they could be used to their full effect instead of at the last legs of Dan's era. That's not being negative, just sensical. Because I really don't want them to feature SPECTRE after this. If they're not going to use the properties to their full potential and really deliver, they should wait until they do feel ready, which I don't think they were here. Some of the retconning is infuriating too, as it took a lot of Silva's agency away for his revenge angle, which was one of the only things that made him interesting to me.

    I also don't think EON are following Marvel, I just think that in this case Marvel are outdoing Bond in how they used their secret organization. SPECTRE needs to feel like a massive revelation and I want to feel their power, but I didn't get as much of that as I wanted in SP. We got to hear all the stuff the organization was involved in worldwide, but never saw any of their horrific control in action aside from the bombing they perform of Africa to get them to join with Nine Eyes. All we have to go on is White's story of why he quit and Blofeld's bragging. They also cut the backstory of SPECTRE's creation and the flashback of White and Blofeld meeting from the film, which is another potential strand of story lost forever that would've been far more interesting.

    You know I like SP, but it could have been exponentially improved in ways that should've felt apparent. So many moments that could have been franchise defining for the modern era, like a torture scene that actually showed a Bond affected, with a more interesting final act. Anyway....
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Dalton was in the talks even for OHMSS. So no surprise he was on the agenda again for TLD. But it was Brosnan who Cubby wanted and only because of stupid tv network execs the deal didn't work out. Those execs thought they can cash in with the new popularity of Brosnan who was constantly in the media then. And so they didn't cancel RS only to cancel it anyway half a year later, those idiots.

    Still, I'm glad it all turned out that way, as Dalton was perfect for the two Bond movies he got.

    So why did they offer it to Dalton first?

    Because Cubby was a gentlemen and loyalty was one of his virtues. Of course he would offer it to Dalton first, he would have offered it to Dalton again in 1994 if Brosnan had gotten the role in 1987.

    It's also clear that Cubby never would have treated Brosnan they way he got treated by BB and MGW in 2004. Cubby would have talked with Brosnan face to face and struck a deal for a last fifth or found a graceful way to part with Brosnan.

    Loyalty didn't really come into it. He was sceptical about Dalton because of his public lack of interest in the role and was encouraged to pursue him by his wife, Dana, who incidentally also encouraged him to go with Sean Connery.
  • Posts: 7,410
    I found the quote in John Glens book, 'For my Eyes Only'. It was Glen and Michael Wilson who wanted Brosnan, Cubby and i quote "wasn't crazy about the idea!" (Casting Brosnan).
    Cubby wanted him to do a 3 day screentest, Glen shot it with scenes from FRWL and OHMSS before Cubby was convinced! When Brosnan was dropped, they went with Dalton, and didn't ask Tim to screentest because they were so sure he was right!
Sign In or Register to comment.