Jump to content

Menu

Outlander people, did you watch?


Mom in High Heels
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I dunno.  I'm just not feeling the chemistry between Claire and Jamie.  James Bond watched it, and said he'd like it a lot more if it weren't for the whole time travel business.  I told him it was the impetus of the books, but he said that bit was just boring. ;)

 

Ohhhhhh, I'm totally feeling the chemistry. Dh, who has not read the books, but is enjoying the series enough that he may indulge me and read them, finally, after *19* years (!!!!!), is feeling it, too. He can recognize "smitteness"  ;) 

 

Ahem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved this episode.  I'm enjoying Geillis and am very curious to see how they're going to play her out.  I keep watching for some small sign that shows what she's up to.  

 

Legwhore...  *snorts*  

 

Is it wrong that I want to reach through my tv and smack the everlasting daylights out of that little girl?  

 

ETA:  Did everyone catch Diana and Ron in this episode?  I thought Diana looked fabulous but I'm not sure I'd have noticed either one of them if I hadn't known to be watching for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished the first book. I wanted to read it before bothering with the show.

I thought it was rather lame and boring. It read as though the author just suddenly thought, "oh I'll have this happen next!" And tossed it in there. No real plot or character development. *shrug*

 

I figure the sex abuse (both in Clair and Jamie's relationship and with the psycho Randall) will be featured in the show, tho frankly, I thought it was just lazy writing in the book that didn't contribute much to the characters or make them very relatable for me. But I know sex sells. Even bad sex apparently.

 

I just don't get the appeal and have no desire to read the second book unless someone can convince me it gets significantly better.

 

I am not a fan of Game of Thrones either. I watched one episode and thought it was just rubbish porn. I kept thinking it would have to get better at some point, but no, it didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More voice over. Die, voice over, die!

 

I did really like the way they had the slow 1940's music playing to show how caught up in her own thoughts she was.

 

I'm torn about the chemistry between the two of them. Increasingly I kind of like him and don't like her. She's thinner and stiffer than the Claire in my mind. I can't decide if they're meshing well or not.

 

I think one of the mistakes with the show is that the book is so strongly from her POV, but the later books introduce lots of POV's, including Jamie's. If I was going to make a cinematic TV show version of the show, I think I'd expand the perspective. It does away with the absurd perceived need to voice over everything with the text of the book (gag) and uses the format better. I mean, you can't have an epic show from a strong single perspective. Or, at least, I can't think of one. You want this to be Game of Thrones or Battlestar Galatica or The Tudors or whatever? All those shows have a diversity of perspectives and different points where you pull for different characters. Let us pull for Jamie by showing us more about him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished the first book. I wanted to read it before bothering with the show.

I thought it was rather lame and boring. It read as though the author just suddenly thought, "oh I'll have this happen next!" And tossed it in there. No real plot or character development. *shrug*

 

I figure the sex abuse (both in Clair and Jamie's relationship and with the psycho Randall) will be featured in the show, tho frankly, I thought it was just lazy writing in the book that didn't contribute much to the characters or make them very relatable for me. But I know sex sells. Even bad sex apparently.

 

I just don't get the appeal and have no desire to read the second book unless someone can convince me it gets significantly better.

 

 

 

Finally, someone who agrees with me on the books!  I *tried* so hard to like them, because it seemed like everyone else did, but I just couldn't.  I think I made it through to the middle of the 3rd book before I said "Enough!" and tossed it aside.  I *kind of* like the show, but I'm still on the fence.  Also, I'm still not seeing any chemistry between them.  There seems to be more chemistry (not to mention more interaction) between Claire and her two guards than Claire and Jamie.  

 

I am not a fan of Game of Thrones either. I watched one episode and thought it was just rubbish porn. I kept thinking it would have to get better at some point, but no, it didn't.  I'm not sure I can forgive you for this. :toetap05:  :D  Yes, there is a lot of T&A in the show, but the plot is so good.  The T&A is mostly thrown in to attract viewers (IMO, though there is PLENTY in the books), but after an ep or so, they stick around, because it's good.  I'm still dying over all the things that happened in the last season (there was A LOT in 8 episodes), and the finale, and can't believe we have to wait until Feb/Mar of next year to see more.   Also, GRRM better get off his arse and finish writing the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I can forgive you for this. :toetap05:[/b] :D Yes, there is a lot of T&A in the show, but the plot is so good. The T&A is mostly thrown in to attract viewers (IMO, though there is PLENTY in the books), but after an ep or so, they stick around, because it's good. I'm still dying over all the things that happened in the last season (there was A LOT in 8 episodes), and the finale, and can't believe we have to wait until Feb/Mar of next year to see more. Also, GRRM better get off his arse and finish writing the books.

It's not just that it is ridiculous gratuitous in the sex department, most of the first episode was whoring about.

 

When I'm reading, I can skim through and think "Blahblahblah." (I'm well known in the house for muttering this out loud even.) Even with a book, I can have no problem doing that for a couple pages every so often, but I'm not going to do that for segments of nearly every chapter. Because I'd like to actually read something interesting. That's why I got the book!

 

So for me, one scene, maybe two, that aren't gratuitous, in a 50 minute episode is probably my limit bc I'd like to actually get in with watching a storyline.

 

I also had a difficult time believing this hardened Scotsman was going to just be so open and sensitive to her feelings and his crap. Um. No. I'm fairly sure he would have gone to his grave about what happened in that prison rather than shared intimate details and jokes about it with 3 men at the MacR. house and later with her at the monastery. I just wanted to toss the book right then.

 

I also don't get the whole time travel thing having a point. I can only presume it will actually have some value to the plot in future books bc it seemed pointless in this first one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think at any point in the series that Jamie jokes about the sexual assault.

 

There is another thread for people who hate the books. Maybe you should look that one up.

I don't hate them. Just sharing my views of the books. Defensive much? *confused*

 

And he does joke. He has just had his his broken hand set and he is resting his head in her lap. She wants to know how badly the rape might have injured him. He jokes that only 6 square inches of him isn't bruised, burned or cut - is he hurt? And starts shaking laughing painfully bc his ribs are broken. Then he says, "Never worry, the six inches that are left are all between my legs." ..."Maybe seven then." ... "Ye needna be delicate about it. I was right, it did hurt less than flogging. But it was much less enjoyable." In bitter humor he says that at least he won't be constipated for a while now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished the first book. I wanted to read it before bothering with the show.

I thought it was rather lame and boring. It read as though the author just suddenly thought, "oh I'll have this happen next!" And tossed it in there. No real plot or character development. *shrug*

 

I figure the sex abuse (both in Clair and Jamie's relationship and with the psycho Randall) will be featured in the show, tho frankly, I thought it was just lazy writing in the book that didn't contribute much to the characters or make them very relatable for me. But I know sex sells. Even bad sex apparently.

 

I just don't get the appeal and have no desire to read the second book unless someone can convince me it gets significantly better.

 

I am not a fan of Game of Thrones either. I watched one episode and thought it was just rubbish porn. I kept thinking it would have to get better at some point, but no, it didn't.

 

 

Trying to convince someone to continue reading the series, seems like a waste of time. It's totally OK to not like the books! There are SO many books I've tried to read because they were recommended here, or elsewhere, and I just did not care for them. By not reading something that doesn't give you pleasure, you're freeing up your time for reading something that will. Carry on, with no guilt!

 

 

 

 

More voice over. Die, voice over, die!

 

I did really like the way they had the slow 1940's music playing to show how caught up in her own thoughts she was.

 

I'm torn about the chemistry between the two of them. Increasingly I kind of like him and don't like her. She's thinner and stiffer than the Claire in my mind. I can't decide if they're meshing well or not.

 

I think one of the mistakes with the show is that the book is so strongly from her POV, but the later books introduce lots of POV's, including Jamie's. If I was going to make a cinematic TV show version of the show, I think I'd expand the perspective. It does away with the absurd perceived need to voice over everything with the text of the book (gag) and uses the format better. I mean, you can't have an epic show from a strong single perspective. Or, at least, I can't think of one. You want this to be Game of Thrones or Battlestar Galatica or The Tudors or whatever? All those shows have a diversity of perspectives and different points where you pull for different characters. Let us pull for Jamie by showing us more about him.

 

I loved the use of 40s music! It was so out of place. Perfect.

 

I've never *loved* Claire, so I honestly never gave much time to creating a complete version of her in my mind, if that makes sense. I have a sort of general brown-haired placeholder that I picture when I'm reading. I have grown to like her more, as we've both aged. She was older than me when I first read Outlander and now she's older than me, again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't get the whole time travel thing having a point. I can only presume it will actually have some value to the plot in future books bc it seemed pointless in this first one.

 

This is exactly what James Bond said about the show.  He said it wouldn't be bad if it were just a show set in Scotland in the 1700's and the settings and costumes are great, but the time travel just doesn't work for him.  Of course then it would be Outlander, so....

 

I will continue to watch for now, unless I get really bored with it.  I'm liking it way more than the books at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't get the whole time travel thing having a point. I can only presume it will actually have some value to the plot in future books bc it seemed pointless in this first one.

This is exactly what James Bond said about the show.  He said it wouldn't be bad if it were just a show set in Scotland in the 1700's and the settings and costumes are great, but the time travel just doesn't work for him.  Of course then it would be Outlander, so....

 

I only read the first book, but I think the time travel has a point even in that one: seeing how a "modern" woman deals with suddenly having to live and survive in the 18th century. One of the reasons Claire is such a capable healer is that she has firsthand knowledge of modern medical practices—even knowing about the importance of sanitation made a big difference. If it had just been a typical historical bodice ripper, I wouldn't have even picked up the first book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I only read the first book, but I think the time travel has a point even in that one: seeing how a "modern" woman deals with suddenly having to live and survive in the 18th century. One of the reasons Claire is such a capable healer is that she has firsthand knowledge of modern medical practices—even knowing about the importance of sanitation made a big difference. If it had just been a typical historical bodice ripper, I wouldn't have even picked up the first book.

I kept expecting that, but other than the healing stuff, not really. There's very little in the book about her dealing with the dramatic change in culture and period expectations. There's the baby and the spanking scene. That's almost it. When in reality, the daily grind of just surviving was a LOT of work and I would think would quickly cause some major mental health issues. At the very least, I'd think dealing with having her period would have been frustrating compared to today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kept expecting that, but other than the healing stuff, not really. There's very little in the book about her dealing with the dramatic change in culture and period expectations. There's the baby and the spanking scene. That's almost it. When in reality, the daily grind of just surviving was a LOT of work and I would think would quickly cause some major mental health issues. At the very least, I'd think dealing with having her period would have been frustrating compared to today.

 

I've always been disappointed the books didn't deal with more of the daily life hassles a time traveler like Claire must encounter. How did she deal with her period or the clothing...or anything that happens in a bathroom? How does she manage to brush her teeth in 1743?

 

We traveled to India (30 years ago) and encountered vastly different ways to live. I can only imagine what 200 years would do.

 

To me, the fascination of the book is the time travel aspect. That's the 'what if' I enjoyed the most. Her perspective on healing and medicines was interesting because of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kept expecting that, but other than the healing stuff, not really. There's very little in the book about her dealing with the dramatic change in culture and period expectations. There's the baby and the spanking scene. That's almost it. When in reality, the daily grind of just surviving was a LOT of work and I would think would quickly cause some major mental health issues. At the very least, I'd think dealing with having her period would have been frustrating compared to today.

 

 

I've always been disappointed the books didn't deal with more of the daily life hassles a time traveler like Claire must encounter. How did she deal with her period or the clothing...or anything that happens in a bathroom? How does she manage to brush her teeth in 1743?

 

 

Yes, I've wondered this too!  Shouldn't she be a little more shocked at the quality of life, sanitation, food, etc?  I would freak the hell out.

 

I started watching Continuum on Netflix the other day (thank you for existing, Netflix!), and they jump 65 years into the past.  You should see the characters confusion over how things work.  The lead isn't know how to drive a gas powered car, and didn't know how a bluetooth earpiece worked.  It's kind of funny in that way.  And that was only 65 years!  Jumping 200 years is a HUGE gap, and there has to be a serious learning curve (and freak out factor).  I'd like to see more of that, other than, Oh, okay, I'm in the 1700's, no big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't hate them. Just sharing my views of the books. Defensive much? *confused*

 

And he does joke. He has just had his his broken hand set and he is resting his head in her lap. She wants to know how badly the rape might have injured him. He jokes that only 6 square inches of him isn't bruised, burned or cut - is he hurt? And starts shaking laughing painfully bc his ribs are broken. Then he says, "Never worry, the six inches that are left are all between my legs." ..."Maybe seven then." ... "Ye needna be delicate about it. I was right, it did hurt less than flogging. But it was much less enjoyable." In bitter humor he says that at least he won't be constipated for a while now.

 

Having known several men that have been raped/molested in their early teens, I understand the bitter humour. I knew them during that time, I knew them when the anger hit, I still know them as adults and have seen the impact on their lives and their different ways of dealing with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't like the latest episode at all. Too gruesome for my taste.

 

I agree...I was telling my son that if something is distasteful in the book you can skim over it a bit. But that's harder on TV. There was too much focus on the flogged back. I get it already...

 

It was weird having the story come from Black Jack Randall instead of Dougal as in the book, too. Changed the flavor of it for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I also don't get the whole time travel thing having a point. I can only presume it will actually have some value to the plot in future books bc it seemed pointless in this first one.

 

If you haven't read the series you really will not get it. Diana Gabaldon is working right now on the 9th book; the 8th one was just released this year. My husband and I were so fortunate to meet her at her appearance in Dallas. You truly cannot begin to understand the arc until you read all of the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only TWO more episodes left....sigh

 

Just for this calendar year! Herself has already posted about the 15th & 16th episodes, which have been filmed, but won't be seen until next calendar year. And the kilt-wearing man from Dr. Who that inspired Jamie also is in those episodes!!!!http://www.dianagabaldon.com/other-projects/outlander-tv-series/news/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting that to people who haven't read the books, the time travel aspect seems superfluous. I can't imagine the story without it - in part because of the way in which she knows what's going to happen and because of all the medical stuff. In the books, it's clear she is appalled by some of the sanitation, but remember she also grew up bumming around in Egypt and roughing it with her archaeologist uncle and then worked as a nurse in the field in WWII, so I think her sense of sanitation is probably different from our senses...

 

There's only two more? That seems nutty. So the first season isn't even the first book. I had read so little about it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There's only two more? That seems nutty. So the first season isn't even the first book. I had read so little about it...

 

Season 1 will cover the entire book.  It's a split season with 8 episodes now, then 8 more starting in early 2015.  This gives the cast a break over the winter months and allows the editing crew time to finish post-production on episodes 15 & 16 before starting pre-production on season 2 episode 1 & 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting that to people who haven't read the books, the time travel aspect seems superfluous. I can't imagine the story without it - in part because of the way in which she knows what's going to happen and because of all the medical stuff. In the books, it's clear she is appalled by some of the sanitation, but remember she also grew up bumming around in Egypt and roughing it with her archaeologist uncle and then worked as a nurse in the field in WWII, so I think her sense of sanitation is probably different from our senses...

 

Plus, she is not a typical woman of her time. She is a modern woman who isn't afraid to speak her mind which some of the men, Dougal and Jamie in particular, find intriguing. It gets her into trouble plenty of times but it also comes in handy plenty of times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did!  I thought the episode was tastefully done.  Hot and steamy without being over the top.  The wedding gown is absolutely gorgeous.  I loved that Cait had to stand on her tiptoes to kiss Sam.  She's not a short woman!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More voice over. Die, voice over, die!

 

I did really like the way they had the slow 1940's music playing to show how caught up in her own thoughts she was.

 

I'm torn about the chemistry between the two of them. Increasingly I kind of like him and don't like her. She's thinner and stiffer than the Claire in my mind. I can't decide if they're meshing well or not.

 

I think one of the mistakes with the show is that the book is so strongly from her POV, but the later books introduce lots of POV's, including Jamie's. If I was going to make a cinematic TV show version of the show, I think I'd expand the perspective. It does away with the absurd perceived need to voice over everything with the text of the book (gag) and uses the format better. I mean, you can't have an epic show from a strong single perspective. Or, at least, I can't think of one. You want this to be Game of Thrones or Battlestar Galatica or The Tudors or whatever? All those shows have a diversity of perspectives and different points where you pull for different characters. Let us pull for Jamie by showing us more about him.

 

 

Well, they seem to be relying on the voice over less as the show progresses. There is hope yet! But I really wanted to comment on your last paragraph--I so totally agree. While I'm enjoying the show overall, I think this really pins down what I am not liking. In the books (the first one specifically) everything is from Claire's POV, and so you have 800+ pages of this internal dialogue. Of course you simply can't reproduce all those internal thoughts on TV (I mean, they're killing us with the voice over as it is), but why would you? Take advantage of the different medium and really bring the characters to life. That's what I was really hoping for with the show, and it's falling a little flat for me. What I really enjoy about the books is all the different characters, and not just Claire and Jaime, though at this point in the story yeah, I was thinking we'd get more from Jaime's POV.

 

 

So who watched the episode last night (today for me since tv companies here are now sensible and don't make us wait but put it up online as soon as it is done being shown in the US yay)?

 

We did! Which brings me to a continuation of my comment in reply to Farrar's...In the book, I felt the relationship (pre-wedding) between Claire and Jaime was a lot more fleshed out. I felt like they had truly become friends and then got tossed into this crazy situation together, and that made it work for me. I'm kind of disappointed that, in the show, you get very little of that. I think this is where using the show to provide other character's POVs (in this case, Jaime's) would have made that work a lot better.  My husband is watching with me and he has not read the books--he thinks the "jump," as describes it, to the wedding was "weird," both visually and in the storyline.  I think a bit has been lost in translation between the books and the show here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

We did! Which brings me to a continuation of my comment in reply to Farrar's...In the book, I felt the relationship (pre-wedding) between Claire and Jaime was a lot more fleshed out. I felt like they had truly become friends and then got tossed into this crazy situation together, and that made it work for me. I'm kind of disappointed that, in the show, you get very little of that. I think this is where using the show to provide other character's POVs (in this case, Jaime's) would have made that work a lot better.  My husband is watching with me and he has not read the books--he thinks the "jump," as describes it, to the wedding was "weird," both visually and in the storyline.  I think a bit has been lost in translation between the books and the show here.

 

I think they did show a growing friendship between Claire and Jaime at the very beginning of the series when she was still tending to his shoulder, but then it seemed like they dropped that thread in other episodes and they grew farther apart, not closer. There were a couple of episodes where they hardly even spoke to each other and seemed distant, which is not at all the impression I had when I read the book. (I only read the first one.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a new watcher and really love it - any period drama makes my heart sing. Can't say kilts do it for me, but the women's clothing is splendid. I was a bit surprised at the wedding because, having not read the books, I could see some mild flirtation between the two but nothing really more than that -- not enough to be so committed to the plan, so to speak.

 

I am tempted to read the books though I'm short on time these days, maybe best to just keep watching it. Thinking about rewatching an episode or two, maybe I'm missing out on things especially the dialect at times -- I do well when people maintain a dialect in a movie but the back and forth in this show is proving a little harder to follow (or maybe it's because I keep trying to multitask while watching).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished watching the Wedding.  Swoon...  

 

My first time through the series, I felt like there was basically no connection between Claire and Jamie and I was feeling disappointed.  The "rent" episode was especially irritating to me - Claire was in a bad mood for the entire hour!  Gah!  Not at all how i pictured it. ..

 

But then I watched the series again this week - 

 

(should I be embarrassed?)

(I also listened to the podcasts)

(I'll be honest here and say that I had to specifically upgrade our Cable plan to make it possible to watch, which is something I never imagined I would do.  ever., so I guess watching the series twice and listening to podcasts and reading the blog of the costume designer just shows I have officially lost it)

 

- and I really saw lots of long lingering looks between the two of them and a growing attraction.  I think my first time through the series I was overwhelmed by the beauty of the show and didn't focus on the story so much, you know?  But the second time through I really noticed the heat.  Even in the Rent episode.  

 

So that's my advice.  If it seems like the wedding is too much of a jump, just watch Jamie, er,  the series again!

 

Next, I think I'm going to attempt to knit something brown and warm and lovely... (while re-watching...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also need someone to convince me to not be Claire for Halloween -- any excuse for making period costumes. Of course, if I don't have time to read a book - probably don't have time to make all the items -- especially since my old shifts and corset are all too small now.

I'd love to have reasons to wear dresses like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I 'fought' with the wedding episode a lot. I know Diana writes in flashback a lot, but seeing it that way on the screen is jumpy. I kept trying to re-organize it in my head while watching.

 

I agree in the books Claire and Jamie have a very good friendship going....not so much in TV version. In fact, I think she and Dougal have had more on screen' moments'...certainly not how it reads in the book.

 

Looking forward to watching again--

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a new watcher and really love it - any period drama makes my heart sing. Can't say kilts do it for me, but the women's clothing is splendid. I was a bit surprised at the wedding because, having not read the books, I could see some mild flirtation between the two but nothing really more than that -- not enough to be so committed to the plan, so to speak.

 

I am tempted to read the books though I'm short on time these days, maybe best to just keep watching it. Thinking about rewatching an episode or two, maybe I'm missing out on things especially the dialect at times -- I do well when people maintain a dialect in a movie but the back and forth in this show is proving a little harder to follow (or maybe it's because I keep trying to multitask while watching).

 

Definitely read the books. The marriage starts out without any real flirtation; it is a marriage of convenience for both of them. Jamie is unattached, not a catch for anyone's daughter, and he is of an age where he is expect to be "relieving himself" with some woman (and he hasn't, therefore, it must be fixed as far as the men of his clan are concerned). Claire is unattached, she is English and expected to inform against the clan, she is a mystery, not a young virgin, no connections, in need of a protector, and kept silent under the wing of the clan. To contract the two together makes absolute sense to those in authority over them. Many marriages in the past started out as such. Jamie and Claire have the start of a friendship, which is more than many that have been in their situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an Outlander marathon this weekend and am finally caught up. I have read the books too.

 

I love the costuming, set design, and landscape shots.

 

I think TV Jamie isn't showing us much in the way of character development.

 

I am still totally icked out by Dougal coming on to Claire in the inn and by Black Jack Randal's account of his "bloody masterpiece." I don't remember him talking about his connection to Jamie this early on. It makes me dread what is coming up in Wentworth prison even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to have reasons to wear dresses like that.

 

There is a local group where I live that makes costumes and does activities.  Sometimes they just go to an event, like a horse race, in costume.  I need to get into it, as I actually have a degree in theatrical costume design (and English-DEAD USEFUL, those), but they get quite weird over details.  I'd just be in it for fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a cold and am stoned on cold medicine  I am watching this atm.

 

 I am trying to get through the first episode, I know we are supposed to find the barbarian Scottish guy in a kilt super hot but I would be rather happy with a husband who took me to the Scottish Highlands and wanted to talk about history. 

 

And we have a winner!  I absolutely agree.  Jamie is just so...blah, and righteous.  He's boring, IMO.  Sorry about your cold.  Hope you feel better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a cold and am stoned on cold medicine I am watching this atm.

 

I am trying to get through the first episode, I know we are supposed to find the barbarian Scottish guy in a kilt super hot but I would be rather happy with a husband who took me to the Scottish Highlands and wanted to talk about history.

I've been reading/watching interviews and that is actually intentional. They're wanting you to see her beautiful, happy married life with Roger compared to the scary, unwelcome situation in which she finds herself. That is the driving force (early on) behind her trying so hard to find a way to get back home. Naturally, the story evolves and changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...