michael_gothard_archive: (wild)
This obituary by Harris Lentz appeared in the February edition (no. 224) of Classic Images - more than a year after Michael Gothard's death. Mr Lentz appears to have been under the impression that Michael was fifty years old, when in fact he was 53.

Michael Gothard, 50 – February 2, 1993

British character actor Michael Gothard committed suicide by hanging at his Home in England. He began his film career in British films in the 1960s, appearing in ‘Herostratus’ (1968) and ‘Up the Junction’ (1968). He played a series of eccentric characters in British horror films during the 1970s including ‘Scream and Scream Again’ (1970), Ken Russell’s ‘The Devils’ (1971), ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’ (1971) and ‘Warlords of Atlantis’ (1978).

He was also featured in the 1974 version of ‘The Three Musketeers,’ and the 1981 James Bond film, ‘For Your Eyes Only.’ Gothard’s other credits include 1985’s ‘Lifeforce,’ and [he] appeared in the telefilms ‘Jack the Ripper’ (1988), ‘Out of Time’ (1989) and 1993’s ‘Frankenstein,’ with Randy Quaid and Patrick Bergen.

He was also seen regularly on British television in episodes of such series as ‘Out of the Unknown’; ‘Department S’; ‘My Partner the Ghost’; ‘Arthur of the Britons’ and ‘Hammer House of Mystery and Suspense.’
michael_gothard_archive: (London)
This report by Jeff Kaye was printed in the Chicago Tribune on 15 Jan 1993, after the film’s UK premier on 29 January 1992, but before its US premiere, which wasn’t until June 1993. Michael Gothard appeared as the Bosun in this film, and his scenes were filmed at Pinewood, as described in the report.

Tnt Goes Back To The Source For `Frankenstein'

Harsh winds are stirring up such a thick cloud of snow across this patch of frozen tundra that it's difficult to see the team of huskies pulling the oversized sled in the distance.

The dogs yelp with enthusiasm as they race past a snowdrift and circle back toward their starting point.

It's a mighty surprising scene for the unprepared observer.

The surprise has nothing to do with the fact that this is all taking place just outside London on a warmish autumn day. This is, after all, Pinewood Studios, one of the most famous movie lots in the world. Here, creating a realistic arctic setting, should be a snap. Next to the tundra is a hulking soundstage marked "007" where some of James Bond's most amazing feats have been filmed.

What's remarkable about this icy milieu is that it has been painstakingly constructed, in the name of strict authenticity, to film the opening sequence of a new movie about Frankenstein.

Frankenstein on a dog sled in the Arctic Circle? It's a weird idea that probably would have been deemed utterly preposterous and tossed in the trash if not for the person who thought of it. That person was Mary Shelley, whose 1818 novel "Frankenstein" begins with a disfigured creature and its creator locked in a deadly chase across the great white North.

Boris Karloff and the legion of square-headed descendants who have played Frankenstein's monster in countless films may have provided hours of thrilling entertainment with their versions of the creature. But what really wound up hideously disfigured in those movies was Shelley's novel.

Now comes Turner Network Television to set things right.

The cable channel is producing what it claims to be the most true-to-the-original-story version of Frankenstein ever filmed, with Randy Quaid as the monster (no, his name is not Frankenstein) and Patrick Bergin as his creator (his name is Frankenstein)

...

The notion of filming the original Frankenstein story began with writer-director-producer David Wickes … "I read the story like everyone else when I was at school," says the British filmmaker, as he sits near a pack of baying huskies on the arctic set. "I was fascinated by it and loved it, and it remained an image forever." He saw all the Frankenstein movies and always believed that they "didn't live up to what I had read."


Wickes finally decided to pursue his idea for the film after a dinner party at which the table talk centered on genetic engineering and the possibility of choosing not only a baby's sex but also its level of intelligence.

"I said, `Well, it's like the Frankenstein story,' and someone at the table said, `You mean the monster with the bolts through the neck?' And I thought, hey, now's the time" to shoot the original version.

An obvious question arises. If the original story is so good, why hadn't anyone filmed it?

"When I started to transpose the novel to movie script, I realized how difficult it was," he says. "A novel is a very different thing from a movie. There are long, introspective thoughts, exhaustively discussed, dismembered and examined under microscopic intensity. You cannot do that in a picture. A picture has to have events and images, dialogue and relationships."

TNT executives not only believed the transformation was possible, but found the idea irresistible …

Full article
michael_gothard_archive: (Locque in For Your Eyes Only)
Marvel Super Special Magazine: For Your Eyes Only on-set report, including an interview with Michael Gothard.

This came out in 1981.

[Contessa Lisl’s] killer in For Your Eyes Only is a cold-eyed assassin called Emile Locque. Played by Michael Gothard, Loque is the film's equivalent of such past villainous henchmen as Red Grant in From Russia With Love and Mr. Wint in Diamonds Are Forever. Gothard is no stranger to cinematic evil – during his career he's played a vampire (in Scream and Scream Again), helped to burn Oliver Reed alive in The Devils and stabbed Simon Ward to death in The Four Musketeers. But he's suffered a lot of on-screen retribution himself.

"I've been killed in so many different ways on both the large and small screens," he said wryly. "I've been hanged, stabbed, strangled, shot, immersed in an acid bath,
crashed on a motorcycle, killed by a 10-year-old boy by a vicious blow to the spine, drowned and – on one memorable occasion – stabbed and drowned simultaneously.

It's quite a challenge to try and make an impact with a character as restrained and quiet as Locque. I had to act in a sort of straitjacket but I certainly did my best to make him into a menacing and evil presence. Audiences usually remember the Bond villains, and their henchmen, so I'm hoping I won't be an exception."

Speculation:
Some of these on-screen deaths are ones we know about:
As John, he was hanged in Michael Kolhlhaas.
As Kodai, he was shot in Stopover.
As Keith, he was immersed in an acid bath in Scream and Scream Again.
As Terry, he crashed on a motorcycle in Up the Junction.
As Hansen, he was killed (or at least maimed, which resulted in his being killed) by a 10-year-old boy by a vicious blow to the spine in The Last Valley.

That leaves four deaths "stabbed, strangled, drowned and stabbed and drowned simultaneously" unaccounted for.

If, as Michael says, these deaths were on film or TV, they must presumably each have occurred in one of five productions:
- the Armchair Theatre play - The Story-teller - in which he played Brian
- the episode of Menace – Nine Bean Rows - in which he played Pip
- the episode of Fraud Squad – Run for your Money - in which he played Jacky Joyce
- the Thirty Minute Theatre play – The Excavation - in which he played Grady
- the TV series - The Further Adventures of the Musketeers - in which he played Mordaunt.

We don't yet know which death belonged to which character.
michael_gothard_archive: (wild)
It is rather disappointing that Michael Gothard - whose scenes in "A Tale of Two Cities" were two of those filmed in Jersey - is not mentioned in this article, but it nevertheless gives some background to the shoot.

Island helps to tell "A Tale of Two Cities"

Trinity Manor was taken back in time yesterday when the BBC began filming of Charles Dickens's classic, "A Tale of Two Cities." Jersey is being used for some location shooting and when the crew have finished they will move to Elizabeth Castle.

It was quite a sight to watch a horse [sic] and four galloping down the drive of the manor, with a heavily made-up man sitting inside, sporting a flamboyant white and pig-tailed wig. The manor is being used as the country residence of Le Marquis, a character in the story. It took three takes of the simple trip up the drive before the cameraman, Elmer Cossey and the director, Michael E. Bryant, were happy.

One scene entails a man hanging on underneath the carriage as it is driven at top speed. The man is the father of a peasant boy who was run over by Le Marquis' coach, and he manages to get into Le Marquis' residence, where he murders him. Stuntman, Terry Forrestal did not look too concerned as he was strapped on to the coach by rope, and then clung on for dear life with his feet. Just before filming started, Terry was attended to by costume designer Diana Colins, whose job was to sprinkle plenty of fuller's earth on him to give a dusty, road-weary effect.

Another task for the scene was to clear the ready-made drive of any tell-tale car tyre tracks that might have made the occasion look far from period. The Seigneur of Trinity, Senator John Riley, was present to record the novel happenings at his manor home with his own camera.

The general feeling of the crew seemed to be one of delight with the setting, and at the end of the week it will be on to Elizabeth Castle, which is being used as the Bastille and for some shots of the streets of Paris.

The cast includes Paul Shelley, who acted in the BBC series, "Secret Army", which Michael Bryant also directed.

JEP May 1980
michael_gothard_archive: (Default)
A report, written by Rosalie Horner, appeared in the Daily Express Saturday 6 August 1977.

They seem to have been filming one of the later scenes, so the series was presumably filmed during the summer months of 1977.

"... Actress Sian Phillips – Livia in TV’s “I, Claudius” series – has changed sides ... as Boadicea – now known more properly as Boudicca – she brandished a sword and led her tribe of ancient Britons into battle against the legions of Claudius.

She was in a Surrey field filming the Thames Television children’s six-part serial “Warrior Queen” which goes out next year.

Producer Ruth Boswell is trying to ensure that the film is a realistic account of the massacre which took place in St. Albans in AD 61 ..."
michael_gothard_archive: (wild)
This career note appeared in Films Illustrated no. 44, April 1975. It followed a review of The Four Musketeers, in which Michael appeared as Felton, though his name did not appear in the review.

Michael Gothard, born London 1942.

First film experience in Paris making underground movies. Subsequently returned to England and appeared in Don Levy’s two and a half hour experimental film Herostratus (1967) and some experimental theatre productions. First big television break in The Machine Stops (first prize, Trieste Science fiction Festival). Subsequently starred in series Arthur of the Britons. Films include Up the Junction (1967), Michael Kohlhaas and Scream and Scream Again (1969), The Last Valley (1970), The Devils and Whoever Slew Auntie Roo? (1971) and The Valley Obscured by Clouds (1972).
michael_gothard_archive: (Default)
This page appeared in "Look-in" for the week ending 8 December 1973.

This came out just after the last episode of "Arthur of the Britons" had aired, on 28 November 1973.

Look-in 8 December 1973
michael_gothard_archive: (Default)
You may recognise him as a screen and television star. But Jerry Bauer talks to the real Michael Gothard.

The Three Musketeers, the film Michael Gothard is making, is set in Estudios Roma, the film centre outside Madrid. The temperature is close to a hundred, although one tried not to think about it.

“The Three Musketeers and I seem to have an affinity for each other. In this film version I portray Felton, the lover of Madame de Winter – Faye Dunaway but on television, I was Madame de Winter’s son in yet another dramatisation. Presumably, I was chosen by Richard Lester for this role because he’d seen me as the inquisitioner in The Devils. Both characters are repressed, violent and mad.”
Read more... )
michael_gothard_archive: (wild)
This interview appeared in ‘X’-Films Vol.3 No 1. 1973.1 While it is more accurate, and contains less that is as demonstrably fake than the ‘interview’ in the German teen magazine “Bravo”, it contains some sections which are certainly made up, and others which seem to have been taken down incorrectly or misunderstood. Also, some of the words Michael is said to have used, such as “helluva”, and “movies” are not – according to A.S., who knew him well – in his idiom. He always said "film" or "picture". He would not have said "unprofessional part", but would have used the correct term of "non-professional part", and he wouldn't have said "'cause"... he would have said “because.” Sections which should definitely be treated with scepticism are annotated.

Interview with Michael Gothard

Michael, how did you become interested in acting as a career?

I went to acting school, but before that I originally became involved because a friend was making an amateur movie, auditioning a lot of professional out-of-work actors and actresses. He couldn’t find exactly what he wanted and I happened to be at the audition, so just for a laugh I auditioned with them and got the part. It was a typical ham movie – boy and girl walking in the park, etc. I think the new wave was very popular at that time – about ten years ago. [1962]

How long have you been acting professionally?

About 8½ years. I went to a place called the Actors Workshop, which in those days was at Baker Street, being run by an American. It was quite a good scene. The first unprofessional part I played was the movie I told you about, which, like most weekend movies, didn’t get finished. Nevertheless, I got some encouragement from these people while I was working with them, so I thought perhaps I should take acting a bit more seriously. At first I thought it was just an interesting thing to do.

What were you doing before that?

I was living in Paris for about a year, just bumming around if you like, just drifting about … I came back to England and met up with these people … I just did it for a laugh – as I was doing many things for a laugh. It only became serious when people started paying me money to do it. After all, I’d been broke for a long, long time.

So you’re not working for the moment?

No. I’m not really looking for work ’cause I was away for six months working on the Arthur of the Britons series. I came back to find a lot of things in a mess, so I can’t really work at the moment anyway. I’ve got a few things to sort out.

What’s acting like in this country at the moment?

The scene here at the moment is very quiet, and has been so for about three years or so.

How are you regarded in the trade?

A lot of people tend to consider me in some way – a word they’re fond of using – established – which to me is a joke. By established they mean I earn a regular living. Well let me tell you, to get yourself in a position where you can be absolutely sure that you work a certain number of months a year is really a very unique position to be in. I found that word very funny. I think you’re really not qualified to use that word unless you’re right at the top – if you’re a Burton or a Taylor or something. The whole thing is such a precarious sort of set up and even more so now than even a few years ago – in England, anyway. The Americans withdrew their finance 3 or 4 years ago and the film industry in this country really took a dive. Suddenly all those fat, well-paid technicians who always had permanent work suddenly found themselves in the same positions as the actors and actresses. The point I’m trying to make is that the situation in this country is so bad now that the technicians, who for years had a really nice piece of the cake, are now confronted with exactly the same situation as we are. That’s how bad it’s got over here.

The section above probably includes misquotations. A.S. suspects that Michael’s criticisms were actually aimed at "the fat cats", as he really respected "the workers", (carpenters, sparks, extras etc), and would never have been so derogatory about technicians, but would have happily been derogatory about “the suits”: producers and studio executives.

And yet, strangely enough, I’ve worked pretty consistently during this time. At the time of the boom – about six or seven years ago – when I was in the early stages of my career, I just couldn’t break in at all. I spent nearly two years out of work, during which time I did all sorts of insane things. I mean, the first job I ever did for money was a film, a 2½ hour colour feature. [Herostratus] I played the lead in it and I was on the screen from start to finish, so you could say it was a big part. The film didn’t have any success. It was experimental, a very strange thing. It had many qualities about it which just didn’t seem right. I spent a long period out of work after that, so I really started with a great flourish.

It was a helluva way to enter into oblivion. I couldn’t get into TV, I couldn’t even get an audition for theatre. But eventually I broke through and got into TV. From then on it was all right. I’ve hardly stopped working since.

So how did it all start?

It sounds like such a cliché. I was walking down the King’s Road on a Saturday morning with some friends, something I very rarely do. We went somewhere for a coffee. I was with a young lady actress who was doing very well at the time. I was sitting at this table and suddenly a young guy came up to me and said, “That gentleman over there wants to talk to you. He’s Philip Saville.” I didn’t know who Philip Saville was, but it turned out he was a television director.

We went for a walk down the King’s Road, chatting away all the while and he told me about a film he was making. Apparently he wasn’t looking for actors and didn’t even know I was one, but said he was looking for a young guy to play a part in a short film he was making for TV. When he realised I was an actor, we arranged an appointment for the following day.

His office was somewhere in Shepherd’s Bush. After being out of work for two years I was very edgy and easily offendable – in as much as I was quick to take insult. Somehow we got into one of those strange interviews. He was really trying to audition me via an interview, asking me very personal questions. I got progressively more annoyed and pissed-off. I thought, ‘Here we go, another little power trip. He’s enjoying himself at the expense of another out-of-work actor.’ I’d been through that scene so many times I was really ready for battle and, well, we ended up having a flaming row – and that was that! I didn’t see him again for quite a long time and I didn’t – needless to say – get the part in that film. Then a few months later I got a phone call. It was Philip Saville.

He said he could use me for something on television with Yvonne Mitchell – a superb actress – and we ended up doing a show called The Machine Stops, which went on to win a prize in the International Festivals, and that’s more or less how I got in, how I started work again.

When I was out of work we started a lunchtime theatre group in St Martin’s Lane, in the West End. There was no money in that – we just hoped these weren’t too many in the audience, so there’d be some sandwiches left! Nevertheless, I had to stick at it, because two years out of work devastates you – you’ve go to keep your hand in. It doesn’t matter really what you do, the important thing is to work. That’s why I did a few horror films. I didn’t consider it a bum part, any more than any other part of the entertainment industry. So I tried to do that as capably as I would do anything else. I sweated over that to get it right, as I did in more serious projects, like The Devils, for instance.

Which did you prefer?

Well, the horror film was more fun – great fun, in fact – but in terms of deeper satisfaction obviously The Devils was better, but it was a much harder thing to do.

I didn’t audition for Scream & Scream Again – they asked me to be in it.

Why did they choose you?

God knows –I really can’t remember how it came about. Maybe they chose me because I was considered a new approach to the problem. The first thing that Vincent Price said to me was, “Your flies are undone.” I thought, ‘Oh, man, what a corny gag!’ They pull that on every inexperienced actor. So, that was the sole extent of my relationship with Vincent Price. The way the film was scheduled, I didn’t have to work with him. It was a very physical part, running up mountains, etc. I did most of the stunts myself. On Arthur of the Britons we did all the stunts ourselves – riding horses and fighting. It was quite a rough show. We used to take turns being in hospital. Really, we tried to schedule it so we weren’t both in at the same time. Oliver ended up with a fractured skull and was in twice for x-rays.

According to A.S., Michael moaned a fair bit about being saddle-sore while filming “Arthur of the Britons”, but never injured himself.

Strange, that I get given all these wild, extrovert parts. The part in Arthur is of a crazy, wild guy – a Saxon – who’s sometimes melancholy, sometimes explosive and violent. I play quite a few parts like that. I suppose it coincides with my natural temperament. I try not to be temperamental as an actor, but it does happen. I’ve played such a wide variety of parts.

I remember Saville with affection, because it was through him I got into this work again (I was absolutely flat broke). When I completed that show I didn’t have a penny. Normally it takes quite a few weeks before you get paid. Anyway, the night we finished recording I went into my dressing room and there was an envelope with money in it. He knew I was broke and without saying anything he arranged for me to be paid that night – as soon as I was finished. But he was a fiery bastard to work with. He shouts, screams and curses, but he’s great – tremendous energy and enthusiasm. I haven’t worked with him for many years, but I remember him as I said, with great affection. It was my big break.

You were waiting for the big break?

No, I don’t think in those terms. For me, when I work, it’s just a job, and I want to be paid for it. I don’t want promises – “This is going to bring you more work; this is going to make your career” – I’m just not interested. I’m not working for that at all. I’m working to earn a living. I enjoy it, sure I do. I’m like a man who does a job and who expects to be paid a certain rate for it. I’m not interested in promises of a great future glory. I’ve hard all that crap for years. It really doesn’t impress me very much. The only thing that impresses me is when the cheque comes in.

But you enjoy acting?

It’s a helluva profession. There are lots of good moments in it. But it’s also a very savage scene. Actors are very vulnerable. They are the most vulnerable in the whole business. For a lot of people, it’s hopeless being an actor, but not really for me. I know what it’s like to feel hopeless. There’s no guarantee. When they talk about ‘being established’ – what the hell does that mean?

But you feel a bit more secure now?

At the moment. I suppose I’ve got an image for the kids. And, judging by some of the letters we get, we’ve made some impression on the emotional life of some of the young ladies of this country! I get funny letters like “You have the most ugly beautiful face I have ever seen” or “My friends think Arthur is prettier than you, but I prefer the way you walk.”

That show was the one I got the most public notice from. I also did another TV series five years ago, called “The Three Musketeers” [The Further Adventures of the Musketeers]. I was playing the villain in that, but I used to get more fan mail than the bloody hero! So, I had an image then, but I don’t know what it was. It just depends how much you’re in the public notice.

But what about “The Devils”?

Well, I get the impression that it’s helped my reputation in the business. It was, after all, a very celebrated film. For me, it was well publicised. I got 3rd or 4th billing. I did all sorts of things in the movie – tortured Oliver Reed, ended up burning him alive and chanting Latin prayer at him. It was an exhausting film – I enjoyed doing it. The Devils was more a mental pressure, by comparison.

For the last two months of Arthur we were knee-deep in snow and rain, so physically it was a much harder part. But Russell was a very exacting man to work for – everyone jumps around. It really challenges you. You’ve really got to get yourself together and concentrate. It’s good. You really feel you’ve accomplished something. That separates the amateurs from the professionals. There’s a lot of amateurs in the business who have no right to be there, but who get away with it – people who have never really studied, who approach it in a very casual sort of way, who take up space. When you work for Russell, you feel good, ’cause you know you’re being used as a professional.

At no point in “Arthur of the Britons” does a snow scene appear. Michael may have said “mud”, because there was plenty of that.

What less challenging roles have you played?

Parts in Department S, Armchair Theatre, Thirty Minute Theatre, Out of the Unknown and Fraud Squad..

Tell me more about “The Devils.”

I played a priest on the 17th century, a fanatic. I had to speak Latin as naturally as I speak English. I had to really work on that. I spent some time in a monastery with some monks to get that whole atmosphere. I studied pages on Latin and exorcism prayers – terribly difficult things to learn. It was agony – you have to learn it like a priest would. I suggested it. Russell fixed it up for me to get into this monastery. He understands how actors work, he’s so professional. He’ll give you all the help you need. I used to get prayer books in the mail, which is incredible. Any success that man has, he deserves.

A.S. is doubtful of the monastery visit, as she thought he was a not a "method" actor. His attitude was, ‘you are an actor, so ACT! You don't need to experience it.’

Do you prefer films to TV roles?

I prefer movies. I don’t like the idea of repeating performances. You can’t compare twenty takes to doing performances every night. With a take, you can alter it. As far as I’m concerned, the more takes the better. I could go on until the sun sets. I find it a really incredible luxury.

Clearly, the question Michael is answering here is, “Do you prefer film or live theatre”, not “Do you prefer films to TV roles?” He said something similar about not repeating oneself to The Runewriter.

Tell me more about your fans.

I had a letter the other day that said, “I’m giving up David Bowie for you!” I thought, well that really must be progress. That’s not bad, is it!

Tell me about your other work.

I’ve done nude scenes. I was playing my usual wild-extrovert-killer-rapist-romantic. Raping one lady with a burning brand between my legs and being quite romantic. With another, I leap after someone with a dagger.

I did a French picture last year in New Guinea – La Valleé. I’d love to go to the States to work. I’d love someone to say, “Come over and do a picture.” That would be a lovely way to go. It’s a country that seems to be slowly torn apart by its internal problems. It’s really got to change course. I don’t think it would be easy to break in there.

What do you think about agents?

My first agent was a disaster – a bad experience. That gave me such a bad feeling about them. Two years without work. I got my own work without an agent, through Philip Saville. William Morris asked me to join them. That was the happy ending. They have a big legal department, so we try to keep the endings as happy as possible.

Do you have other interests besides acting?

Music. I play flute, jam around with other guys. I enjoy good food and travelling which is mostly in my job. I’ve worked in Czechoslovakia, France, Australia, and the New Guinea jungle for a few months.

Do you answer fan mail?

I’ve only answered two fan letters over the years. Sometimes you get one that is so very original that you feel it might just be worth an answer. We don’t usually get to see them.

According to A.S., Michael got to see most, if not all, of his fan mail, and answered it. He was lovely with fans, always giving autographs. He insisted that he only had work because of the people who wanted to see him. She remembers helping by writing out the envelopes in which he would send his replies, and signed photos.

1 The exact publication date is not known.
michael_gothard_archive: (pensive)
THE EX-BEATNIK WHO PLAYS KAI

MICHAEL GOTHARD was among the first of the "underground" heroes to emerge into the mainstream of the acting profession.

In Arthur of the Britons (Wednesday) he plays the Saxon, Kai, brought up in the Celtic community. Generally, he is associated with more sinister, misfit roles, for example his part as a killer in Scream and Scream Again, and the psychopathic priest-inquisitor in another film, Ken Russell's The Devils.

Gothard, single and in his early 30's, has a broad, massively square face and a deep, hard voice which seems un-English, though he comes from North London. Contrasting with his appearance are his small, rectangular metal-rimmed glasses, perched low on his nose in the style of the docile shoemaker in Pinocchio cartoons.
Read more... )
michael_gothard_archive: (Default)
The July 1971 issue of "Films and Filming" included a four-page picture review of "The Devils."

Here are the two pictures which featured Michael Gothard as Father Barré.
Read more... )
michael_gothard_archive: (wild)
A two-page feature on "The Last Valley", including this photo of Michael Gothard as Hansen, appeared in the 1971 Photoplay Film Annual.

Hansen in Photoplay

Profile

michael_gothard_archive: (Default)
michael_gothard_archive

October 2015

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 31

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 26th, 2017 08:38 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios