This year, CAFERGOT maximum dosage, CAFERGOT brand name, contrary to most others, all movies were actually good and deserved to be in this category, buy CAFERGOT from mexico. Buy cheap CAFERGOT no rx, Much a relief for me, and much easier to get through them, what is CAFERGOT. Buy CAFERGOT online no prescription, :-)
What I also liked is that it was mainly, to me, online CAFERGOT without a prescription, CAFERGOT overnight, new actors starring in these movies, or at least actors who hadn't have tremendous overexposure over the years, where can i find CAFERGOT online. CAFERGOT dosage, I have given the movies grades from 1 to 5, where 1 basically means it sucks, CAFERGOT gel, ointment, cream, pill, spray, continuous-release, extended-release, Taking CAFERGOT, and 5 is very good.
The nominated movies
Let's go through the movies, in the order I saw them:
This movie is about Jamal, a boy who grows up in the Mumbai slum, and eventually ends up on the "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?", CAFERGOT OVER THE COUNTER. It's a wonderful story about him growing up, after CAFERGOT, CAFERGOT samples, the tough reality in India, meeting good and thoroughly evil people on the way - and- it's about true love.
It's a very good movie, is CAFERGOT addictive, CAFERGOT description, and it's different to most other movies I've seen. In the beginning, where to buy CAFERGOT, Ordering CAFERGOT online, some parts really had me clenching my teeth, wondering what dreadful thing were the next to happen, online buying CAFERGOT hcl. Real brand CAFERGOT online, I would have to say that it did get just a little bit easier/nicer in the as the movie went along, but still exciting.
Young boy meeting one woman one day, CAFERGOT schedule, My CAFERGOT experience, and evolving his first strong feelings of love. They have a very interesting relationship, CAFERGOT from canadian pharmacy, Low dose CAFERGOT, and she's quite reserved all the time. CAFERGOT OVER THE COUNTER, Recommended is that you don't read more about the plot than the above sentence, and you will probably get the most out of it.
What I like about Kate Winslet, playing the woman, is her acting to begin with, but also that I find her really sexy. In these days of botox, CAFERGOT mg, CAFERGOT blogs, plastic surgery, she's so natural and just oozing sensuality.
It's a good and interesting movie, CAFERGOT no rx, CAFERGOT over the counter, and very touching at times.
Frost/Nixon revolves around the interviews David Frost did with former president Richard Nixon, after the Watergate scandal and Nixon's resignation, CAFERGOT alternatives. CAFERGOT used for, Very interesting twists and turns, and I love the sense of that era one gets when watching it.
In the beginning, CAFERGOT pics, No prescription CAFERGOT online, you get the feeling that the people behind this move genuinely hate Nixon, but gradually it goes to show that although what he done, CAFERGOT australia, uk, us, usa, Kjøpe CAFERGOT på nett, köpa CAFERGOT online, he was just a human as well.
Probably the most well-known movie amongst the broader public. The character Benjamin Button is born as an old man, generic CAFERGOT, and as time goes by, he becomes younger and younger. The effects and views on this is intriguing to see, although the movie has a number of parts that just doesn't get your interest that much.
However, while I'm not such a sucker for romance in movies, when it comes to the topic of death and about children/being a parent, it reaches my most inner feelings. One part in the movie had me bawling like there was no tomorrow, and it really touched me.
A wise man told me that you don't know if a movie was good just after you watched, you know it a few days, when you see if you go and think about it, if it affects your dreams and thoughts, CAFERGOT OVER THE COUNTER. While the movie overall perhaps isn't worth a grade over 3, seeing how I was moved by the movie, I allowed it to get a 4.
This story is about Harvey Milk, who was the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California. This movie goes from him being uninterested in politics and being open about his homosexuality, to the bitter ending.
Sean Penn, as always, is absolutely fantastic. The movie itself is good too, but nothing more, nothing less. It does show a terrible history, though, with persecution of homosexual people and failure in trying to understand people with other values and norms than oneselfs'.
And the winner is...
Given other awards and how different it is, my guess is that Slumdog Millionaire will take this one home. CAFERGOT OVER THE COUNTER, What I'm happy to say, though, is that any of these movies do deserve the prize, and contrary to previous years, no matter the winner, I won't be upset.
Have you watched any of these movies, and if yes, what did you think.
Previous years' movies
If interesting, take a read about the nominated movies the previous years:
Slumdog Millionaire won a a fair victory in the category. Congratulations!
Sean Penn got a well-deserved Oscar for Best Actor (although I'm sure Mickey Rourke would have deserved it too), Kate Winslet finally got an Oscar for Best Actress. It is also note-worthy that Heath Ledger got an Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role.
I've always liked watching movies, so in 2005, for the first time, I decided to watch all the movies nominated in the Best Motion Picture of the Year before the Oscar Academy Awards. Just to know what I think about the result, and whether they actually were good movies.
I don't have any aspirations to write perfect film critique or something, but rather just express what I think about the nominated movies. It will indeed be interesting to see which one wins, and what the general take on that decision is. I've graded the movies where the scale works like that 1 is very bad and 5 is very good.
The nominated movies
Here are the movies and my opinions about them, in the order I watched them:
First one out, and I was really interested to see what the Coen brothers had achieved this time. They're fantastic at creating an ambiance and interpret some of the local US phenomenons and characters. The movie starts out with the quality and originality we've gotten used to from them, but then it somewhat fails to deliver. It loses momentum, and nothing really happens or has gotten you spellbound watching.
What makes this movie worth seeing, though, is the outstanding and truly scary performance by Javier Bardem. The grade is maybe not completely fair, but I think it's a bit low because I expected more, and that it started out well but couldn't keep it as good.
Juno is about a teenage pregnancy. Doesn't sound to alluring, right? But this movie is actually very cool with down-to-earth characters, a witty dialog (which I've heard some people think is a bit too Gilmore Girls-ish) and good actors.
Given the topic, don't be discouraged. It's a movie with some interesting turns and overall, it makes you feel good about people and life. Shit happens, but in the end it's all about attitude.
This movie is utter crap. It sickens me to see the overwhelming reviews and bunch of Oscar nominations it have gotten. Don't get me wrong, the movie itself is a good craft and Daniel-Day Lewis is a really good actor.
But the story... Oh my God. It's so long and it's soo boring. Really. I thought No Country For Old Men was a bit slow, but Jesus... This is quicksand in movie form. I was going to give it a grade of a weak 2, but then came the ending (don't worry, I won't give it away). Let's just say that it takes place 25 years after the bulk of the movie, and one of the characters look exactly the same! Couldn't they at the very least given him a fucking beard?!
A Romance/Drama taking place in England, and sort of a costume movie. Not really the criteria which gets me going, I can tell you that. But you can just guess how pleasantly surprised I was then that this movie turned out to be great! It caught my interest fairly soon, or rather, had me thinking that this won't be too shabby.
Then, with its turn and twists, and some incredible scenes, it elevated itself into the best movie out of the nominated, no doubts. Love, drama, sorrow, hardships. It has it all, and this, my friends, is quality.
George Clooney definitely stars in very different kinds of movies; some rubbish, and some pretty good. I'd say that his is neither. It's just ok. The movie itself starts out quite good with a very intense dialog, and the mystery surrounding some things gets you in a pretty good grip.
The things is, though, that the movie never succeeds in taking it to the next level. It's decent, and you do want to know how it turns out. Problem is, it gets too ordinary in the end and promising implications ends up in solutions you've seen too many times before.
Which one should win?
Without a doubt: Atonement. If any of the others were to win, I guess I could still live with it; just as long as it's not There Will Be Blood.
Are these the best movies?
Previous years when doing this, I've claimed that most of the movies were far from the best ones the preceding year, and that most of them, more or less, were a waste of time. This is generally true this year around too. After I've done this, I can watch movies that actually seem interesting (thinking Sweeney Tood, Into the Wild etc) and of which I am sure that they must be better than the majority of the above mentioned.
However, I have to say that doing this made me watch a movie I wouldn't have seen otherwise, Atonement, and for that I'm very grateful!
Have you seen any of these movies, and what do you think?
And the winner is...
No Country For Old Men won. In retrospect, I think it was ok, although I still think it could've been much better.
By now, I'm sure you know about the controversy between NBC and Apple, where NBC decided to ditch Apple's iTunes Store and instead sell their shows through Amazon Unbox.
The reasoning behind NBC's decision is that they wanted different prices for different shows. It might, to some people, sound like a reasonable demand. However, this stance basically comes from greed, and failing to acknowledge that one of the major things behind Apple's success with iTunes store is the pricing model seems to me like a fundamental business error.
At iTunes, no matter what artist you want to buy music from, the price per song is the same. No matter what video/show clip you want, it's the same price, and it's reasonably low and fair. The consistency in this model has proven to be great in reaching people, because with such simplicity people will know what to expect and find it just.
Another reason for switching is that Amazon offers stricter DRM than Apple, which will, of course, make it less flexible for the end users and deliver less value per price for the product. So, NBC might very well get a higher price for their shows at Amazon, but since they will, I'm convinced, sell a lot less copies with that higher price and more "protection", they're bound to earn less money and gain more bad-will.
The sum is that NBC had a shot at actually selling more shows for downloading, lost out on it because of greed, and there will soon be a higher concentration of their shows available at any torrent web site. If they are serious about stifling illegal downloading and actually deliver something worth its price to their customers, my advice is for them to seriously rethink.
I also read that some analyst thought that this would mean less iPod sales because there wouldn't be sufficient availability of video shows. Yeah, right. Like there's no way for users themselves to convert video clips for iPod usage (Windows alternative), clips that they could get from any other source of their liking.
For some time, I was looking around for the best hard drive media player to plug into my TV, and I scoured the web and harassed my friends to get some good pointers. And, finally, I found just what I needed!
Basically, just to describe my needs: I wanted a product with a hard drive to save all my movies on; be it ripped DVDs, downloaded movies or any other kind. The idea was to completely move the computer out of the equation, so anyone in the family (basically, the people aren't tech freaks like me) could use it just by using a remote.
As I saw it, it came down to two options, and I thought I'd do a basic comparison of them here for you:
Apple recently released Apple TV, and everybody was going crazy for it. So, let's take a quick look at specs:
40 GB hard drive.
Option to stream video to it from the computer.
Only supports iTunes for transfers.
Only supports movies in two formats, H.264 and MPEG-4, which basically means items bought from the iTunes store, or converting your existing movies.
My take on it is that the hard drive is completely insufficient; 40 GB is almost nothing, less than some iPods, for Pete's sake. Streaming is not an option for me, because in that case I'd rather just put my MacBook Pro next to the TV instead; the idea was to become independent from the computer. And, being limited to iTunes for transferring is not a desirable situation.
But, the biggest flaw of them all, a giant one, is the lack of supported video formats. Also, in many countries in Europe where it's released, you can't even buy movies from the local iTunes store. When it comes to getting around the ridiculous limitations that Apple have built-in, to learn more you can go to Apple TV Hacks and How-To: play DivX and Xvid on your Apple TV.
But, to me, I'm not interested in paying for a product which so many drawbacks and limitations, and is far from ready for the prime time market.
Verdict: Just like Front Row, Apple TV looks great and is completely useless. Shame on you, Apple.
For about the same price (around $299), a couple of months ago I bought a TViX HD M-4000P, which has meet all of my needs.
The specifications are:
250 GB hard drive.
Almost no video format limitation at all. Supports wmv9, WMV, HD, .avi, .mpg, .vob, .asf, .tp, .tr, IFO, ISO. Codecs: MPEG 1 / 2, XVID.
Subtitle support: smi,sub,srt,aqt,utf,lrc / Image Subtitle : sub (with idx).
File transfers just any way you like, exactly as with any external drive.
Can act as a FTP server.
You can insert any hard drive you want to, and also connect external hard drives through USB.
And that's pretty much all I want. It is definitely not as good looking as the Apple TV, but instead it has a real remote, and, at the top of it all: It. Just. Works.
The only two downsides is that it doesn't support wireless connections, so you need to connect to it via a USB cable, and that it can be just a little bit too noisy. However, with five different fan speed settings available, they are most likely to satisfy your needs (with two small children at home, I can't have the volume too loud, so maybe that's why I can hear the TViX at all; a friend who has the same model says he can't her his' when watching something).
Tip for Mac users: Use the Disk Utility to format the hard drive you use to the MS-DOS File System. This is necessary for the TViX to work and for you to be able to read and write files.
My recommendation is that if you look for his kind of product, TViX is definitely the way to go, since it won't hold you back in anyway. There are also a number of different models available, so just see which one is the right for you!
Yes, apparently it's casual Friday here today with the topics. :-) Let me be a male pig, just this one time, and just list some of the movies that made me gasp (and some of them were also good movies overall):
Salma Hayey is a goddess! Desperado was a good movie, but she just blew me away! When I was studying, I got a postcard from her and made my brother's girlfriend write a faked message in Spanish on it, so it seemed it was from her (translated, it read something like: "I love you, cutie").
In the times we live in, it's a fact that a lot of people download music and movies from the web through P2P or BitTorrent. The music and movie industries naturally see this as a threat and try to stifle it, but it seems these attempts are in vain.
The idea is that companies, artists, actors and others should get paid for what they do, which is a fair assumption. The problem, though, is that the industry is stuck in old distributional chains where they had a lot more control. With the advent of Internet, however, things are bound to run out of control. My belief is that no matter how hard they try to legislate and to hunt people who fileshare down, the phenomenon will continue to exist, and also grow stronger in its rebelliousness against the "higher power".
"We've lost so-and-so much money"
The basic, let's be outright honest about this, crap is that companies lose so-and-so much money on people who have seen, for instance, a movie by downloading it instead of going to the cinema. Just because someone has watched a movie illegally doesn't mean that they otherwise would have paid to see it. Most people watch movies in a casual manner, and instead of having some kind of fake hopes that this would have been money in the bank for the company, just see the enormous marketing benefit of this!
If they like the movie, they will tell their friends and recommend it. Their friends, in turn, might watch it in the cinema or buy the DVD; they might also just download it. Either way, if they like it, they will spread the word, and so on. Never underestimate viral marketing!
Which road to take
To me it seems like there are two fundamental paths to choose from; either, try and hunt down and punish people who fileshare, or find a new angle and offer a product that supersedes the illegal alternatives and instead makes people addicted to the "real" thing. In many cases, it comes down to availability:
Is what I want available when I want it? If not, how can I get it?
That's the core mindset of the audience, so it's time to listen to them. People love using the Internet for accessing their favorite music and movies, but the services today aren't well-developed enough and/or are so ridiculously overpriced that, as an example, a movie download will cost the same as buying the DVD in a store, but without the packaging and actual DVD record. What makes you think people would pay the same money for less value? Really?
DRM is a joke. Really. Whenever a legally bought product, in any way, becomes harder to use than something that can be downloaded "for free", why would people pay? Throw away all your demands for restrictions, because they simply won't work. Let people share a movie or a song as many times as they want, through whatever medium they want.
Forget about proprietary solutions that limit the user to a certain computer platform or digital music (e.g. MP3) player. If, for any reason, the distribution channel forces the end user to use a product from a certain provider, you've lost. There will always be cracks, hacks and workarounds, so you have to live with it. Tough, but that's the reality; never think you can outsmart such a vast community of people who are very technically skilled. DRM of any kind is the road to failure.
People do want to do the right thing
Some people will never pay, and that's the way it is. A witch hunt will never make a difference, since their main goal is to get something for free, not the actual experience of what they're getting. However, I sincerely believe that a majority people want to go the legal route and pay for what they watch/listen to. Anyone, who is, say, 25+ of age, have grown up in a world where you actually had to buy what you wanted, in terms of records and movies. Kids who are teenagers now, and the coming generations, learn to download things from the Internet before they learn to pay. And they are really the gist of the problem.
If such a habit becomes a de facto standard for accessing any entertainment material, we will have to face a downward spiral with less and less income for companies producing music and movies. And then, at the end of the day, less quality content will be produced and distribution companies will go for the quick profit. Everyone loses.
What users want
Whenever a music record, or, more importantly, a movie is released/having its premiere, people want it. Immediately! The buzz is right then, and as with all hypes, you have to let it work for you instead of against. Instead of fighting vigorously to quench it, music and movie companies have to start providing what people want. My humble take is that, if not already, the situation is on its way overboard. Listen to opinions, and try to meet the mass market's need and desires, to able to outcompete illegal file sharing.
In the area of TV shows and movies, people don't want to wait for it to come to their country, or to wait another week for the next episode of their favorite series. We live in a on-demand world and if the audience wants to watch several episodes in a row, let them have it (given that it's already produced, of course).
When a movie (or TV show) premiers, make it instantly available as a download to all the world.
Make it available in a format so attractive that searching through P2P and/or BitTorrent sites for a good quality copy is a waste of time.
Reasonable pricing: maybe $0.50 for a song and $5 for a movie.
Alternatively, offer free ad-sponsored solutions, which will be a good complement to buying.
No DRM or any other lock-ins. Seriously.
General availability. Everything that's accessible through any other channel has to be available through the Internet as well.
A good example
Some TV companies in the US made their TV shows available, ad-sponsored, online the day after they were shown on TV, which is, in general, a great idea. The problem with this, though (except for the fact that they haven't been able to watch as the exact same time as the program), is, again, availability. Sure, US citizen could watch it, but what about the rest of the world? Sure, I understand the problematic situation that they can't make it available to all the world simultaneously, while also trying to sell it to international networks. But this is most likely something that has to be changed to be able to cater to the whole world at once.
So, the only good example I've seen so far of thinking in the right terms is Joost. It is ad-supported but otherwise completely free for the end user, who can choose to watch whatever he/she wants no matter the time (I've been beta-testing Joost for a while now, and will write a review about it in the future; stay tuned). However, Joost doesn't yet offer movies so there's a wide open field there to target.
And I think this solution is one of the ways there are to go: offer good content as easily available as possible, with a different financing plan than current alternatives have.
For the third year in a row now, I've watched the five movies nominated in the Best Motion Picture of the Year category for the Oscars before the ceremony, to predict the winner. I thought I'd share my opinions about them and my guess about which movie will win.
Clint Eastwood's track record in directing movies, especially as of lately, is definitely impressive. This movie is a depiction of the battle at Iwo Jim seen from an Japanese angle, and it is utterly refreshing to see something like that. The whole movie is in Japanese, there aren't (gratefully) any American hero stories etc. What it does show is just how horrible wars are and how it affects the regular people. Also, the balance between war scenes and flashbacks is delicate, and just perfectly balanced.
Babel has been hyped up a lot, but frankly, I wasn't that impressed. It's a decent movie, and perhaps I wasn't in the mood when I watched it, but I'm getting tired of these movies that come off being pretentious in their: "Oh, suffering! Embrace it, feel it!". Maybe that isn't even the intention of the director, maybe I'm lashing out at the people themselves hyping Babel, I don't know. It was ok, I guess.
It was really a surprise to me that this movie was nominated, and I was convinced that I would have to force myself through it. But on the contrary: the movie is great and especially the first 20 minutes are outstanding! After that, it kind of loses tempo/edge a little, but is still good. Some parts of the story actually remember me of National Lampoon's Vacation at its best.
This movie could've been so good, but it just wasn't. Sure, some people get all shivering with excitement speculating what the life might look like for the English royalties, but I just found it boring most of the time. Gotta say that Helen Mirren is very good in her role, though.
The beginning is fantastic, and the ambiance it conveys is just great! Great actors feature prominently, too; what about names like Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon and Alec Baldwin?! Overall, a good movie, but maybe I'm just a tiny bit disappointed in how it all turns out. Fantastic actors and great environments, though, so definitely a film worth seeing.
Best Foreign Language Film of the Year
While discussing nominated movies, I just have to mention two other movies in the Best Foreign Language Film of the Year. Both are very much worth watching, and I really recommend them:
A magical movie, or rather, a wonderful tale, with all kinds of fantastic ingredients! Great acting, well-balanced story, good effects. One of those movies showing a world and a place you just want to learn more and more about.
Taking place in Berlin before the fall of the Berlin wall, showing what the society was like for people not sharing the state's vision. It is a gripping tale of how an agent gets deeply interested and involved in some artists' life, when he's assigned to secretly survey them.
I should also mention Children of Men. It's a dystopia about a chaotic 2027 when women are no longer fertile and mankind is about to die out. Clive Owen and Michael Caine are fantastic and I just wished the movie had been twice as long, just to get more than a glimpse from the well-crafted world they display!
So, which movie will win?
I know everyone's betting for The Departed, and it is definitely due time for Martin Scorsese to win. However, I think Letters from Iwo Jima will really challenge it. If not any of those, to me, Little Miss Sunshine can win just because of its high level of being entertaining.
In the end, Eastwood has already gotten his Oscars, so my money is on Scorsese and The Departed. And don't worry, it's not a pity Oscar, but one for a job well done. If he gets the Oscar for directing, too? Maybe... :-)
I love movies, so this year I've carried on a tradition that I started last year: to watch all the five movies nominated for an Oscar in the category Best Motion Picture of the Year, so I know if the best one wins. However, I have to say that after seeing this year's five movies, I feel very reluctant to waste my time on something like this next year.
I'm writing this about 8 hours before the The 78th Annual Academy AwardsÃ¢â€žÂ¢ are starting, so please let me give you a rundown of the movies nominated and what I thought of them:
I take it most of you know what this movie is about, or maybe you've even seen it as well. The most common thing I heard or read about it before I saw it was:
It's that damn gay western
Just because of narrow-minded people like that, I sincerely wanted it to be good. Problem is, it isn't. It's just a mediocre movie that has gotten so much attention for the reason that it deals with such a topic in an open and non-judgmental way, which I encourage. The thing is, in my book, this isn't a reason to give it a lot of awards and attention. Like a friend said to me:
If it hadn't had its gay theme, no one would've watched it
Probably needless to say, but Philip Seymour Hoffman is, as he is in every movie he stars in, very good. I've never seen any tapes with Truman Capote to make the call if he's a dead ringer or not, but people tell me so. Unfortunately, otherwise this movie isn't that intriguing. It's ok, no more, no less. My tip, though, is that we will see an award go to Mr. Hoffman in the category Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role.
Without a doubt the best movie in this company, and one of last bear's best movies. Dealing with a lot of parallel intrigues, racism and violence in Los Angels, this one is a must-see. Really. See it now! I hope Matt Dillon wins in the Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role category.
This one is in black and white, nothing I have a problem with; on the contrary, it suits the plot and the feel of it. Dealing with the McCarthy hearings in the early 1950'sand how CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow and team made a stand and fought him. Could've been very good but is just ok.
My first thought when I saw that this movie got nominated was that Spielberg got a nomination as usual when making a movie about a tough topic. This movie ain't that bad, although it's a very sensitive subject and I can imagine that people knowing more about the actual events might oppose some things in Spielberg's interpretation. It is ok, though, and sometimes actually exciting.
Conclusively, I have to say that I can't really fathom why four out of five of the above mentioned movies have been nominated. With the exception of Crash, all the other movies are on the level "movie-I-might-watch-on-TV-late-at-night-if-I'm-too-tired-to-go-to-bed", motion pictures that should be straight to video. I'm fairly sure that Brokeback Mountain will win, which saddens me. Kudos to Ang Lee for being brave enough to make such a film, but definitely not the best movie last year.
If there's any justice and people actually dare voting for the best movie and not for what's the most politically correct thing for the moment in Hollywood, Crash will win.
Have you seen any of these movies? What's your take?
Updated Monday March 6th
Yes! Crash won Best Movie! I'm so happy to see that there's some justice! All winners can be found in IMDB's awards page.
Ok, maybe I'm trippin'-flippin'-smoking mushrooms here. Those of you who come here to solely read about web developing, and don't want to know a rat's ass about me or my personal opinions will probably be scared away. But hell, I'll try anyway.
Still with me? Good! Here's the deal: I love movies. I always have, I probably always will. So my idea here is to have very short reviews of movies on a part of this web site, with the possibility for you to comment on what you thought about it, if you want to recommend it to someone else and so on. And the point with this is definitely not about being pretentious, it's just about sharing movie experiences.
I think that you, my readers, are a very broad spectrum of interesting and cool people, so I really want to know about your takes on these movies. No registration needed, just express your opinion.
The movies reviewed so far are:
Yes, I know that the Star Wars saga, The Lord of the Rings trilogy and their likes aren't in that list. If you miss them, or want any other movie reviewed, just contact me through any of the means mentioned in my About page.
On the other hand, if you're only interested in movie reviews, you can check back any time at the movie page.
That's all for now. Please write at least one comment on one of the movies! :-)
PS. These first reviews are extremely short, probably since I was writing them all at the same time. In the future when I write more reviews (if anyone comments and appreciates these reviews, that is), they'll most likely get at least a little bit longer. DS.