I too have seen Bambi II already and I just wanted to offer some thoughts I had while watching this film.
The first reaction I had while watching this film (and felt again throughout the film) is that now looking back at the original film, I am definitely a believer in the assertion that much more can be done with Bambi. The animation in this movie is excellent and in several areas surpasses that of the original film. The voice work, particular for Bambi and his friends and the Great Prince, are excellent. Much of the character work in the film is of very high quality. Still, despite all this, Bambi II falls very far from the quality of the original film and despite its being possibly the best of the direct-to-video Disney films, I feel that to future generations, Bambi II will end up being just as forgettable as its other DTV predessors.
For me, Bambi II fails for three reasons: a big change in which the characters and the world of Bambi is done, the lackluster music, and the lacking story.
When it comes down to it, Bambi and The Lion King are two very similar and yet dissimilar films. Bambi is ultimately the story of nature and animals told with human dialogue and speech. In contrast, The Lion King is a story about humans told using animal motifs. The original Bambi is so realistic that you could pretty much turn off the volume, turn on some nature sounds, and find it to be a very realistic and credible account of real-life animals. I don't think you could ever do this with The Lion King.
I say that Bambi is an animal story told with human dialogue, because when you ultimately look at the characters of the original movie, none of them are particularly human. Young Bambi, Thumper, and Flower exhibit many of the cute qualities that we see in babies and children: which is perhaps much of the appeal of the characters. However the animal play they engage in are things that I find fairly believable for animals. You don't see them playing red light green light, kickball, or games that are obviously human. The lack of humanity in these characters are even more evident in the adults. The Great Prince is for the most part an aloof almost-supernatural character with purposes and motivation pretty much incomprehensive to the human mind. Ronno is a pure one-dimensional adversary. The romance that Bambi, Thumper, and Flower have for their respective mates is pretty much completely hormone-driven and probably not based on the type of "true love" or "attraction" that we see in human Disney couples. Like the majority of animals, family deaths don't seem to have any long-term effects on the characters. I saw no indication that the death of Bambi's mother affected any character in the long-term. As an audience watching the characters, we are seeing these characters no differently than that of the hunters of the forest. The only difference is that we can understand the animal's speech and songs.
The problem with the Bambi II is that it ultimately approaches the story the same way The Lion King did. The story is clearly a human story populated by various human archetypes and characters who are dressed up as animals. Of course, this does not make a film bad. In fact, I do confess that in many ways, Bambi II's choice to push the human qualities of the characters do indeed help you relate to and sympathetize with the characters. However, in many many areas of the film, the human element is pushed too much and pulls you out of the reality of the animal world. The result is that the beautiful sense of realism that the original Bambi created is broken. This is not to say that I disagree with the approach of The Lion King. My disagreement is with the sequel's choosing to break with the approach of its predecessor and also its inability to handle its own change of approach in a way that doesn't hurt the reality of the film.
I am willing to believe that young Bambi is scared of lightning. I am willing to believe that cute little animals will join and watch the birth of a young deer. I am willing to believe that in this forest hierachy, the deer is (for whatever reason) able to command the respect and attention of others. I cannot deny that there are a few leaps of faith and stretches of the imagination that the original film requires of the viewer. However, the sequel really goes above and beyond the limits of believable reality. I can believe that Bambi would play around on the ice and slip as slide in the first film. However I cannot believe that Bambi, once he steps into cold winter water, would be jumping up and down yelling "cold cold cold". I can believe that animals would gather to watch the birth of Bambi and likewise his children. However, the idea of a ritualized Groundhog's Day festival with a neurotic Newman-like groundhog that culminates with the characters and groundhog singing "Let's Sing a Gay Little Spring" is just too unbelievable for me. It's one thing to see the Great Prince seemingly surveying his domain as a guardian of the forest; it's another to hear him spit out codes of honor and conduct in the way a human King would educate his son.
In looking at both films, I will admit that I feel in retrospect that the original film could have probably pushed human emotions and behavior in the animals a bit more and still retained that balance of fantasy and realism. In retrospect, there are alot of characters that I wish they had fleshed out a bit more in the original film. In fact I actually like that the sequel chose to make Ronno into a slightly bigger character and tried to give him a distinct personality. I really like the character design of Ronno with the antler stubs, the green eyes, and the little scarred ear. I'll even go out and say that I kind of like the idea of turning him into the "bully" type character that the sequel chose to do. However, the way this is done in the sequel, Ronno really ends up as little more than the deer version of Nelson, The Simpsons school bully. I'm sure there is a good way of making him the bully character and also remain within the reality of the animal world. The Ronno of Bambi II however, with his laugh coupled with the occasional snorting, several cracks and jokes he makes that are way too hip, and certain ways his body moves in motion, just completely ruin the realism and integrity of the Bambi world.
Ok. Now the music. All I can say about the music is that I have gained an even greater appreciation and respect for the "Love is a Song" theme that was the musical heart of the original story. There is a part in the new film where the "Love is a Song" theme underscores Bambi's reunion with his mother in a dream. The music in this part is just gorgeous and I was reminded of the gorgeous use of James Horner's "If We Hold on Together" them in the first "The Land Before Time". However, it really says something about the soundtrack when the best part of the music is a reprise of the theme of its 60+ year old predecessor. The score is decent but it is not memorable in any way except when reprising old themes. The songs used in the movie are just mediocre at best. Considering that they are referenced anywhere in the score, the songs just don't seem to be a natural and organic part of the soundtrack at all. Considering the incredible use of music and songs in the original film, the new soundtrack is just shameful.
Finally, what perhaps ultimately weakened the movie the most is simply the story. I am willing to forgive all the grievances I filed earlier if the story is an excellent one. Sadly, the story probably hurts Bambi II more than anything I have said earlier. In the beginning of my post, I said that I am now convinced that more can be done in the Bambi universe. In retrospect there are alot of things that the original film ignored or glanced over that seemed to be something the sequel promised to resolve. I mean, in the context of the original film, that period of time between Bambi's mother's death and his return as an adult is of pretty little consequence and I could certainly do without seeing it. However in thinking about it, I do admit to being curious about how Bambi's relationship with his father developed, how Bambi dealt with his mother's death, and other possiblities. The problem with Bambi II's plot is that it tries to tell and embuse purpose and meaning to this lost period in Bambi's life. However, ultimately the story just fails to explore the unanswered questions of the original in a particularly compelling way. In addition, the film fails to justify its own existence as ultimately, as portrayed in this film, this period of Bambi's life turns out to be as pointless and irrelevant as it seemed in the original film.
Much of the story problems of this film admittedly stem from the first problem I pointed out, the decision to push the human element. The original movie sidestepped things such as the death of Bambi's mother's death. I can accept that a deer would mourn the death of their mother when it happens and then quickly forget about the death and move on without difficulty. The problem is that Bambi II doesn't want you to think of the characters as animals. It wants you to think of them as humans. Unfortunately for the story artists, humans are a bit more three-dimensional and emotionally-complicated than animals and I feel required more work and effort on the part of the story. Throughout the sequel it is suggested that the death of Bambi's mother had events on both Bambi and his father. The film however, explores these possibilities on a very rudimentary and vague way. It implies, but never goes further than that, ultimately frustrating my involvement with the plot. The relationship between Bambi and his father is also done in a fairly lackluster way. It's rubbed in our face that the Great Prince is obsessed with the almost-code-like values and behavior of being a prince and that his values and ideas are about to come to a crashing haul or a paradigm shift when he is forced into raising a young son that he never really knew. I want to believe that all of this is resolved and done in a fashion that is satisfying. However, this is ultimately not the case. The Great Prince and his son never truly "get" each other and seem to resolve their differences. They are only pushed into moments where they superficially seem to bond. Again, I am willing to cut some slack on the portrayal of "animals" and their relationship with each other. I am a bit more harsh on the portrayal of human relationships however, which is ultimately what seemed to be the purpose of this sequel.
When it comes down to it, I admit that I enjoyed watching this film. However, I feel that my enjoyment ultimately derived more from the joy of seeing old characters I have loved for years again. There was very little I enjoyed in this film that wasn't in some way a part of the original film. In looking over this post, I guess I am very hard on this film and might be criticized for being too picky. I feel however, that especially when it comes to Disney, many of us fans have forgotten that Disney used to stand for the very best of entertainment. I think that we have seen Disney churn out so many horrible and pointless direct-to-video sequels and disgustingly superficial films like Chicken Little that we have lowered our standards to the point that we are willing to accept anything Disney throws our ways that is better than The Return of Jafar and Pocahontas II. In a way, I think it ruins our integrity because it shows that we are willing to accept less than excellent work. A good sequel is ultimately one that acknowledges the original film and then goes to new and better places with it. Bambi II, despite its beautiful animation, just does not go anyway new and better with the original film: in fact it goes to worse places than the original. It acknowledges the original film all right, but that's all it does. Bambi II just simply does not justify its own existence and unfortunately is just the latest in a chain of exploitive money-grubbing rehashes of Disney's old material.
"Plotastic?" Going to have to go look that one up.
Bambi II is up there as one of the best Disney sequels. It's not perfect but faaaaar better than stuff like Hunchback II and Cinderella II. I have a couple minor gripes with it but they are almost not worth mentioning. If I did mention them people would blow them out of proportion.
I had many thoughts on this film for a long time, hoping it wasn't a cheap, poorly written, direct-to-video release. After seeing the preview on Disney.com, I can see that this film is actually really good. The voice-acting in the film is great, the backgrounds are a dead-on representation of the backgrounds from the original Bambi, & the animation is simply superb. I'm glad that they didn't make Bambi 2 like a Disney channel cartoon, but rather a job that is "theater-worthy". I've learned that legendary animator Andreas Deja worked on the film, animating Bambi & Thumper. I've only seen the preview, but after seeing it, I think that this film is probably the best Disney sequel/direct-to-video movie ever.
(Disney execs... keep making films like THIS, stick to "quality-not-quantity" films, not the other way around.)
We are willing to accept anything Disney throws our ways that is better than The Return of Jafar and Pocahontas II. In a way, I think it ruins our integrity because it shows that we are willing to accept less than excellent work.
Not necessarily. Some people can see that there are multiple levels of quality, not just two levels. Bambi II is way better than The Return of Jafar and Pocahontas II but I still noticed things they could improve on, including some of the things you mentioned. But just because I say Bambi II is waaaaaaay better than The Return of Jafar and Pocahontas II it in no way means I think it is at the absolute pinnacle of quality or that I am willing to just settle for that level of quality from now on with everything Disney releases. When you can see that the "cheapquels" just keep getting better and better (I'm talking about a general trend; I realize there may be instances to the contrary) then it is easier to loosen up. And the whole deal with Disney and Pixar now could drastically change how DTV sequels are produced, if they ever are anymore.
I agree 1000% with what Tascar says about the film..........talk about spot ON! The beauty about the original "Bambi" was that it's a story about nature told in a humanistic way but without comprimising the fact that these are ANIMALS and not humans we're looking at ....that's what made Felix Salten's book such a success and ultimately the film that was created from it. Salten gave us a world in which animals could express themselves in a way that we humans could understand but he never forgot that his characters were'nt human and never forced the reader to accept them as anything else than what they were. Same with Uncle Walt.......he and the boys cutesyfied the daylights out of the story to make it more" family friendly" ....hell, it's a cartoon, right? But, no matter how sweetsypoo he got with the characters, Walt never NEVER let us forget that they were at heart, animals...no more, no less.
And the music......glad someone else agrees with me! Vapid, boring weenybop craptunes suitable for the dentists office do NOT belong here!! Talk about comparing silk purses to sow's ears........YEESH!! I just watched the film again and the stuff 'specially composed for it makes me shudder and turn down the volume as soon as it reaches my ears. I agree about the dream sequence when you hear "Love is a Song" playing in the backround...it's gorgeous, though I thought that Bambi's animation was so sub-par that it looks more like a DTV afterthought rather than an intregal part of the film. They really could've used alot more from the original than what they did for the soundtrack..." I Bring You a Song" with that beautiful cello as an example...they had so much to work with yet they chose not to utilize such a rich treasure trove of music and instead sacrificed quality for the sake of being "hip". Sorry, kids but I don't know what is so bloody hip about using such generic and downright boring "can't tell a song without a scorecard" type junk that nobody's gonna remember inside of a month. This has always been my arguement with all the other Disney animated releases over the past 15 years...they create a bunch of "snazzy" tunes that fit into the film about as well as a square peg in a round hole just for the sake of creating a soundtrack.......does'nt matter that the songs do absolutely nothing to enhance the telling of the story and overall flow of the film...again, it's as if the music department threw these jingles together one night after a binge meal of coffee and doughnuts without really giving any thought as to how they would fit within the context of the movie. Very dissappointing. Thanks, Tascar...excellent, excellent review.
When Walt Disney created the original Bambi, he deserved a standing ovation, all he received was a loss at the box office and a strike to deal with. Now, almost 64 years later, it has become one of the most enduring features of all time. The same now can be said for Brian Pimental. He has taken a story that most any Disney fan would have spit on and turned it into a wonderful film that shows what time and patience can do. While direct to video, you would never know unless you had picked it up from the video store yourself.
When Bambi II was announced most dismissed the idea, claiming almost blaspemy for toying with a classic. I can assure you, there is no reason to be afraid. Mr. Pimental has followed Walt’s original morals and made it into something Disney can be proud of, and that all of this generation should see. Many reviews I have read said that it has put human characteristics in animals instead of the opposite that occurred in the original, this is true. The original used these characteristics to tear at your heart, and so does the sequel, just in a different way. I will admit I am a grown man, and there were a few scenes I had to wipe a little moisture off of my eyes. I assure you children will feel the emotion, as well as adults who are familiar with the original work.
While there are still about two weeks until the film is released, I will not give any of the good details away. This feature I assure you now has no characters singing, well, there is one, but, it is not a full length feature song or anything that will bore you or make you have that “Oh good grief” expression on your face. When you watch the original, not to say Bambi was a coward, but, this really shows how he gathered his strength. It will make you almost puff your chest out with pride with Bambi a few times.
When Bambi lost his mother, there was a feeling of silence on the matter and this is no exception. Bambi deals with the loss of his mother, but, there is no weeping or extreme sadness, although, there is a scene in the beginning that will have those who have seen the original with that pit in your stomach feeling.
The music is perfect for the film. They really did their homework on how Walt and his team constructed the first film. While there are country artist, there is only one song that sounds even remotely country, and, that is in the ending credits. As I said before, too, there are no characters singing, so, no need to fear that.
Animation in the original Bambi took over six years to create, and you could tell. Using the original’s sketches, the artists made Bambi II in about three years, but, the look is superb. While I haven’t been able to see any other Disney sequels, this sets a very high standard I’m sure. The animation and locomotion in here is wonderful, you can really tell they took the time to make the film look excellent. Nobody who sees Bambi II will be complaining about sub-par animation, I assure you.
When I had the pleasure of seeing the original Bambi, in June of 2005, I was touched by the story, the characters, the music, animation and the feeling of the forest. The sequel does the exact same. The only problem I had was the film was only 72 minutes and it leaves you begging for more. Everything in it is absolutely breathtaking. While not quite as well done as the original, I doubt anything ever will be, this is a wonderful story that Mr. Pimental deserves to be recognized for. I can safely say if Walt Disney was still alive today, he would look at this film, smile, and with a tear in his eye say “That’s pure gold, boys.”
Regarding the "sub-par animation quote".....for the most part, you are correct in saying that the overall quality of the animation is excellent. Unfortunately, that quality is a little inconsistant when it comes to the new characters we meet in this film, namely Ronno, the gopher and the porcupine. Where 99% of the animation with Bambi, Thumper and other characters we've come to love retain almost all of the fluidity and expressivness from the original, the new characters have that same "modernized" DTV type design I've seen in previous releases........needless to say the difference between the two stands out like a sore thumb and decreases the overall quality of the film itself. It's as if you can pick out which characters were rendered with the original 1942 drawings as a guideline and which ones were created by the artists without any guide at all. You can really see the difference when you watch the opening segment...they brought back some of the incidental characters like the duckling, the chipmunk, the squirrel and the little field mouse from the first film without utilizing any of the '42 production drawings as a guide..and you can really see a huge dip in quality when you compare it to the rest of the movie. Oh sure, the animation is fine, the computer generated colors are neat, but their design completely lacks the charm they had in the first film and again, it stands out like a sore thumb.
As for the music you're right, it is indeed perfect ...for a DTV movie, that is. Unfortunately it's NOT the perfect choice for a movie that supposed to be a high quality sequel to Disney's most treasured legacy. You gotta remember that the music is supposed to seemlessly fit the film in such a way that it enhances the story and helps create a mood without stopping or distracting from the action in any way. It's not supposed to be this boring retred "muzak" that's nothing more than an opportunity for the latest no-talent manufactured "Poptart" clone to pump out a song just for the sake of a soundtrack CD. Can you honestly say that whatever that listless countryfied tune I can't really remember is on the same level as " Little April Shower" or "Love is a Song"? I don't think so.
Don't get me wrong...........this is indeed the best DTV film that the Mouse House has ever produced, but it is what it is..........a DTV film that could've been something so much greater. I love Disney and know what they're truly capable of and it saddens me to see how we've all become so accepting of whatever they put out that it really does'nt matter
WHAT the quality is like. I've no doubt that this is gonna sell like crazy and Disney's gonna be very pleased with itself and I'm sure all involved with be delirously happy with the outcome. Too bad John Lassiter was'nt the head of animation when they thought of this project...if that would've been the case, we would've gotten a sequel truly worthy of the Disney name instead of having to settle for less.
I must just be a huge Bambi nut, but I absolutely loved it. Like I said before, Bambi has soft spot in my heart. Now I'd like to see a theatrical version of Bambi's Children. From reading the book, it would be a wonderful film if they followed it. It isn't quite as harsh as the first Bambi, but it dosen't have the same impact either.
So am I......."Bambi" has always been my #1 all time favourite and I guess that's one of the main reasons I'm so hyper-critical of the sequel. As for seeing a "Bambi's Children" that would be absolutely wonderful! It's a terrific story with such endless possibilities that they could create an entire franchise without ever once having to deviate from the books! Who knows? With a real honest to God animator like Lassiter at the Disney ship's helm maybe we might actually see something like this............and I'm sure as hell it ain't gonna be another DTV if he's got anything to say about it!!
Hey what you want I'm busy with school and I bet Isidour is busy too.
Anyways, yeah the characters are modernized but what did you expect really? It's not like they're going to use the same techonology and what not that they used making the original movie to make the new movie. And society has changed a lot since 1942 were everyting now-a-days are done with computers. Why? Because computers are fast and cheap. You know a computer is a tool just like the tools that they used in 1939-1942. But this time there's no Pearl Harbor bombing going on so we should see a bigger profit when the new movie comes out compared with the old movie coming out.
I was watching the original the other day and from what I got from the previews to the new movie... not a whole lot has changed. I mean in the original you have Thumper and Bambi skating on the ice. Ok, I don't know about anyone else but when I go hunting I certainly don't see a deer and a rabbit slidding across the ice like that. In the new movie you kind of have the same stuff going on like Thumper(who I'm going to call Mr. T) and Flower lifting up that log to hide from Mr. T's sisters and he's like "I pitty the fool who has to hide from his sisters." And you also have Mr. T riding Bambi like a horse (no pun intended). Once again I've never seen a skunk, a deer and a rabbit do that. So what I've found out they have basically the same kind of human characteristics in the original as they do in the new movie. I mean besides the dialoge and how the characters are animated... there really isn't a difference.
Finally... the only thing disappointing and I've said this before was that I was hoping they would of made a sequel instead of a mid-quel. I wanted to see how Bambi and Faline raised their children and compered it with the way they were raised. I would of much rather seen that but I guess they wanted a movie with cute, and cuddly baby forest animals instead of getting serious. But who knows, they were bold enough to make a mid-quel, I sense that another Bambi movie is on it's way. Well, depending on how successful Bambi II is going to be. Hopefully if they do it will be as good if not better then the original and the mid-quel... hopefully better. And yes I know the difference between Bambi II and Bambi 2, you don't need to get into that.
Like I said before, If they made "Bambi's Children", which I highly think they will, if they follow the book it could be an excellent film. The book in intriguing and very well written, and, quite a bit more kid friendly than the first book. Like I said Zol, Bambi II was terrific, I loved every min. of it and didn't want it to end. I think you will enjoy it too, just remember guys..It's just a movie
Anyways, they started making midquels because people complained about "sequels" focusing on the offspring of main characters from the original movies. So they said, "Okay, then we'll just make midquels that just tell even more about the main character's life." Then people start complaining that that's not what they really wanted. They will never be able to satisfy every fan's pre-conceptions about what a sequel/midquel/prequel should be like. Of course, there may never be any more now anyways.
You do have to admit the scene with the dogs was very original (stole the "Luring" part from the book) and the ending scene with the rocks kind of tugged at the ole' heart strings
I knew there was something similar to the book that was also in the movie but I couldn't put my finger on it. The only difference is he's and adult and he hears Falines voice and once again GP has to have his ass.
Zoltack wrote:Hey what you want I'm busy with school and I bet Isidour is busy too.
Anyways, yeah the characters are modernized but what did you expect really? It's not like they're going to use the same techonology and what not that they used making the original movie to make the new movie. And society has changed a lot since 1942 were everyting now-a-days are done with computers. Why? Because computers are fast and cheap. You know a computer is a tool just like the tools that they used in 1939-1942..
Well Duuuuuuh! Ya think? S'cuse please, but the actual look and design of an animated character has nothing to do with the technology available ....it has everything to do with the skill of the artist who draws it in the first place! Sure they've got all these new toys to play with when you compare this to what the Nine Old Men had and such, but just because you have all this wiz-bang gear at your disposal does'nt necessarily mean you have the artistic knowledge, experience or foresight to create something as visually rich as what they did back in 1942. C'MAAAAN!! Let's be real here...you can have every 21st century gadget known to mankind in your arsenal, but you if don't have the same talent, dedication to detail and love of the medium that the 9 Ol'Guys had , you're only gonna get what you put into it. Hey... here's a little food for thought.....could you just imagine what Disney could've produced if he and the boys had all this stuff back in the day??? OMG, could you just picture it??? Gives me goosebumps the size of transport planes just thinking about it!!
Zoltack wrote:I was watching the original the other day and from what I got from the previews to the new movie... not a whole lot has changed. I mean in the original you have Thumper and Bambi skating on the ice. Ok, I don't know about anyone else but when I go hunting I certainly don't see a deer and a rabbit slidding across the ice like that. In the new movie you kind of have the same stuff going on like Thumper(who I'm going to call Mr. T) and Flower lifting up that log to hide from Mr. T's sisters and he's like "I pitty the fool who has to hide from his sisters." And you also have Mr. T riding Bambi like a horse (no pun intended). Once again I've never seen a skunk, a deer and a rabbit do that. So what I've found out they have basically the same kind of human characteristics in the original as they do in the new movie. I mean besides the dialoge and how the characters are animated... there really isn't a difference..
No kiddin? No difference, huh? Wait till you see the film then you'll know what Tascar and I are talking about. The differences are sometimes so blatantly obvious that you can actually tell when the artists were using the original artwork from 1942 as a model for the characters and when they were not.....it stands out that much. Also, the first film had about 90 words of dialogue and depended on the action of the protagonists to tell the story...the new film is almost completely driven by the dialogue which unfortunately brings us back to one of the major points that Tascar and I were referring to. In the original film the characters are "humanized" to a certain extent, but it's done so in a way that charms us yet never lets us forget that these are not humans children.You could read their thoughts and emotions thru their body language rather than their gab, which really lends a sense of believability in their portrayal. The constant patter of the characters in the mid-quel destroys that illusion and lets you know that these are nothing more than human children with animal masks slapped over their faces. BTW, have'nt you ever seen some of Disney's "True Life Adventures"? You see some baby animals doing some pretty silly and "human-like" stuff that you'd never expect,yet they're still animals, right?
Zoltack wrote:Finally... the only thing disappointing and I've said this before was that I was hoping they would of made a sequel instead of a mid-quel. I wanted to see how Bambi and Faline raised their children and compered it with the way they were raised. I would of much rather seen that but I guess they wanted a movie with cute, and cuddly baby forest animals instead of getting serious. But who knows, they were bold enough to make a mid-quel, I sense that another Bambi movie is on it's way. Well, depending on how successful Bambi II is going to be. Hopefully if they do it will be as good if not better then the original and the mid-quel... hopefully better. And yes I know the difference between Bambi II and Bambi 2, you don't need to get into that.
Now on this I hope you're right! Maybe with Lassiter at the helm this just might fall into the realm of possibilites. God knows it'd be a much better film than this one and it would return the "franchise" to what made it so great to begin with. OMG, did I say "FRANCHISE"???? EEEK!
ohoy!
Thumper singing and maing fun of Bambi that he can`t jump? ok, i for him to jump bu I never thought I would see that
I just watched a commercial of the DVD on KTLA and well, I`ll have to watch it(on the big screen n_n)
I wasn`t around here because I was busy with the big U, vacations and "twitteratted" stuff but I have some free time ad I said "let`s visit my old bambi lover fellows" whisch I`m glad to see n_n
Boy am I slow.
