Fan Forum
Remember Me?
Register

  Request a Forum   |     View New Forums

Closed Thread   Post New Thread
 
Forum Affiliates Tags Thread Tools
Old 08-12-2016, 01:49 AM
  #106
Master Fan

 
HipHopKingMike's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 18,806
The episode was OK but I wasn't too keen on it - there were much better episodes in S1, IMO. Good to see Matthew Perry in that episode.
Brandon was sweet but I actually liked the fact that they made his character become arrogant - it does happen but he was generally a good guy. Everyone has faults like Mr Perfect Womanizer himself.
Brandon and Andrea in S1 weren't stuck up but came from humble backgrounds. Kelly had a rich sexual history but every girl wants to be her, every guy wants to nail her. She was deemed as this rich, spoilt, bratty and very popular girl from HS. Funny enough though, I really liked Kelly this season and in S2 as well - she didn't get on my nerves at all in the first 2 seasons and could have potentially been my favorite female character on the show but stuff happens
__________________
Huge Fan of 50s,60s,70s,80s,90s,00s,10s, 20s R+B, HipHop, Soul, Funk, Reggae Dancehall, Grime, Drill, Freestyle, Disco, Dance and Motown music
HipHopKingMike is offline  
Old 09-30-2016, 08:03 PM
  #107
Fan Forum Hero

 
heyitsrachel's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 58,420
PP updated. Thanks!
heyitsrachel is offline  
Old 10-11-2016, 09:25 PM
  #108
Part-Time Fan
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 435
Season 1 is a mixed bag. I think it's the worst season of the first four "original gang" ones.

It's very interesting to watch the relationship set-ups in season 1 that ultimately went nowhere.

Brenda/Andrea - It's really obvious that, of any of the girls, Brenda was initially suppose to be Andrea's girlfriend. They spend a lot more time together in season 1, and the summer between the school years, than later. By the time you get to season 4 and Andrea gives Brenda the muffler as a going away present these two are totally strained and don't seem like friends at all.

Scott/Everyone - Self explanatory.

Andrea/Steve - It's obvious that their impromptu make out session was suppose to be seeds for a later exploration. One that unfortunately never came.

Brandon/Andrea - It's obvious that this was suppose to go fully romantic at some point. Even as a kid I remember a lot of people just assuming they'd get together. They had a pretty big following. I did read somewhere that the intention for season 4 was for them to finally go there, but Gabrielle's pregnancy shifted everything. Not sure how true that was.


Steve/Kelly - Few people seem to recall that they slept together again during season 1. Looking back, considering that there was no Kelly/Dylan or Kelly/Brandon during the first season, it seemed like Kelly and Steve were the logical conclusion. Not even that they'd be this great couple, but I do think there's more than enough to support the idea that the writers were open to reuniting them.
jaquen7 is offline  
Old 10-12-2016, 05:01 AM
  #109
Fan Forum Hero

 
yulan's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 65,586
Quote:
Season 1 is a mixed bag. I think it's the worst season of the first four "original gang" ones.
I don't know. I can never classify first 4 seasons by quality, but only by enjoyment, and I actually really enjoy S1. There is a fair number of filler episodes, but I somehow don't mind. I rewatched some stuff recently and it is actually better than I remember. Second half of the season is definitely better.

Quote:
It's very interesting to watch the relationship set-ups in season 1 that ultimately went nowhere.
I would also add Kelly/David and Donna/Steve to those you listed. I think they were totally hinting at Kelly/David as a potential couple ("popular girl and a nerd who adores her" recipe), and did not plan to make them step-brother and step-sister in S1. I also don't think they planned to pair up David and Donna in S1. Only when they decided to give Donna more space and time, they neutralized Kelly/David as a potential couple so he would be available for Donna. I even think they were given a step-sibling connection to make sure they were completely neutralized as a potential romance (also to integrate David more into the gang).

And I think they were hinting at Donna/Steve in Spring Dance, when they went there together. I guess it could have gone like - once Steve gets the hint Kelly's not into him, he hooks up with Kelly 2 (which Donna sort of was in S1). But that did not amount into much.

Quote:
Brenda/Andrea - It's really obvious that, of any of the girls, Brenda was initially suppose to be Andrea's girlfriend. They spend a lot more time together in season 1, and the summer between the school years, than later. By the time you get to season 4 and Andrea gives Brenda the muffler as a going away present these two are totally strained and don't seem like friends at all.
Yeah, they had some nice moments in S1, and I'm really sorry they did not develop better individual friendship because Shannen and Gabby were the best actresses on the show, iMO, and I really enjoy their scenes. It also made sense they would connect: they were not from Beverly Hills, they were not as rich as others, they were not blonde, they were good students, smart and interested in social issues. Kelly and Donna were really not at that point.

It is interesting that Brenda and Andrea had so many moments when they connected and one would think they became friends, yet whenever Brandon brought Andrea into conversation, Brenda was like "Andrea Zuckerman?!", like she was shocked Andrea would do something humane Then she would immediately add something nice about her, but it seemed as she was estranged from Andrea as in the beginning.

Quote:
Scott/Everyone - Self explanatory.
Well I think they did not try to connect him with anyone except David, and that was the problem. I also don't see how they would. I still don't understand purpose of his character, except to be David's reality check. Maybe in the beginning show was aiming at two different groups of teenagers, and David and Scott were like comedic duo aiming at younger teens. IDK. This way, it feels like David was already secondary or even tertiary character, and Scott was his sidekick. The sidekick of a second or tertiary character. Weird.

Quote:
Andrea/Steve - It's obvious that their impromptu make out session was suppose to be seeds for a later exploration. One that unfortunately never came.
You think they really aimed to explore them further romantically? I am more inclined to think it was just a filler/plot device to amuse us briefly in one episode. Otherwise they would have given us more hints, at least that season But fandom will regret missed opportunity forever, because they would have have been amazing.
__________________


Brenda stands alone. Because she can.
Icon by oth. fan

Last edited by yulan; 10-12-2016 at 09:44 AM
yulan is offline  
Old 10-12-2016, 01:39 PM
  #110
Part-Time Fan
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by yulan (View Post)
I don't know. I can never classify first 4 seasons by quality, but only by enjoyment, and I actually really enjoy S1. There is a fair number of filler episodes, but I somehow don't mind. I rewatched some stuff recently and it is actually better than I remember. Second half of the season is definitely better.
This is exactly how I feel about season 1. I do enjoy season 1, I just don't think it's as consistent as 2-4.


Quote:
Originally Posted by yulan (View Post)
It is interesting that Brenda and Andrea had so many moments when they connected and one would think they became friends, yet whenever Brandon brought Andrea into conversation, Brenda was like "Andrea Zuckerman?!", like she was shocked Andrea would do something humane Then she would immediately add something nice about her, but it seemed as she was estranged from Andrea as in the beginning.
Yes, that was odd. I really think the writers just dropped the ball with Andrea/Brenda. But, then again, to be fair, Shannen and Garbielle did have better chemistry with others over each other. But there was potential there for a bit of depth because their adversarial story over the drama teacher really was one of the better acted stories of the early seasons.


Quote:
Originally Posted by yulan (View Post)
Well I think they did not try to connect him with anyone except David, and that was the problem. I also don't see how they would. I still don't understand purpose of his character, except to be David's reality check. Maybe in the beginning show was aiming at two different groups of teenagers, and David and Scott were like comedic duo aiming at younger teens. IDK. This way, it feels like David was already secondary or even tertiary character, and Scott was his sidekick. The sidekick of a second or tertiary character. Weird.
Originally Scott and David were two grades behind the others. I wonder if, even then, Aaron was planting seeds just in case they wanted to keep the focus high school related. Like he would do 2 seasons later with the influx of 9th graders who were suppose to be spun off.


Quote:
Originally Posted by yulan (View Post)
You think they really aimed to explore them further romantically? I am more inclined to think it was just a filler/plot device to amuse us briefly in one episode. Otherwise they would have given us more hints, at least that season But fandom will regret missed opportunity forever, because they would have have been amazing.
I do, looking back. I actually think Steve/Andrea would probably have definitely ended up together if she'd stayed. The actors were close in age, had chemistry and Steve was developed in the direction of Andrea types. I think the season 1 episode was a seed that they COULD water if they wanted to.
jaquen7 is offline  
Old 11-19-2016, 11:02 PM
  #111
Fan Forum Hero

 
heyitsrachel's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 58,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaquen7 (View Post)
Originally Scott and David were two grades behind the others. I wonder if, even then, Aaron was planting seeds just in case they wanted to keep the focus high school related. Like he would do 2 seasons later with the influx of 9th graders who were suppose to be spun off.
I didn't know that it was originally two years. But I'm glad they only did one year since it would be really difficult for David to graduate with everyone if he was 2 years behind.

But the 2 years behind thing does make sense since in the pilot, Brenda tells Jason that she's a junior (instead of a sophomore).

The spinoff possibly was definitely an idea with Herbert, Sue, and Nikki. That never happend though.
heyitsrachel is offline  
Old 12-27-2016, 12:06 PM
  #112
Elite Fan

 
playgroundDiaries's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 29,908
Quote:
I forgot Roger Azarian (Matthew Perry's character) ended up in psychiatric hospital
Yeah, that ending does sometimes get forgotten. Perhaps this was the show pulling out the "so damn serious" big guns, unsure of whether they'd be renewed for many more episodes. It is critical that they acknowledged some things are beyond the scope of Jim and Cindy's advice, lol.
Quote:
In a way, it seemed as a darker version of Dylan's relation with his father, and it was sort of referenced that way.
I forgot why Roger wanted to kill his dad ...
Quote:
I think that relation to sex was much healthier than all soul searching and self-victimization from following seasons.
You mean for Kelly, or the show's portrayal of sex in general after S1? I agree with your sum up of Kelly's relation to sex that season and enjoyed it for what it was. I think they needed to develop the characters more before allowing them to get more reflective and personal about it, which I also welcomed.

I liked Brandon's journey from naive corny jokester to more arrogant and scorned dudebro later. The path kind of makes sense. But yeah, soft and sweet Brandon is one of the best parts of S1.

Quote:
It's very interesting to watch the relationship set-ups in season 1 that ultimately went nowhere.

Brenda/Andrea - It's really obvious that, of any of the girls, Brenda was initially suppose to be Andrea's girlfriend.

Andrea/Steve - It's obvious that their impromptu make out session was suppose to be seeds for a later exploration. One that unfortunately never came.
I can see that. It makes sense they'd want to go for that, with Andrea being a good friend (and one of the first) of Brenda's brother. Steve/Andrea had the whole opposites attract vibe and would be a good bridge between the different social circles in the early group.

Quote:
I also don't think they planned to pair up David and Donna in S1. Only when they decided to give Donna more space and time, they neutralized Kelly/David as a potential couple so he would be available for Donna. I even think they were given a step-sibling connection to make sure they were completely neutralized as a potential romance (also to integrate David more into the gang).
And this. Yeah, there's no way Donna/David was planned in S1. They're even shockingly dismissive of one another in retrospect. I like the term "neutralize" here. It's kind of like "neuturing", lol.

Quote:
Maybe in the beginning show was aiming at two different groups of teenagers, and David and Scott were like comedic duo aiming at younger teens. IDK.
I think at that point he was primarily a vehicle by which the audience could 'spy' on this new WBH landscape from an outsider's awe-struck perspective.
__________________
✗ Mel
playgroundDiaries is offline  
Old 12-28-2016, 04:11 AM
  #113
Fan Forum Hero

 
yulan's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 65,586
Quote:
It is critical that they acknowledged some things are beyond the scope of Jim and Cindy's advice, lol.
Right It was about time.

Quote:
I forgot why Roger wanted to kill his dad ...
Because he felt like his dad was putting too much pressure on him on the one hand, and not giving him enough love on the other. And he was swallowed by his image. Unlike Jack's, it was a positive image, sort of, because his father was greatly successful, supposedly legally.

Quote:
You mean for Kelly, or the show's portrayal of sex in general after S1? I agree with your sum up of Kelly's relation to sex that season and enjoyed it for what it was. I think they needed to develop the characters more before allowing them to get more reflective and personal about it, which I also welcomed.
I meant Kelly. Well, I would totally reverse the process of her evolution in that sense. The way we saw her in the beginning, as a girl who had troublesome sexual experiences, but learned to overcome them, enjoy sex and be relaxed about it - that is what I would like to see as a result of personal work on herself. To change what she did not like, but to accept herself for everything she was. That already seemed as a result of a certain therapy actually, and I think she said she took some in Meeting Mr. Pony, although she did not say why exactly. What she missed, in my opinion, was more openness about things she was not happy about, and learning how not to blame herself for certain things (Ross Weber or relation with her father). And I really liked how relation with her father was developed by the end of S3.

But I really had a problem with the way she reflected on her sexual past from S3 onwards. She got into such an intense self-loathing, and she never fully processed it as a self-loathing also, but into projection of everything she hated about herself on the other women (Valerie was a prime example). She hated her previous self so much, and never made a peace with it. The closer she was to the lead female role, the more show got into whitewashing of her past, and blaming everyone around for things about Kelly which could not be a good example for the kids watching the show. That leads me back to your first question - no, show never actually had a relaxed attitude about sex, and Kelly was one of the central figures in the manifestation of it. Leading ladies had to be prude in that sense. Donna stayed eternal virgin (ok, not literally ), Brenda had to do a lot of psychological preparation for first sex, and Kelly had to get into rigid routine of having sex strictly with people she loved. The only way for her to have sex with someone she did not love was to be raped.

As Charles Rosin said, "We had this wonderful character named Brenda Walsh who was a proof that a girl could have sex without being a ****". According to the moral of the show, even more, girl had to be sure that THE GUY is in love with her so she could have sex with him and not be considered a ****. That was a premise in the beginning, and later it changed, but only because characters became adults. While Kelly was Brenda's sidekick, she served exactly as this opposite example - girl who has sex with someone for whom she is not exactly sure she's in love with, and who definitely does not love her, automatically becomes a ****. I think morale of her story was - girls, be careful of who you have first time with, because that will define you forever. If it's a guy who does not truly love you, it can only be a disaster. Look at Kelly, she did not do it right. Look at Brenda (lead character, wink wink), she did it right.

Quote:
I liked Brandon's journey from naive corny jokester to more arrogant and scorned dudebro later. The path kind of makes sense.
Nooo, but come on, guys, he became insufferable I do agree that the journey makes sense, but I also think, in terms of logic and my personal preferences , that cocky phase should have been temporary. Also, Brandon seemed to lose all of his insecurities, and that was not logical at all. The only post-S3 insecurity I can think of was about Kelly not loving him, from the end of S5 onwards.

Quote:
Steve/Andrea had the whole opposites attract vibe and would be a good bridge between the different social circles in the early group.
Hm, yes, but there was also no need for that bridging. Steve could helped Andrea to get closer to Kelly and Donna, but she did that via Brenda and Brandon. Later she also became closer with Dylan. And Andrea could have helped Steve to become closer with... hm, no one.

Quote:
I think at that point he was primarily a vehicle by which the audience could 'spy' on this new WBH landscape from an outsider's awe-struck perspective.
But we already had Walshes for that. I guess this was a comical version of the spying though (and also literal spying), while the Walshes were handling serious issues.
__________________


Brenda stands alone. Because she can.
Icon by oth. fan
yulan is offline  
Old 12-29-2016, 09:53 AM
  #114
Elite Fan

 
playgroundDiaries's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 29,908
Quote:
Nooo, but come on, guys, he became insufferable
It's just really hard for me to find any of the original cast insufferable. I do wish he had kept more insecurities. They seemed to dissipate with his role as a politician, which should have given him more. Actually, maybe I'm misjudging and he did have such inner conflicts but projected more arrogance at the same time to counterbalance them. It's really funny to consider Brandon's solo or main insecurity being how much Kelly does or does not love him in later years, given how I know you feel about both of the characters' trajectories. S8 must have been a blast.

This ancient video rant re: S1 Brandon still cracks me up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giqGbajYdQQ I can't identify with it. Except the 1x05 remark.

Quote:
Hm, yes, but there was also no need for that bridging. Steve could helped Andrea to get closer to Kelly and Donna, but she did that via Brenda and Brandon.
Yes, they went the alternative route, so S/A wasn't necessary.

Quote:
But we already had Walshes for that. I guess this was a comical version of the spying though (and also literal spying), while the Walshes were handling serious issues.
Exactly. We needed someone whose outlook could be over-the-moon (David's view of Kelly and Steve) while the twin protagonists broke ground in discovering what's real.

Quote:
The way we saw her in the beginning, as a girl who had troublesome sexual experiences, but learned to overcome them, enjoy sex and be relaxed about it - that is what I would like to see as a result of personal work on herself. To change what she did not like, but to accept herself for everything she was.
Me too. But did we really see that whole trajectory reach fruition in S1 (or pre-series)? I would say not. I know how she presented herself and I feel like your characterization of S1 and the show's portrayal of sex and underlying messages for the audience is spot-on. Had we only gotten S1, I'd wholly share your impression of Kelly's inner world.

But then came S2, which cast some new shadows on S1. So busy with the love-hate dance with Steve, we didn't get to see Kelly in sexual/romantic entanglements S1 that began anew or required any kind of assertiveness to protect herself or could demonstrate her healthy attitude towards relationships and sex. What we got was the alarming confession of date rape to build on "Perfect Mom" in explaining the occasional dichotomy between public and private impressions of her life/how she's feeling, and two years of virtual celibacy from a girl who's 'boy crazy' -- punctuated by events like in S2's "Summer Storm", where she prematurely and quite embarrassingly strips naked for Kyle because she doesn't know what to expect from a guy who is not out to primarily use her for sex, or at least do so before getting to know her. She was clearly still messed up from her time with boys pre-series.
Quote:
But I really had a problem with the way she reflected on her sexual past from S3 onwards. She got into such an intense self-loathing
This starts from at least S2's "Everybody's Talkin' About It" onward, with the touching conversation between her and Andrea. And not helped at all by the Halloween episode.

Quote:
and she never fully processed it as a self-loathing also, but into projection of everything she hated about herself on the other women (Valerie was a prime example).
You're right, it feels like she did this. It was a long process. Hell, she even technically throws a chair at Steve in S7, saying she is "still getting over it" (her past). Meanwhile, I think she did a lot of work in S3-S5 to be okay with herself.

Quote:
What she missed, in my opinion, was more openness about things she was not happy about, and learning how not to blame herself for certain things (Ross Weber or relation with her father).
Yup.

Quote:
and Kelly had to get into rigid routine of having sex strictly with people she loved. The only way for her to have sex with someone she did not love was to be raped. […] According to the moral of the show, even more, girl had to be sure that THE GUY is in love with her so she could have sex with him and not be considered a ****. […] I think morale of her story was - girls, be careful of who you have first time with, because that will define you forever. If it's a guy who does not truly love you, it can only be a disaster.
SUCH an interesting assertion, which I totally agree that they pushed, and very successfully too.
__________________
✗ Mel

Last edited by playgroundDiaries; 12-29-2016 at 10:06 AM
playgroundDiaries is offline  
Old 12-30-2016, 01:53 AM
  #115
Fan Forum Hero

 
yulan's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 65,586
Quote:
It's just really hard for me to find any of the original cast insufferable.
For me, everyone was so much easier to deal with prior to S5. When the show took new direction that season, they really lost me as a fan.

Quote:
I do wish he had kept more insecurities. They seemed to dissipate with his role as a politician, which should have given him more. Actually, maybe I'm misjudging and he did have such inner conflicts but projected more arrogance at the same time to counterbalance them.
That would make sense. But damn, it was the worst way to deal with insecurities, and something that was never really pointed out. I guess, because we were not supposed to perceive it as arrogance, but self-confidence of a person who must be right.

I mean, he had a lot of reasons to be insecure. Somebody once called him "a short guy with the Napoleon complex"


Quote:
This ancient video rant re: S1 Brandon still cracks me up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giqGbajYdQQ I can't identify with it. Except the 1x05 remark.
Quote:
Had we only gotten S1, I'd wholly share your impression of Kelly's inner world.

But then came S2, which cast some new shadows on S1.
Uf. I always have a problem to see material from earlier seasons in the light of later, because there is a lot of rewriting and new directions, and I don't have a feeling such developments/retroactive clarifications were initially planned/written into material from previous seasons, but were just added afterwards. If they had been planted into earlier seasons, fine, but a lot of was just an afterthought, and not a continuous, carefully planned writing. But anyway, when it comes to Kelly, I don't see much difference between S1 and S2, so S1 does not seem to me different in the light of S2. I agree that the whole trajectory did not reach the fruition in S1, otherwise I would have not mentioned she had issues to work on. But I am not sure the trajectory ever reached higher point than that, honestly. Maybe a bit in S2 (but then again, she was in a period of sexual abstinence) and S4 (except that a lot of stuff surrounding her sexual past was confusing for me, at best).

I am not sure I see Halloween as a vehicle to propel Kelly's self-loathing. She took a lot of blame for sexual assault on herself, but I think Brenda, Donna, Dylan and Steve did a good job persuading and explaining to her (and audience) why it was not. They especially emphasized an importance of saying "no". I guess that is why her experience with Ross Weber was never called a date rape (at least I think it was not), not even in later seasons when Kelly was completely victimized - it was never mentioned that she said no or did not really want to sleep with him. But I don't want to venture there at the moment. I guess that Halloween episode was supposed to be a big milestone for Kelly, showing us that she "learned something" - not just how to say no, but in general not to throw herself at men, because she kept rejecting them a whole episode, and Brenda told her she was proud of her for that. It was a counterpoint to Summer Storm.

Quote:
This starts from at least S2's "Everybody's Talkin' About It" onward, with the touching conversation between her and Andrea.
Aha, I did not see it that way. I mean, she said she could never know whether the guys liked her for herself or because she would be easy to have sex with. But it seemed to me at that point that she knew that she deserved better (unlike in S3, "I'm just a stupid blonde bitch" period). That's why she also fought a whole S2 to get a decent date, if not a relationship. She was aware how people perceived her - maybe she even exaggerated it a bit - but when she told that story to Andrea again, it seemed to me that she pointed out at Weber as the main culprit for her reputation, not herself. That was a nice change. It was a warning to Andrea to carefully choose a moment and person for her first time, and a lot of shame for what her first time turned out to be like, but she did not meekly accept that also. She struggled for better - better reputation, better guy, better feeling about herself.

I think Steve's role in developing healthier attitude toward sex and relationship is quite underrated, but then again, we did not see their relationship, so it is hard to say. But it seems to me, given how long they were in a relationship, that she got confidence somebody might perceive her as more than one night stand. And if not before, she definitely enjoyed sex with him.

Quote:
SUCH an interesting assertion, which I totally agree that they pushed, and very successfully too.
Yeah, there was a lot of moralization going on. They sort of gave up on it with Andrea, but that was when the characters entered college. I did not care about it first time I watched, but I rewatched her first time recently and I was like - wow, this is well done. She picked a guy she liked and who liked her, they were not deeply in love, so what. It was all fine. No big reminiscences and reflections. Finally.
__________________


Brenda stands alone. Because she can.
Icon by oth. fan

Last edited by yulan; 12-30-2016 at 03:56 AM
yulan is offline  
Old 06-21-2017, 07:27 PM
  #116
Obsessed Fan

 
loveslullaby's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,587
This is one my least fave seasons to re-watch tbh. A lot of the early eps bore me a bit. The only one's off the top of my head that I enjoy as a whole are "A Fling In Palm Springs", "Isn't It Romantic", and "Spring Dance".

Quote:
I think that relation to sex was much healthier than all soul searching and self-victimization from following seasons. I liked it way better.
S1 Kelly was so fun. I wish they could've evolved her without making her such a buzzkill or Debbie Downer a lot of the time.

Last edited by loveslullaby; 06-23-2017 at 05:38 PM
loveslullaby is offline  
Old 06-23-2017, 06:00 AM
  #117
Fan Forum Hero

 
heyitsrachel's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 58,420
I enjoyed s1 as an intro season. Overall, I enjoyed it. I do prefer the other seasons more because they get in more of the couple issues but it's also nice to have a season without much couple triangle issues.
heyitsrachel is offline  
Old 07-03-2017, 07:15 PM
  #118
Dedicated Fan
 
Gynge's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 757
Gynge is offline  
Old 07-03-2017, 09:38 PM
  #119
Fan Forum Hero

 
heyitsrachel's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 58,420
That's a great collage!
heyitsrachel is offline  
Old 07-04-2017, 07:17 AM
  #120
Master Fan

 
HipHopKingMike's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 18,806
That is good
__________________
Huge Fan of 50s,60s,70s,80s,90s,00s,10s, 20s R+B, HipHop, Soul, Funk, Reggae Dancehall, Grime, Drill, Freestyle, Disco, Dance and Motown music
HipHopKingMike is offline  
Fan Forum  |  Contact Us  |  Fan Forum on Twitter  |  Fan Forum on Facebook  |  Archive  |  Top

Powered by vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2024.

Copyright © 1998-2024, Fan Forum.