POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Moderators: Annie, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne, Brad D

In your opinion, what is the nature of Audrey’s situation in Part 12?

Poll ended at Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:37 am

She is in the “real” world of Twin Peaks.
57
38%
She is in a coma, and the scene takes place in her head.
29
19%
She is not in a coma, but she is dreaming.
2
1%
She is not in a coma or dreaming, but experiencing a psychological delusion.
40
26%
She is trapped in the Black Lodge.
7
5%
Audrey and Charlie are acting in or rehearsing for a movie or play (not Twin Peaks)
5
3%
Other (please explain in thread)
12
8%
 
Total votes: 152
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby sylvia_north » Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:45 am

whoisalhedges wrote:these multiverse/parallel theories that so many fans poo-poo as too sci-fi are precisely the ones that - in my understanding - are WAY more "realistic" than the boilerplate "eternal struggle of good vs. evil" stuff. :lol:


Right, especially when Martha Nochimson talked to Lynch at length over years about it. These are Lynch's ideas, Vedic science and quantum physics as he explains it. ** Lynch isn't a physicist either, it's really just an instinctive understanding that makes a hell of a lot of sense.

The good/evil stuff is the schlock of stock sci-fi, limiting Newtonian in-a-box physics like the mental hospital/coma is the stuff of soaps . I'm balls deep in The Hidden Reality by Brian Green. That it fits with the Upanishads so nicely - no wonder DL is so obsessed with the unified field as the basis for everything in cosmic existence, including his storytelling. I take back everything negative I said about TR. He's hitting us with everything he couldn't in the 1990's and really refined his philosophy.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby whoisalhedges » Mon Aug 28, 2017 4:14 am

I'm really thinking the very next book I need to read is Swerves.
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby Novalis » Mon Aug 28, 2017 5:23 am

Dreamy Audrey wrote:The two men at the Roadhouse were credited as "Richard Bucher - Man Hit with Bottle" and "Scott Cameron - Throwing Man", so it wasn't Bobby or anyone else we know. However, I thought the attacker called the other man "Barney" (does anyone have subtitles for the episode and can confirm this?). In Part 1, Marjorie Green said the manager of the house where Ruth Davenport lived was called Barney and she said about him "Barney's not here. He's a funny one, that Barney. He's in the hospital, not the regular hospital." After the other nuthouse references, it's possible that Audrey is really in a mental institution with all those mentioned characters.


I thought he said Barney too. Well-spotted on where that name has cropped up before, I'd forgotten what the forgetful woman next to Ruth's had said to the police. I like the idea that the booth conversations in the roadhouse and all the names mentioned are dream / hallucination sequences that integrate people she's in hospital with or conversations she's overheard; it makes some sense of all the non sequiturs, animals, and bizarre talk -- not to mention the way James' performance is so at odds with all the other acts, strangely welcomed and over-rated (but why would Audrey dream it this way?). I'm kinda scared that won't be the solution though. I'm afraid it will be more complicated, and that I've slipped up when it comes to catching what Lynch and Frost are up to.

I hate to admit this, but I don't understand this situation at all.

sylvia_north wrote:
whoisalhedges wrote:these multiverse/parallel theories that so many fans poo-poo as too sci-fi are precisely the ones that - in my understanding - are WAY more "realistic" than the boilerplate "eternal struggle of good vs. evil" stuff. :lol:


Right, especially when Martha Nochimson talked to Lynch at length over years about it. These are Lynch's ideas, Vedic science and quantum physics as he explains it. ** Lynch isn't a physicist either, it's really just an instinctive understanding that makes a hell of a lot of sense.

The good/evil stuff is the schlock of stock sci-fi, limiting Newtonian in-a-box physics like the mental hospital/coma is the stuff of soaps . I'm balls deep in The Hidden Reality by Brian Green. That it fits with the Upanishads so nicely - no wonder DL is so obsessed with the unified field as the basis for everything in cosmic existence, including his storytelling. I take back everything negative I said about TR. He's hitting us with everything he couldn't in the 1990's and really refined his philosophy.



I've started reading Swerves and understand so far the idea of a central, unified consciousness that people somehow have to dig down to in order to connect with each other and with the whole. I get that it is composed largely of love, or universal compassion. All this jars with my own worldview (I was a lot more into all this spiritual stuff in the 1990s, now I consider myself a materialist) but I can entertain it. I feel a resistance towards it as something presupposed by an understanding of Twin Peaks. I'm happier and more comfortable with the Gothic angle: the blue rose, doppelgangers, doubles and the Freudian unheimlich. All the Vedic stuff however feels like a burden placed on me, like some kind of required reading that the rebellious spirit in me wants to just skip and say 'nah--it can't be that religious/preachy/didactic/programmatic'. I'm always on the brink of looking into it, but can't help feeling it is something you either buy into wholesale or leave alone. I don't particularly want either; insofar as I can relate to it, I want to have it as a corpus or body of knowledge at my disposal, not to be subject to it, like an ideology. At best I'd like to understand where Lynch is coming from, but I don't particularly want to go there with him.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
adl345
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 12:43 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby adl345 » Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:13 am

Novalis wrote:
Dreamy Audrey wrote:The two men at the Roadhouse were credited as "Richard Bucher - Man Hit with Bottle" and "Scott Cameron - Throwing Man", so it wasn't Bobby or anyone else we know. However, I thought the attacker called the other man "Barney" (does anyone have subtitles for the episode and can confirm this?). In Part 1, Marjorie Green said the manager of the house where Ruth Davenport lived was called Barney and she said about him "Barney's not here. He's a funny one, that Barney. He's in the hospital, not the regular hospital." After the other nuthouse references, it's possible that Audrey is really in a mental institution with all those mentioned characters.


I thought he said Barney too. Well-spotted on where that name has cropped up before, I'd forgotten what the forgetful woman next to Ruth's had said to the police. I like the idea that the booth conversations in the roadhouse and all the names mentioned are dream / hallucination sequences that integrate people she's in hospital with or conversations she's overheard; it makes some sense of all the non sequiturs, animals, and bizarre talk -- not to mention the way James' performance is so at odds with all the other acts, strangely welcomed and over-rated (but why would Audrey dream it this way?). I'm kinda scared that won't be the solution though. I'm afraid it will be more complicated, and that I've slipped up when it comes to catching what Lynch and Frost are up to.

I hate to admit this, but I don't understand this situation at all.

That's where I'm at too. I'm trying to come with some aesthetic or dramatic metric that can be used to separate out the Road House scenes that clearly took place in reality (Shelly and her friends in Part 2, Richard's introduction, James's scenes, the sweeping scene) from all the other much more random scenes and I'm coming up empty. It's notable that the fight scene with James and Green Glove Guy didn't have a band and was instead just playing a song over the speakers (same with the sweeping scene), but the scenes with Shelly & Richard did have bands.
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1820
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby Audrey Horne » Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:44 am

amazing theories- wrapping my puny brain around it.

*and sorry about thinking Vedder was singing "Diane" when he was singing "Sand."
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby sylvia_north » Mon Aug 28, 2017 7:26 am

adl345 wrote:
Novalis wrote:I like the idea that the booth conversations in the roadhouse and all the names mentioned are dream / hallucination sequences that integrate people she's in hospital with or conversations she's overheard; it makes some sense of all the non sequiturs, animals, and bizarre talk -- not to mention the way James' performance is so at odds with all the other acts, strangely welcomed and over-rated (but why would Audrey dream it this way?). I'm kinda scared that won't be the solution though. I'm afraid it will be more complicated, and that I've slipped up when it comes to catching what Lynch and Frost are up to.

I hate to admit this, but I don't understand this situation at all.

That's where I'm at too. I'm trying to come with some aesthetic or dramatic metric that can be used to separate out the Road House scenes that clearly took place in reality (Shelly and her friends in Part 2, Richard's introduction, James's scenes, the sweeping scene) from all the other much more random scenes and I'm coming up empty. It's notable that the fight scene with James and Green Glove Guy didn't have a band and was instead just playing a song over the speakers (same with the sweeping scene), but the scenes with Shelly & Richard did have bands.


Yeah, it's a threshold place that exists in reality. Enchanted, I guess. Like it was in episode 14. The Bardo moment = liberation, you can be dead or alive. The experience can shatter you into nonexistence or change your life for the better. Talking about Club Silencio and no hay banda, this threshold place shows "the world is a horror show of emptiness- an attitude in keeping with the fear that lies at the heart of some perspectives of quantum mechanics and also at the heart of the cultural nihilism of those who have seen that social systems are relative in form" (nochimson.) The people are all real in that we all participate in the illusion of reality, of stretching and vibrating and overlapping dynamic disappearing and appearing universes.

Also it's a bar we feel safe in, but it conceals the unknown - Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Remember that Annie mentions Heisenberg at the RR before the weirdness with the coffee cup falling and dripping? This scene is like what happens to Dan at Winkie's, which might only be a hostile deadly place for him. His psychiatrist is fine. So everyone's reality is their own, full of individual illusions, people and events. And Winkie's, like the RR, is a standardized comforting place. Like Lynch's own Bob's Big Boy.. but is anything that solid?

Instead of no recording, at Roadhouse we have famous recording artists- this is the shallow world of the marketplace and illusions of solidity. "The essence of how the marketplace works through top down imposition of illusory form onto organic life, is a negative event. It is constituted of what is not possible and who is not there." It's supposed to break illusions for the audience to have industry rock stars in Twin Peaks, an industry show that makes us question reality. Rebeckah Del Rio, who doubly signifies unreality in this capacity as a figure from Mulholland Dr, appearing supports the Roadhouse = Club Silencio idea.

Hay una banda but rly no hay banda. It's real, but reality is an illusion at the quantum level.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby Novalis » Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:24 am

sylvia_north wrote:
adl345 wrote:
Novalis wrote:I like the idea that the booth conversations in the roadhouse and all the names mentioned are dream / hallucination sequences that integrate people she's in hospital with or conversations she's overheard; it makes some sense of all the non sequiturs, animals, and bizarre talk -- not to mention the way James' performance is so at odds with all the other acts, strangely welcomed and over-rated (but why would Audrey dream it this way?). I'm kinda scared that won't be the solution though. I'm afraid it will be more complicated, and that I've slipped up when it comes to catching what Lynch and Frost are up to.

I hate to admit this, but I don't understand this situation at all.

That's where I'm at too. I'm trying to come with some aesthetic or dramatic metric that can be used to separate out the Road House scenes that clearly took place in reality (Shelly and her friends in Part 2, Richard's introduction, James's scenes, the sweeping scene) from all the other much more random scenes and I'm coming up empty. It's notable that the fight scene with James and Green Glove Guy didn't have a band and was instead just playing a song over the speakers (same with the sweeping scene), but the scenes with Shelly & Richard did have bands.


Yeah, it's a threshold place that exists in reality. Enchanted, I guess. Like it was in episode 14. The Bardo moment = liberation, you can be dead or alive. The experience can shatter you into nonexistence or change your life for the better. Talking about Club Silencio and no hay banda, this threshold place shows "the world is a horror show of emptiness- an attitude in keeping with the fear that lies at the heart of some perspectives of quantum mechanics and also at the heart of the cultural nihilism of those who have seen that social systems are relative in form" (nochimson.) The people are all real in that we all participate in the illusion of reality, of stretching and vibrating and overlapping dynamic disappearing and appearing universes.

Also it's a bar we feel safe in, but it conceals the unknown - Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Remember that Annie mentions Heisenberg at the RR before the weirdness with the coffee cup falling and dripping? This scene is like what happens to Dan at Winkie's, which might only be a hostile deadly place for him. His psychiatrist is fine. So everyone's reality is their own, full of individual illusions, people and events. And Winkie's, like the RR, is a standardized comforting place. Like Lynch's own Bob's Big Boy.. but is anything that solid?

Instead of no recording, at Roadhouse we have famous recording artists- this is the shallow world of the marketplace and illusions of solidity. "The essence of how the marketplace works through top down imposition of illusory form onto organic life, is a negative event. It is constituted of what is not possible and who is not there." It's supposed to break illusions for the audience to have industry rock stars in Twin Peaks, an industry show that makes us question reality. Rebeckah Del Rio, who doubly signifies unreality in this capacity as a figure from Mulholland Dr, appearing supports the Roadhouse = Club Silencio idea.

Hay una banda but rly no hay banda. It's real, but reality is an illusion at the quantum level.


It's strange but if this kind of realisation has been the intent then it looks like Lynch has been playing the long game. Although I'm aware Nochimson divides his work into two, and sees only his latest work as evidencing this kind of radical indeterminacy-plus-effectively-real-unified-consciousness, it seems to me that at least as far back as FWWM Lynch was playing around with thoughts of what matter is for this level. I'm thinking for example of the excised lines from the FWWM script, particularly Mrs. Tremonds:

Code: Select all

            FIRST WOODSMAN
            (subtitled)
         We have descended from pure air.

           MAN FROM ANOTHER PLACE
            (subtitled)
         Going up and down.  Intercourse between
         the two worlds.

                BOB
            (subtitled)
         Light of new discoveries.

                MRS. TREMOND
            (subtitled)
         Why not be composed of materials and
         combinations of atoms?

           MRS. TREMOND'S GRANDSON
            (subtitled)
         This is no accident.

           MAN FROM ANOTHER PLACE
            (subtitled)
         This is a formica table.  Green is its
         color.

   He touches the table.

               FIRST WOODSMAN
            (subtitled)
         Our world.

           MAN FROM ANOTHER PLACE
            (subtitled)
         With chrome.  Any everything will
         proceed cyclically.

               SECOND WOODSMAN
            (subtitled)
         Boneless.

               MIKE
            (subtitled)
         Yes, find the middle place.

   Bob begins to scream with anger.

                BOB
            (subtitled)
         I HAVE THE FURY OF MY OWN MOMENTUM.

              TREMOND'S GRANDSON
            (subtitled)
         Fell a victim.


'Why not be composed of materials and combinations of atoms?' seems to be like a pre-ontological question, as if it were entirely a matter of consciousness what form being might take for these folks. So it's as if they pre-exist in this pre-ontological domain (outside language, law and symbol and all the rest of the 'illusory' marketplace stuff) but are in a position of power with respect to how they might come to exist within it. While to me this is so much like Early (German) Romanticism's obsession with the infinite power of the author/dreamer to create, but having created always retaining a link to that potential and being able to rub out and redo things so that nothing is ever final or complete or reified (which is where Wilson's ideas of Lynch's Transcendental Irony are all ultimately sourced), from a quantum perspective I guess it represents the co-existence of every possibility: everything happens, on its own illusory level. Which particular thread we follow it will always be partial; the creative impulse is the thing, not the particular story. In both accounts there is the same degree of detachment from the particular. It doesn't really matter what happens or appears to happen, the important thing is that something is happening, and this seems to be where our attention is being directed by Lynch. Something is happening, and it happens not necessarily because of the will of some creator figure, but because it is woven out of the pure possibility that is inherent in the nothingness of existence. I can kinda grasp this metaphysics of potentiality because I read a lot of ontology texts, not least Aristotle's Metaphysics in the past. What jars with me is the Vedic reading, because I don't understand it and can't follow its contradictions. It's like having to suspend the difference between the real and the unreal and deal with this third place which is both. I'm used to this contradiction on a different level, for example, when dealing with things like questions of national borders, financialised economies or biological ideas of race, where things which the physical science has no hard determining boundaries or determinations for nonetheless exist absolutely in the way that human communities tend to perform and enforce them, making them wirklichkeit (effectively real). They take on reality because of 'social objectivity', that is, because they are mass-performed, despite being ungrounded in any phenomena of natural science. The whole of structural anthropology, from the study of human institutions to Hegelian ideas of externalisation and the ethical, relies on that one insight: historically, humans weave stories out of thin air and then perform them as if they were ahistorical givens. We organise our experience in line with certain parameters that vary from epoch to epoch and culture to culture: there's no tablet of stone telling us what the baseline experience should be, so together we work it out -- and thus societies exist. All this is well-rehearsed and understood by lots of people. What I can't fathom is some kind of crucial difference in this Nochimson-Lynch conversation, that she keeps referring to, which is that Lynch isn't talking about the human world, or isn't limiting this insight to the human world. Is this difference predicated on the sentience of what we call matter? Is it that, as Mrs. Tremond says, thoughtforms pre-exist their substantial realisation and 'the universe' itself is just one version of what is always unravelling from these primordial thoughts/dreams? If so, I'm out: I don't want to understand Lynch any more. I've been down this road before and it doesn't lead anywhere but mysticism, political quietism and idealism of the kind I need to avoid.

If, on the other hand, there is the possibility of retaining some kind of philosophy of action in all this then I can accept this vision as a valid/workable worldview (without having to accept it myself of course).

Sorry to blather on like this in a topic about Audrey. Maybe we should get a separate thread for these kind of discussions. I'd happily keep it going through the bleak days ahead, when TPTR is all done.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
douglasb
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 1:51 pm
Location: Exiled in England
Contact:

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby douglasb » Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:03 am

Can it be a coincidence that Audrey and Cooper both appear to have 'awoken' in the same episode?
User avatar
ThumbsUp
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby ThumbsUp » Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:44 am

douglasb wrote:Can it be a coincidence that Audrey and Cooper both appear to have 'awoken' in the same episode?


That's what I was thinking.

Also... now, Audrey and Diane have both said "I'm not me" in different episodes.
User avatar
chromereflectsimage
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:03 am

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby chromereflectsimage » Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:45 am

douglasb wrote:Can it be a coincidence that Audrey and Cooper both appear to have 'awoken' in the same episode?

and the same episode Richard died and Diane turned into a seed.
User avatar
chromereflectsimage
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:03 am

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby chromereflectsimage » Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:46 am

ThumbsUp wrote:
douglasb wrote:Can it be a coincidence that Audrey and Cooper both appear to have 'awoken' in the same episode?


That's what I was thinking.

Also... now, Audrey and Diane have both said "I'm not me" in different episodes.

Audrey also said 'Who are you, Charlie?' and Diane asked the same of Mr. C
User avatar
ThumbsUp
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby ThumbsUp » Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:51 am

chromereflectsimage wrote:
ThumbsUp wrote:
douglasb wrote:Can it be a coincidence that Audrey and Cooper both appear to have 'awoken' in the same episode?


That's what I was thinking.

Also... now, Audrey and Diane have both said "I'm not me" in different episodes.

Audrey also said 'Who are you, Charlie?' and Diane asked the same of Mr. C


So good. Man, who would've thought that Audrey and Diane could end up being so closely linked.

Have we talked at all about why Charlie looks the way he does, is the way he is, etc.? If Audrey projected him or whatever, why does he take the form he does?
User avatar
sylvia_north
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby sylvia_north » Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:37 am

Novalis wrote: Maybe we should get a separate thread for these kind of discussions. I'd happily keep it going through the bleak days ahead, when TPTR is all done (...) from a quantum perspective I guess it represents the co-existence of every possibility: everything happens, on its own illusory level. Which particular thread we follow it will always be partial; the creative impulse is the thing, not the particular story. In both accounts there is the same degree of detachment from the particular. It doesn't really matter what happens or appears to happen, the important thing is that something is happening, and this seems to be where our attention is being directed by Lynch. Something is happening, and it happens not necessarily because of the will of some creator figure, but because it is woven out of the pure possibility that is inherent in the nothingness of existence.
That was an amazing train of thought. And yeah I think quantum particles are too weird to apply objectivity to, or much philosophy that doesn't spiral out into more postmodern meaninglessness when reality comes into the conversation.

Yes all about the instinctive storytelling and interpretation. The Log Lady intros are taking on a whole new flavor.

laughingpinecone's (are you there?) Schrodinger's Audrey theory still works I think for now even with the Billy leaping 6 feet in the air conversation.
i .. am .. not ... your... foot
User avatar
wxray
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 5:04 am

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby wxray » Mon Aug 28, 2017 5:53 pm

Novalis wrote:
Dreamy Audrey wrote:The two men at the Roadhouse were credited as "Richard Bucher - Man Hit with Bottle" and "Scott Cameron - Throwing Man", so it wasn't Bobby or anyone else we know. However, I thought the attacker called the other man "Barney" (does anyone have subtitles for the episode and can confirm this?). In Part 1, Marjorie Green said the manager of the house where Ruth Davenport lived was called Barney and she said about him "Barney's not here. He's a funny one, that Barney. He's in the hospital, not the regular hospital." After the other nuthouse references, it's possible that Audrey is really in a mental institution with all those mentioned characters.


I thought he said Barney too. Well-spotted on where that name has cropped up before, I'd forgotten what the forgetful woman next to Ruth's had said to the police. I like the idea that the booth conversations in the roadhouse and all the names mentioned are dream / hallucination sequences that integrate people she's in hospital with or conversations she's overheard;

But it isn't "Barney". It is "Monique."

The man is yelling his wife's name, and then yells at the man he hits. Very similar to what happened with James!
monique.JPG
monique.JPG (25.07 KiB) Viewed 313 times
User avatar
Audrey Horne
Posts: 1820
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: The Great Northern

Re: POLL: The Nature of Audrey's Situation (Spoilers)

Postby Audrey Horne » Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:12 pm

I still think Charlie was Audrey, and she was arguing with herself, her methodical, logical self. She runs to him and pleads, "get me out of here" face to face, and then Bam! She's face to face with reality staring in the mirror.

Now I don't think she's awake in the sense that she can go open a door and tell people, Hey I'm out of my coma. But instead she's awake to the fact she was living in a false reality. Much like Diane's Tulpa was having a similar awakening. But I don't think they're going to repeat the tulpa state with Audrey, Dougie and Diane are enough. I think her body is still in the coma (and her seeing herself in the mirror is what she really looks like now)... But her mind and soul are trapped somewhere else.

I think Lynch and Frost are very protective of their original characters, and for some reason my instinct tells me we're only supposed to be worried she is a tulpa.
God, I love this music. Isn't it too dreamy?

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return (Spoilers)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests