Customer Reviews


94 Reviews
5 star:
 (26)
4 star:
 (30)
3 star:
 (24)
2 star:
 (5)
1 star:
 (9)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars 2010: The Year We Make Contact [2009] [Blu-ray]
2010: The Year We Make Contact [2009] [Blu-ray] SPACE FICTION OF A SUPERIOR KIND!

A new time, a new odyssey, a new chance to confront enigmas arising from the daring Jupiter mission of 2001. Crew members aboard the Leonov will rendezvous with the still-orbiting Discovery. And their fate will rest on the silicon shoulders of the computer they reawaken HAL-9000...
Published 3 months ago by Andrew C. Miller

versus
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Not 2001, but interesting and enjoyable
This is not on the same level as 2001... but it is a good film for those who were mystified by 2001, since it answers some of the questions posed by the first film very nicely. Unfortunately, the silly cosmic greeting card from Europa at the end of the film is a major disappointment and the casting of an overly emotional Roy Scheider instead of William Sylvester (who...
Published on March 28 2004 by classicmoviefan


‹ Previous | 1 210 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars 2010: The Year We Make Contact [2009] [Blu-ray], July 9 2014
By 
Andrew C. Miller - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)   
2010: The Year We Make Contact [2009] [Blu-ray] SPACE FICTION OF A SUPERIOR KIND!

A new time, a new odyssey, a new chance to confront enigmas arising from the daring Jupiter mission of 2001. Crew members aboard the Leonov will rendezvous with the still-orbiting Discovery. And their fate will rest on the silicon shoulders of the computer they reawaken HAL-9000 [voice of Douglas Rain]. Based on the Sir Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey sequel, director Peter Hyams spellbinder – nominated for 5 Academy Awards®** – stars Roy Scheider, John Lithgow, Oscar winner*** Helen Mirren, Bob Balaban and Keir Dullea.

**1984: Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, Costume Designs, Make Up, Sound and Visual Effects

***2006: Best Actress for The Queen

Cast: Roy Scheider, John Lithgow, Helen Mirren, Bob Balaban, Keir Dullea, Douglas Rain [voice of HAL-9000], Madolyn Smith, Saveliy Kramarov, Taliesin Jaffe, James McEachin, Mary Jo Deschanel, Elya Baskin, Dana Elcar, Oleg Rudnik, Natasha Shneider, Vladimir Skomarovsky, Victor Steinbach and Candice Bergen [voice of SAL-9000]

Director: Peter Hyams

Producer: Peter Hyams

Screenwriters: Peter Hyams and Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Composer: David Shire

Cinematography: Peter Hyams

Resolution: 1080p

Aspect Ratio: 2.40:1

Audio: English: 5.1 Dolby TrueHD, English: 5.1 Dolby Digital, French: 5.1 Dolby Digital, Spanish: 5.1 Dolby Digital, German: 5.1 Dolby Digital, Italian: 2.0 Dolby Digital, Spanish: 2.0 Dolby Digital and Portuguese: 1.0 Dolby Digital Mono

Subtitles: English SDH, French, Spanish, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese and Swedish

Running Time: 116 minutes

Region: Region A/1

Number of Discs: 1

Studio: Warner Home Video

Andrew’s Blu-ray Review – Judged strictly on its own, as if it were an original production with no connection to '2001: A Space Odyssey', Peter Hyams' film version of '2010' is arguably one of the better sci-fi pictures to come out of the 1980s. Unfortunately, you really can't judge the movie on its own. Its existence is inextricably tied to Stanley Kubrick's legendary masterpiece. Any positive attributes '2010' may have are unavoidably overshadowed by comparison to its predecessor. There's just no two ways around it. As the direct sequel to one of the greatest motion pictures ever made, quite frankly, '2010' cannot in no way be compared to ‘2001’, it must stand on its own merit.

The fault for that lies mainly with author Sir Arthur C. Clarke. If a few of the sub-plots had been changed around a bit, the movie is a mostly faithful adaptation of Clarke's novel '2010: Odyssey Two' in all of its most important aspects. When Sir Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick collaborated back in 1968, the results were a fusion of each man's strengths as a storyteller: Sir Arthur C. Clarke's background in hard science fiction and his grounding in plausible scientific speculation, with Stanley Kubrick's visionary artistry and mind-bending flights of imagination. The sequels (the author penned four books in the series) are purely Sir Arthur C. Clarke's doing, and suffer from the lack of Stanley Kubrick's perspective.

That's not to say that Sir Arthur C. Clarke was an inferior storyteller to Stanley Kubrick. In his prolific career, he wrote several legitimate classics such as 'Childhood's End' and 'Rendezvous with Rama'. The two men simply approached the material from completely different angles. Their collaboration on '2001' produced something beautiful and transcendent. '2010', on the other hand, just isn't in the calibre.

At the end of '2001', the human race had encountered the single most important event in its history, and was quite possibly poised at the brink of an evolutionary jump forward. As '2010' picks up, we learn that basically nothing has happened in the following nine years. In fact, the mysterious monolith and the intelligence behind it don't seem to have much interest in Earth or humanity at all. The film opens with a stream of facts and data that recap the discovery of the monolith and the first mission to Jupiter. In this alternate timeline, the U.S.S.R. is still a major superpower, and the Cold War is still very much on. While their governments squabble over an escalating conflict in Central America, the American and Soviet scientific communities decide to launch a joint mission out to Jupiter. Their plan is to board the derelict spaceship Discovery and find out exactly what went wrong the last time. The Soviets can get there faster, but only the Americans can reactivate and repair HAL 9000, and so they need each other. Leading the expedition are Dr. Heywood Floyd [Roy Scheider taking over from William Sylvester] and the Russian captain Tanya Kirbuk [Helen Mirren].

While Stanley Kubrick embraced ambiguity, Sir Arthur C. Clarke was a strict literalist. The brilliance of '2001' lay in its open-ended nature, the fact that it opened the door for ideas that each audience member would have to interpret for him- or herself. '2010' sets about to systematically deconstruct all of the mysteries left unresolved at the end of the first story. It attempts to provide rational, understandable explanations to the images and plot developments that were intended to represent concepts beyond humanity's comprehension. Do you need to be told, in easily-digestible terms, exactly what the monolith and the Star Child were, where they came from, what they did, and how they worked? Well, here you go. Personally, I find it more interesting to ponder those things on my own, especially when the explanations that Sir Arthur C. Clarke comes up with are so simplistic and mundane.

If I haven't mentioned Peter Hyams much in all this time, well the director illustrates Clarke's story with workmanlike competence and efficiency. The film has strong performances from the cast and solid production values for an '80s sci-fi flick. The model and miniature effects are quite excellent and hold up very well. (However, optically they have dated really badly and some of the compositing work is downright terrible, especially using 4:3 video screens, where ‘2001’ video technology was so far advanced and still stands out today). Anyway Peter Hyams stages several moments of nail-biting suspense, including the aero braking sequence and a breathless spacewalk between the Russian craft Leonov and the Discovery. I have to admit disappointment that he falls back on that old crutch of using sound in the vacuum of outer space (which Kubrick went out of his way to avoid). Nevertheless, I think it's safe to say that '2010' is the best movie that Peter Hyams ever made, even if that's not much of a complement considering some of the dreck he's churned out in the years since.

For what it is, the film's script is intelligently written and has some thought-provoking ideas. The depiction of the future year of 2010 misses the mark in a few respects (like the Soviet Union still being around, or the preponderance of all those bulky CRT computer monitors), but is a fairly credible extension of the world created in Kubrick's film. Unfortunately, the movie lacks any real vision, which '2001' had in spades. On its own, '2010' is a decent enough sci-fi picture. But it's not a worthy follow-up to '2001'.

Blu-ray Video Quality – '2010' is not the revelation on Blu-ray that '2001: A Space Odyssey' was, but that has more to do with the nature of each film, than their respective high-definition transfers. Unlike its predecessor, the majority of '2010' wasn't shot on 65mm film, just regular 35mm. Furthermore, director Peter Hyams performs double-duty as cinematographer on all of his films. His preferred visual style is dark and grainy. He favours source lighting and high-speed film stocks. You'll find a consistently drab appearance among most of his other films ('Timecop', 'The Relic' and 'End of Days', et al.).

The 1080p transfer is at the mercy of its source material. Presented in its theatrical 2.40:1 aspect ratio, the image is flat and hazy. Colours appear accurate, but aren't particularly noteworthy. Contrast wavers; a lot of shots had their exposure pushed in the lab, elevating black levels and grain.

Accepting that, the Blu-ray is certainly a substantial improvement over the DVD edition released with a cruddy non-anamorphic letterbox transfer back in 2000. Although fairly soft due to the lighting and use of photographic filters, the picture has a decent amount of detail and exhibits no signs of Digital Noise Reduction or artificial sharpening. The special effects footage (which was shot on 65mm by an entirely different crew than the live action scenes) looks terrific. The model shots are as sharp, clear, and well-lit as you could hope. If anything, the contrast between the two types of scene is a little jarring, but that's just the way the film is. The 1080p encoding has a few minor issues. The grain isn't always well-compressed, and sometimes comes across noisy or blocky. I also noticed some colour banding on the flat surface of the monolith. Still, overall, this transfer is about as good as I'd ever expect '2010' to look in high definition.

Blu-ray Audio Quality – '2010' was nominated for a Best Sound Academy Award back in 1984. For its vintage, this is an interesting sound design, even if fidelity and aggressiveness aren't quite up to modern standards.

The Blu-ray offers the soundtrack in 5.1 Dolby TrueHD or Standard 5.1 Dolby Digital formats. Dialogue sounds a little flat, but the music (especially Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathustra) has nice body and depth. The movie features some very loud, shocking sound effects. The aero braking sequence is an auditory highlight with pretty intense bass action guaranteed to get your subwoofer rumbling. Even though the movie played in 70mm theatrical engagements with a 6-track audio mix, the 5.1 options on the Blu-ray are virtually devoid of surround activity. Whether that's inherent to the original sound design (it wouldn't surprise me) or an issue with the conversion to 5.1 configuration, I can't say.

Blu-ray Special Features and Extras:

2010: The Odyssey Continues [Vintage Documentary] [9:00] Sir Arthur C. Clarke introduces the movie by the novel's title, '2010: Odyssey Two', and in the introduction to this vintage making-of promo. The short piece doesn't go into much depth, but does offer some quick interviews with visual futurist Syd Mead, production designers (who stress the importance of a utilitarian style in the sets), and SFX people. It's kind of amazing to see that Sir Arthur C. Clarke and director Peter Hyams were essentially communicating by E-mail (via a primitive "computer link-up") all the way back in 1984. Around that time, I thought I was on the cutting edge with my computer.

Theatrical Trailer [3:00] A 4:3 pan and scan trailer in pretty lousy condition and cannot understand why they could not do the same ration as the actual film, this is a very bad unprofessional attitude of Warner Home Video.

Finally, '2010: The Year We Make Contact ' is a film simultaneously underrated and not nearly as good as it should have been. If you can try to divorce your expectations from any comparison to '2001: A Space Odyssey', it's a solid '80s sci-fi adventure. Unfortunately, it is a sequel to '2001', and on that mark it sort of fails. Despite this, it is still a good companion Blu-ray to the previous awesome film, but what lets it down is the 4:3 video screens, at least with 2001, the technology was far advanced looking and is still today after 50 years and I think that aspect lets the film look slightly old fashioned. Despite this anomaly the Blu-ray looks and sounds about as good as the film can look or sound, and is still worth a recommendation, despite not coming anywhere near the very high standards of ‘2001’ which we were hoping to see when it was released in the cinema. Again, still despite this it is a worthy addition to ‘2001’ and very honoured to have it in my Blu-ray Collection.

Andrew C. Miller – Your Ultimate No.1 Film Fan
Le Cinema Paradiso
WARE, United Kingdom
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars One of the Best Sequels Ever Made..., Aug. 31 2001
By 
Doc Kinne (Somerville, MA USA) - See all my reviews
In a Hollywood culture that gives us such disappointing films as "American Pie II," "Highlander II," "and "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" the intelligent film viewer wisely looks at a sequel with a critical eye. This is even more so if the sequel is following up a movie that has become the arguably the most recognized science fiction film of all time.
Will "2010" ever rate higher than "2001"? Probably not, if a poll was taken. However, Hyams managed to make a thrilling and timely film that certainly stands up to the original while making its own specific statement. And for my money, I liked "2010" better than I liked "2001."
"2010" is a very DIFFERENT film from "2001." "2001" was almost an "art film." "2010" is a straight, intelligent, science-fiction drama. But what is different is not necessarily worse and "2010" proves that. One of the charms of "2001" is that it gave us mystery. Interestingly, one of the charms of "2010" is that it gives us answers.
Here we get to meet HALs father and sister. We meet the engineer who build the Discovery. And we get a rollocking good, solidly built film. And who knows, with the recent theories on Jupiter's moon Europa this film might be well turn into science-fact!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars My god, it's full of stars..., June 10 2001
By 
Mark Hills "Nobody gets me, I'm the wind, baby!" (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
One of the biggest reasons why I think the so-called purists had such an allergic reaction to 2010 was that it was such a departure from Kubrick's 1969 masterpiece. In 2001, the audience is largely a witness to events and then must reach their own conclusions. In 2010, the audience is told what is happening through a host of wonderful characters that simply were not present on 2001. Heywood Floyd (Roy Scheider) is a fantastic protagonist. He obviously a gifted scientist, but unlike his counterpart and HAL-9000 creator Richard Chandra (Bob Balaban), seems far more connected to the human race than his particular field of expertise. In the end they are two completely different films. 2001 is a landmark film, no doubt about it, nothing like it had ever been seen before, but it was made in the 60's and perhaps younger people feel disconnected from it for that reason.
2010 begins 8 years after the Discovery disaster. The massive ship had been dispatched to Io in orbit around Jupiter to investigate a second monolith, identical but larger than one found on the moon. A Russian scientist Moisevitch (Dana Elcar) informs Floyd that the Soviets will reach the Discovery almost a full year before the Americans will and that Floyd should check Discovery's orbit. When he does so Floyd learns that the ship's orbit has begun to decay and will fall towards Io unless it is recovered. Moisevitch convinces Floyd that having American scientists onboard would make the trip go much smoother. Now that the scientists agree it is the politicians who now must be convinced. Unfortunately, the Americans and the Soviets are headed for a showdown off the coast of Honduras which may lead to war.
Four months later aboard the Soviet ship the Alexei Leonov, the joint American-Soviet crew arrives at Jupiter and in a spectacular sequence must use a process known as aero-braking in order to slow down enough to put the ship in position to rendezvous with Discovery. After this we are introduced to Walter Curnow (John Lithgow), the engineer and brains behind the Discovery II, the ship the Americans were building to go to Jupiter. Curnow and Russian Maxim Brailovsky (Elya Baskin) must transit over from the Leonov to the Discovery with the violent moon of Io spinning dangerously beneath them. Once on board the spinning American ship, they get its systems operational and pull it out of the decaying orbit. It is then they release Chandra to see if he can recover the damaged HAL-9000 (Douglas Rain). (Interesting tidbit: Add one letter to HAL and you get IBM).
Once recovered both ships move towards the second monolith which is two kilometers long. Things sour back home on Earth and both crews are ordered by their governments to return to their respective ships It is here that Floyd, aboard Discovery's bridge, receives his first message from David Bowman (Kier Dullea), that he must leave the area within two days. Believing it a hoax, Floyd asks HAL who is sending the messages, to which the computer replies "...I was David Bowman." then, "Look behind you..." And we see David Bowman for the first time-still young and still wearing the orange spacesuit. Floyd follows him into the pod bay where Bowman is revealed to be an old man. Floyd is told that "...something wonderful is going to happen." and then watches dumbfounded as Bowman transforms once again into the starchild.
Back on the Leonov, Floyd argues with Captain Tanya Kirbuk (Helen Mirren) that perhaps they really ought to head back home. Kirbuk is skeptical and can't find any reason to go along with Floyd's crazy plan. Only after they concoct a plan to use the Discovery as a massive booster rocket that the large monolith vanishes is Kirbuk convinced. Only problem now is convincing HAL to go along with the plan- the AI was created to be curious, but also to look after the Discovery and if the ship is left behind it may be destroyed. It then becomes a race against time as a large black spot appears on Jupiter that seems to be consuming the planet. The massive gas giant begins to shrink.
Ultimately 2010 boils down into a wonderful science fiction movie- yes, it's 'science fiction' and not 'sci-fi'. The only reason I think that abbreviation is used is because most people have short attention spans. It is not 2001, as the movies are separated by a generation of directors who had different values and a different audience. Strangely enough, Arthur C. Clarke's book makes far more sense than Kubrick's film does and even the short story that the book and then the movie were drawn from is more conclusive. 2010 is a sequel and not the same film as 2001, if it were, Kubrick would have directed it and it would have been called 2001: Part II. Both films are excellent, but they aren't the same.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Probably A Lot Better Than You Think It Is. A Good Watch !, June 5 2001
If you're looking at this DVD, then the odds are pretty good that you've seen, or perhaps even own, 2001:A Space Odyssey.
You know who HAL is, and Dave Bowman ( "Open the pod bay doors, HAL" ). This is good. You have some background to this movie.
What's better though - is that you don't need that background. This film works even if you've never seen the classic "2001". It does a great job of giving you some background as part of the plot.
This is a very good, stand alone, film. It works on a lot of levels and is a great sci-fi story.
Yes, the monolith is back, and yes, it's doing some strange things. Roy Scheider is sent to check out some of the odd happenings. He's hitching a ride on a Russian ( It helps to remember that when this film came out, we were still pretty deep in the "Russian's Are Bad" mentality. ) Spacecraft, complete with a strong female captain and a ( english speaking ) crew. Scheider has his team along for the ride.
The interaction between the American Crew and the Russian Crew is wonderful. Roy Scheider, who can sometimes be a little overpowering in his acting style, is wonderful here. His main counterpart is the Russian Captain, played by the always watchable Helen Mirran ( of "Prime Suspect" fame ).
Also along for the ride is John Lithgow and Bob Balaban ( as the tender Dr.Chandra ).
The cast if first rate and the writing and storytelling are right on. I don't want to give away any plot points but the mystery of the monolith is still there.
This film probably isn't as "deep and meaningful" as the original but it does hold it's own as a sci-fi movie.
Oh, and yes, that's Candice Bergen as the voice of SAL 9000.
Give this movie a try. Go in without expectation and you'll be surprised. It's a good watch.
Best Regards, turtlex
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The difference between Cinema and Theater, Aug. 4 2000
By 
Matthew Colville (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
The other reviews of this film do a great job of describing how fantastic it is. But there's an important distinction between 2001 and 2010 that may help you understand why so many people like it, in spite of it being actually contradictory in filmmaking ethos to 2001.
2001 was one of the greatest examples of what cinema (movies as art) could do. It was abstract, compelling, engrossing and confrontational. It changed the way you thought for a little while, and changed what many people thought movies could do, forever.
2010 isn't cinema at all, it's a *play*. Everything compelling about this, except perhaps the special effects (which, while awesome, are tellingly static) happens between two people, through dialog. Two people sit on a park bench and decide the fate of the Discovery. Two people argue on the bridge of a soviet spaceship about the Monolith. Two people stand in the middle of the high desert of California and trade cold-war secrets about an alien encounter. And it's all *awesome*! Some of the best dialog and acting wev'e seen in science-fiction. I can prove, using algebra, that if you watch the first 10 minutes of this movie, you'll watch the whole thing.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The Monolith Returns..., July 27 2000
By 
P. B. Fey (Phoenixville, PA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Director/Writer/Cinematographer (he wore all three hats on this film!) Peter Hyams continues the story of the mysterious monolith as a joint U.S.-Russian crew speeds toward the derelict spaceship Discovery and earth's destiny. Set against a backdrop of Soviet/US Central American tensions--quite tangible back in 1984, when this film hit screens--"2010" manages to rise above the cold war polemic to offer a new hope. Hyams' film manages to balance Star Wars-type action (Lucas's, not Reagan's) with the intellectual and moral implications first posed in Stanley Kubrick's "2001." An excellent cast is led by Roy Scheider and Helen Mirren, with Keir Dullea returning as Dave Bowman. This film is thrilling, frightening, touching, and even humorous. Highly recommended!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Not 2001, but interesting and enjoyable, March 28 2004
By 
classicmoviefan (Rancho Mirage, CA) - See all my reviews
This is not on the same level as 2001... but it is a good film for those who were mystified by 2001, since it answers some of the questions posed by the first film very nicely. Unfortunately, the silly cosmic greeting card from Europa at the end of the film is a major disappointment and the casting of an overly emotional Roy Scheider instead of William Sylvester (who played Heywood Floyd in 2001) was a major miscast in my opinion. William would have played the role with more "cool" and "control" as an authentic scientist-astronaut would have really been for such a mission. Still, the effects and visuals are good and the film is enjoyable. Keir looks great as Bowman and the metaphysical touches are interesting.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Arthur C. Clarke Fans Rejoice...., May 1 2009
By 
Nick B. (Manitoba, Canada) - See all my reviews
What can I say? The book is always better than the movie. However, the movie does not have to be worse than the book. It can be different. This is the case with this movie. 2001 was a watershed in many ways in terms of science fiction both in book and film form. Either movie can stand on its own merits and terms. If you are a fan, watch both of them back to back. I don't know if anyone has the energy or desire to do it, but it would be fantastic if the rest of the books were turned into movies as well as the story does not end with 2010. Buy the books that continue the story to its conclusion and for that matter, buy the whole set and read them. They are well worth it. Arthur C. Clarke is one of my favourite authors.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A WELL-CRAFTED SEQUEL TO "2001: a space odyssey"!, Oct. 17 2001
By 
Steven Hancock (Winston Salem, NC United States) - See all my reviews
The visual effects are awesome. The storyline, although totally fictional, is exciting and dramatic. The acting is superb! The way that Peter Hyams envisioned the adaptation of Arthur C. Clarke's bestselling novel (which was written very well, and meant to be a sequel to both the novel AND the movie "2001: a space odyssey") is very unique, incorporating a possible nuclear war and re-working the ending to make this movie more exciting. The incredible film is, in my opinion, far superior to 2001. The DVD is interesting. It is well worth the price. Grade: A+
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Better than the origional, April 22 2001
By 
Eric J. White "Ships don't come in, they're b... (Windsor, PA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Many of us were left scratching our heads after the first part, 2001. This movie not only explains that and pulls it together, but it expands on it as well. It has everything you hope for in a sequel and more. In fact, I'd say the sequel is better than the original. It's certainly more entertaining and fast paced. It's also a little more believable with post star wars effects. No question...important part of ANY sci-fi library.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 210 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First