Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-07-28 08:12:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:25 to life, acpo, australia, bill hastings, eidos, hitman: blood money, keith vaz, law enforcement, new zealand, phil willis, police, protests, reservoir dogs, tom mcghie, torture

British Police & Politicians Condemn Reservoir Dogs Game

Eidos seems determined to challenge Take Two as the video game industry's bad boy publisher.

Last year's release of cops-and-robbers shooter 25 to Life inspired months of protests by law enforcement groups as well as legislative proclamations in Pennsylvania and Michigan. Now comes word that police in the U.K. are outraged by Eidos' upcoming game adaptation of director Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs film.

As reported in the Yorkshire Post, police officials are concerned that "players can take police officers hostage and go on to burn out their eyes with a lit cigar, chop off their fingers with a cigar cutter and hack off their ears using a scalpel, while they plead for their lives and scream in pain."

Viewers of the ultra-violent 1992 movie may recall that the "Mr. Blonde" character, played by actor Michael Madsen, viciously and psychotically tortures a police officer hostage.

A representative of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), which represents chief constables in the U.K., condemned Reservoir Dogs, saying "Anything that encourages violent emotions, including such emotions towards members of the police service, is particularly disturbing and can only be described as offensive. It is disappointing to find violent video games on the market that may cause psychological harm to those who play them."

Tom McGhie, speaking on behalf of officers in the West Yorkshire Police Federation, said Reservoirs Dogs was a "sickening glorification of violence against police officers. Anything that encourages that type of behaviour, when police officers are suffering more attacks than ever before, should be banned."

Nor has the dust-up escaped the attention of members of Parliament.

"It's impossible to see how such a game can have anything than a highly damaging effect on how people perceive and react to police officers," said Harrogate MP Phil Willis said, "I am absolutely staggered that such a game is being allowed to be sold in our shops. It sends out the message that the police and authority figures are there to be targeted and dispatched, desensitises people to the idea of killing and undermines normal moral values."

Leicester East MP Keith Vaz, an outspoken critic of video game violence, contends that the Reservoir Dogs game "promotes and supports the infliction of extreme violence and cruelty." Vaz has called for the game to be banned.

GamePolitics readers may recall that Reservoir Dogs was recently banned in Australia and New Zealand. However, the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) told the Post that the game will be rated for players 18 and older and is expected to appear on retail shelves in the U.K. later this year.

"It contains nothing that is particularly stronger than things found in most 18-rated games," said a BBFC spokeswoman. However, Bill Hastings, New Zealand's Chief Censor said, "Players can pistol-whip hostages and repeatedly smash their heads on to nearby walls and surfaces. After the police comply, they can be disarmed, or killed in whichever manner the player chooses."

GameSpot's E3 preview confirms the existence of at least some degree of player-controlled torture in Reservoir Dogs:

"...we got a look at the game's hostage system. Basically, you'll be able to take any random character in the game, from civilians to cops, hostage at any point. While you have the person held hostage, you can use that person as a human shield as necessary or as a negotiating tactic against aggressors like cops. If you happen upon anyone while holding a hostage, you can order them to surrender. Normal people likely will, but cops tend to take more convincing, so you can then injure the hostage somehow (without killing them)..."

GP: First it was 25 to Life, next those mysoginist ads for Hitman: Blood Money and now this. We're still a bit unclear on the specifics of the violence in Reservoir Dogs, but harming hostages? That equals torture in GP's mind, and that's a line we really wish Eidos hadn't crossed. Inevitably, the rest of the video game industry will pay the price for game content such as this.




Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]aresef
2006-07-28 02:01 pm UTC (link)
You don't see these hypocrites trying to pull copies of the movie off store shelves, do you?

(Reply to this)

Ahh, the lovely sound of hypocracy
[info]yukimurasanada
2006-07-28 02:05 pm UTC (link)
Gee, doesn't anyone else see this as somewhat ironic. Resovior dogs, when it came out, was viewed as an edgy, violent, brilliant movie, and is one of the reasons that Q.T is so well regarded around the world. Because unlike others, he dares to challange the rules and the morals and the beliefs of what others think is to much. Take kill bill, perhaps the bloodist and move violent movie in recent years, and yet it was a massive success both critically and finacially.

SO now a game, based on a violent but highly respected movie is coming out, but now the Authorities are panicing. Where was your panic when the movie came out you self rightous imbeciles? Or is the fact that it's a game make it a problem.

More and more proof that the older generation never learns, never grows wiser, never evolves, but just stays the same and fears what it doesn't understand.

Perhaps the biggest irony of all, is I know more kids who've seen kill bill and Resivor dogs, then have played GTA.

How sad a statement is this about the last generation. They can't even learn from over 200 years of history.

Pathetic, thats what it is.

I hope our generation remembers this in the future.

(Reply to this)


[info]anticron
2006-07-28 02:16 pm UTC (link)
After the police comply, they can be disarmed, or killed in whichever manner the player chooses."


The problem they have is that players are given a choice. Ponder how ridiculous that is for a moment.


We're still a bit unclear on the specifics of the violence in Reservoir Dogs, but harming hostages?

Do you have a problem with movies (or other media) doing the same or similar?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]semperar
2006-07-28 05:39 pm UTC (link)
Authority figures are inherently paranoid about the security of their authority. It is the nature of all establishments to think that they are the binding force of society and that social contract never existed.

It is with that paranoia that they AWLWAYS assume the worst about human beings.

Thus, the average politician literally thinks that jail time is the ONLY thing that keeps ANY human, from little Billy to grandma Betty from murdering another. Were there not clear and obvious punishments, even old ladies would be murderous looters.

Any medium that presents the illusion that there aren't consequences for these behaviors is creating a direct threat to them.

This is how career politicians view human beings. End of story.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

they carry them big guns, but they wear them big vests - [info]ds_chun, 2006-07-29 05:06 am UTC
Re: they carry them big guns, but they wear them big vests - [info]semperar, 2006-07-29 06:15 pm UTC
Re: they carry them big guns, but they wear them big vests - [info]ds_chun, 2006-07-29 08:07 pm UTC
I'm a little confused...
[info]philoetus
2006-07-28 02:24 pm UTC (link)
I'm confused GP, are you saying it is more morally acceptable to kill the person rather than take them hostage. Given the two options the hostage route seems win-win, I mean the hostage gets to live (and probably a lucrative movie-of-the-week deal) and the hostage taker gets a bargaining chip.

P.S.
Not advocating hostage taking here, it just seems like it being more taboo than murder seems a little foolish.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I'm a little confused...
[info]gamepolitics
2006-07-28 03:53 pm UTC (link)
my opinion - harming or killing hostages is problematic for Eidos - and by extension - the video game industry.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I'm a little confused... - [info]bustermanzero, 2006-07-28 10:31 pm UTC
Re: I'm a little confused... - [info]sigma_7, 2006-07-29 11:34 am UTC
I shall have to disagree
[info]imperialcreed
2006-07-28 02:25 pm UTC (link)
"We're still a bit unclear on the specifics of the violence in Reservoir Dogs, but harming hostages? That equals torture in GP's mind, and that's a line we really wish Eidos hadn't crossed. Inevitably, the rest of the video game industry will pay the price for game content such as this."

I fail to see the problem with Eidos crossing that line. Books and films have been doing it for years, and if we ever want to see games accepted as the equal of those mediums (and I believe it is) then I believe the inclusion of mature content like this is acceptable when in an appropriate context.

Folks who protest against games like RD (like the reactionary and woefully out of touch Vaz) always fail to recognise a couple of important points. For a start, as with the beating up of hookers in GTA, the devs at no point force the player into doing such a thing. I'll wager that how you treat a hostage in RD will be left up to the player. There is a significant difference between a game where you have to beat someone to death and where you have the option to beat someone to death. It's a distinction that is often overlooked.

What is also being overlooked (at least by public figures when they speak out against games like this) is the rating of the game. RD will, without a doubt, be rated 18's in the UK and will only be legally available to adults. Lobbyists scream about the children, but ignore the fact there is no legal way a child can purchase games like this. As adults we have the freedom to choose what kind of entertainment (be it slasher flicks, violent games or pornography) we want. The original movie of RD is one of the most iconic and popular films of all time, has been recognised and lauded as such, yet contains huge amounts of visceral violence. The quotes in the article above could just as easily have been about the film itself, but no one is whipping themselves into indignant anger over the fact that Reservoir Dogs is freely available on DVD for public consumption.

To me it's a tad exasperating - There have been countless other films and T.V. series where police officers, public officials, soldiers, homeless people, drug users, council workers, politicians and pets (to name a few examples) have all been victims of violence and yet no-one protests and moans about how "desensitises people to the idea of killing and undermines normal moral values." Games have become a cultural whipping boy in the last few years, and I think that's been born out of the misguided perception that games are for (and should only be for) kids.

As for the suffering of the games industry, it's too early to tell. By all accounts business is booming, and back when people were trying to outlaw rock n' roll and moving pictures there were folk who insisted they weren't long for this world. All the industry needs is a sensible, hard-nosed approach to deal with detractors, and the willingness to call them on their bullshit (I'm looking at you, Jack Thompson, Hilary Clinton, Keith Vaz et al)

Rant over

(Reply to this)


[info]ianc14
2006-07-28 02:54 pm UTC (link)
It is disappointing to find violent video games on the market that may cause psychological harm to those who play them.>/q>
Errm, any proof? Thought not.

Vaz has called for the game to be banned.
Not surprised in the least. Hes like our he-who-will-not-be-named, cept hes an MP.

(Reply to this)

I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports
[info]ace_of_sevens
2006-07-28 03:06 pm UTC (link)
A lot of these reports are talking about gameplay in considerably more detail than anythign in the video game press. This leads me to wonder where the details are comign from. I doubt Eidos gave special moral panic screenigns of the game. I suspect they're made up. If not, I think this is a bad move on Eidos's part as it's sure to turn enough people off as to limit their market, not to mention the bad press it will get the industry.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports
[info]gamepolitics
2006-07-28 03:56 pm UTC (link)
yes - I agree. The paragraph that cites the torture in the movie, the ear-cutting, cigar burning... I've yet to see a report of that in the game.

The GameSpot coverage indicates harming hostages as a means to an end. I guess that's not the same as torture for its own sake, as Mr. Blonde does to the poor cop in the movie, but still... it's intentionally harming a defenseless victim. It's going to be a problem, I do believe.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports - [info]nightwng2000, 2006-07-28 04:17 pm UTC
Re: I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports - [info]jahbulon, 2006-07-28 11:05 pm UTC
Re: I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports - [info]anticron, 2006-07-28 04:20 pm UTC
Re: I'm wondering about the accuracy of these reports - [info]ace_of_sevens, 2006-07-29 12:29 am UTC

[info]chenry
2006-07-28 03:14 pm UTC (link)
From some of the gameplay videos i've seen, you can grab a guy and use him as a human shield, and then shoot said person in the head when you don't need them. I've seen civies in some of the demos, so I guess you can use a civilian as a shield.

you can do that in Hitman: Blood Money as well...

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]ianc14
2006-07-28 04:20 pm UTC (link)
you can do that in XIII too. No constryvasy other that game tho.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]toxic_offender, 2006-07-29 09:05 pm UTC
Then again, they're not the first
[info]jabrwock
2006-07-28 03:21 pm UTC (link)
The Punisher game already had torture, although you could only torture the bad guys, but it was quite detailed and gory. And a few other mainstream games have featured torture elements at some point, just not quite so graphic. And usually it's someone other than the player administering it.

I think the BBFC did the right thing. Call it crap, but still allow stores to sell it.

One question for the various police orgs, how does the game promote violence against cops, but the movie not? Where were their protests when the movie came out, or when it went to video?

Then again, at least the police weren't calling for a ban. They just voiced their disgust, which is perfectly reasonable. It's the bandwagon-jumping politicians who turned that disgust into a call for a ban who annoy me. Phil Willis should really think before he opens his yap. My guess is that he'd have a heart attack if he ever walked into a local comic or video store...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Then again, they're not the first
[info]goodrobotus
2006-07-28 04:48 pm UTC (link)
Being a UK Resident, I decided to exercise my Rights :)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Considering there was the same kind of complaining when the original movie Reservoir Dogs came out, that it 'encourages violence to Officers' etc, and yet, despite all the howling, nothing whatsoever came of it, I'm not surprised to see History repeat itself.

If games promoted violence towards it's 'subjects', I can only hope that I never keep Turtles, since I would be jumping on them all the time.

Seriously, I see this going the same way as the movies, lots of noise, and no effect, which is exactly as it should be in our country that allegedly promotes 'Freedom of Expression'. After all, the Bible contains Murder, Rape, Genocide, Torture and a whole host of other terrible acts, I think there'd be a bit of a problem if we started following this road for everything that didn't sit too comfortably with our sensibilities.

Trying to point the finger at some very shaky and dubious research regarding the input of ALL types of media and saying it is computer games is a common scare tactic in the US to try and pamper to voters, It's a pity to see it re-emerging here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Then again, they're not the first - [info]jythie, 2006-07-28 07:11 pm UTC
Torture
[info]bustermanzero
2006-07-28 03:35 pm UTC (link)
While not the first time it appeared in games, this is easily one of the more graphic ones, and if its player-controlled then now we're looking at something you normally only see in unrated flash games. A new step in video game violence? Probably. A game that causes only damage to people? Since when are MPs psychologists? Be concerned, but don't ban the damn thing before its released, and certainly don't listen to mister Squirrel Cheeks.

(Reply to this)


[info]traiklin
2006-07-28 03:44 pm UTC (link)
hmm...

The Yorkshire Post link makes no mention of banning the film that the game is based on.

So it's ok for the SOURCE Material to be distributed even though it shows the acts of violence without any ability to avoid it where as the game (as far as I can tell) doesn't force you to do anything.

You don't HAVE to take a hostage, you don't HAVE to torture anyone, You don't HAVE to kill anyone.

That's what makes sandbox game great, cause they are slowly starting to get that you are supposed to do ANYTHING you want, if you want to go through a game without killing anyone then you can (with the exception of a few missions).

also the ones making the game might of been working close with Quentin Tarantino and these parts were his idea cause he wanted to do more in the movie but couldn't do to time constraints (the movie going to long) and this gives him the ability to expand on his original ideas.

Maybe the ones making it got through most of the game quicker then expected and it just didn't seem all that interesting, GTA Set the bar for what you can do and everyone want's to pass it to be the new "Standard" when it comes to these games, so they decided to throw in hostage taking.

Aslong as the game isn't based off the 25 to life engine then it should actually be good and done right, the 25 To Life engine was just so horribly flawed that they added in all that shock value stuff cause if they hadn't no one would of even looked at the games, Online the maps are so small and uninteresting that matches last about 5-10 minutes with a full room offline the stages are bland and have nothing interesting happening.

Hopefully with this one they can make it seem like the movie and give it that same atmosphere and fill in the games for some of the characters (remember not all of them were shown, they focused on a couple of them while the rest just sort of vanished). Remember before passing judgment we have to know if you HAVE to take hostages and you HAVE to torture them, cause if you can avoid doing that in the game and it's in for a last resort to get away (cause remember when you are trying to get away from something you will do so by any means necessary) but if it is in there and you HAVE to use it (not counting the particular scene in the movie cause that's staying true to the source) then it will turn out exactly like 25 to life, getting press for all the wrong reasons (and getting press to make the game successfull when it really shouldn't be because it's a bad game).

(Reply to this)


[info]penpaperprint
2006-07-28 03:47 pm UTC (link)
it was a bad ass movie though

(Reply to this)


[info]konrad_arflane
2006-07-28 03:48 pm UTC (link)
Hmmm. I don't know if I'll play it, and I can't really comment on how controlling in-game torture would affect someone without personal experience, I think.

I will say this, though. Reservoir Dogs was one incredible movie. And anyone who thinks it glorifies torture or violence to police officers doesn't grasp the distinction between depiction and glorification at all. One might as well say that "Schindler's List" glorifies the Holocaust, IMO.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Once again...
[info]woundwalker
2006-07-28 05:42 pm UTC (link)
Movie = Edgy
Game = Sick

(Reply to this) (Parent)

My prediction of how this turns out.
[info]terminator44
2006-07-28 04:18 pm UTC (link)
The game will suck, just like 25 to Life, and nobody will play it. It is a movie-to-game adaptation, after all.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: My prediction of how this turns out.
[info]toxic_offender
2006-07-29 09:40 pm UTC (link)
A movie adaption, eh?

So, by your logic, Goldeneye was a bad game that nobody played? The Warriors was a bad game nobody played?

Way I see it, if it comes out more than a year or so after the movie came out, it actually has a chance of being good, since we know it's not just a cheap way to get a quick buck off a movie that's playing on a big screen somewhere right.....this......second.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: My prediction of how this turns out. - [info]terminator44, 2006-07-30 01:18 am UTC
Oh, they'll complain about it....
[info]goodrobotus
2006-07-28 04:29 pm UTC (link)
But every time so far that one of these games has been dragged up before Parliament they response has been the same...'Go find a REAL problem to deal with.'

After all, as one Reporter once pointed out, if gaming teaches habits for violence, why do footballers ever punch anyone?

Certainly if this does become the first 'banned' (as opposed to merely not imported or stocked) game in the UK, I'll start writing letters to various members of Parliament telling them to get their act together, they've got far more important concerns at the moment.

(Reply to this)


[info]you_said_what
2006-07-28 04:57 pm UTC (link)
So I take it a SAW video game would be a no no too?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Indeed...
[info]bustermanzero
2006-07-28 10:35 pm UTC (link)
Or Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

The Movie
[info]rudgerlight
2006-07-28 05:02 pm UTC (link)
I was starting to get concerned with these posts until I read the last one. People, the film does not glorify or promote violence towards police officers. Though I'm sure we can point to movies that do, Resevoir Dogs is not one of them. In fact, the reason that the torture scene is so famous is because it is so painful to watch, which means that we are meant to sympathize with the cop being tortured. People shouldn't be watching and cheering Mr. Blonde on, cause if they are we sohuld all be concerned. However, I'm sure without a shadow of a doubt, that Eidos is not making this game so that you sympathize with cops that you hold hostage. I will agree that the availability of choice saves this game to some degree, at least pertaining to violence towards police officers.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: The Movie
[info]gamepolitics
2006-07-28 10:29 pm UTC (link)
true that the torture scene *is* painful to watch - at least if you are an empathetic person.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: The Movie - [info]eternallegenduk, 2006-07-29 09:26 am UTC
Re: The Movie - [info]ace_of_sevens, 2006-07-29 02:13 am UTC
Re: The Movie - [info]yllamana, 2006-08-06 05:15 am UTC
You know....
[info]mysticgamer
2006-07-28 05:38 pm UTC (link)
This is probably why europe gets videogames last.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: You know....
[info]shadedspriter
2006-07-29 01:19 am UTC (link)
We get most videogames last for two reasons

1. PAL TV settings (50hrz refreash and everything else)
2. France, Germany, Spain etc most games are released in multi language version.

We do get european games first most of the time - Tomb Raider: Legends was out 2 weeks before in the UK...and I believe that the Rayman games were also.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: You know.... - [info]theonereason, 2006-07-29 09:48 am UTC
Re: You know.... - [info]terminator44, 2006-07-29 02:30 pm UTC
Re: You know.... - [info]ianc14, 2006-07-29 03:09 pm UTC

[info]thefremen
2006-07-28 06:12 pm UTC (link)
I think Pink will probably buy a few copies but myself I will opt out on this one. I wouldn't want to play as one of those characters, at least with CJ he was pushed into that situation by external forces, but with these blokes they have a choice and they chose to be in a Quinten Terrentino movie.

(Reply to this)


[info]boffo97
2006-07-28 07:06 pm UTC (link)
It's my opinion that just like any other media, video games have the right to include any kind of content they want.

People are only having cows at this because it's a game rather than a movie.

That being said, recalling 25 to Life... at least when Rockstar pushed the envelope, it was with GOOD games.

(Reply to this)


[info]grimm24
2006-07-28 07:10 pm UTC (link)
Yeah well........ the british talk funny and...they have silly hats

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]kroninokiller
2006-07-29 08:06 pm UTC (link)
amen

(Reply to this) (Parent)

say what now?
[info]enmitywithin
2006-07-28 07:31 pm UTC (link)
after what happened with 25 to life c/o miami jack, I believe it's going to blow over as a stupid political issue.

Besides. was the original resevoir dogs movie banned in the UK? Obviously not.

Hypocrisy much?

how many times has it been proven? how many times does it have to be said? these games do not "encourage" "train" "teach" or "glorify" those violent act at all, or at the very most any more than the original movie did.

I can't wait to see the hub-bub these people raise over Splinter Cell Double Agent.

(Reply to this)


[info]durlock
2006-07-28 08:29 pm UTC (link)
To crack a Role Playing Joke.

INT/WIS: CHA isn't the only dump stat apparently.

Besides that, I'll try the game to see if it's any good when it comes out. The movie, and most QT movies are a bit to out there for me. To much violence...kinda like Elfen Lied...but like I said, I'll try the game and we can go from there.

Has anyone ever asked the politicians why they're going off on a videogame that's based on a movie...or why they think that kids can magically get ahold of this? I mean...come on, it's just pathetic how low they're stopping now.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]enmitywithin
2006-07-29 02:28 pm UTC (link)
Old-school d&D style, I've missed you.

I think I might just be a tad too nerdy, I actually get that joke.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]seangrimm
2006-07-28 10:11 pm UTC (link)
Tom McGhie, speaking on behalf of officers in the West Yorkshire Police Federation, said Reservoirs Dogs was a "sickening glorification of violence against police officers. Anything that encourages that type of behaviour, when police officers are suffering more attacks than ever before, should be banned."

This guy makes it sound like anyone that sees a violent movie or videogame immediately grabs a kitchen knife, runs out in the street and stabs the first cop they see. If violence in a videogame is encouragement that we should immitate it then why isn't everyone running around with shotguns hunting zombies or just stealing a new car every time they need to drive somewhere? Could it be the majority of people have a comprehension of right and wrong, and that they are law abiding citizens that don't lash out violently but have no problems with simulated fictional violence in a computer generated world? Of course not, if that was true videogames would be perfectly safe! The truth is videogames have secret messages in them that tell you to murder your family and burn down your house and rape your dog, and that is why the good people in your local police forces and government offices are protecting you by censoring and banning any media that might wreck your tiny little useless brain.

(Reply to this)

There's another movie that glorifies torture:
[info]curiousthompson
2006-07-28 11:01 pm UTC (link)
It's called the CUBE MOVIE franchise. All three movies have people forced to go through a series of rooms like a cube where there's the possibility that they will die instantly (Or slowly as shown in Cube Zero) if they enter the wrong room. The movie also focuses on the pyscological effects of people after trapped in it as the movie progresses. And it's traps are the most brutal that ever exists. And the CUBE MOVIES WERE NOT BANNED.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: There's another movie that glorifies torture:
[info]shadedspriter
2006-07-29 01:24 am UTC (link)
Only the first cube movie is currently released in the UK (as far as I know...I know cube zero hasn't been released - hypercube was on TV so it might be on DVD in some bargin bin somewhere)

the movies themselfs do not promote torture...for one reason - Torture isn't killing someone...torture is giving someone pain and keeping them alive to endure it.

now as someone said - Saw is sort of torture - but in a paplov's dog trying to get someone to better them selfs sort of way.

(I over annalyse too many movies)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…