Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > New Movie: Kingdom of Heaven Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 15, 16, 17  Next 
Author Message
Patrick Kelly




Location: Wichita, Kansas
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 5,739

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 12:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

That article seems to justify my fears of this movie being used as a modern message piece.

I really wish Hollywood would quit trying to paint the events of past centuries with a modern brush.

"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Roger Hooper




Location: Northern California
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Likes: 1 page

Spotlight topics: 4
Posts: 4,393

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 12:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I just read the article Alina pointed to - I guess it's too much to expect a filmmaker to not slant an historical movie one way or another, or to try to make a point of how we should act now. I hate movies as fables.

A good novel covering this subject - Jerusalem, by Cecelia Holland.
View user's profile Send private message
Patrick Kelly




Location: Wichita, Kansas
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 5,739

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 12:36 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Trying to get this thread back on the general track.

It is nice to see what appears to be real maille being used. At least real in the sense that it actually looks like metal instead of knitting or slices of rubber hose.

The movie I'd really like to see would bee one of the Battle of Hastings. With two big battles to be covered as well as a lot of potential for personal drama it would be a good one.

"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Steve Grisetti




Location: Washington DC metro area, USA
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Likes: 9 pages
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 1,812

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 2:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gabriel Stevens wrote:
I'm perfectly willing to let Scott abuse history as long as the movie is well done and entertaining. I'm just curious how all this is going to be distorted so that the muslims need defending as it says in the article Alina linked to. Historically didn't Saladin pretty much show up and Orlando's charater handle the negotiations for surrender of the city?


I think (or at least hope Big Grin ) that the folks who frequent this site have more of an interest in, and better knowledge of, history than the population as a whole. The problem that I have with distorted history in film is that many people will take this as their history lesson. With some films, that is just an annoyance. With this film, and considering today's political climate, that is unhelpful, at best. Eek!

Well, we can at least hope (for now) that the depictions of arms, armor, tactics, etc are reasonable.... Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Fabert





Joined: 03 Mar 2004
Likes: 10 pages

Posts: 493

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 5:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steve Grisetti wrote:

Well, we can at least hope (for now) that the depictions of arms, armor, tactics, etc are reasonable.... :)


If only they could give us a break from the gasoline-soaked flaming missiles launched from trebuchets and catapults, I would not complain about minor technical liberties. But that's what the stunt crews know how to do, so that's what we will get. I think it's part of the union contract to include these things.
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Grisetti




Location: Washington DC metro area, USA
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Likes: 9 pages
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 1,812

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 5:31 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steve Fabert wrote:
If only they could give us a break from the gasoline-soaked flaming missiles launched from trebuchets and catapults,


You mean they didn't have gasoline? What did people use for fuel in their cars back then?? Laughing Out Loud
View user's profile Send private message
Joe Fults




Location: Midwest
Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 3,646

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 9:45 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alina Boyden wrote:
I just read the following news article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xm...world.html

I'm sooooooo sick of the anti-Catholic, anti-crusades propaganda that has been perpetuated by both Hollywood and historians. This news article made me pleased that modern historians at least can take a semi-reasonable stand on the crusades for a change.


Thanks for the link.

Confirms what I feared. Hovever I liked the fact that even the Islamic scholar was quoted as saying this interpretation is rubbish and that nobody had moral high ground in the conflicts. For the life of me I cannot understand why the media and entertainers have become so enamoured with trying to prove how terrible Western civiliazion is/was.

Perhaps feeling guilty over lives of self indulgence?

"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
View user's profile Send private message
Joe Fults




Location: Midwest
Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 3,646

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 9:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steve Fabert wrote:
Steve Grisetti wrote:

Well, we can at least hope (for now) that the depictions of arms, armor, tactics, etc are reasonable.... Happy


If only they could give us a break from the gasoline-soaked flaming missiles launched from trebuchets and catapults, I would not complain about minor technical liberties. But that's what the stunt crews know how to do, so that's what we will get. I think it's part of the union contract to include these things.


Python had it right years ago with Bessie.

"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
View user's profile Send private message
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Sun 02 Jan, 2005 10:31 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Joe Fults wrote:
Alina Boyden wrote:
I just read the following news article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xm...world.html

I'm sooooooo sick of the anti-Catholic, anti-crusades propaganda that has been perpetuated by both Hollywood and historians. This news article made me pleased that modern historians at least can take a semi-reasonable stand on the crusades for a change.


Thanks for the link.

Confirms what I feared. Hovever I liked the fact that even the Islamic scholar was quoted as saying this interpretation is rubbish and that nobody had moral high ground in the conflicts. For the life of me I cannot understand why the media and entertainers have become so enamoured with trying to prove how terrible Western civiliazion is/was.

Perhaps feeling guilty over lives of self indulgence?


Well I'm not going to even click my own link but I believe they quoted the author of "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes." This is one of my favorite books of the crusades. I really liked it. And I'm completely convinced the Crusades were justified defensive measures to the threat posed by Islam. So, history doesn't offend me, interpretations don't offend me, blatant anti-Catholic and anti-European propaganda offends me.
View user's profile
David McElrea




Location: Canada
Joined: 26 Nov 2003

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 438

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 4:33 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alina Boyden wrote:
Quote:
Well I'm not going to even click my own link but I believe they quoted the author of "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes." This is one of my favorite books of the crusades. I really liked it. And I'm completely convinced the Crusades were justified defensive measures to the threat posed by Islam. So, history doesn't offend me, interpretations don't offend me, blatant anti-Catholic and anti-European propaganda offends me.


Fantastically well put, Alina.

I would broaden "Catholic" to "Christian", however... the modern (or, better, post-modern?) Western instinct for self-loathing and pc revisionism isn't so discriminating (pun intended) as to distinguish between Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox-- all are equally disdained, as is Western heritage in general. Some have called it the intolerance of "tolerance"-- as it impacts history, I guess it comes down to the diseased (and surely outdated by now) view that history is totally subjective.

Until the West, discovers (or rediscovers) a paradigm for recognising the possibility of objective truth, revisionist movies will be the least of our problems... still, it's annoying, isn't it? Happy

David
View user's profile Send private message
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional




Joined: 20 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Posts: 2,608

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 6:36 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Patrick Kelly wrote:
Trying to get this thread back on the general track.

It is nice to see what appears to be real maille being used. At least real in the sense that it actually looks like metal instead of knitting or slices of rubber hose.

The movie I'd really like to see would bee one of the Battle of Hastings. With two big battles to be covered as well as a lot of potential for personal drama it would be a good one.


Yes, I think it could really be an epic. There's actually the potential for at least three battles, William the Norman's maneuvering at home even prior to the invasion, Harold Hadraada (they ought to make a movie just about him and his adventures) and so forth. In fact what I'd really like to see is a movie about Harold Hadraada, a movie about William and a movie about Harold the Saxon culminating in the Battles at Stamford Bridge and Hastings...

TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Grisetti




Location: Washington DC metro area, USA
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Likes: 9 pages
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 1,812

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 7:02 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Russ Ellis wrote:
Patrick Kelly wrote:
...The movie I'd really like to see would bee one of the Battle of Hastings. With two big battles to be covered as well as a lot of potential for personal drama it would be a good one.


Yes, I think it could really be an epic. There's actually the potential for at least three battles, William the Norman's maneuvering at home even prior to the invasion, Harold Hadraada (they ought to make a movie just about him and his adventures) and so forth. In fact what I'd really like to see is a movie about Harold Hadraada, a movie about William and a movie about Harold the Saxon culminating in the Battles at Stamford Bridge and Hastings...


I think that such a film could have a great deal of potential. In addition to the battles and personal drama, there would be the political intrigue involved with the succession to Edward the Confessor. But who would be the ideal production team to get this one "right"?
View user's profile Send private message
Patrick Kelly




Location: Wichita, Kansas
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 5,739

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 8:45 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Steve Grisetti wrote:
Russ Ellis wrote:
Patrick Kelly wrote:
...The movie I'd really like to see would bee one of the Battle of Hastings. With two big battles to be covered as well as a lot of potential for personal drama it would be a good one.


Yes, I think it could really be an epic. There's actually the potential for at least three battles, William the Norman's maneuvering at home even prior to the invasion, Harold Hadraada (they ought to make a movie just about him and his adventures) and so forth. In fact what I'd really like to see is a movie about Harold Hadraada, a movie about William and a movie about Harold the Saxon culminating in the Battles at Stamford Bridge and Hastings...


I think that such a film could have a great deal of potential. In addition to the battles and personal drama, there would be the political intrigue involved with the succession to Edward the Confessor. But who would be the ideal production team to get this one "right"?


I actually think Peter Jackson's team could pull it off fairly well. It wouldn't be a fantasy production but they certainly have the resouces and experience at portraying nice A&A on screen. As long as they stick to history, so that we wouldn't have any pointy-eared Saxon's shield surfing down Senlac Hill. Big Grin

Another added plus is that all we'd have is a bunch of white guys trying to kill each other, so maybe we could concentrate on the A&A and the adventure instead of engaging in a post-retro guilt complex.

Of course some of those vikings might still have been pagans at Stamford bridge. So we'd have Saxon christians whupping buttocks on a poor dysenfranchized and misunderstood religious minority. Not too mention the fact that the Battle of Hastings might cause friction between the english and the french members of the audience.

We'd better forget about it. Wink

"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Chuck Wyatt





Joined: 31 Mar 2004
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 62

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 11:58 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I have been wanting to see a Battle of Hastings movie for well over 20 years!
Another movie I would like to see is one of Robert the Bruce and how he restores the Scottish monarchy.
He deserves alot ...ALOT more credit and recognition than he was given in Braveheart.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Joel Whitmore




Location: Simmesport, LA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 342

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 3:55 pm    Post subject: The Bruce         Reply with quote

Chuck Wyatt wrote:
I have been wanting to see a Battle of Hastings movie for well over 20 years!
Another movie I would like to see is one of Robert the Bruce and how he restores the Scottish monarchy.
He deserves alot ...ALOT more credit and recognition than he was given in Braveheart.


There was a low-budget movie made called The Bruce. As a matter of fact it starred Oliver Reed. The Bruce was a shrewd politician and not above getting his hands dirty. Comyne the red found out about that at the point of Robert's dirk...in a Catholic church no less!

As far as this Crusader "epic" is concerned, I am like Patrick. I will go see it. I don' texpect much historically except perhaps to see period weapons. Hollywood seems to feel that we, the general public, are too stupid to like a movie that has no clear-cut bad guy/s. So they slant/change history. The negotiations and political manuverings that went on during the crusades would make Machevelli green with envy. The battle at the Horns was a disaster because of a battle of egos. Still, I will shell out my money and sit in the seat, watch Orlando Bloom get fake dirty and then retire here to complain about the historical inaccurracies that are bound to crop up and feel bad that Hollywood spent gobs of money to "nearly" get it right.

Joel
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Steve Grisetti




Location: Washington DC metro area, USA
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Likes: 9 pages
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 1,812

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 4:27 pm    Post subject: Re: The Bruce         Reply with quote

Joel Whitmore wrote:
...Still, I will shell out my money and sit in the seat....


I will probably wait for it to come out on video, after it wins a gazillion oscars.
View user's profile Send private message
Joel Whitmore




Location: Simmesport, LA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 342

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 6:09 pm    Post subject: The Horns of Hattin         Reply with quote

I love this era of European history and I thought I’d write a little account of the situation that brought about the battle at Hattin. The crusader states had been at battle with Saladin. In 1185 Baldwin IV, King of Jerusalem, was nearing the end of his life. He called a council of the barons and appointed his sickly 7-year old nephew ( also named Baldwin) as his successor to the throne with the express stipulation that the regency was to be given to Raymond of Tripoli. The Knight’s Templar elected Raymond’s bitter enemy, Gerard de Ridfort , as their grandmaster. A few weeks later Baldwin IV, 24, died leaving Raymond the ruler of Jerusalem. An envoy to Europe had failed to bring another crusading army to help with Saladin and this was coupled with short winter rains and the prospect of food shortages. Raymond convinced the barons to a four-year truce with Saladin. Saladin, who was having his won problems controlling his Muslim vassals, readily agreed. In Baldwin’s last council, the barons took oaths to uphold the king’s will that should his nephew not reach the age of 10 years, the new king was to be decided by the pope, the Holy Roman Emperor, the King of France and the King of England.

In 1186 the young king Baldwin died at the age of 8 and the provisions of his uncle were to go into effect to elect a new king. King Baldwin IV’s uncle was appointed the young king’s guardian. Joscelin of Courtenay, who suggested that Raymond call a meeting of the barons at the city of Tiberias in Galilee. When Raymond had gone, Joscelin got the Templars to take the boy’s body to Jerusalem while he sent his wn troops to occupy Tyre and Beirut. He then summoned Baldwin’s mother Sibylla and her young husband , Guy of Lusignan to Jerusalem to make Sibylla ruler of Jerusalem. Raymond was furious at this power play behind his back. The coronation of Sibylla was all but a done deal when the grandmaster of the Hospitallers, Roger de les Moulins, refused to brak his sacred vow he swore to Baldwin IV. They would have ignored his objections had he not held one of the three keys to the coronation regalia, which he refused to give up. He threw his key out of a window and de Ridfort promptly found it and opened the chest. However, Guy was extremely disliked by the patriarch and refused to place the crown on the head of Guy. Raymond finally had an outburst and tried to convince the other barons to crown another leader but had no support. He went back with his wife to Galilee, refusing to follow the cowardly Guy.

With the succession settled, Jerusalem began to prosper under the 4-year truce when greedy Reynald of Chatillion began to attack the fat caravans passing through his lands. In 1186 Reynald fell upon a very rich caravan and raided it, executing all that were not killed during the skirmish. Saladin hated Reynald above all the crusaders in Chrsitendom and demanded Reynald to give up the loot and the few Muslim prisoners he had taken. Reynald refused King Guy’s order and kept the loot. Saladin wanted war. Surprisingly Bohemond of Antioch and Saladin agreed that they would still enforce the truce and Raymond reasserted his support for the truce for Tripoli and his wife’s lands in Galilee. Raymond also secretly got Saladin’s support to make himself King of Jerusalem for supporting Saladin in a way against Renald and Guy. Grand Master de Ridfort convinced King Guy to let him lead forces against Raymond for his insubordination and unite the Christians before the war with Saladin began. Along the way Guy was joined by Balian of Ibelin who convinced King Guy that fighting Raymond would only weaken the Christian kingdoms and aid the Muslims. On April 29, 1187 the delegation set out to come to terms with Raymond . On April 30, Saladin’s son sent an envoy to Raymond asking for permission for a Muslim cavalry force to cross his lands unhindered. Uncomfortable Raymond honored his agreement with Saladin and let them pass. He then sent a rider to inform the Christian delegation of the Muslim calvary and advised them to stay out of the way of the cavalry. All in the delegation agreed except de Ridfort who called upon the local priory leader to attack the force. James de Mailly gathered about 200 Christian knights to attack the Muslim cavalry. What they found when they crested a hill was a force of about 7,000 muslim cavalry watering their horses. De Mailly and the master of the Hospitaillers agreed to retreat. Gerard de Ridfort accused them of cowardice and ordered an attack. Slaughter ensued and only de Ridfort and two others managed to get out of the valley alive. Raymond saw the cavalry riding with heads on their lances and canceled his treaty with Saladin and pledged feality to Guy in Jerusalem. In the meantime Saladin had assembled an ary of about 30,000. On July 1, Raymond’s wife, Eschiva, was trapped in the city of Tiberias as Saladin’s forces laid siege. In a military council at Acre, Raymond advised that Saladin would not hold his siege for long in the summer heat with little water. When the Muslim’s pulled from the siege, he advised, they should attack.

Once again de Ridfort’s hatred for Raymond came out and he accused Raymond of cowardice and selling out to Saladin. So the Christian army headed towards Tiberias and made camp at Sephoria, about 20 miles west. The encampment at Sephoria had superior grazing lands for the horses and an abundance of water. On July 2, 1187 Countess Eschiva got a message through to the Christians asking for help. Once again Raymond counseled not to move to help his own wife. Gerard de Ridfort pleaded with King Guy all night and finally convinced him to attack Saladin the next day. ONl July 3, the Christian army began to head for Tiberias. The sun was fierce and all day not a trace of breeze helped the Christian army. Saladin moved his forces to the village of Hattin, to block the road. Hattin had plenty of water. All morning and all day Muslim archers harried the army, especially the Templas who took the rearguard. Finally, on the afternoon of July 3, 1187, the Christian army reached a barren rock shelf above the village where they could see two rocky outcrops ahead known locally as the Horns of Hattin. Raymond wanted to fight on that day to the Sea of Galilee for the water, but once again, de Ridfort won out and convinced Guy to camp that night. Saladin set fire that night to brush on the hillside and keep the army up all night with choking smoke. When dawn broke, the Christian was surrounded. To the Christians’ credit they repelled charge after charge of the Muslim cavalry. But slowly thirst overcame them and the entire outnumbered army fell. King Guy was treated with honor buy Saladin who served him water with his own hand. Reynald of Chatillion was arrogant to Saladin and the great Sultan struck off his head. All of the Templars and Hospitalers were executed in a bizarre spectacle. A group of visiting Muslim Sufis from Egypt were given the task of beheading the knights of the military orders. Muslim chroniclers recount how some of the Sufi’s, students not warriors had to hack six , seven, or eight times at the heads to get them off. Thus ended a disastrous chapter in the history of the Crusaders. All because of infighting, strong wills and jealousy. Common themes eh?

Joel
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Mon 03 Jan, 2005 8:19 pm    Post subject: Re: The Horns of Hattin         Reply with quote

I take it you aren't a big de Ridfort fan lol.
View user's profile
Joel Whitmore




Location: Simmesport, LA
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 342

PostPosted: Tue 04 Jan, 2005 4:55 am    Post subject: Re: The Horns of Hattin         Reply with quote

Alina Boyden wrote:
I take it you aren't a big de Ridfort fan lol.


de Ridfort was surely a capable military man. I have no feelings towards him in either direction. None of this main cast of characters could be called the ideals of chivalry and certainly upholding the ideals of Christianity was not high on thier lists. I think it's a clear example of how power struggles over little more than two men disliking one another can bring down entire kingdoms. This same kind of infighting was to eventually bring down the Christian kingdoms in the middle east (oversimplified, yes, but accurate). In the end it usually comes down to the usual human frailties of greed, jealousy and the lust for power. I was trying to illustrate that the real story is much more interesting than having a Hollywood hero on a white horse cut swaths through ranks of enemies. Nor is it as simple as a peaceful people defending themselves from angry foreign invaders. As stated above, if one looks at the crusades through modern eyes then an entire incredible story is missed by passing judgements on motives using our current value systems. The fact that teh crusades happened at all is incredible considering the state of Europe at the time of the first crusades. One could look at the Pilgrim's Crusade and ask "How could all those people be so stupid to leave their homes and travel thousands of miles because of a sermon given one Sunday at church?!" If you don't try to understand the medieval mind, then this certianly appears nearly insane. I think that is what Patrick is talking about in his post above. It just irritates me that Hollywood automatically thinks that I cannot comprehend a story that requires me to think or to have any foreknowledge of the events portrayed. Some will counter, "Hollywood is about making money adn getting the most people in theater seats they can. So the story cannot eb too complex or it will turn people off." I counter that the popularity of battles, treachery, plotting, backstabbing and deciet would be popular in any context as long as the story deosn't drag, and that is about writing, not altering facts. Anyway, enough railing about what I am not sure of. I'll withhold judgement on this movie until it comes out and I cast my own eyes on it.

Joel
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Lloyd Clark




Location: Beaver Dam, WI
Joined: 08 Sep 2004

Posts: 508

PostPosted: Tue 04 Jan, 2005 7:13 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Patrick Kelly wrote:
Of course some of those vikings might still have been pagans at Stamford bridge. So we'd have Saxon christians whupping buttocks on a poor dysenfranchized and misunderstood religious minority. ...
We'd better forget about it. Wink


As one of the disenfranchised and misunderstood religious minorities, I am beginning to have worries about the direction that this thread is taking. While I understand that many feel that the popular press and entertainment industry is out to "revise" history into a much more PC environment (even if they have to go way overboard in their depiction of the "evil" European christians) - a case in point would be the English feelings towards movies by Mel Gibson. Could we keep our discussions here on a "less volatile" level?

The main problem with films designed for entertainment is that they will ALWAYS take artistic license with historical characters for sake of providing a "more entertaining experience." And, yes, there main goal is to put butts in the seats, rather than trying to provide what many of them would disdainfully term a "documentary" experience. To that end, we get gasoline soaked projectiles, fired at night, simply because it looks "cool" (remember the night scenes from Apocolypse Now?

As for movies that I would love to see: Henry VIII as a young king (Cloth of Gold, anyone?); William Marshall; Cornwell's Winter King series (now that would be a great Arthur movie!); Brian Boru; and the story of Cu Cuhulain.

Cheers,

Lloyd Clark
2000 World Jousting Champion
2004 World Jousting Bronze Medalist
Swordmaster
Super Proud Husband and Father!
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > New Movie: Kingdom of Heaven
Page 2 of 17 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 15, 16, 17  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum