• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

HBO has five potential Game of Thrones spinoffs in development [GRRM & Bloys updates]

Turin

Banned
Jon Snow is awesome. I just want him to look before he leaps.

Michael Moorcock (what an unfortunate name) wrote an essay called Epic Pooh deriding celebrated fantasy authors like CS Lewis and Tolkien and others.

One of his criticisms is that they had the same goals as Winnie the Pooh, that is they seek to comfort its readers rather than challenge them and that their stories were escapist literature that refused to deal with issues raised by the real world.

I think Game of Thrones stopped caring about challenging issues a long time ago.
 

Sean C

Member
Michael Moorcock (what an unfortunate name) wrote an essay called Epic Pooh deriding celebrated fantasy authors like CS Lewis and Tolkien and others.

One of his criticisms is that they had the same goals as Winnie the Pooh, that is they seek to comfort its readers rather than challenge them and that their stories were escapist literature that refused to deal with issues raised by the real world.
He understands that Lewis was writing allegorical theology for children, right?
 

duckroll

Member
Mr Moorcock sounds like a big dick to me. And he's wrong too, Winnie the Pooh has more similarities to GRRM than to GoT. Just look at how that baseball game makes children suffer.
 

Black_Sun

Member
He understands that Lewis was writing allegorical theology for children, right?

Yeah, he does.

He mentions that the Narnia books downtalk to children in a way that Baum and Nesbit never do.

According to C. S. Lewis his fantasies for children - his Narnia series of seven books beginning with The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and ending with The Last Battle - were deliberate works of Christian propaganda. The books are a kind of Religious Tract Society version of the Oz books as written by E. Nesbit; but E. Nesbit would rarely have allowed herself Lewis's awful syntax, full of tacked-on clauses, lame qualifications, vague adjectives and unconscious repetitions; neither would she have written down to children as thoroughly as this childless don who remained a devoutly committed bachelor most of his life

As a child, I found that these books did not show me the respect I was used to from Nesbit or Baum, who also gave me denser, better writing and a wider vocabulary. The Cowardly Lion was a far more attractive character than Aslan and Crompton's William books were notably free from moral lessons. I think I would have enjoyed the work of Alan Garner, Susan Cooper and Ursula Le Guin much more. They display a greater respect for children and considerably more talent as writers.

I mean besides the fact that he thought writers like these guys were trying too hard to comfort their readers and infantilizing them, he also thought of this:

Moorcock criticises a group of celebrated writers of epic fantasy for children, including Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, and Richard Adams. His criticism is based on two principal grounds: what he sees as the poverty of their writing style, and a political criticism. Moorcock accuses these authors of espousing a form of "corrupted Romance", which he identifies with Anglican Toryism. The defining traits of this attitude are an anti-technological, anti-urban stance which Moorcock sees as ultimately misanthropic, that glorifies a vanishing or vanished rural idyll, and is rooted in middle-class or bourgeois attitudes towards progress and political change.
 

Black_Sun

Member
Hells yeah. Aegon's Conquest all the way through to the end of Robert's Rebellion please.

A king a season would make the show 18 seasons long

Mr Moorcock sounds like a big dick to me. And he's wrong too, Winnie the Pooh has more similarities to GRRM than to GoT. Just look at how that baseball game makes children suffer.

He is, yeah. He sounds pretty grumpy throughout the whole essay as if these guys used to bully him.
 
Why should I give a damn what this rando dude Moorcock whatever thinks?

I love Narnia, Tolkien, and Game of Thrones.

But yeah OT I'm way down with some GOT spin offs. I'm not ready to say bye to that Universe with only 2 seasons left
 

Black_Sun

Member
Why should I give a damn what this rando dude Moonrock whatever thinks?

I love Narnia, Tolkien, and Game of Thrones.

He isn't some rando. He wrote the Elric Saga.

In 2008, The Times newspaper named Moorcock in its list of "The 50 greatest British writers since 1945".

The Three Eyed Raven/Bloodraven is partially based off of the protagonist of his series, Elric. And the Valyrians and Targaryens are based off of Elric's people, the Melniboneans.


(Robert Baratheon and Drogo are partially based off of Conan the Barbarian)
 

Joeku

Member
Boy they sure are scared about what to do once this show ends, huh?

The probably could have gotten five seasons out of The Dark Tower if they wanted to.
 

Black_Sun

Member
I've legit never heard of this ever. Not saying it's not good or not but I have no idea what this is

Really? I mean you have a Geralt of Rivia avatar so that's even more surprising.

Elric is the original White Wolf. Geralt of Rivia's nickname as well as Jon Snow's nickname are homages to him.

The Elric Brothers from Fullmetal Alchemist are also named after Elric of Melnibone.

Blue Oyster Cult even wrote a song about Elric called "Black Blade".

When Joffrey shouts out what they should call his new sword in the show, someone suggests Stormbringer. That's a shoutout to Elric's cursed sword that feeds on the souls of people.

If you're into tragic fantasy heroes, I'd definitely recommend reading the Elric Saga. It's about a weak and frail albino who is also a sorcerer king that eventually chances upon a cursed sword called Stormbringers that makes him strong and healthy but feeds on the souls of people.
 

Tevious

Member
A book or HBO series based on Robert's Rebellion era would be all my dreams come true.

I often find the stories of younger Ned, Robert, Jaime, the King's Guard, etc from that time a lot more interesting than the present day stuff in ASoIaF.

I'm concerned that it will be redundant by the time GOT is finished. We may have Bran revisiting all the major events by the time the show is over. We'll already know what happened to everybody. There won't be any concern for whether Ned or Robert will live or die this season, etc. I'm not sure how a Robert's Rebellion show would work, unless maybe it focused on other characters that are just caught up in the events. Sort of like Vorenus and Pullo from Rome with mostly everyone else being historical figures.
 

Black_Sun

Member
Just to further prove the Targaryens/Valyrians are based off of the Melniboneans:

Centuries before Elric's birth, Melniboné,also
known as the Dragon Isle, ruled its world through sorcerous might and sheer power. However, by the time of Elric's birth, it has slipped from its preeminent place, being one of many nations. Its people, the Melnibonéans, are not wholly human, and although popular culture describes them as being almost elvish they are not. Elric and the Melnibonean people are descended from dragons. Melnibonean dragon ancestry is discussed at length in the novel, Heart of the Dragon, an untold tale of Elric. — skilled with magic and beautiful
, though psychologically similar to cats, with a callous nature. They are bound by many ancient customs.

Melniboné's capital and only surviving city is Imrryr, known as The Dreaming City. Most of the rest of the island has been allowed to revert to wilderness in Elric's time. Caverns exist below the island, in which dragons sleep, awaiting the Melnibonéans' summons to war.

Maybe I should create a thread about GRRM's influences and how he's actually taking a lot more from fantasy than history for his series.
 
Season 5 could've been good if they had actually taken a year off to work on the scripts. The only reason it's so bad besides the usual problems is because D & D weren't sure the actors were going to renew their contracts to season 8 so they acted as if they were going to finish in season 7.

And then after they finished filming, it turned out that season 8 was good to go, they decided to pad season 6 to hell and back.

Season 5 was always gonna be rough since they reach the point in the story most of the characters have to fuck about and do nothing waiting for some other events to happen. Hell they just gave up on Bran for a season because there was zero shit for him to do north of the wall.
The whole season hinged on D&D managing to write in interesting subplots, something they haven't been the best at.

Some of this problem carried into Season 6(Jaime's storyline) but overall season 6 was a return to form.

You could cut out half the episodes from season 6 and you will not have missed anything of importance.
Guess what, you can do that in every other GOT season. If anything Season 6 had too much payoff. Then again after 5 seasons of more build-up than actual pay off it was bound to happen.

I am ok with episodes not advancing the storyline much as long as it's giving something I like action, world building,character development etc. That's why I liked Hardhome.
 

Black_Sun

Member
Season 5 was always gonna be rough since they reach the point in the story most of the characters have to fuck about and do nothing waiting for some other events to happen. Hell they just gave up on Bran for a season because there was zero shit for him to do north of the wall.
The whole season hinged on D&D managing to write in interesting subplots, something they haven't been the best at.

Some of this problem carried into Season 6(Jaime's storyline) but overall season 6 was a return to form.


Guess what, you can do that in every other GOT season. If anything Season 6 had too much payoff. Then again after 5 seasons of more build-up than actual pay off it was bound to happen.

I am ok with episodes not advancing the storyline much as long as it's giving something I like action, world building,character development etc. That's why I liked Hardhome.

I dont think it was a return to form.

Because once you put in under the magnifying glass, season 6 has the same problems as season 5 only that it's got better pay off endings.

You still have a lot bullshit happening to get there.

Why do the Dothraki venerate Daenerys when back in season 1, they were very adverse to magic?

How did Arya survive being stabbed in the belly, falling into the river, running around everywhere and falling down stairs with those wounds and then being able to beat the Waif(because Arya can see better in the dark)?

Why is Davos suddenly wanting Jon to be revived by Melisandre? It comes off more like he read the script rather than being natural. Plus he thinks Melisandre is the Mother of Demons. This just does not jive with his character.

What was the point of Ramsay marrying Sansa if ultimately none of the Northerners really cared about the Starks in the end? The North Rememebrs squat.

Etc.

It's shoddy writing. Everyone does what the plot needs them to and it comes off as cheap. It keeps me from being invested in the world.

Now yeah, there was good stuff in there but it's like 80 % of the time GOT is a joke and 20 % of the time it's legitimately great.
 

CloudWolf

Member
Are there seriously people in here claiming Sansa's inconsistency is somehow intended? Sure, if you ignore every interview the writers and Sophie Turner give about Sansa where they constantly claim that season 6 features Sansa finally being a 'player'.

Honestly though, I think the praise for season 6 is a bit much. It was way better than season 5, but still nowhere near the quality of season 1-4. Even the last two episodes had some glaring flaws in logic and writing. Some of them are already discussed here, but let's not forget that the single biggest sin of the final two episodes was the fact that apparently D&D completely forgot what the main conflict of the entire series is about. It's all about inheritance and rightful claims, yet here they have Cersei blowing up half the city (which everyone with half a brain should be able to figure out that it was her who did it) and becoming queen despite having zero claims to anything. Or what about Yara and Theon's plotline with them making a case to Daenarys that their uncle somehow usurped the throne from them? Newsflash: No, he didn't, he was rightfully elected. Family ties give you no claim to the throne in an electoral system, you are the usurper.
 
Are there seriously people in here claiming Sansa's inconsistency is somehow intended? Sure, if you ignore every interview the writers and Sophie Turner give about Sansa where they constantly claim that season 6 features Sansa finally being a 'player'.

Honestly though, I think the praise for season 6 is a bit much. It was way better than season 5, but still nowhere near the quality of season 1-4. Even the last two episodes had some glaring flaws in logic and writing. Some of them are already discussed here, but let's not forget that the single biggest sin of the final two episodes was the fact that apparently D&D completely forgot what the main conflict of the entire series is about. It's all about inheritance and rightful claims, yet here they have Cersei blowing up half the city (which everyone with half a brain should be able to figure out that it was her who did it) and becoming queen despite having zero claims to anything. Or what about Yara and Theon's plotline with them making a case to Daenarys that their uncle somehow usurped the throne from them? Newsflash: No, he didn't, he was rightfully elected. Family ties give you no claim to the throne in an electoral system, you are the usurper.

If not Cersei who else had claim to that throne? All the officially legitimate Baratheons are dead as are their consorts. The throne kind of goes to her by default.

And besides hereditary succession was never the been the be all end all in this world. If it was the Targaryens wouldn't have been chased out of Westeros and the Boltons would have never been named Wardens of the North.
 

Black_Sun

Member
Are there seriously people in here claiming Sansa's inconsistency is somehow intended? Sure, if you ignore every interview the writers and Sophie Turner give about Sansa where they constantly claim that season 6 features Sansa finally being a 'player'.

Honestly though, I think the praise for season 6 is a bit much. It was way better than season 5, but still nowhere near the quality of season 1-4. Even the last two episodes had some glaring flaws in logic and writing. Some of them are already discussed here, but let's not forget that the single biggest sin of the final two episodes was the fact that apparently D&D completely forgot what the main fucking conflict of the entire series is about. It's all about inheritance and rightful claims, yet here they have Cersei blowing up half the city (which everyone with half a brain should be able to figure out that it was her who did it) and becoming queen despite having zero claims to anything. Or what about Yara and Theon's plotline with them making a case to Daenarys that their uncle somehow usurped the throne from them? Newsflash: No, he didn't, he was rightfully elected. Family ties give you no claim to the throne in an electoral system, you are the usurper.

It's very different story intentions at work. D & D are going with the idea that rules and laws don't mean shit in the world. It's all about rule of the strongest. Game of Thrones is very Social Darwinian in that sense.

In GRRM's series, it's not about might trumping law. The commentary is more about how truth doesn't really matter only people's perceptions of the truth. "Power resides where people believes it resides"'is one of the biggest themes in the series.

So someone like Renly can get people to join him by leveraging his charisma, good looks and presenting himself as the Good King in order to fool people into thinking he's king material.

Whereas Stannis, despite actually being the one true king, can't do any of that because he has no charisma, is average-looking and unpleasant to be around despite probably being more competent at governance and military command than Renly.
 

Turin

Banned
Are there seriously people in here claiming Sansa's inconsistency is somehow intended? Sure, if you ignore every interview the writers and Sophie Turner give about Sansa where they constantly claim that season 6 features Sansa finally being a 'player'.

Honestly though, I think the praise for season 6 is a bit much. It was way better than season 5, but still nowhere near the quality of season 1-4. Even the last two episodes had some glaring flaws in logic and writing. Some of them are already discussed here, but let's not forget that the single biggest sin of the final two episodes was the fact that apparently D&D completely forgot what the main conflict of the entire series is about. It's all about inheritance and rightful claims, yet here they have Cersei blowing up half the city (which everyone with half a brain should be able to figure out that it was her who did it) and becoming queen despite having zero claims to anything. Or what about Yara and Theon's plotline with them making a case to Daenarys that their uncle somehow usurped the throne from them? Newsflash: No, he didn't, he was rightfully elected. Family ties give you no claim to the throne in an electoral system, you are the usurper.

I'll second that. Really just succeeded in moving the story along and not succumbing to edge-lord nihilism.
 

Black_Sun

Member
If not Cersei who else had claim to that throne? All the officially legitimate Baratheons are dead as are their consorts. The throne kind of goes to her by default.

And besides hereditary succession was never the be all end all in this world. If it was Targaryen wouldn't have been chased out of Westeros and the Boltons would have never been Wardens of the North.

Well no, that's not how royal succession works. It'd go to the next closest of kin to the Baratheons. Cersei isn't related to the Baratheons so it doesn't make sense for it to go to her. Going by the books, I suppose the next closest of kin could be the Martells or funnily enough, Brienne.

And the Baratheons are related to the Targaryens. Robert, Stannis and Renly are Rhaegar, Daenerys and Viserys' cousins.

And being the Warden of the North was meant to be a temporary title. Tyrion and Sansa were meant to inherit the North after Robb Stark died but Sansa fled and Tyrion was exiled before he could impregnate her so the Boltons took control in the absence of all others and even then Ramsay married Sansa to tighten his hold on the North.
 
Michael Moorcock (what an unfortunate name) wrote an essay called Epic Pooh deriding celebrated fantasy authors like CS Lewis and Tolkien and others.

One of his criticisms is that they had the same goals as Winnie the Pooh, that is they seek to comfort its readers rather than challenge them and that their stories were escapist literature that refused to deal with issues raised by the real world.

But I've read the Elric saga (maybe not all the books? It was many years ago) and it seemed to me escapist literature to...
 

YAWN

Ask me which Shakespeare novel is best
I don't trust D&D with Dunk and Egg, they'd strip it of all it's subtlety.
I hate the way Game of Thrones has ended up, especially after it's strong 1st season.
 
I don't trust D&D with Dunk and Egg, they'd strip it of all it's subtlety.
I hate the way Game of Thrones has ended up, especially after it's strong 1st season.

Its still really fun to watch week to week but all the intrigue between the characters has been completely lost for a while tbh.
 

YAWN

Ask me which Shakespeare novel is best
Its still really fun to watch week to week but all the intrigue between the characters has been completely lost for a while tbh.

Yeah, that's my problem with it. It's just mindless entertainment now.
You can see plot twists coming from a mile away and there's a lot of plot induced stupidity.
It really has just devolved into "tits and dragons".
 
Really? I mean you have a Geralt of Rivia avatar so that's even more surprising.

Elric is the original White Wolf. Geralt of Rivia's nickname as well as Jon Snow's nickname are homages to him.

The Elric Brothers from Fullmetal Alchemist are also named after Elric of Melnibone.

Blue Oyster Cult even wrote a song about Elric called "Black Blade".

When Joffrey shouts out what they should call his new sword in the show, someone suggests Stormbringer. That's a shoutout to Elric's cursed sword that feeds on the souls of people.

If you're into tragic fantasy heroes, I'd definitely recommend reading the Elric Saga. It's about a weak and frail albino who is also a sorcerer king that eventually chances upon a cursed sword called Stormbringers that makes him strong and healthy but feeds on the souls of people.

This. There is a lot of Moorcock in GRRMs writing.
 

xrnzaaas

Member
Has HBO's approach changed or is it just me? I was under the impression that they don't want to show that they're planning to milk this franchise, because it's by far their most popular right now.
 
Am I the only one who thought he looked too much like Neil Patrick Harris?

I just don't think he looked or sounded anything like Ned.

 

Black_Sun

Member
This. There is a lot of Moorcock in GRRMs writing.

Yep. ASOIAF is a mash up of Tolkien, Moorcock, Robert E Howard and Tad Williams with a sprinkling of Lovecraft and history fiction.


Even Azhor Ahai/The Prince that was Promised/The Warrior of Light is in part influenced by Moorcock's idea of the Eternal Champion who is reincarnated each time in a different hero.

And while that's a common story trope, GRRM gives another shout-out to the Elric Saga by naming two of Azhor Ahai's personas as Eldric Shadowchaser and Hyrkoon the Hero.

Eldric = Elric of Melnibone

Hyrkoon = Yrkoon (Elric's cousin and rival)
 

Patriots7

Member
It's very different story intentions at work. D & D are going with the idea that rules and laws don't mean shit in the world. It's all about rule of the strongest. Game of Thrones is very Social Darwinian in that sense.

In GRRM's series, it's not about might trumping law. The commentary is more about how truth doesn't really matter only people's perceptions of the truth. "Power resides where people believes it resides"'is one of the biggest themes in the series.

So someone like Renly can get people to join him by leveraging his charisma, good looks and presenting himself as the Good King in order to fool people into thinking he's king material.

Whereas Stannis, despite actually being the one true king, can't do any of that because he has no charisma, is average-looking and unpleasant to be around despite probably being more competent at governance and military command than Renly.
Stannis would have been shit at governing. Say what you want about Renly, it was pretty clear that out of the three brothers he would have been able to govern the best.
 
Big additional update from GRRM on his blog:
About Those Spinoffs...

So while I was on the road out California way, the story broke about the four GAME OF THRONES spinoffs that HBO is developing. And of course the news has since spread everywhere, all over the web and all over the world.

Yes, it's true. More or less. Though, as is all too common these days, various distortions and misapprehensions have crept into some of the reports along the way. And television being the fast-moving business that it is, there have already been some further developments.

For what it's worth, I don't especially like the term "spinoff," and I don't think it really applies to these new projects. What we're talking about are new stories set in the "secondary universe" (to borrow Tolkien's term) of Westeros and the world beyond, the world I created for A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE. It is a world, and a pretty big one, and if there were eight million stories in the naked city back in the 50s, just think how many more there are in an entire world, and one with thousands of years of recorded history.

None of these new shows will be 'spinning off' from GOT in the traditional sense. We are not talking Joey or AfterMASH or even Frazier or Lou Grant, where characters from one show continue on to another. So all of you who were hoping for the further adventures of Hot Pie are doomed to disappointment. Every one of the concepts under discussion is a prequel, rather than a sequel. Some may not even be set on Westeros. Rather than 'spinoff' or 'prequel,' however, I prefer the term 'successor show.' That's what I've been calling them.

Yes, I am involved, and have been for months. I had my first meeting with HBO about the possibility of a successor show back in August, when I pitched them two possible series. (One of those is among the concepts being developed, one is not). In the months that followed, other writers were brought in and pitched other ideas. Ultimately HBO decided to go ahead with four separate developments, to be written by Max Borenstein, Jane Goldman, Brian Helgeland, and Carly Wray.

It was stated in some of the reports that I am working with two of the four writers. That's not quite right. I've actually been working with all four of the writers. Every one of the four has visited me here in Santa Fe, some of them more than once, and we've spent days together discussing their ideas, the history of Westeros and the world beyond, and sundry details found only in The World of Ice & Fire and The Lands of Ice & Fire... when we weren't drinking margaritas and eating chile rellenos and visiting Meow Wolf. They are all amazing talents, and I am excited to be working with them. In between visits, I've been in touch with them by phone, text, and email, and I expect there will be a lot more back-and-forth as we move forward.

And there's more. We had four scripts in development when I arrived in LA last week, but by the time I left we had five. We have added a fifth writer to the original four. No, I will not reveal the name here. HBO announced the names of the first four, and will no doubt announce the fifth as well, once his deal has closed. He's a really terrific addition, however, a great guy and a fine writer, and aside from me and maybe Elio and Linda, I don't know anyone who knows and loves Westeros as well as he does.

Some of the reports of these developments seem to suggest that HBO might be adding four successor shows to the schedule to replace GAME OF THRONES. Decades of experience in television and film have taught me that nothing is ever really certain... but I do think it's very unlikely that we'll be getting four (or five) series. At least not immediately. What we do have here is an order for four -- now five -- pilot scripts. How many pilots will be filmed, and how many series might come out of that, remains to be seen. (If we do get five series on the air, I might have to change my name to Dick Direwolf).

The one goal that EVERYONE involved shares here is to make these new shows just as good as GAME OF THRONES itself. No easy task, mind you. David Benioff and Dan Weiss are a tough, tough act to follow, as all those Emmys demonstrate.

I can't tell you what the shows will be about (well, I could, but I won't), but I will tell you a couple of things they WON'T be. Which will disappoint some of you, sure, but better to do that now than later, I think.

We're not doing Dunk & Egg. Eventually, sure, I'd love that, and so would many of you. But I've only written and published three novellas to date, and there are at least seven or eight or ten more I want to write. We all know how slow I am, and how fast a television show can move. I don't want to repeat what happened with GAME OF THRONES itself, where the show gets ahead of the books. When the day comes that I've finished telling all my tales of Dunk & Egg, then we'll do a tv show about them... but that day is still a long ways off.

We're not doing Robert's Rebellion either. I know thousands of you want that, I know there's a petition... but by the time I finish writing A SONG OF ICE & FIRE, you will know every important thing that happened in Robert's Rebellion. There would be no surprises or revelations left in such a show, just the acting out of conflicts whose resolutions you already know. That's not a story I want to tell just now; it would feel too much like a twice-told tale.

More than that, I will not say. Feel free to makes your guesses, if you like... but I am not going to be confirming or denying anything, so don't expect replies.

And yes, before someone asks, I AM STILL WORKING ON WINDS OF WINTER and will continue working on it until it's done. I will confess, I do wish I could clone myself, or find a way to squeeze more hours into the day, or a way to go without sleep. But this is what it is, so I keep on juggling. WINDS OF WINTER, five successor shows, FIRE AND BLOOD (that's the GRRMarillion, remember?), four new Wild Cards books, some things I can't tell you about yet... it's a good thing I love my work.
 

Ithil

Member
Sounds like they're all gonna be very far in the past.

I'm gonna guess one of them concerns all the various shit that went down with the Targaryans during their reigns (Dance of Dragons, etc), and going by that not-just-Westeros talk, I bet one is set far, far away, maybe in the far east of the world map, where there's almost no actual info given yet. That'd give them tons of creative licence to do what they wanted, including going as big as they like.

The other two, I don't know. It sounds like he wants them to be all new rather than just adaptations of events already heavily explained in ASOIAF.
I will guess that only one of them actually gets made at this time, however, to start airing in 2019 after GOT ends next year. Two at the very most, and not starting at the same time.
 
FFS I don't begrudge that it seems like he has a much better time with the show than books but stop stringing people along damn it.
 

duckroll

Member
Blackfyre it is

I think it's a lot more than that. GRRM has always spoken about how much he loves writing about the Targs, and a huge chunk of World of Ice and Fire is dedicated to their reigns. So no doubt that'll be one of the main things they will be mining for more content.

The other thing they could be mining, which honestly I think no one wants to see, is Yi Ti and the Long Night. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
 
Top Bottom