Share prlwctd's profile
prlwctd
prlwctd's stats
- Review count182
- Helpfulness votes116
- First reviewOctober 10, 2007
- Last reviewJuly 31, 2009
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating4.1
Reviews comments
- Review comment count0
- Helpfulness votes0
- First review commentNone
- Last review commentNone
- Featured review comments0
Questions
- Question count0
- Helpfulness votes0
- First questionNone
- Last questionNone
- Featured questions0
Answers
- Answer count0
- Helpfulness votes0
- First answerNone
- Last answerNone
- Featured answers0
- Best answers0
![Play Misty for Me [DVD] [1971]](https://pisces.bbystatic.com/prescaled/500/500/image2/BestBuy_US/images/products/73f9b558-092f-4225-b86e-467b78bc4cf6.jpg)
This excellent DVD release of Clint Eastwood's 1971 directorial debut Play Misty for Me will please newcomers and longtime fans alike. Loaded with DVD extras, the movie's print has been cleaned up and returned to its original aspect ratio with a good anamorphic widescreen transfer. Beautifully filmed on-location by master cinematographer Bruce Surtees, the movie also serves as a love letter to the rugged California coastal town of Carmel. The Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono audio track is excellent and the scenes set at the Monterey Jazz Festival are given new sonic life on this disc. There are numerous disc extras to select (though some of them are too slight to be worth mentioning), but by far the best is the hour-long look back at the making of the movie. Entitled "Play It Again: A Look Back at Play Misty for Me," it's full of interviews with Eastwood, female lead Jessica Walter (in an excellent, star-making performance), key producers, writers, and others. This documentary makes plain that Play Misty for Me set the stage for Eastwood's career as a talented, individualistic director who refuses to get sucked into Hollywood power games or pointless power trips. After this film, Eastwood continued to use little or no makeup for actors, naturalistic lighting, real locations over sets, rich jazz scores, and tight budgets. Made for well under a million dollars, Play Misty for Me was a big mainstream hit with general audiences that also earned praise from indie film godfather John Cassavetes. The DVD also features a too short featurette on Eastwood and famed action-suspense director Don Siegel. A mentor and collaborator, Siegel was even amusingly cast as a bartender, mainly so Eastwood could get help from him on the first couple of days of shooting (he ended up not needing any). Besides better-than-average production notes and movie stills, the disc also features a montage of potential poster art that ends with the finished product. As a side note, the disc also makes plain that Eastwood considers Fatal Attraction to be an uncredited remake of Play Misty for Me.
Posted by: prlwctd
Misty is up there with Citizen Kane, Duel, & Boyz N the Hood (the respective directorial debuts of Orson Welles, Steven Spielberg, & John Singleton) as one of the all-time great freshman directorial outings.
Eastwood was already a movie star before he fulfilled his life long ambition to direct with this movie. His skill behind the camera led to his (arguably) more-acclaimed second career as a film director.
However, his performance as the deejay who gets more than he bargained for when he embarks on what he believes is a casual relationship with a fan (played on a wonderfully scary note by Jessica Walter), who wants something much more from her interactions with him, is noteworthy because, while we may not quite agree with his attitude toward such issues, his character, Dave Garver, still wins our sympathy because he doesn't encourage his nemesis the way the male leads in the lesser films this classic inspired (such garbage as Fatal Attraction, Poison Ivy, The Crush, Swimfan, Basic Instinct, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle) do.
Don Siegel, who directed Clint several times (not least of which in Dirty Harry) has a wonderful small role as a bartender.
Eastwood was already a movie star before he fulfilled his life long ambition to direct with this movie. His skill behind the camera led to his (arguably) more-acclaimed second career as a film director.
However, his performance as the deejay who gets more than he bargained for when he embarks on what he believes is a casual relationship with a fan (played on a wonderfully scary note by Jessica Walter), who wants something much more from her interactions with him, is noteworthy because, while we may not quite agree with his attitude toward such issues, his character, Dave Garver, still wins our sympathy because he doesn't encourage his nemesis the way the male leads in the lesser films this classic inspired (such garbage as Fatal Attraction, Poison Ivy, The Crush, Swimfan, Basic Instinct, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle) do.
Don Siegel, who directed Clint several times (not least of which in Dirty Harry) has a wonderful small role as a bartender.
What's great about it: Great acting, directing, and suspense
What's not so great: nothing I can think of
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
+3points
3of 3voted this as helpful.
Posted by: prlwctd
I was dreading this remake. While Zombie's first film, House of 1000 Corpses, was enjoyable, his 2nd, The Devil's Rejects, was not so much, maybe because it lacked the sharp sense of humor of Corpses. Hence, I expected his take on Halloween to be more of the same.
It was nice to see that I wasn't only partially right. When I heard that Zombie was going to have Michael's mom be a stripper, my first thought was "Oh, Lord." However, his wife, Sheri Moon, made her a very sympathetic woman. You really felt sorry for her when she sees her little boy go ballistic on the world.
Other pluses: A cleverly cast Danielle Harris as Annie (a la Annette O'Toole in Smallville) and a nice reconstruction of the famous Myers mask.
Sadly, these assets are outweighed by the fact that this remake does nothing Halloween (or rather, Halloween's imitators) didn't already do. For instance, I saw Ronnie's "She gotta nice dumper on her!" coming a mile away. I also disliked how Laurie, Annie, & Lynda basically curse each other incessantly when we first meet them (& they're friends?). I was also surprised that Malcolm McDowell was as wasted here as Christopher Lee was in the Star Wars prequels. I would've thought if anyone in this film would have the opportunity for scenery chewing.... Oh, well.
And Michael Myers being white trash? No, just no!
This is not deplorable, but it is also not on par with great remakes like The Thing, The Fly, and War of the Worlds.
It was nice to see that I wasn't only partially right. When I heard that Zombie was going to have Michael's mom be a stripper, my first thought was "Oh, Lord." However, his wife, Sheri Moon, made her a very sympathetic woman. You really felt sorry for her when she sees her little boy go ballistic on the world.
Other pluses: A cleverly cast Danielle Harris as Annie (a la Annette O'Toole in Smallville) and a nice reconstruction of the famous Myers mask.
Sadly, these assets are outweighed by the fact that this remake does nothing Halloween (or rather, Halloween's imitators) didn't already do. For instance, I saw Ronnie's "She gotta nice dumper on her!" coming a mile away. I also disliked how Laurie, Annie, & Lynda basically curse each other incessantly when we first meet them (& they're friends?). I was also surprised that Malcolm McDowell was as wasted here as Christopher Lee was in the Star Wars prequels. I would've thought if anyone in this film would have the opportunity for scenery chewing.... Oh, well.
And Michael Myers being white trash? No, just no!
This is not deplorable, but it is also not on par with great remakes like The Thing, The Fly, and War of the Worlds.
What's great about it: a surprisingly sympathetic performance from Sheri Moon Zombie
What's not so great: Halloween Zombie-style, 'nuf said.
No, I would not recommend this to a friend.
Share this review:
0points
1of 2voted this as helpful.
![Star Trek V: The Final Frontier [Collector's Edition] [2 Discs] [DVD] [1989]](https://pisces.bbystatic.com/prescaled/500/500/image2/BestBuy_US/images/products/304b2327-370a-41e7-956a-951dd4939472.png)
After a rather lackluster release in 1999, William Shatner's directorial debut, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier comes to DVD once again, this time in an impressive, two-disc, collectors edition. The first disc features the film presented in a widescreen 1.85:1 anamorphic transfer that preserves the original theatrical aspect ratio. In addition, the English soundtrack has been rendered in both Dolby Digital 5.1 and Dolby Digital 2.0 with a dubbed French soundtrack available in Dolby Digital 2.0. Bonus features on the first disc include a feature-length audio commentary by Shatner and his daughter Liz Shatner, author of Captain's Log: William Shatner's Personal Account of the Making of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, and text commentary by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda, co-authors of The Star Trek Encyclopedia. The second disc is composed completely of supplemental features, including eleven featurettes, deleted scenes, theatrical trailers, and television spots.
Posted by: prlwctd
This film prompts so many questions from the viewer, and, in this case, that's not a good thing.
Why did this clown who calls himself Spock's brother come out of left field?
Why does nothing work on the new Enterprise?
Why do Vulcans suddenly have the ability to project mass hullucinations for all to see?
Why is the great David Warner in such a wasted role here?
Why was Shatner's notorious ego given free reign here as writer and director?
Why, why, why?
Why did this clown who calls himself Spock's brother come out of left field?
Why does nothing work on the new Enterprise?
Why do Vulcans suddenly have the ability to project mass hullucinations for all to see?
Why is the great David Warner in such a wasted role here?
Why was Shatner's notorious ego given free reign here as writer and director?
Why, why, why?
What's great about it: we knew it couldn't get any worse
What's not so great: everything else
No, I would not recommend this to a friend.
Share this review:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.
Ben Affleck and Kate Beckinsale are war-torn lovers in director Michael Bay's epic reenactment of the 1941 tragedy Pearl Harbor. Buena Vista has done a great job on this 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer (spread over two DVDs). All aspects of this picture look great, including even colors, dark black levels, and natural-looking fleshtones. Aside of a small amount of edge enhancement during one scene, this is a fine-looking transfer that should please fans. The audio is presented in DTS 5.1 Surround, Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround in English and French, as well as an English 2.0 soundtrack produced for those listening with headphones. The Dolby 5.1 and DTS soundtracks are very full, featuring continuous use of surround sounds throughout the entire film. Bombs and explosions rocket around the viewer through most of the film's running time. All aspects of the dialogue, music, and effects are distortion-free. Also included on this disc are English subtitles. This two-disc Pearl Harbor set, while not jam-packed, includes a few well-produced extra features. Two documentaries, "Journey to the Screen: The Making of Pearl Harbor" and "Unsung Heroes of Pearl Harbor," are both extensive and very informative. The first documentary focuses on the making of the film, which includes interviews with stars Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett, Kate Beckinsale, producer Jerry Bruckheimer, and most of the main crew. The second feature takes a look at the real Pearl Harbor and includes interviews with survivors from that awful day. The second documentary is easily the more impressive and moving of the two. Finally, there is a music video by Faith Hill for the hit song "There You'll Be," a short promo for National Geographic: Beyond the Movie -- Pearl Harbor, as well as a teaser and trailer for Pearl Harbor. This is a nice, if insubstantial, DVD edition of Pearl Harbor.
Posted by: prlwctd
Despite eye-popping work on the Pearl Harbor attack, this film feels more like Star Wars than Saving Private Ryan and, as a result, is disgraceful to those who served & died in WWII.
When our boring, wooden heroes take off in planes to combat the Japanese attackers, I'm surprised they didn't start to belt out the Star Wars theme the same way Peter Griffin did in "The Family Guy"'s Star Wars episode.
Instead of a poignant story of the 1941 fateful attack at the titular location, we are instead given a lamely written love triangle involving three uninteresting people. Why? Because apparently that's what teenagers want to see as we can't have any movie with Ben Affleck & Josh Hartnett get a R rating because it would turn away the all-important teenage demographic. God forbid, this movie should have the brutal honesty which has been a hallmark of great war films like Patton, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Glory, Saving Private Ryan, Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters From Iwo Jima.
When our boring, wooden heroes take off in planes to combat the Japanese attackers, I'm surprised they didn't start to belt out the Star Wars theme the same way Peter Griffin did in "The Family Guy"'s Star Wars episode.
Instead of a poignant story of the 1941 fateful attack at the titular location, we are instead given a lamely written love triangle involving three uninteresting people. Why? Because apparently that's what teenagers want to see as we can't have any movie with Ben Affleck & Josh Hartnett get a R rating because it would turn away the all-important teenage demographic. God forbid, this movie should have the brutal honesty which has been a hallmark of great war films like Patton, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Glory, Saving Private Ryan, Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters From Iwo Jima.
What's great about it: the SFX
What's not so great: everythingn else
No, I would not recommend this to a friend.
Share this review:
-7points
1of 9voted this as helpful.
![1941 (Collector's Edition) [DVD]](https://pisces.bbystatic.com/prescaled/500/500/image2/BestBuy_US/images/products/be68df19-5673-451e-8c53-55429cc91026.jpg)
Posted by: prlwctd
1941, Spielberg's 5th fiilm, was quite anticipated upon its release in 1979. His first 2 films (Duel & The Sugarland Express) gave him critical acclaim and his following 2 (Jaws & Close Encounters of the Third Kind) said he was here to stay as a film director.
First, the good news: Spielberg assembled a dream cast, including the top-billed John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd, along with Robert Stack, Christopher Lee, Toshiro Mifune, Ned Beatty, and others. The art direction, music, and costumes also are well done.
Now, the bad news: Sadly, what kept the film from attaining the same classic status as Dr. Strangelove is the lack of one thing every comedy needs in order to be good: laughs. While the film has a chuckle or two (like Lee and Mifune speaking to each other solely in German and Japanese, respectively), there are no standout classic funny moments as there are in classic laughfests like A Shot in the Dark, What About Bob?, and the aforementioned Kubrick film.
Thankfully, the cast keeps the movie from becoming something even worse than an unfunny comedy-a painfully unfunny comedy. Hence, 1941 isn't as bad as, say, Nothing But Trouble, Tomcats, Bubble Boy, or Freddy Got Fingered. For that, it's certainly worth a look for the curious.
Happily, Spielberg's future attempts at comedy proved more successful (Catch Me If You Can & The Terminal).
First, the good news: Spielberg assembled a dream cast, including the top-billed John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd, along with Robert Stack, Christopher Lee, Toshiro Mifune, Ned Beatty, and others. The art direction, music, and costumes also are well done.
Now, the bad news: Sadly, what kept the film from attaining the same classic status as Dr. Strangelove is the lack of one thing every comedy needs in order to be good: laughs. While the film has a chuckle or two (like Lee and Mifune speaking to each other solely in German and Japanese, respectively), there are no standout classic funny moments as there are in classic laughfests like A Shot in the Dark, What About Bob?, and the aforementioned Kubrick film.
Thankfully, the cast keeps the movie from becoming something even worse than an unfunny comedy-a painfully unfunny comedy. Hence, 1941 isn't as bad as, say, Nothing But Trouble, Tomcats, Bubble Boy, or Freddy Got Fingered. For that, it's certainly worth a look for the curious.
Happily, Spielberg's future attempts at comedy proved more successful (Catch Me If You Can & The Terminal).
What's great about it: great cast & great production values
What's not so great: zero laughs
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
-5points
0of 5voted this as helpful.
Posted by: prlwctd
Although a smash in its first two seasons, Lois and Clark was, in some ways, reborn at the beginning of its third. Before Lois accepts Clark's marriage proposal, she reveals that she knows how super-unique he is. They eventually embark on a romantic relationship with all the trials and tribulations that come with it.
Almost midway through the season ("Ultra Woman") the two become engaged.
These episodes provided an engaging new direction for the series with Dean Cain and Teri Hatcher wonderfully playing off each other. It seemed as if the show would become the golden exception to the "Moonlighting" curse of having main characters get together.
However, this promising momentum came to a drastic halt when ABC televised what we were told was the wedding episode in February of 1996. The episode in question ("I Now Pronounce You...") became a bold-faced lie by the producers as it didn't end with a wedding between the title characters, but with Clark marrying a clone (yes, a clone) of Lois due to Lex Luthor's interference. To add insult to injury, the episode became the first of a Melrose Place-esque arc which would last an irksome 5 EPISODES, involving Lois getting amnesia, which prompts Luthor and then a unscrupulous psychiatrist to try to win her love.
This wasn't merely a case of a series going in a direction that most viewers disliked. This was a case of the show's loyal fans being deliberately lied to and toyed with for weeks on end. Not surprisingly, this arc led to many fans quitting their viewership of the show for good, despite a few watchable episodes at the third season's end and the characters REALLY getting married the following season, which, due to the drop in viewership, turned out to be its last.
If anything could be viewed as snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, it's the third season of Lois & Clark.
Almost midway through the season ("Ultra Woman") the two become engaged.
These episodes provided an engaging new direction for the series with Dean Cain and Teri Hatcher wonderfully playing off each other. It seemed as if the show would become the golden exception to the "Moonlighting" curse of having main characters get together.
However, this promising momentum came to a drastic halt when ABC televised what we were told was the wedding episode in February of 1996. The episode in question ("I Now Pronounce You...") became a bold-faced lie by the producers as it didn't end with a wedding between the title characters, but with Clark marrying a clone (yes, a clone) of Lois due to Lex Luthor's interference. To add insult to injury, the episode became the first of a Melrose Place-esque arc which would last an irksome 5 EPISODES, involving Lois getting amnesia, which prompts Luthor and then a unscrupulous psychiatrist to try to win her love.
This wasn't merely a case of a series going in a direction that most viewers disliked. This was a case of the show's loyal fans being deliberately lied to and toyed with for weeks on end. Not surprisingly, this arc led to many fans quitting their viewership of the show for good, despite a few watchable episodes at the third season's end and the characters REALLY getting married the following season, which, due to the drop in viewership, turned out to be its last.
If anything could be viewed as snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, it's the third season of Lois & Clark.
What's great about it: great new direction for the series
What's not so great: wrongheaded 'soap opera' story arc in the middle of the season
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.
Posted by: prlwctd
Xena deservedly became a smash (even more so than the series that it spun off of, Hercules: The Legendary Journeys).
However, the show began to falter as it entered its final season, with the title character becoming more and more godlike (and, as a result, less and less human) and, even worse, her bond with her sidekick Gabrielle became minimized.
Perhaps, then, it shouldn't have been a complete surprise that the show's finale, while possessing a more epic scope than the finale for Hercules, is a letdown.
Yet another previosuly unmentioned chapter of Xena's past returns to haunt her. This time, it's a figure in Japan who, like Lao Ma in Chin, became smitten with Xena, who, still being a warlord at this point, allowed her ambition to overcome her morality.
Although the photography is first rate, this trip to Japa seems to come out of left field making the whole episode seem anticlimatic with the series itself (whereas both the respective finales for Star Trek: The Next Generation & Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had some prior buildup).
The ending of the episode is especially unsatisfying as most anyone who's already seen it knows.
However, the show began to falter as it entered its final season, with the title character becoming more and more godlike (and, as a result, less and less human) and, even worse, her bond with her sidekick Gabrielle became minimized.
Perhaps, then, it shouldn't have been a complete surprise that the show's finale, while possessing a more epic scope than the finale for Hercules, is a letdown.
Yet another previosuly unmentioned chapter of Xena's past returns to haunt her. This time, it's a figure in Japan who, like Lao Ma in Chin, became smitten with Xena, who, still being a warlord at this point, allowed her ambition to overcome her morality.
Although the photography is first rate, this trip to Japa seems to come out of left field making the whole episode seem anticlimatic with the series itself (whereas both the respective finales for Star Trek: The Next Generation & Star Trek: Deep Space Nine had some prior buildup).
The ending of the episode is especially unsatisfying as most anyone who's already seen it knows.
What's great about it: good acting from the 2 leads, beautiful production values
What's not so great: anticlimatic series finale
No, I would not recommend this to a friend.
Share this review:
-1point
1of 3voted this as helpful.
Posted by: prlwctd
This film, while successful upon it original 1968 release, was relegated in US cinemas to midnight/drive-in screenings like Vincent Price's Edgar Allan Poe adaptations (indeed, its original US title was the somewhat-catchy "The Conqueror Worm," the title of a Poe poem).
Had the film received the same mainstream distribution as "Rosemary's Baby"(also released in 1968), it quite possibly could've led to an Oscar for Price for his brilliant, haunting portrayal of the title character.
Price's character, one Matthew Hopkins, travels the English countryside with his unscrupulous sidekick making money by torturing innocents suspected of witchcraft. One such individual, a kind priest, dies as a result of such action, which, in turn, incurs the wrath of his niece(whom Hopkins has designs on) and her lover, a soldier.
The film also gained some noteriety due to the drug-induced death of its director, Michael Reeves, following the completion of filming.
Had the film received the same mainstream distribution as "Rosemary's Baby"(also released in 1968), it quite possibly could've led to an Oscar for Price for his brilliant, haunting portrayal of the title character.
Price's character, one Matthew Hopkins, travels the English countryside with his unscrupulous sidekick making money by torturing innocents suspected of witchcraft. One such individual, a kind priest, dies as a result of such action, which, in turn, incurs the wrath of his niece(whom Hopkins has designs on) and her lover, a soldier.
The film also gained some noteriety due to the drug-induced death of its director, Michael Reeves, following the completion of filming.
What's great about it: Great acting and directing, shocking scenes of brutality
What's not so great: not for the squeamish
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
+1point
1of 1voted this as helpful.
![Halloween II [DVD] [1981]](https://pisces.bbystatic.com/prescaled/500/500/image2/BestBuy_US/images/products/635d860d-6081-43d4-9a63-8a3856a12156.jpg)
Rick Rosenthal's sequel to the classic horror film Halloween, Halloween II, comes to DVD with a widescreen anamorphic transfer that preserves the original theatrical aspect ratio of 2.35:1. The English soundtrack is rendered in Dolby Digital Stereo. Spanish and French subtitles are accessible and the soundtrack is closed-captioned. Supplemental materials include the theatrical trailer and production notes. This is a solid release from Universal that boasts strong picture quality.
Posted by: prlwctd
Halloween II belongs in the category of 'inoffensive sequels,' along with Superman II, The Lost World: Jurassic Park, and Scream 2.
It's more graphic(and, as a result, less effective) than its predecessor. The dark, nearly empty hospital where Michael ends up resuming his pursuit of Laurie strains credulity, and the Empire Strikes Back-inspired angle of Laurie's connection to Michael is silly.
However, the movie is still better than Halloween's countless other imitators. One reason being that it wisely begins where the first one left off, with many of the same people on both sides of the camera.
Both Donald Pleasance and Jamie Lee Curtis do a fine job reprising their roles and the film's conclusion is satisfying.
It's more graphic(and, as a result, less effective) than its predecessor. The dark, nearly empty hospital where Michael ends up resuming his pursuit of Laurie strains credulity, and the Empire Strikes Back-inspired angle of Laurie's connection to Michael is silly.
However, the movie is still better than Halloween's countless other imitators. One reason being that it wisely begins where the first one left off, with many of the same people on both sides of the camera.
Both Donald Pleasance and Jamie Lee Curtis do a fine job reprising their roles and the film's conclusion is satisfying.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
+5points
5of 5voted this as helpful.
Posted by: prlwctd
After gathering praise for his effective urban thriller Assault of Precinct 13, John Capenter's status as an A-list director was secure with his followup-a simple, but scary shocker called Halloween.
This one film led to almost two decades worth of imitators, none of which had the same impact. One reason for this being that Halloween had characters worth rooting for. Donald Pleasance is perfect as the doctor who's the only one with any understanding of the seemingly-inhuman killer who's escaped from his custody and returned to his old haunts to resume his murder spree. Likewise, Jamie Lee Curtis deservedly became famous as the potential victim who manages to escape Michael Myers. Also worth noting is that Nancy Loomis and P. J. Soles, as the girls who aren't so lucky, prove equally endearing and sympathetic(unlike later slasher film victims, who signed their death warrants by simply being mean to the Last Girl Standing). John Carpenter's music rivals that of Jaws, Psycho, and Suspiria as the finest score for any horror film.
This one film led to almost two decades worth of imitators, none of which had the same impact. One reason for this being that Halloween had characters worth rooting for. Donald Pleasance is perfect as the doctor who's the only one with any understanding of the seemingly-inhuman killer who's escaped from his custody and returned to his old haunts to resume his murder spree. Likewise, Jamie Lee Curtis deservedly became famous as the potential victim who manages to escape Michael Myers. Also worth noting is that Nancy Loomis and P. J. Soles, as the girls who aren't so lucky, prove equally endearing and sympathetic(unlike later slasher film victims, who signed their death warrants by simply being mean to the Last Girl Standing). John Carpenter's music rivals that of Jaws, Psycho, and Suspiria as the finest score for any horror film.
I would recommend this to a friend!
Share this review:
+1point
1of 1voted this as helpful.
prlwctd's Review Comments
prlwctd has not submitted comments on any reviews.
prlwctd's Questions
prlwctd has not submitted any questions.
prlwctd's Answers
prlwctd has not submitted any answers.