Go Back   Orlando Love > Movies and Stage > Kingdom of Heaven

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 14th, 2004, 03:36 PM
daydreamer58
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Test Screening Review

Ain't It Cool News has a review of the first test screening of KOH. WARNING: IT HAS SPOILERS!


Quote:
Vertigo chimes in with the first review anywhere of Ridley Scott's KINGDOM OF HEAVEN!!!

Hey folks, Harry here with a film I'm dying to see next year... Ridley Scott's KINGDOM OF HEAVEN!!! Ridley's return to the super-epic - with a fantastic cast. From folks on the inside, I can tell you the word on this film has been spectacular. That this review, with SPOILERS btw, gives the movie an 8.5 at it's full on 3 hour + cut... and mentions a couple of dragging moments that will either be excised or given proper speed by getting the final score in place. This is definitely one of the ones to watch for in 2005! Here ya go...

Heya Harry.

Me and the gal pal were going to the movies to see Blade Trinity when I noticed that a line was forming off to the side and everyone was holding yellow slips of paper. Being the curious fellow I am, I approached one of the numerous suits walking around handing out the papers and he told me they were having a Test Screen for a new movie that was UNTITLED, developed by a major production studio and slated for Summer 2005 release. He asked if we were interested in participating... duh.

We got in line and speculation was screaming around us, everything fro STAR WARS to CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY. After about 30 minutes of waiting, were were allowed to enter the theater when they announced they wouldn't allow anyone in that had picture phones... I was getting excited!

Just before the film, a suit gets up and says that the movie we were about to see just finished being edited and has some technical flaws (never mind those) and that we were the first people to ever see the cut.

After the film I did some research on the net at imdb.com and found the movie "KINGDOM OF HEAVEN". The movie was 3 hours and had tons of gory action, intense drama and a romance story for good measure. The action was great and the acting was superb. I know that they will not keep the 3 hour running time because the movie had a few times where it really dragged along.

The movie is very, Braveheart / ROTK / Gladiator / very epic!!! Anyways here's the story.

***SPOILERS***

The movie starts and there are about 3 title cards talking about the crusades in the 12th century. The film opens on a mountain side road in 12th century France. There is a dishonorable funeral for a woman who has committed suicide, when Godfrey of Ibelin played by LIAM NEESON rides by with a few fellow crusaders. They make their way into a small village and find out that the woman was wife to the local blacksmith, Balian played by ORLANDO BLOOM. Liam tells Orlando that he had been with his mother and that Orlando was his son, he has come to ask for forgiveness and to offer Orlando to join his Crusade in Jerusalem. Balian declines the offer. Liam offers the invitation again saying he will be in Jerusalem.

Anyways...the story pretty much goes as follows:

The local priest wants Balian to leave cause his wife committed suicide (saying she will be in Hell for eternity for her sins), Balian kills the priest and catches up to Godfrey on the way and asks if it is true that he can relieve his and his dead wife's sins so that she may be in Heaven by going to Jerusalem. The authorities catch up and want to arrest Balian, the crusaders defend him and Godfrey is mortally wounded in the battle. Godfey knights Balian and now Balian is a lord with a seat in Jerusalem. Balian arrives in Jerusalem after a ship wreck that only he and his horse survive.

The King of Jerusalem is stricken with leprosy and is forced to wear an Iron Mask. I believe ED NORTON plays King Baldwin IV. His personal aide is Tiberias, played by Jeremy Irons. The king is losing power to his sisters fiance (by arrangement), Guy de Lusignan played by Marton Csokas. This "Guy" is very ruthless and blood-thirsty and controls the 200,000 troops in Jerusalem. The Kings policy is that Jerusalem should be open to all faiths. However Lusignan has other plans such as killing all the Muslims he can find. The kings sister, Sybilla played by Eva Green (who is smoking hot!!) falls in love with the very pleasant and now righteous Balian.

Saladin, the leader of the Muslim people, is upset at the killing of the Muslims and sets out to recapture the city. Meanwhile the king wishes Balian to kill Lusignan, marry Sybilla and gain control of the army and continue Jerusalem's open faith practices. Balian deciles because he will not commit such and evil act. Sybilla asks him "Would not one evil be worth a million good?" and is upset.

The King dies from his disease, and Sybilla's 7 year old son becomes king of Jerusalem. She was married before and her husband supposedly had died in battle. The Kid King comes down with leprosy and Sybilla poisons him to ease his suffering.

Lusignan claims the throne and sets out to destroy the Muslims who are now advancing on the city of Jerusalem. Balian advises against it saying the desert will kill the crusaders because of the lack of water. Lusignan scoffs at the idea blinded by his own power. Leaving the city defenseless Lusignan sets out across the desert only to have the entire army defeated by the superior tactics of Saladin.

Jerusalem is left unprotected full of "normal people" with Balian now in control. Now Saladin's army arrives outside Jerusalem and what follows is a siege battle that is up there with the battle fro LORD OF THE RINGS: RETURN OF THE KING. This battle is about 40 minutes long and freaking rocks! Eventually Jerusalem falls and Saladin is impressed with Balians honorable tactics and offers Balian to surrender the city and all inside will be given safe passage to Christian lands. Balian surrenders Jerusalem.

The movie ends with Balian and Sybilla living a less than royal life in a remote village in France. Balian has resumed the role of blacksmith when one day some Crusaders come asking for the Great Balian. Balian says he doesn't know him. One of the crusaders wearing a crown says he is the King of England and they are going to recapture Jerusalem. Balian stays and the Crusaders ride away.


Good movie I give it 8.5/10. I like the epics.

I am Vertigo
I guess he liked it.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old December 14th, 2004, 04:46 PM
Leggybelle Leggybelle is offline
Passionately Enthralled
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: in heaven when I think about Orlando
Posts: 2,436
Wow....this sounds great !! It looks like Ridley Scott may have another winner. Thanks so much for finding and posting this review, daydreamer. What I wouldn't have given to be one of the persons seeing that first screening !!!

It sounds like there is a teriffic story surrounding Balian, led by some very capable actors. Comments about the acting were good....so I imagine that includes Balian !! I wonder how much of a romance story line there is between Orlando and Eva Green? I hope it is more and better than in Troy with Orlando and Diane Kruger.

Hopefully, the trailer for KOH will be shown with Flight of the Phoenix starting this weekend. I can't wait to see Balian !!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old December 14th, 2004, 08:17 PM
Mnemosyne's Avatar
Mnemosyne Mnemosyne is offline
Lost
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: With Paris in Troy
Posts: 331
That's AMAZING! Thank you so much for posting DayDreamer! That is really promissing and now I don't Know how I will be able to wait 'till next year to see it! I'm guessing that the trailer won't play in our theatres in Portugal that soon.

At least I'm free from the anxiety of knowing something about the movie. All that secrecy was killing me.

Love the begining. Very dark, I bet that will certainly put us on the right mood to watch such a film.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old December 14th, 2004, 08:24 PM
texasreina
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
First let me say how jealous I am. Those people who had the opportunity to see this movie, what a wonderful Christmas present.

The movies sounds good. Let's hope the failure of past epic movies will not affect this movie. It does sound like a good movie, I just pray that it's not over 3 hours long like Alexander.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old December 15th, 2004, 02:06 AM
DMW3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
The action was great and the acting was superb


Now that's exactlywhat I wanted to hear! seems like this movie is going to shut some people up.

Diane
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old December 15th, 2004, 03:13 AM
Elf Lady's Avatar
Elf Lady Elf Lady is offline
In Valinor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Undying Lands
Posts: 5,794


I read that over on AICN and got so excited. I certainly hope this film will knock the critics out.

Thanks for posting it daydreamer!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old December 15th, 2004, 05:21 AM
luv4ever
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
i just read that a couple of minutes ago on the site. sounds great. i cant wait. =)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old December 15th, 2004, 06:44 AM
jsclark86
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Oh, I can't wait for this film to come out! I'm so excited. I hope it blows everyone away!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old December 15th, 2004, 10:12 AM
Claddagh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I only read up until the spoilers and I like what I read! No surprises really though, this is Ridley Scott and Orlando Bloom, how can you go wrong?!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old January 20th, 2005, 05:09 PM
daydreamer58
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
KoH Movie Reviews

This must be the first KoH movie review of the film (as opposed to trailer review), so here's a new thread for this. From Channel 4 Film:

Quote:
Kingdom Of Heaven
avg. user rating (1-10): 8.37
(293 votes)

0 minutes
USA/UK (2005)

starring Orlando Bloom, Liam Neeson, Jeremy Irons, Eva Green, Edward Norton, Ghassan Massoud, Brendan Gleeson, David Thewlis, Michael Sheen, Kevin McKidd, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Marton Csokas
directed by Ridley Scott

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN FILM REVIEW

Gladiator director Ridley Scott returns to the historical epic with a film about the Crusades. Will the potentially controversial tale starring Orlando Bloom be enough to revive a flagging genre?

With the failure of King Arthur, the critical mauling dished out to Troy and the disastrous performance of Oliver Stone's Alexander, the historical epic has been unable to capitalise on the surge of interest instigated by Gladiator's enormous success. It's only right then that Hollywood's continued interest in the genre will rest with Ridley Scott's Crusades film Kingdom Of Heaven. If it works it will give the historical epic a much-needed shot in the arm.

The film focusses on the run up to the third Crusade in the 12th century and promises to deliver onscreen carnage on a vast scale. Orlando Bloom stars as Balian, a French blacksmith reluctantly drafted into the Crusades after travelling to Jerusalem to absolve himself of sin after his wife's suicide. Jerusalem at this time was ruled by the Catholic king, Baldwin IV, but he's suffering from leprosy and his policy that Muslims, Jews and Christians should be able to co-exist is under threat from his brother-in-law, Guy De Lusignan (Csokas), who is intent on wiping out the Muslims.

Given that one of the film's biggest set-pieces is the Battle of Hattin, in which the Crusaders are slaughtered by the forces of Muslim leader Saladin (Massoud), and the other major battle is Saladin's subsequent siege of Jerusalem, the film sounds potentially controversial, especially in the current political climate. According to Scott, though, it's actually the Christian forces that come off worst. "All you've got to do is tell the truth," says the director. "The whitest knight was Saladin and the worst fundamentalists were Christian. They made the problem."

Predictably the film has already upset some people. An article in 'The New York Times' , which attempted to stir up controversy by supplying a number of academics with a purloined copy of the script, quoted one expert on Islamic history as saying the movie would teach people to hate Muslims by propagating stereotypes of them as "retarded, backward [and] unable to think in complex form". An article in the 'Telegraph' quoted several British academics who believed the film (which no one has seen) pandered to Islamic fundamentalism by portraying the Muslims as sophisticated and civilised and the Crusaders as brutes and barbarians.

Seems Scott can't win, but he has nothing but praise for writer William Monahan's script, describing it as "the best material I've ever had". A former journalist, Monahan used primary sources as much as possible to shape the story and while some will question the film's accuracy, as Scott points out, history is conjecture anyway. "There's 300 years of perception and a mass of material so what you do is you glean through a lot of it and form your own opinion."

What's not in any doubt is the quality of the cast Scott has assembled. Bloom may not have impressed in Troy but his character here is more chivalrous and it certainly promises to be a meatier, grungier role if he can muster the necessary gravitas. He's joined by rising star Eva Green (The Dreamers), who plays Lusignan's wife Sybilla and adds romantic tension by falling for Balian. Add to this mix Liam Neeson as Balian's father, Jeremy Irons as Tiberius, an uncredited Ed Norton as King Baldwin and the likes of David Thewlis and Brendan Gleeson in supporting roles and it's hard to see how Scott can go wrong.

Film Review by Alistair Harkness
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old January 20th, 2005, 05:16 PM
Sazi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
*sigh* Is it May yet????????????????????
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old January 20th, 2005, 05:43 PM
Rozzan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It sounds very interesting and promising. Something to look forward to.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old January 20th, 2005, 06:48 PM
SherinaSue
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
OOOh! I am so excited about this!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old January 20th, 2005, 06:48 PM
LSA's Avatar
LSA LSA is offline
The Elf!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 158
I just hope that the political controversy doesn't reflect negatively on the film. It seems to me from that review that the so-called experts will put their own spin on the interpretation of the film regardless of how Scott may present it. And I am sure those same experts will nitpick the film for every little preceived discrepancy to their version of the facts and history.

I just wish that these people would accept the movie for what it is - the interpretation of a story by the director. Movies in general are meant to entertain. If these people are looking for historical facts or films that promote their own beliefs, then they should be watching documentaries and propaganda films.

I have seen Scott's other movies and there is much to admire. He's already earned his fame as a director and doens't need a controversial film to increase the spotlight on himself.

I personally can't wait to see this film as I love historical epics, and with Orlando being directed by Scott, that's just icing on the cake.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old January 20th, 2005, 06:58 PM
Elf Lady's Avatar
Elf Lady Elf Lady is offline
In Valinor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Undying Lands
Posts: 5,794
Thanks for posting that daydreamer! I really enjoyed reading that as well as loving the 8.37 rating (heh...should have been higher!).

I think the controversy (irritating as it is) will probably bring more people into the seats in May. Remember all the noise about "The Passion of the Christ"? Sure did benefit Mel Gibson's film.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old January 20th, 2005, 08:28 PM
guitarchick's Avatar
guitarchick guitarchick is offline
British Boy Lovin' Goon
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,131
This isn't really a movie review, more like a script review or movie preview. But I agree with EL, I think that the controversial part, if it's capitalized on which it is, subtly of course, will put butts in seats. And good reviews. Good word of mouth. Remember, Alexander tanked because of both those.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old January 20th, 2005, 09:36 PM
Malene
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarchick
This isn't really a movie review, more like a script review or movie preview. But I agree with EL, I think that the controversial part, if it's capitalized on which it is, subtly of course, will put butts in seats. And good reviews. Good word of mouth. Remember, Alexander tanked because of both those.
Alexander tanked because of bad word of mouth,that is what you mean?
It was one of those times where the hype didn't meet the expectations.And Oliver Stone is (was) just as merited as Scott in the critics and publics eye.So let's hope Sott delivers when Stone couldn't.
I'm going to have to be swept up off the floor anyway with Orlando being meaty and grungy and all.....
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old January 20th, 2005, 10:24 PM
Leggybelle Leggybelle is offline
Passionately Enthralled
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: in heaven when I think about Orlando
Posts: 2,436
Finally saw the trailer for KOH at my theater......oh, my...seeing Orlando on the big screen is so much better than on the computer screen....he is sooooooo manly looking in this role !!! Hard to believe he is the same person that is playing Drew in Elizabethtown.

What a showcase of his talents this summer will be.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old January 21st, 2005, 05:08 AM
DMW3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malene
Alexander tanked because of bad word of mouth,that is what you mean?
It was one of those times where the hype didn't meet the expectations.And Oliver Stone is (was) just as merited as Scott in the critics and publics eye.So let's hope Sott delivers when Stone couldn't.
I'm going to have to be swept up off the floor anyway with Orlando being meaty and grungy and all.....
Malene, I do think there is a difference between Scott and Stone. Stone's movies are politically in your face, so to speak, this means that he does have a body of detractors that include both the public and the critics, whereas Scott does not have a body that oppose his film-making from an ideological viewpoint. Although I like and admire both directors, I do think that Scott, despite not having the Oscar that Stone has, is a more highly thought of director, in both critical and general movie going public terms. Stone annoys people with his deliberate contraversy, whereas athough occassionally contraversial, Scott is not out to make a political point and therefore gets up fewer people's noses!

Diane
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old January 21st, 2005, 06:47 AM
Serein's Avatar
Serein Serein is offline
10th Doctor's Companion
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: TARDIS
Posts: 4,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMW3
Malene, I do think there is a difference between Scott and Stone. Stone's movies are politically in your face, so to speak, this means that he does have a body of detractors that include both the public and the critics, whereas Scott does not have a body that oppose his film-making from an ideological viewpoint. Although I like and admire both directors, I do think that Scott, despite not having the Oscar that Stone has, is a more highly thought of director, in both critical and general movie going public terms. Stone annoys people with his deliberate contraversy, whereas athough occassionally contraversial, Scott is not out to make a political point and therefore gets up fewer people's noses!

Diane
I agree. Scott seems to be much more respected in the public and critical eye than Stone. Personally, I have never liked any of Stone's films because I don't enjoy films that try to hammer me over the head with whatever statement is trying to be made at the moment. Same reason I couldn't stand the Kill Bill movies. They felt like deliberate attempts at throwing every taboo in your face.

Scott does not do that. He may give you a very gritty movie but he's not trying to "change your mind", so to speak. He lets you feel without forcing it upon you how you should feel about his film. It's a less agressive approach to directing, IMO.
__________________

Shameless Middle Earth Hussy #2
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old January 21st, 2005, 10:09 AM
Pumpkin Spice
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Apparently there's been another screening ... a couple of people have posted about it over at IMDB. They haven't said too much, except that it needs editing! One said it will be good if it's cut, the other, well, they said it was garbage. Sounds like that person needs a bran muffin to me!

Ahem. Anyway, here's the best part:
i think the acting was pretty good...yea even orlando bloom is, dare i say, good in it.

How about that? A grudging compliment from an obvious non-fan!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old January 21st, 2005, 05:56 PM
Malene
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMW3
Malene, I do think there is a difference between Scott and Stone. Stone's movies are politically in your face, so to speak, this means that he does have a body of detractors that include both the public and the critics, whereas Scott does not have a body that oppose his film-making from an ideological viewpoint. Although I like and admire both directors, I do think that Scott, despite not having the Oscar that Stone has, is a more highly thought of director, in both critical and general movie going public terms. Stone annoys people with his deliberate contraversy, whereas athough occassionally contraversial, Scott is not out to make a political point and therefore gets up fewer people's noses!

Diane
I am aware there is a difference.The two directors make very different films.
Stone always wants to make some sort of political point,while Scott mostly merely wants to tell a good story.My point was that they are both respected and expected to deliver the goods.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Oliver Stone politicly,he mostly makes good movies out of whatever message he wants to get across.
In the case of Alexander,Stone didn't.
I agree with you about the Kill Bill films, Serein.I'm not a Tarantino fan for exactly those reasons.I thought Pulp Fiction was cool,but enough already.We've seen it all.

Last edited by Malene; January 21st, 2005 at 06:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old January 22nd, 2005, 06:14 PM
iluvorlando's Avatar
iluvorlando iluvorlando is offline
Utterly Obsessed
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newcastle , England
Posts: 675
it sounds good , not long to wait now ..... bring on May
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old January 22nd, 2005, 06:47 PM
nikki16's Avatar
nikki16 nikki16 is offline
Balian's Lover
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: in Balians Arms
Posts: 2,201
I so cannot wait for may now, i want to see this movie so bad.

Nikki
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old January 23rd, 2005, 06:21 PM
nazgul88's Avatar
nazgul88 nazgul88 is offline
Pervy Picture Handler
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany.
Posts: 9,009
There's a link at OBM to a review of a test screening ...

Quote:
Kingdom of Heaven test screening
posted by Jas, 01/23/05
The Kingdom of Heaven message board at Internet Movie Database has a review of the KOH test screening, from Orlando's acting to the technical aspect of the movie posted by zeldasf. Click here to read it.
Well, I clicked "here" and found this:

HUGE SPOILER ALERT!
Quote:
I watched a screening of this just tonight and it was pretty good. naturally, being a work in progress, some of the scenes lagged and i wouldn't be surprised to see some unnecessary scenes cut from it. and then there's some similar Gladiator elements in this film as well...eh...still, it has great potential and the battle scenes were just epic...just...epic...something that you gotta see in a theater. so yea, i'm happy...wahoo :)
.... answering some of the questions ... SPOILERS
Quote:
There are spoilers here
.
.
.
.
1. i think the acting was pretty good...yea even orlando bloom is, dare i say, good in it. i think i'm most impressed by Ed Norton's King Baldwin cuz although he's all covered, he still manages to act well.

2. i had 3 favorite scenes. 1) the vultures circling the bodies of the dead soldiers. 2) the shift from muslims and christian soldiers clashing to that of still and dead soldiers...great overhead shot. 3) Saladin putting the crucifix back upright.

3. i don't think it was too biased...the film was basically promoting a message of tolerance and that the city doesn't belong to just one religion or faction...if anything i think the screening version actually was preaching it a little too much. if it had been more subtle, it woulda worked better i think
Quote:
wow...are u sure u guys want me to answer all those??? well...i'll try not to give too much away and just so you know, it's just my opinion of it...the finished product may be a lot different and you might think it's a piece of crap (i really hope it isn't tho)...ok so here we go.

On Orlando Bloom's acting...
I guess it was just a change to see him not in such a wimpy, girly way. I think actingwise, he carried the film pretty well, but then again, he had a great supporting cast...so he's decent...I'd say he's improved but not quite at the caliber of Russell Crowe in Gladiator. I'd say his character in this film is generally more likeable and sympathetic than his Paris in Troy (that was just...irritating), and Brad Pitt in Troy was pretty wooden, so i think in this one he's surpassed that. I haven't seen Alexander so i can't compare that.

On the chemistry between Orlando and Eva...
Ok, i gotta say that although there seems to be a love scene in the trailer, it was cut from the version I saw...and upon retrospect, the version i saw was kinda awkward w/o that scene cuz it went from them being basically strangers to another character calling Balian Sybilla's (i think that's her name) "lover". mmm i think their chemistry is pretty good...the good news is Eva can act so that always helps.

As for the good vs. bad question...
The film's message is tolerance...so i think i'll leave it at that.

The technical aspects of the film...
The cinematograhy is amazing...if you love Ridley Scott's other works, u kno his style and u'll love this too. The scope of the film is very very, well, epic. the battle at the end was amazing and some of the shots were composed soooo well...the 3 I liked best were quite poignant and powerful. in the version i saw, not all the CGI was done but when it is, i think it'll look brilliant (i'm hoping). they completed the CGI stuff for the temples and buildings in Jerusalem and they seemed to me like a real, historical version of minas tirith from LOTR...like on that kinda scale, but it was supposed to be real, ya kno (sorry if i don't make sense...it's late). and i think overall, the completed CGI stuff was better than in Troy (which i was kinda disappointed by. so yea...this is truly a film of epic proportions.

And for the film in general...
I don't wanna get everyone's hopes up too much...i enjoyed wat i watched and i think it's a bit better than Troy (i haven't seen King Arthur). so yea...i think if they just fix the film's pacing at the beginning and the end, and complete the CGI stuff and streamline a little more...it should be cool. and even if you don't like it...you should still see it on the big screen for the amazing battles.

hoped that helps!

The discussion on the board is still going on at the moment. People asking a lot more questions which are not answered by 'zeldasf' yet. So I guess there will be more review bits to come.

I hope, you don't mind me bringing this over, Daydreamer!



~ Naz ~
__________________

Orlando's Queen of Pixels. - Naz's Gallery - LJ

Last edited by nazgul88; January 23rd, 2005 at 06:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Orlando Love Shop

Legolas Greenleaf
The views and opinions expressed by members of this board and of members of external links/boards are their own and do not represent those of the board's owners. No copyright infringement intended, all pictures property of original owners. All altered images property of respective owners. Copyrights and trademarks for books, films, articles, magazines and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. This board and its owners are not affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises, New Line Pictures, the Tolkien Estate, Disney Pictures, Warner Bros. or Orlando Bloom.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.