Latest Movie News Headlines

C'mon, Hollywood! Quit using computer generated blood effects!

Nov. 5, 2013by: ResidentRiddle64

Nitpicking a film is something that I honestly don't enjoy doing. I hate to ruin a good movie for myself by hating on the small things, but something I always have a difficult time overlooking is computer generated blood effects. While I wouldn't say CGB has ever been the deciding factor on whether a movie was good or not, the fact is when it's used (and noticeable) it takes away from the power of individual scenes, which does end up hurting the movie, overall. 

When bloody violence is put into a film, I feel it's for one of four purposes: realism, humor, shock value, or spectacle. Unlike heavily computer generated landscapes and characters, violence isn't limited by genre. The realistic and intense violence in a dramatic film like SAVING PRIVATE RYAN reaches the same intended effect as a more comedic action film like DJANGO UNCHAINED. Both films are very bloody, but are completely different tonally. Both use practical blood effects, which enhance the desired feel of the movie's mood. Seeing the graphic carnage of WWII was made much more intense with the lifelike blood effects. In DJANGO, the violence was more exaggerated and over the top, but with Tarantino using powerful squibs and blood effects it made it seem more realistic. Had they used CGI blood in either of those films, the would have lost the feel completely. 

That said, I can understand that some filmmakers prefer the "technique" of using CGB. With practical blood effects, things are bound to get messy and/or go wrong (not to mention a heavy cleanup from one take to the next). As in every case, there are exceptions to the rule. Take 300 for example. It’s a heavily stylized movie that uses computer-generated effects in nearly every shot. The CGB not only belonged, but enhanced the film and gave it an artistic feel all its own. Director David Fincher used CGB in ZODIAC, however measurements were taken to ensure that the blood looked as realistic as possible. The use of CGB not only saved him time setting up shots and multiple takes, but he was able to get exactly what he wanted.

Again, it doesn't matter what genre it's found in, whenever CGB is badly utilized, it takes away from the intended reaction. How much more brutal would this scene have been from HOT FUZZ had they not used any computer enhanced blood effects? Obviously, it was supposed to be graphic, shocking and completely rooted in dark humor, but here, it comes off as a little dopey. There are dozens of instances in WATCHMEN, but one of the more distracting scenes is this little number. What should’ve been a visceral, eye-shielding scene was ruined by computer-generated dismemberment. MIDNIGHT MEAT TRAIN is another example. Sure, the gore effects looked neat, but when a horror movie shows blood that’s so obviously fake, I'm more inclined to feel disappointed instead of disturbed and queasy.

Obviously, there are still films being made the right way with the good old-fashioned red stuff. EVIL DEAD heavily relied on practical effects and while there were some instances of obvious CGB, it was very little. While the movie isn't necessarily a favorite of mine, there's no denying how disturbingly effective the violence was. Movies like KICK-ASS and NINJA ASSASSIN should have taken the same route. The CG blood effects in those movies left a lot to be desired and while it wasn’t a make or break on the quality of the films, it lost all of its intended effects whenever a fake gush of blood flashed on screen. 

Of course, what's happening on screen to the actors isn't real, but if it appears to look real the suspension of disbelief is easier to suspend and I, as a moviegoer, will accept what I see. With all the advancements in technology, one would assume they would've gotten CGB down to a perfection at this point, but damn it if it doesn't look like complete dog shit and isn't hidden well at all whenever it's underutilized. Take THE EXPENDABLES (and its sequel) for example. The movie was advertised as a harkening back to the action films of the 80’s. While it locked down the appropriate actors, tone and feel for those old-school films, the brutality and badassness of the violence was lost since they took the CGB route. THE EXPENDABLES is rated R for strong action and bloody violence throughout, but God knows why. Where the violence should have been hard hitting and nasty, it just came across as looking cartoony and the blood spurts look like something that belong in a video game. If they had gone a little more gritty and realistic like ZODIAC did, maybe this crisis would have been averted.

So, C'mon, Hollywood! Don't take the lazy route of adding blood in post. Not only does it look shitty, but it also takes away from whatever feeling you want the audience to experience, be it horrific shock or an intense adrenaline rush. I get that it saves time and doesn't break the bank when it comes to corn syrup and squibs, but I think we've all seen enough films to know that the extra effort produces the best bloody results. 

Extra Tidbit: What's been the worst CGB utilized scene you've noticed?
Source: JoBlo.com

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

10:52AM on 11/05/2013
While I loved the film, a lot of the final battles scenes of Rambo were terrible. Especially the scene where Rambo disembowels the Burmese guy at the end.
While I loved the film, a lot of the final battles scenes of Rambo were terrible. Especially the scene where Rambo disembowels the Burmese guy at the end.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
10:53AM on 11/05/2013

TIDBIT: All Cheerleaders Die

Fun film, don't get me wrong... I would nary speak ill about Lucky McKee (whom I was LUCKY enough to meet after the premiere of this film at TIFF! He's a very humble, humorous dude)... but there is one CGB effect in a slow-motion shot that just takes you entirely out of the film. We know it's low-budget, but this shot belongs in an animatic.
Fun film, don't get me wrong... I would nary speak ill about Lucky McKee (whom I was LUCKY enough to meet after the premiere of this film at TIFF! He's a very humble, humorous dude)... but there is one CGB effect in a slow-motion shot that just takes you entirely out of the film. We know it's low-budget, but this shot belongs in an animatic.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:59AM on 11/05/2013
Fair point throughout the column but I wonder which is worse - fake CGI blood or fake CGi guns' muzzle flash. I think both options should be banned.
Fair point throughout the column but I wonder which is worse - fake CGI blood or fake CGi guns' muzzle flash. I think both options should be banned.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:01AM on 11/05/2013
"Nobody makes me bleed my own blood..nobody".

Good article.
"Nobody makes me bleed my own blood..nobody".

Good article.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:01AM on 11/05/2013
What was the name of that Viking movie that came out a few years ago. The fake blood was so bad the movie became unwatchable... I can't even remember the name of the damn thing.
What was the name of that Viking movie that came out a few years ago. The fake blood was so bad the movie became unwatchable... I can't even remember the name of the damn thing.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:44PM on 11/05/2013
Oh! Dude, I'm so sorry- wrong movie. I was thinking of "Outlander." Reference clip: [link]
Oh! Dude, I'm so sorry- wrong movie. I was thinking of "Outlander." Reference clip: [link]
11:41AM on 11/05/2013
But the blood man! It was so bad lol
But the blood man! It was so bad lol
11:27AM on 11/05/2013
Pathfinder's opening sequence is so underrated and amazing though. That alien technology has such great mythology. Makes me wish there was a movie just based on that ethos.
Pathfinder's opening sequence is so underrated and amazing though. That alien technology has such great mythology. Makes me wish there was a movie just based on that ethos.
11:11AM on 11/05/2013
Ahh found it! Pathfinder, the damn movie was called Pathfinder. Just awful!
Ahh found it! Pathfinder, the damn movie was called Pathfinder. Just awful!
11:18AM on 11/05/2013
As a compositor, I can speak on behalf of this topic. We use VFX blood for a number of reasons, ranging from budget to convenience. Certain scenes require multiple takes- when the blood gets everywhere, you have to stop production to clean it up (and re-paint the walls if necessary.)

It's also about control. With VFX blood, you can control where the blood goes, how fast it comes out and the color of it. Certain cameras require very specific lighting- which could make the blood either black
As a compositor, I can speak on behalf of this topic. We use VFX blood for a number of reasons, ranging from budget to convenience. Certain scenes require multiple takes- when the blood gets everywhere, you have to stop production to clean it up (and re-paint the walls if necessary.)

It's also about control. With VFX blood, you can control where the blood goes, how fast it comes out and the color of it. Certain cameras require very specific lighting- which could make the blood either black if done wrong or too red, making it look fake.

With that said, I would absolutely prefer using practice effects in regards to blood. I completely agree, it creates an entirely different feel than VFX blood.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:16PM on 11/08/2013
As long as I get the last word, get fucked!
As long as I get the last word, get fucked!
5:44PM on 11/05/2013
Thanks Smoove, glad I could explain it a little bit in detail. Thanks giving me your opinion also, I'm glad you see the positive and negatives of both applications.
Thanks Smoove, glad I could explain it a little bit in detail. Thanks giving me your opinion also, I'm glad you see the positive and negatives of both applications.
4:57PM on 11/05/2013
Thanks for providing some insight into the reason why. The multiple takes is probably very compelling. This argumnt is academic in a way. When it's done well, or used to compliment practical effects - it's fine, and barely noticeable.

In a way this argument is academic. As for as the "past century of filmmakers who used practical effects with no problem" (which doesn't take into account the fact that there was no alternative to practical effects until very recently) - well, there's plenty
Thanks for providing some insight into the reason why. The multiple takes is probably very compelling. This argumnt is academic in a way. When it's done well, or used to compliment practical effects - it's fine, and barely noticeable.

In a way this argument is academic. As for as the "past century of filmmakers who used practical effects with no problem" (which doesn't take into account the fact that there was no alternative to practical effects until very recently) - well, there's plenty of practical blood effects that are as, or more, fake and distracting as CGI effects. It all comes down to time, money, talent, and desire. If something is done purely as an avoidable shortcut, it'll show, no matter what it is.

topchambers: I don't think I've ever seen a constructive comment come out of your account. I think that's why it's pretty easy to infer that you're just a pissy armchair director. No need to see your resume.
2:11PM on 11/05/2013
Gay!
Gay!
2:07PM on 11/05/2013
Agreed Deejay, not paying attention to his comments. You're good. :)
Agreed Deejay, not paying attention to his comments. You're good. :)
2:00PM on 11/05/2013
Boo fucking hoo, you lazy filmmaker. God forgive any feature you tend your hand to....
Boo fucking hoo, you lazy filmmaker. God forgive any feature you tend your hand to....
1:36PM on 11/05/2013
Absolutely agree Elder, I would prefer practical blood than VFX blood. Chambers took it upon himself to insult me when I even said I like real blood, I was simply explaining why we use VFX blood.
Absolutely agree Elder, I would prefer practical blood than VFX blood. Chambers took it upon himself to insult me when I even said I like real blood, I was simply explaining why we use VFX blood.
11:53AM on 11/05/2013
I think the real problem though Deejay is that it just looks so fake as CGI, I understand your point but when it doesn't look real then the whole thing is pointless.
I think the real problem though Deejay is that it just looks so fake as CGI, I understand your point but when it doesn't look real then the whole thing is pointless.
11:36AM on 11/05/2013
Well shit - it looks like the past century of filmmakers who used practical effects with no problem must have had it all wrong then....!

And when the fuck did you glance at my CV to make that judgement?
Well shit - it looks like the past century of filmmakers who used practical effects with no problem must have had it all wrong then....!

And when the fuck did you glance at my CV to make that judgement?
11:28AM on 11/05/2013
Productions cost a lot of money. It's easy to sit behind an arm chair and dictate to me laziness when you're not on set for 14-18 hours a day or in an editing room for 3 months straight.
Productions cost a lot of money. It's easy to sit behind an arm chair and dictate to me laziness when you're not on set for 14-18 hours a day or in an editing room for 3 months straight.
11:26AM on 11/05/2013
So what you're saying is you use blood when you don;t want to spend more money, time or can;t be bothered to use practical effects......?
So what you're saying is you use blood when you don;t want to spend more money, time or can;t be bothered to use practical effects......?
11:25AM on 11/05/2013
I completely agree. The biggest culprit is the Expendables. The CG blood in that is fucking embarrassing!
I completely agree. The biggest culprit is the Expendables. The CG blood in that is fucking embarrassing!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:26AM on 11/05/2013
Brad Jones, aka the Cinema Snob, pointed out how disappointing it is that Machete Kills relies on so much CG gore when they have Tom frikkin' Savini, practical makeup gore master, right in front of them on the cast.
Brad Jones, aka the Cinema Snob, pointed out how disappointing it is that Machete Kills relies on so much CG gore when they have Tom frikkin' Savini, practical makeup gore master, right in front of them on the cast.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:47AM on 11/05/2013
After seeing Die Hard, RoboCop, Predator and Total Recall, there hand been great movie blood in any form CG or not. With the exception of Saving Private Ryan.
After seeing Die Hard, RoboCop, Predator and Total Recall, there hand been great movie blood in any form CG or not. With the exception of Saving Private Ryan.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
11:50AM on 11/05/2013
Dredd 3D.
Dredd 3D.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:38AM on 11/06/2013
A mix of practical blood, and CG for the slo-mo stuff.
A mix of practical blood, and CG for the slo-mo stuff.
11:54AM on 11/05/2013
The blood FX in DREDD 3D were fantastic.
The blood FX in DREDD 3D were fantastic.
11:52AM on 11/05/2013

Completely took me out of "Expendables"

When Eric Roberts got killed I remember being completely taken out of the picture because what came out of him didn't even look real. GGI blood, above all things, doesn't belong in films. There is no way to make it look like actual blood. It is a cheap and extremely cheesy thing to do to a film.
When Eric Roberts got killed I remember being completely taken out of the picture because what came out of him didn't even look real. GGI blood, above all things, doesn't belong in films. There is no way to make it look like actual blood. It is a cheap and extremely cheesy thing to do to a film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:05PM on 11/05/2013
Yes! That CG knife!
Yes! That CG knife!
11:52AM on 11/05/2013
I agree with this completely. And I understand that VFX artists/crew may think it's easier to use but when it doesn't look real, what's the point? It's to the point now where I actually smile when I see squibs being used again in movies. As over the top as it was, DJANGO UNCHAINED was a fresh return to the squib era.
I agree with this completely. And I understand that VFX artists/crew may think it's easier to use but when it doesn't look real, what's the point? It's to the point now where I actually smile when I see squibs being used again in movies. As over the top as it was, DJANGO UNCHAINED was a fresh return to the squib era.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:14PM on 11/05/2013
Thank god! I've been saying this for years! Cgi ruins a lot of movies! Especially cgi blood
Thank god! I've been saying this for years! Cgi ruins a lot of movies! Especially cgi blood
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:30PM on 11/05/2013
Worst offender has to be Rambo 4.0 where the gore was unintentionally hilarious compared with RIII. Yes, I agree with tech advancement and what not, but a balance needs to be struck where realism is concerned with the exception of 300 as rightly pointed out.
But in the case of Saw 4 onwards practical fx can also look awful but maybe thats because of rating concerns and sh!t.
Worst offender has to be Rambo 4.0 where the gore was unintentionally hilarious compared with RIII. Yes, I agree with tech advancement and what not, but a balance needs to be struck where realism is concerned with the exception of 300 as rightly pointed out.
But in the case of Saw 4 onwards practical fx can also look awful but maybe thats because of rating concerns and sh!t.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:49PM on 11/05/2013
completely agree with this! I wondered why people thought Expendables was violent as I found it very mild & I think its for the reason mentioned here.. THE WALKING DEAD is a show that has the right idea of mixing up practical effects with cgb & it comes off very well on screen
completely agree with this! I wondered why people thought Expendables was violent as I found it very mild & I think its for the reason mentioned here.. THE WALKING DEAD is a show that has the right idea of mixing up practical effects with cgb & it comes off very well on screen
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:54PM on 11/05/2013
I agree with this rant. I've always been a defender of CGI to be honest because some fanboys just hate on it for simply being CGI but the CGI gore has always been where I draw the line. Oddly enough, the films you mentioned in the article aren't ones that bothered me lol.
I agree with this rant. I've always been a defender of CGI to be honest because some fanboys just hate on it for simply being CGI but the CGI gore has always been where I draw the line. Oddly enough, the films you mentioned in the article aren't ones that bothered me lol.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:27PM on 11/05/2013
Agree!
Agree!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:57PM on 11/05/2013

C'mon on Hollywood! Double your budgets!

While I agree with the article in principle, unfortunately, the cost and time involved with practical blood effects make them near impossible for low budget movies to use. Let's hope the CG evolves to look better soon, as they're definitely not going to stop using it.
While I agree with the article in principle, unfortunately, the cost and time involved with practical blood effects make them near impossible for low budget movies to use. Let's hope the CG evolves to look better soon, as they're definitely not going to stop using it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:36AM on 11/06/2013
Wow, a condom, fake blood, a small pop-gag and some wardrobe are more expensive than hiring a keyboard digi-monkey for $50-100 an hour to spend a day pulling off CGB?
Wow, a condom, fake blood, a small pop-gag and some wardrobe are more expensive than hiring a keyboard digi-monkey for $50-100 an hour to spend a day pulling off CGB?
4:30PM on 11/05/2013
Huh? "practical blood effects make them near impossible for low budget movies to use"?

You must have never seen a 80's slasher film.
Huh? "practical blood effects make them near impossible for low budget movies to use"?

You must have never seen a 80's slasher film.
+14
2:02PM on 11/05/2013
While we're at it, let's ban CGI anything from horror movies. Nothing kills the scares more than a CGI hack job posing as a vengeful spirit/bloodthirsty demon.
While we're at it, let's ban CGI anything from horror movies. Nothing kills the scares more than a CGI hack job posing as a vengeful spirit/bloodthirsty demon.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:58PM on 11/05/2013
Nice article. The only time cgi blood worked for me was 300.
Nice article. The only time cgi blood worked for me was 300.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:40PM on 11/05/2013

Tidbit...

I've been watching a lot of Chinese martial arts movies recently, and the way blood is used in some of these movies, is just beyond laughable. Some of the CG backgrounds, foregrounds, etc. are pretty awful too.
I've been watching a lot of Chinese martial arts movies recently, and the way blood is used in some of these movies, is just beyond laughable. Some of the CG backgrounds, foregrounds, etc. are pretty awful too.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:19PM on 11/05/2013

Works23.com

my roomate's mother makes $70/hr on the internet. She has been fired from work for 5 months but last month her check was $19971 just working on the internet for a few hours. see here now..... Works23.com
my roomate's mother makes $70/hr on the internet. She has been fired from work for 5 months but last month her check was $19971 just working on the internet for a few hours. see here now..... Works23.com
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
10:08PM on 11/05/2013
The worst offender is not CGB but rather CGGC: Computer Generated Gun Shots. Nothing distracts me more during an action sequence than seeing a gun fired, with no kickback, no shell being expended from the magazine or barrel yet a shot is fired. CGI is meant to enhance, not detract...
The worst offender is not CGB but rather CGGC: Computer Generated Gun Shots. Nothing distracts me more during an action sequence than seeing a gun fired, with no kickback, no shell being expended from the magazine or barrel yet a shot is fired. CGI is meant to enhance, not detract...
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:04AM on 11/06/2013

Not sure what's wrong with that Watchmen clip.

I agree with the article. Using CGI cheapens the intended effect (if it's noticeable, at least... but 99% of the time it is), and it also removes the magic of movies. Movies used to be forced to use practical effects, but now it seems you have to fight to even use some practical effects. CGI is a cheap way out of ingenuity. It's just... ugh.

But I don't see what's wrong with that Watchmen scene. It looked pretty fine to me... in fact, it looked like it could have been practically-done
I agree with the article. Using CGI cheapens the intended effect (if it's noticeable, at least... but 99% of the time it is), and it also removes the magic of movies. Movies used to be forced to use practical effects, but now it seems you have to fight to even use some practical effects. CGI is a cheap way out of ingenuity. It's just... ugh.

But I don't see what's wrong with that Watchmen scene. It looked pretty fine to me... in fact, it looked like it could have been practically-done for the most part.

The most distracting use of CG for me is SAW III, when Jeff is in the Freezer Room Trap. The breath... his breathing. It is so stupid because when the breath comes out, it's not timed well at all with his actual breathing. :( So annoying. It's so tiny, but so so stupid. For a series that prides itself in using mostly practical effects, that one CG scene makes me a sad panda.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:04AM on 11/06/2013

So glad you brought this to light

CGB has been bugging me me for a while now. I'm reminded of it everytime I watch The Walking Dead. I like practical effects and in my mind it is never okay to use CGB, EVER. It is lazy filmmaking to me. Sure creating other worlds and creatures lend themselves to some CG due to size and scope but blood effects should ALWAYS be practical. It ALWAYS looks phony and takes me out of the "reality" of the piece. If I wanted to see that stuff I'd play video games.
CGB has been bugging me me for a while now. I'm reminded of it everytime I watch The Walking Dead. I like practical effects and in my mind it is never okay to use CGB, EVER. It is lazy filmmaking to me. Sure creating other worlds and creatures lend themselves to some CG due to size and scope but blood effects should ALWAYS be practical. It ALWAYS looks phony and takes me out of the "reality" of the piece. If I wanted to see that stuff I'd play video games.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:37AM on 11/06/2013
i have to agree nothing is worse then getting into a scene then bam fake computer blood just pulls me right out of it i prefer old school effects
i have to agree nothing is worse then getting into a scene then bam fake computer blood just pulls me right out of it i prefer old school effects
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:01AM on 11/06/2013
The worst CGB I've ever seen, considering it's a movie with a big budget, was the unrated cut of Alien Vs Predator. They literally just added it on after the fact. The CGB was pathetic and laughably bad. But then again, so was the movie.
The worst CGB I've ever seen, considering it's a movie with a big budget, was the unrated cut of Alien Vs Predator. They literally just added it on after the fact. The CGB was pathetic and laughably bad. But then again, so was the movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:38AM on 11/06/2013
I'll agree with this to a point - there is a tendency to 'go digital' or plan for effects in post production, and there's a skill and artistry to doing anything well digitally (the real trick being to make it look natural) and it's when that aspect of naturalizing digital effects isn't handled well (or just plain taking them too far) that you notice it's an effect and it's jarring toward the suspension of disbelief required to lose yourself in a film. I'm sure there are benefits to filmmakers
I'll agree with this to a point - there is a tendency to 'go digital' or plan for effects in post production, and there's a skill and artistry to doing anything well digitally (the real trick being to make it look natural) and it's when that aspect of naturalizing digital effects isn't handled well (or just plain taking them too far) that you notice it's an effect and it's jarring toward the suspension of disbelief required to lose yourself in a film. I'm sure there are benefits to filmmakers to using digital gore (not having to clean up afterwards, being able to get exactly the right pantone colour for your blood, etc) but I think you need to be self regulating on such matters - if a shot is possible with practical effects, if you really love making films there should always be a desire to achieve it in camera, and digital gore should be used for the impractical or impossible shots and let the digital effects artists really work at making it look as real as possible. There's a balance to everything, so I'm not going to decry digital effects as a medium, but when the nature of action and horror is essentially visceral - if you can make it look real by slinging around corn syrup or whatever, why wouldn't you instead of relying on digital effects that will take infinitely more work to look less convincing.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:30AM on 11/06/2013

It's popular because you can control the splatter, but the people don't realize it looks fake

The whole CGB thing started as a way to make blood work in slo-mo, and because squibs and blood packs can be unreliable. But as with any computer generated effect, it is oversold, and practical effects artist have to work around it. Hopefully it is just a fad, but in a Hollywood that likes to be PG-13 friendly, I think it's gonna be rare to see squibs on film anymore.
The whole CGB thing started as a way to make blood work in slo-mo, and because squibs and blood packs can be unreliable. But as with any computer generated effect, it is oversold, and practical effects artist have to work around it. Hopefully it is just a fad, but in a Hollywood that likes to be PG-13 friendly, I think it's gonna be rare to see squibs on film anymore.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!