Greetings! Have you ever wondered if a movie's worth blowing the money on to see at the theater or what to add next to your NetFlix queue? Then you've come to the right place! Enjoy!

May 2013 Review Roundup

Summer's here and the time is right to head to the megaplexes to see some movies the way they're meant to be seen. I nearly quadrupled my theatrical viewing total.

May 3 - Iron Man 3 (8/10)
May 6 - Limitless: Unrated Extended Cut (9/10)
May 8 - Oblivion (4/10)
May 13 - Star Trek (7/10)
May 16 - Star Trek Into Oblivion (5/10)
May 27 - Fast & Furious 6 (8.5/10); The Hangover Part III (6/10)

Most Enjoyed: Furious 6
Least Enjoyed: Oblivion

Month's Movies Watched: 7
Previously Unseen: 5
Theatrical: 5
Home: 2
Year-To-Date: 30
YTD First-Timers: 26
YTD Theatrical: 7
YTD Home: 23

"The Hangover Part III" Review

Following my viewing of the revved-up and better-than-ever 6th installment of the Fast and Furious franchise, I strolled down the row at the multiplex into The Hangover Part III, which is advertised as the final chapter of the Wolfpack Trilogy and we can only hope so. It's not that it sucks, it's just that there's nowhere left for this series to go.

Eschewing the blackout-and-try-to-figure-out-WTF-happened formula of the first two films, The Hangover Part III opts for a linear structure. After Alan's (Zach Galifianakanisasnuffleupagus) man-baby antics have driven his father into the grave, the family decides it's time to send him to a clinic in Arizona to get him back on his meds and the Wolfpack consents to drive him out there. On the way, their minivan is forced off the road and Doug (the one who was missing in the first movie whom no one knows the actor's name) is taken hostage by John Goodman. It seems Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong) ripped off $21 million in gold bars from a heist they pulled and he thinks the Wolfpack can find him now that Chow has escaped from the Thai prison he was in and is back Stateside. They have three days to find Chow and the gold or Doug is dead.

How much you enjoy this non-hangover-induced Hangover is dependent on how much you love/like/tolerate/hate the Chow character because he gets a lot of screen time. I like Chow, so I was cool with the emphasis. Alan is more of the same and while Galafreyanklebiteris (sp?) remains fully committed to the the character, at this point I really don't know why the Wolfpack didn't skip simply skip the clinic and drive out into the desert and bury him. (Whether he was dead first is irrelevant.) Ed Helms doesn't has much to do this time and Bradley Cooper really emails his performance in. Considering how many weeks it takes to shoot a feature film, you somewhat have to respect the amount of work Cooper put in to make sure he didn't look like he wanted to be there. (Yes, that's an ironic comment.)

The Hangover Part III was a surprise box office disappointment as Furious 6 left it choking on its dust but where the Fast and Furious series was able to reinvent itself, The Hangover series can't because this chapter was the reinvention and there's simply not enough there there to make further trips to the well advisable.

Score: 6/10. Catch it on cable.

"Fast & Furious 6" Review

Does anyone remember when The Fast and the Furious was this little B-movie from 2001 about street racing in the Valley? Because the series certainly hasn't over the years beginning with the conceptual reboot it received in Fast Five as The Rock appeared as a Federal agent looking to bust the Vin Diesel-powered family of ace drivers. Suddenly the series was a heist caper picture with seriously over the top action scenes culminating with a huge bank safe being dragged through the streets of Rio like a wrecking ball. With the series back firing on all cylinders, it was time to up the stakes and the result is Furious 6 (as it's credited; no relation to Grandmaster Flash's old back-ups), a movie that's big, noisy, dumb and hella fun.

Furry Sex (sp?) kicks off with The Rock and new sidekick Gina Carano (Haywire) investigating a theft of top secret technology in Moscow. (Why a U.S. lawman is there is because he was in Rio in the last movie; in other words, because.) Since the job was done by a international crew of bad guy drivers, Rock decides recruit Diesel and Company with something that was teased in the middle of the end credits of Fast Five: that Michelle Rodriguez's Letty - last seen being killed off on the 4th installment, Fast and Furious - is working with the bad guys. If Diesel et al help take down the kingpin, everyone gets pardons, but all Diesel wants is to return Letty to his family. Hijinks ensue.

While Fast Five was pretty cool in the action scenes, the in-between parts which were meant to serve has plot and stuff were slow and boring. That's been fixed this time with lots of yuks particularly between Ludacris and Tyrese. Everyone in the supporting cast gets some good jibes in and it's funny stuff.

As for the action scenes, they've ramped up the level of craziness to 12 and the realism knob to -12. The laws of physics operate on Looney Tunes rules and human bodies take so much pounding that it's a miracle half the cast doesn't die of internal injuries or that anyone dies at all from falling. I know we don't see these sorts of movies for their realistic depiction of driving - the lengthy disclaimer at the end reminding the audience that what they just watched was unrealistic and dangerous made me chuckle because wouldn't the world be better off if those who need this helpful safety tip removed themselves from the gene pool? - but stuff happens a lot that makes the "Yeah, right!" alarm threaten to go off. (The finale - which I guessed correctly the trailer spoils - must take place on a runway 20 miles long.)

Afterwards, the silliness of the plot holes will hit you - like why have a convoy which can be attacked by car when you could simply fly the target to the location? - but you'll be having too much fun while you're watching. That said, the way they cover the reintroduction of the dead Letty is actually pretty reasonable. Diesel still acts like a narcoleptic side of beef, but that's still better than Paul Walker can muster. The Rock always tickles me with how he knows exactly what sort of movie he's in and delivers a perfectly-calibrated performance. It's good to have M.Rod back playing tough chicks after a couple years off doing European art house films and the fights (yes, plural) between her and Carano are good if only it's a change to see kickass chicks who aren't skinny twigs (think: Zoe Saldana in Columbiana or Angelina Jolie in Salt) who actually look like they can deliver or take a punch without snapping a limb.

A final note: Just as a plot point of Furious 6 (i.e Letty's alive?) was teased at the end Fast Five, there's a tease for the next flick at the end here and based on the reaction of the crowd they could have gotten the budget for Fastious 7 (I'm calling dibs on that title!) from pre-sales as people filed out. It also retcons an event of Tokyo Drift and pins down for once and all where the 3rd movie in the series fits chronologically in the Fast and Furious world: sixth in line.

Score: 8.5/10. Catch a matinee.

"Star Trek Into Darkness" Review

A major part of the publicity during the production and run-up to the release of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness, the sequel to 2009's Star Trek reboot, was the Romulan cloaking device over what character Sherlock star Benedict Cumberbatch was playing. Initial rumors were that he was going to be Khan, then original series figures Gary Mitchell or Robert April. When promo photos listing him as "John Harrison" were released, it sparked another round of speculation - "Who's John Harrison? Is that his real name or is he really Khan or Gary Mitchell or Robert April." Even though I'm normally adverse to spoiling things in reviews, it's not that big a deal and frankly I think you dear readers should be warned up front about what Star Trek Into Darkness is...

Cumberbatch is Khan and Star Trek Into Darkness is Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - Rebooted Trek Universe Edition.†

STID kicks off with a rollicking pre-title sequence setting up how Kirk is still taking little things like the rules and the Prime Directive less-than-seriously. Then comes a nearly-silent sequence introducing Khan, er, "John Harrison" as a man offering to cure a dying little girl in exchange for her father becoming a suicide bomber of a Federation facility in London. This triggers a chain of events which naturally lead Kirk to instantly regain the Captain's chair of the Enterprise that he'd lost not 10 minutes earlier for being too impulsive and callow.

Apparently Starfleet doesn't have any other qualified personnel for critical positions which is why when Scotty resigns from the Enterprise later in the movie, Chekov is reassigned from his normal duties confusing the ship computer's voice recognition system to run Engineering since apparently no other crewmen in Engineering are qualified. (This is why Chekov, not someone whose full-time job is operating the transporters, had to rush from the bridge in the first movie to save Kirk and Sulu. Right.)

Assigned with hunting down and killing to death Khanisson, Kirk and company have to learn about balancing the desire for revenge with the needs of justice meted out by legal proceedings and if you think that sounds a little like an allegory for debates over the prosecution of the War on Terror, the script by Bad Robot house writers Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindeloff break out the Metaphors For Dummies flashcards to make clear that killing bad guys with drones is BAD! and there's a hidden agenda by shadowy forces to provoke war. (These guys are aware that Dubya isn't President anymore, right?)

While the political preening is somewhat annoying, what really kills Star Trek Into Darkness is a general sloppiness in writing and tone at a story level. Technology either works amazing levels like being able to teleport across the galaxy at one point to barely working from a few miles away at another. The opening sequence involves the Enterprise being hidden underwater (it's in the trailer, so it's not a spoiler) but why is it there other than to provide a cool visual? The whole reason Gene Roddenberry invented the transporter was because it wasn't possible to convincingly land the ship with 1960s VFX, so what purpose does this scene serve other than to do it because they can? Why wasn't a shuttle sent down if the transporters weren't an option.

The Klingons make their first appearance in the Abrams version of the Trek universe, but it doesn't amount to anything. There is a secret villain with a gigantic battleship that apparently he was able to have designed and built without anyone's knowledge. The "humor" is forced and limited, with Spock and Uhura bickering in the middle of missions like unprofessional schoolkids and vaguely racist jokes about Spock's lack of sense of humor offered as witty repartee. But it's when the story returns to regurgitating Wrath of Khan that it really bores and reveals its laziness. Not only will you be able to predict exactly how they'll get out of their predicament, but I defy you from not laughing at an iconic moment which doesn't work in its new context.

When the movie was meant to be the most thrilling was when I became the most bored because it was literally sound and fury signifying nothing. I tuned out and stopped paying attention to the Big Action Moments because there were no stakes at risk; all was going to end well in the end. It's too bad because the cast is uniformly excellent as they were last time out. Cumberbatch is the best Bond villain in ages, but he too is saddled with a script that's contradictory about his motivations. It's a testament to his thespian heft that you don't realize until the drive home how little sense his actions made.

Nerds don't like the Orci-Kurtzman-Lindeloff writing squad, calling them "hacks" for their work on the Transformers series but unlike Oscar-winning hack Akiva Goldsman (Batman & Robin, Lost In Space, A Beautiful Mind) it's not that they're terrible as much as so successful and insulated that no one has the ability to point out how lazy they've become. Their movies make tons of money, so who cares if plot canyons exist? [/raises hand to indicate that I care] It's too bad since they had an opportunity to make something unique from their rebooted universe and they chose to go with the path of least resistance.

Some may be concerned for what this portends for Abrams' next project, the hotly-anticipated-and-feared Star Wars: Episode VII - Title To Be Announced In 2014 Probably. I'm not panicking (yet) because the Bad Robot boys won't be involved in the scripting. I'm not sure what having the scribe from Toy Story 3 and Little Miss Sunshine will bring to the party, but Lawrence Kasdan is reportedly consulting and I don't think producer Kathleen Kennedy will allow the sloppy writing Abrams accepted from his pals. I'm just hoping he builds some sets instead of going with these giant factories, breweries and labs which don't look like they'd fit in a starship; it's the Enterprise, not the TARDIS!

Score: 5/10. Catch it at the dollar show.

† The whole "John Harrison" conceit was only constructed to hide that they were retelling Wrath of Kahn. Why the secrecy? Probably to preempt the inevitable year-plus of bitching about, "Why aren't they telling NEW stories? They're so lazy and unoriginal! Kahn isn't white! Lens flare rage!" It'd be like if Man of Steel's hype hid that it was General Zod, calling him "Bill Williams" so people didn't react, positively or negatively, to the Superman II recycling.


AICN's Capone liked it in his review burping up at one point with regard to Khan that "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" and I posted this as a comment (thus some repetition from above):

Not only is that one of the more insipid liberal tropes - which obviously tickled Capone's happy spots about the movie; "Drone strikes bad! Marcus = Dick Cheney!" - but it's totally inapplicable here because there's no freedom Khan is fighting for. His fellow prisoners freedom? When you blow people up without announcing why - "Free my fellow prisoners from 300 years ago!*" - you don't get to claim some morally superior mantle.

Khan was thawed out to help Marcus' agenda of militarization because he's super smart and savage. Fine, so if he wants to blow the whistle, why not go to the 23rd Century version of MSNBC to tell the story rather than do a convoluted scheme to save a terminally ill child with his Magic Blood in exchange for the father being impressed into service as a suicide bomber?

What was the purpose of that plot thread? Wouldn't it have been better to have Khan himself sneak into the secret Federation weapons base, blow it up to trigger the meeting at Starfleet HQ, and then have Marcus simultaneously sending Kirk off to catch Khan and hide his connection? The only reason for the kid is to establish Khan's Magic Blood, which is then reminded of when McCoy injects the tribble, so that when Kirk is making his Noble Sacrifice, the Get Out of Death card they play at the end is set up to not seem like a total deus ex machina, like say shooting his body down to a planet which makes life from lifelessness. *cough* (Not to mention that they have a hold filled with other superpeople from Khan's ship who probably have the same Magic Blood.)

The whole "John Harrison" conceit was only constructed to hide that they were retelling Wrath of Kahn. Why the secrecy? Probably to preempt the inevitable year-plus of bitching about, "Why aren't they telling NEW stories? They're so lazy and unoriginal! Khan isn't white! Lens flare rage!" It'd be like if Man of Steel's hype hid that it was General Zod, calling him "Bill Williams" so people didn't react, positively or negatively, to the Superman II recycling. I'm wondering if I would've liked it more if I'd know for sure that they were up to instead of being let down and rapidly bored by what they did?

* I'm surprised that no one is calling out the broken math of Kahn being frozen for "300 years" since the events of Star Trek Into Darkness occur in 2259 which means Kahn would have to have been made a genetically-engineered superman and shot into space in 1959 before we had any of those capabilities. Space Seed said that Kahn was a warlord in the 1990s, but Blade Runner also presumed a far different future 37 years away, too. Orci, Kurtzman and Lindeloff could have fixed everything by freezing their Khan for 200 years, but they were too occupied with typing Bickersons dialog for Spock and Uhura to squabble with during crucial missions.

"Star Trek (2009)" Blu-ray Review

With the impending release of Star Trek Into Darkness, there has been an uptick in hating on J.J. Abrams' reboot of the franchise with these two videos bagging on the ridiculous plot holes and stuff:

I was mindful of most of the plot holes back in 2009 when I saw it and frankly didn't mind so much because Abrams had made the first Star Trek movie in ages that looked like a MOVIE and not a higher-budgeted television episode. It moved swiftly, was fun and the cast did a great job of capturing the essence of the original cast without resorting to mere mimicry.

That said, the super-convenient manner in which every member of the crew lands in their final spots seem cheesy (in a bad way) now and stuff we're supposed to accept like Starfleet has a base close enough to Vulcan to see its destruction with the naked eye, but it's not in the same system AND it's staffed by Scotty all by himself with the Oompa Loompa from Tim Burton's Willie Wonka movie. Come on.

There's a lot Star Trek does right, but enough silly decisions to give the nerd rager's a decent-sized club to beat it with. Rewatching the Blu-ray after watching the videos above made the gaffes unignorable. Also, the lens flare has lens flare.

Score: 7/10. Buy it on sale.

"Oblivion" Review

When the trailer for Tom Cruise's latest flick, Oblivion, came out there was a lot of snarky about how it looked like a mash-up of WALL-E and The Matrix (with Morgan Freeman in the Morpheus role) and having seen it I can only wish it had managed to make the sum equal to a fraction of the parts of those films.

Set in 2077, the Earth had been devastated by an alien invasion that started with the shattering of the Moon and the decimation of the planet by earthquakes, tsunamis and nuclear weapons. (More on this later.) With the Earth trashed, the remains of the human race have relocated to Titan, a moon of Saturn because the much closer and relatively warmer Mars would've made too much sense or something. Cruise plays Jack (not because he just played Jack Reacher and couldn't learn to answer to another name or anything), a drone repair tech who fixes the armed flying death spheres that protect giant pyramids sucking the oceans up and converting them to fusion fuel to propel the exodus of the final crews to Titan from an orbiting four-sided die called the Tet (short for tetrahedron).

His base of operations is Tower 49, a slick, icy-cold, sterile tri-level structure perched thousands of feet up above the clouds, looking like an Apple store in 2001. Keeping him company in his work (and bed, it appears) is Andrea Riseborough (me neither), who sorta looks like what Tilda Swinton would look like if she was a woman and not from David Bowie's homeworld and makes me think they couldn't get Emily Blunt or Jessica Chastain for the part. She monitor's operations from their base and skinny dips in their clear swimming pool (as in you can see into it from the outside) that runs the width of the station on their "front porch" with the walkway to the glass bubble-crossed-with-dragonfly jetcopter that Jack uses to...wait, what the what?!? A SWIMMING POOL?!?!

Most of the reviews for Oblivion have singled out its design sense for praise while damning the derivative and mundane story, but while the gleaming white metal and glass construct of everything is spiffy, it doesn't jibe with what a real operations base would need. Then again, it's not surprising when you consider that the director is Joseph Kosinski who helmed the also-slick but empty TRON Legacy. (The engine exhausts are like the updated Recognizers.) There's a weird disconnect between the ruined Earth and this shining spire and their supposedly urgent mission.

Also, I've had to here with the ridiculous alterations to the landscape that this movie and shows like Defiance portray where the surface is radically transformed in impossible, but picturesque ways. As the trailer shows at 0:34 of the trailer, the Washington Monument is only slightly askew and the Capitol done is visible, but a major setting is the Observation Deck of the Empire State Building which is at ground level because supposedly 1000 feet of dirt have buried it, making the landscape look like Iceland, the current hot exotic location as its use for Prometheus and Game of Thrones shows. As with everything else, making it look cool is more important than having it make sense.

Oh yeah, I never finished recapping the story, did I? That's OK, neither did the screenwriters (working from a pitch for a graphic novel by Kosinski) and as the trailer shows, it's all nonsense about secrets and dreams and mysterious women who fall from the sky and blah-blah-woof-woof. When a movie opens with a mention that their memories had been wiped because just because that's a huge warning flag because it makes no sense; it's like having a pool in your space tower. To Oblivion's tiny credit, the explanation of what's really happening isn't what most people will guess, though when that reveal starts to hint itself, you'll leap a few minutes ahead of the storytelling. The ending and the coda are also ridiculous.

Cruise and Riseborough are fine with what they're given as is former Bond hottie Olga Kurylenko as the Woman Jack Dreams About Who You Will Not Be In The Least Bit Surprised When It's Revealed She's His Wife From Before The Apocalypse. (Whoops! Spoiler alert!) Freeman has so little to do but add useless gravitas to the Morpheus role and the guy who plays Jamie Lannister on Game of Thrones has the thankless sidekick-who-doesn't-like-our-hero part. Zoe Bell is listed in the credits but I never spotted her and have no idea who that character was, not that it matters.

For some reason some people think that Kosinski is some sort of visionary director on the rise but based on TRON Legacy and Oblivion, those people are sadly mistaken. (One clown on in particular thinks he should do the next Star Trek movie. No, Bub.) A few slick sets don't substitute for solid stories well told and he's whiffed both times. I didn't get much sleep the night before, but I was dozing off at 1:30 in the afternoon while watching this and "It kept me awake" is the pass-fail for my girlfriend when she watches something. Just saying.

Normally I'd be giving this a catch it on cable recommendation, but for the luscious visuals and the super-cool sound effects for the killer drones when they're in hunting mode. If you've got a good sound system for your home theater, rent the Blu-ray; otherwise wait for cable.

Score: 4/10. Rent the Blu-ray.

"LImitless: Unrated Extended Cut" Blu-ray Review

I've been wanting to get this for over two years since it was my favorite movie of 2011, but it never seemed to go on sale until just recently, then Beast Buy never had it in stock until the other day when I was able to pick it up.

My original review is here and on second viewing it still holds up, though I was able to notice the use of color timing and camera techniques a bit more. A check online of the comparisons between the theatrical PG-13 cut and this "unrated"* cut are minor; mostly trims to sex and violence that don't seem too extreme in their unbowdlerized form. It's not profound, but it's immensely entertaining and Bradley Cooper kills it in the lead. It's also amusing to realize that he and Robert De Niro would team up in a couple of years and earn Oscar nominations for Silver Linings Playbook.

The Blu-ray looks and sounds great, but it's really thin on the extras side with a pair of fluffy short EPKs - the most techy thing mentioned is the film stocks used for different phases - that add up to about 15 minutes and an alternate ending that's remarkably not as good as what made it into theaters. (Reshoots can help!) I haven't listened to the commentary track yet.

Score: 9/10. Buy it.

* The dirty little secret of the "unrated" label is that it's meant to imply more sex and violence in a movie cut - which in the case of horror or action movies that studio demand a profit-enhancing PG-13 instead of an R-rating lives up to its implied meaning - all it really means is that the MPAA didn't rate it. If Pixar wanted to insert a few more shots of sunsets into Finding Nemo and put it out as the "Unrated Edition", they could even though there'd be nothing risque about it.

"Iron Man 3" Review

Marvel's "Phase Two" - the post-Avengers slate of movies which will include the upcoming Thor: The Dark World, the shooting Captain America: The Winter Soldier, the in pre-production Guardians of the Galaxy, all leading up to Avengers 2 - kicks off with Iron Man 3 which serves as a conclusion to the trilogy; an impression that the closing credits being a greatest hits clip reel from all three Iron Man movies reinforces.

After the events of The Avengers, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr. killing it as usual) is a wreck - racked by crippling anxiety attacks, unable to sleep, drifting away from his lady love Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow, who's never been hotter and when you see the movie, you'll get what I mean by that), spending his nights tinkering on a literal army of suits, implanting sensors into his body to act as magnets that attract the pieces to him. The man inside the iron is corroding.

Meanwhile, a shadowy terrorist called the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is reining terror via television hacks portending doom for the President as a lesson to America which is never really made clear. After Tony's pal Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) is critically injured in a Mandarin attack, Tony dares the Mandarin to come and get him, which he does in a spectacular assault, showcased in all the ads and trailers, on his Malibu home. Barely escaping with his life, Tony crash lands in Tennessee where he needs to find a way to repair his broken suit and psyche and figure out what the Mandarin is up to and how it connects to soldiers working for a slick Guy Pearce who has developed a tech called Extremis which may have miraculous powers albeit with terrible side effects.

While there is plenty to like in Iron Man 3 - especially some great quippy stuff and a scene involving Rhodey's (Don Cheadle) account name and password - there are some weird flaws in the script which hurt things overall. Comic book fans who were already at Nerd Rage Level Orange over the casting of a non-Chinese actor as the Mandarin will go full Level Red/DEFCON 1 when they see how the character is handled in the movie. Non-comic fans probably won't mind, but comic fans will howl. The overarching plot of revenge targeting the President never makes sense and the motivation of the villain seems specious. They really should've had Joss Whedon do a hardcore polish on things.

When watching the Avengers, as awesome a feat it was of juggling so many balls, I felt like something was missing though I couldn't quite put my finger on what could've been improved. Here it's easy to easy to diagnose the core problem: the weakly-motivated villain who seems aimed at the wrong target. Somehow co-writer/director Shane Black (who wrote Lethal Weapon and collaboated with RDJ on Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) decided that Tony Stark's nemesis should be fear and thus the villain villain was given short shrift. It's like how the awful Skyfall wanted to make Bond getting old the problem so we were given a terrible villain who was little more than a disgruntled ex-employee who should've taken his grievance to his union rep.

I've seen a lot of hyperbolic bashing of Iron Man 3 around the Internet from Manichean nerds whose binary mentality can't see anything between flawless victory and epic failure, so they're calling this the "Worst. Marvel. Movie. Ever." In a world where the first Hulk, Elektra, and Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer (not to mention DC's pathetic The Dark Knight Reloaded) are fighting for last place, perhaps the twerps need a trip to the optometrist to have their sense of proportion checked.  There's also an element of "it doesn't feel like the other movies" from the same people who'd be first to whine that "they're just recycling the same stuff over and over instead of doing something different." Ignore them.

It comes down to this: Is Iron Man 3 good, does it have good writing, acting, action and is it worth seeing. The answers are yes; mostly, but could've been improved in the plot; yes; yes; and yes. Nuff said!

Score: 8/10. Catch a matinee.

While there are a couple of spoilers in the trailer, it's interesting to see how much isn't in the trailer and I've chosen to skip over those parts in the review because it's nice to be surprised.

DirkFlix. Copyright 2010-2015 Dirk Omnimedia Inc. All rights reserved.
Free WordPress Themes Presented by EZwpthemes.
Bloggerized by Miss Dothy