Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > So much for the Star Trek Movie

So much for the Star Trek Movie (Page 5)
Thread Tools
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
^^ I know that . I'm just talking about the look of the pic specifically.
That picture was in the same style as a lot of "cast pictures" of the time. But these characters held the public's attention quite strongly, so the picture itself was a sensation too.

I remember seeing the picture in TV Guide when I was a kid, and how fantastic it was. Particularly since TV reception then was not nearly as great as cable has conditioned us to expect today. If you watch TOS episodes from the first batch of DVDs, you may note how relatively poorly the effects shots come through. That was just fine back then because of the combination of broadcast characteristics and resolution of TVs. Oh, and ST was one of the biggest reasons for color TV sales then too-and color TV tended to look much sharper than B&W.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 11:03 AM
 
Wil Wheaton likes it.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 11:04 AM
 
We had a color TV when Star Trek was on NBC, but I was still too young to understand a lot of it until it went into syndication.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 11:05 AM
 
For you nerds with iPhones, I made Star Trek wallpapers.

http://starmike.deviantart.com/

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 11:41 AM
 
I'm actually kinda frustrated, I have a date tonight and we'll probably end up seeing wolverine... I'd sooner see the new trek.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 01:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Salty View Post
I'm actually kinda frustrated, I have a date tonight and we'll probably end up seeing wolverine... I'd sooner see the new trek.
Then go see Star Trek?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 01:49 PM
 
Wolverine's probably a better date movie anyway. A couple of hairy, sweaty, lumberjack sort of guys going at it with sharp claws...yeah, I can see that.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 01:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I remember seeing the picture in TV Guide when I was a kid, and how fantastic it was.

Dammit! I was so going to say "I wonder where that picture came from? It looks like a TV Guide cover or something."
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 02:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
Wolverine's probably a better date movie anyway. A couple of hairy, sweaty, lumberjack sort of guys going at it with sharp claws...yeah, I can see that.
It's a better date movie only in that you won't regret missing what's on screen if you're making out through it.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:20 PM
 
Well, I was a bit disappointed. It was OK, but seemed to be missing something.

Awesome effects, but the story makes no sense, the villain isn't very interesting, and I was hoping for less slapstick. I'm optimistic, but as restart movies, I preferred Batman Begins and Casino Royale.

OTOH, my GF loved the movie.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:26 PM
 
 

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
 
 
Pick your nitpicks more wisely next time!

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:44 PM
 
 

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 10:57 PM
 
Big nitpick: The story was bad.

 
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2009, 11:16 PM
 
^^ that

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 04:27 AM
 
Well that was pretty meh.

Cast were great, effect pretty good, Quinto and Pegg were stand out, knowing winks to TOS and movies all present and correct but an emotional content of zero.

 


In short, whizz bang, laugh, gee, wow. No feelings in it.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 06:42 AM
 
There were never any feelings in TOS were there. The movies had some fake feeling but the show was totally sterile, no? I think that's why guys were cool with it but it did nothing for girls.

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 07:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by mrtew View Post
There were never any feelings in TOS were there. The movies had some fake feeling but the show was totally sterile, no? I think that's why guys were cool with it but it did nothing for girls.
Yes, there were. Why do you think so many people loved the show? Without emotion it would have fallen into obscurity like Lost in Space.

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 08:17 AM
 
TOS had very STRONG emotional content. Every episode had some sort of emotional hook, whether it was "it's headed for Earth and we have to stop it!" or "Awww, Scotty's in love." If you watched the show for its story content, you'd have picked that up despite the very contemporary styling and fashions.

Headed out to see the movie this afternoon. I think I'll enjoy it. But I think a lot of people who posted here having not liked it are just a bit jaded by all sorts of other "blockbuster" type films. Hint: it ain't supposed to be "art," and it ain't supposed to be Michael Bey, it's supposed to be Star Trek, a genre unto itself.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 08:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Headed out to see the movie this afternoon. I think I'll enjoy it. But I think a lot of people who posted here having not liked it are just a bit jaded by all sorts of other "blockbuster" type films. Hint: it ain't supposed to be "art," and it ain't supposed to be Michael Bey, it's supposed to be Star Trek, a genre unto itself.
It was the same writers as Transformers, which I guess explains the nonsense story line.

Then again, I loved Transformers... except for the nonsense story line that is.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Near Antietam Creek
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 09:35 AM
 
My wife (a graphic design professor): J.J. Abrams and his f**cking Futura.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 12:47 PM
 
I enjoyed it. It was new while being a great homage to the original series. The story was no more convoluted that any other sci-fi, the script was spot on, the humor was not too much,the sfx were top notch, and the casting was great imo. I wasnt expecting this movie to be as good as it was, in fact i was expecting a travesty to the original series(the only ST series that i have actually watched to date).... luckily, i was pleasantly surprised. I did miss Sulu's accent.

Im not a huge star trek fan, so im not prone to picking on the smallest of flaws. And as far as prequels go, it is by far the best one in recent memory.

What i like most, was the non stop action..... they didnt spend huge chunks of time on specific character building, it was just worked into the main plot. Go watch it in theater.

Cheers
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; May 8, 2009 at 02:52 PM. )
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 01:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I did miss Sulu's accent.


And as far as prequels go, it is by far the best one in recent memory.
I preferred Casino Royale and Batman Begins.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Near Antietam Creek
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 01:25 PM
 
<pedant>BB and CR are "reboots" or "reimaginings" not prequels. ST took us to where the band got together--something not yet shown in TOS or films.</pedant>
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Union County, NJ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 01:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by scottiB View Post
<pedant>BB and CR are "reboots" or "reimaginings" not prequels. ST took us to where the band got together--something not yet shown in TOS or films.</pedant>
But...

 

Home - Twitter - Sig Wall-Retired - Flickr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 02:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
George Takei's accent i guess
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 03:04 PM
 
I went to see it yesterday. In a word: awesome. Much better than expected.

iMac 20" C2D 2.16 | Acer Aspire One | Flickr
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Near Antietam Creek
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 03:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by starman View Post
But...

 
Even so,

 
it still would be a prequel with a side of reboot--which I'd call this one, too.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 06:49 PM
 
I really liked the look of the movie and the characters were great. The story was pretty bad though.

If I understand correctly from this point on it is an alternate reality and everything we saw in all the other series is irrelevant as Vulcan was never destroyed which is a huge change in the timeline.

I was expecting a big reset button at the end but I am almost more disappointed that there wasn't one.

The dumbest moment for me was how both Kirk and Spock are both stranded in the exact same spot on a planet?!! What are the odds of that!?

The sets were awesome except some of the lower decks like engineering just looked like a beer brewery with lasers shining on them.

Bridge and spaceshots were tiiiiiight!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 08:10 PM
 
Yeah, I was surprised at the lack of reset button too, especially since black holes are apparently magic and they had one handy at the end.

It seems like a lot of people were bugged by the coincidence of meeting Scotty, but Simon Pegg was freakin' brilliant, so I didn't mind.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 09:12 PM
 
I liked it a lot. I loved the look, I liked the way they changed phasers to be pulse weapons instead of continuous beams, and I liked the industrial look of spaces like Engineering.

I thought the story worked well. Remember, this is a movie based on a 60s TV show. While it could and often did bring up real social issues, it almost always told good, if somewhat simplified stories.

The handy black hole creating "red matter" seemed like the bestest buzzword I've seen in years.
 
I noticed and HATED product placements. Especially the Nokia placement. But I got over it because the rest of the film was awesome enough.

Simon Pegg was GREAT as Scott. Meeting him where they did was a bit odd, (and the place didn't look at all like I wish it had), but he more than made up for it. I liked Cho too; a bit of humility, a bit of wicked blade work, and some badass flying. (And what's the stuff about George Takai's accent? He had a fairly deep voice in TOS, but no real accent that I recalled. Nichell Nichols had a fairly distinctive accent then, but Zoë Saldana did a very straight "Generic American" accent in the film and nobody complained about hers.

One thing I want to gripe about: we only hear about Nurse Chapel, but we never see her. In fact, Uhura is the ONLY female primary cast member. What's up with that?

Overall, this is one I need to see again, in part because it was going so fast that I KNOW I missed some stuff.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2009, 09:33 PM
 
I give it 4 out of 5 disgusted sighs.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 12:53 AM
 
Bloody fantastic.

4.5/5
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
And what's the stuff about George Takai's accent? He had a fairly deep voice in TOS, but no real accent that I recalled.
He had a very distinct way of speaking. I used to imitate it, and my voice has never been deep enough to imitate Takei. I think it's more of a cadence thing?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:43 AM
 
I missed something in the plot. When they went through the black hole they arrived right when Kirk was born. They then took 25 years doing what exactly?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:55 AM
 
Waiting for Spock to grow up, I think.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 08:08 AM
 
 
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 08:37 AM
 
Okay, so holy crap that was a good movie. Let me start off by saying that I was a pretty hard-core trekkie from middle school through college (I was in Jr. High/Sr. High during most of DS9's run, and watched the Enterprise premier with college buddies my Junior year, if that gives you a date context). So I'm familiar with the Trek canon.
 
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Waiting for Spock to grow up, I think.
No, waiting for him to SHOW up. Remember they showed Pike the picture of Spock Prime's ship...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oneota View Post
Okay, so holy crap that was a good movie. Let me start off by saying that I was a pretty hard-core trekkie from middle school through college (I was in Jr. High/Sr. High during most of DS9's run, and watched the Enterprise premier with college buddies my Junior year, if that gives you a date context). So I'm familiar with the Trek canon.
 
 
I agree that the movie was great, but with Star Trek, you must have an open mind for every possibility.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 09:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oneota View Post
 
To hell with canon. I think canon, the older one gets, hurts a story more than helps it. The amount of baggage a writer must contend with in the Star Trek universe is insane. I, for one, am glad they opted to start from scratch.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 10:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
 
I agree that the movie was great, but with Star Trek, you must have an open mind for every possibility.
I guess I hadn't thought of it that way (but it's not a bad way to look at it) -- every time they do something with time in Star Trek, they always go to so much trouble to "maintain the timeline" and put things back the way they were that I guess I tend to think of there just being the one "reality."
 


If I were the type to go to conventions, I think the next one would certainly be interesting -- watching everyone try to reconcile what just happened to their universe.
( Last edited by Oneota; May 9, 2009 at 10:23 AM. )
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 10:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
The dumbest moment for me was how both Kirk and Spock are both stranded in the exact same spot on a planet?!! What are the odds of that!?
Ya, that was the only bit that really bothered me. I'm glad, though, that they didn't have a reset button at the end.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 10:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Oneota View Post
If I were the type to go to conventions, I think the next one would certainly be interesting -- watching everyone try to reconcile what just happened to their universe.
Why reconcile? It's not like all of the Star Trek episodes up to this date have been erased from existence.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 10:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Why reconcile? It's not like all of the Star Trek episodes up to this date have been erased from existence.
Yeah, I realize that it's not like everyone's DVD collections disappear into a puff of smoke while they're at the theater. But it will undoubtedly spur conversations much like the one we're having now, only geekier. Some people don't like having their imaginary universes messed with, you know.
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 11:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
The dumbest moment for me was how both Kirk and Spock are both stranded in the exact same spot on a planet?!! What are the odds of that!?
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Ya, that was the only bit that really bothered me. I'm glad, though, that they didn't have a reset button at the end.
Ummm... Nero stranded Spock Prime where he could watch "the show," and Spock (young) had Kirk dumped immediately AFTER that "show". Timing, not coincidence, and mostly on the young Spock's part.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 12:05 PM
 
 


I know many people don't care but it just really annoyed me. Too bad, because I enjoyed the first half of the movie much more.

However, perhaps I'll see it again if it shows up locally in Imax. The second time I'll know the plot is idiotic and hopefully won't care as much.

PS. I can't believe I'm posting this from a dimsum restaurant, on my iPhone over 3G no less. Back when I saw (my favourite Star Trek movie) Wrath of Khan for the first time, who would have thought it would be so soon? The future is here. Now I just need a transporter.
( Last edited by Eug; May 9, 2009 at 12:25 PM. )
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: T •
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 01:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Ummm... Nero stranded Spock Prime where he could watch "the show," and Spock (young) had Kirk dumped immediately AFTER that "show". Timing, not coincidence, and mostly on the young Spock's part.
Well Nero just dumped him on a planet that could see vulcan, he didn't drop him off at the only observation platform on the planet. I don't see how young spock would know his counterpart from the future was down there and dropped kirk off 1k from the same spot.

That and the 25 years of searching for spock really bugged me.

I read and article interviewing the writers and they said they purposely wanted to have a new timeline to start fresh. Good idea I guess as the problems with prequels you know when everyone dies and all important events so there isn't much surprise.

This way things can go much different such as Tuvok from Voyager probably never was born (Thankfully) and neither was Kirstie Alley vulcan character from ST2.

There will also be much more major changes as the dominion war from DS9 could be lost because no romulans to side against them to things we can never think of as Vulcan was a major player in the Federation.

I guess this is a good thing I am just so used to that re-set button with any time travel and I rather liked Vulcan so it is a bit of a shock the the geek system.

Gonna see it again in IMAX on Tues. Can't wait!
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 01:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post

There will also be much more major changes as the dominion war from DS9 could be lost because no romulans to side against them to things we can never think of as Vulcan was a major player in the Federation.
Actually, if I understood it properly, Romulus was destroyed in Spock Prime's timeline, about 10-ish years after the events of Nemesis (TNG was supposed to be around 80 years after TOS, and Nemesis was about 10-15 years after TNG ended, then the 30 years between the end of TOS and the original 6 movies). So in the timeline we're in now, Vulcan is gone, but Romulus should still be present and okay.
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2009, 02:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
Well Nero just dumped him on a planet that could see vulcan, he didn't drop him off at the only observation platform on the planet. I don't see how young spock would know his counterpart from the future was down there and dropped kirk off 1k from the same spot.
Valid points, but I think it just turned out to be the "most convenient spot" for both stranders.
Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES View Post
There will also be much more major changes as the dominion war from DS9 could be lost because no romulans to side against them to things we can never think of as Vulcan was a major player in the Federation.
Who said "no Romulans?" Nero and his bunch are gone, but he was explicitly operating separate from the empire. There should still be both Romulus and Remus just where they were. And maybe the Federation can actually prevent that supernova in the future from doing what it did to Nero's time...

Lots of possibilities, but nothing deleted the Romulans as a race. What this film does, in essence, is just give us a link into an alternate timeline by having "our" Spock involuntarily moved into it. There have been countless alternate timelines created in Star Trek; we simply have a connection to one that the writers can now write new and different stories in.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:38 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2