MEDIOCREMOVIE.CLUB
  • Reviews
  • Side Pieces
  • Shane of Thrones
  • Podcast
  • About
  • Archives
  • Game of Thrones Fantasy

Chi-Raq

3/15/2016

22 Comments

 
B
​2.87

A Greek play transplanted to southside Chicago, the fiery Lysistrata organizes a sex strike that will last until warring gangs put down their weapons.
​

Directed by Spike Lee.  
Starring Teyonah Paris, Nick Cannon, and Angela Bassett
Initial review by Jon Kissel

Picture
Chi-Raq is suffused with two motifs, one that I love in movies and one that I'm often ambivalent about.  The former is a sense of cool.  Spike Lee shares an ability to make things look cool with directors like Tarantino or Jim Jarmusch, where his shots and his characters have that mixture of self-confidence and nonchalance.  It's a hugely appealing way to make movies, and one that is counter to the other motif in Chi-Raq: shirt-ripping, screaming to the heavens earnestness.  I generally don't like these kind of movies that wear their hearts on their sleeve, especially when compared to cool movies that have a level of detachment from what's happening around them.  Lee mixes these two polar opposites together, having sophisticated characters exhort their true feelings without a trace of irony.  Somehow, it worked on me.  The critical response to Chi-Raq has been mixed, as I expect our discussion to be, but it's that rare love-it-or-hate-it movie, where half of the critics are giving it their highest grades while the rest are, at best, calling it a failed experiment.  I'm in the first half.

That balance between cool and earnest is present throughout the film, from the opening frames to the last ones.  Nick Cannon's song plays, eschewing the rap lyrics of accumulation for something far more meaningful, followed by a besuited Samuel L. Jackson as Dolmedes, going full ham and loving it.  The delirious, synchronized concert ends in violence, with the victims later revisited as they essentially address the camera, and not in a fun, meta way but in a sincere, lesson-learning way.  Lysistrata is the coolest chick in the world, but she has a goal as quixotic as world peace.  I feel like this might be the only way to make a movie as overtly political as Chi-Raq is.  Aside from the bonus of the innate allure of actors like Teyonah Paris, Jackson, and Angela Bassett, the director gets to have magnetic people deliver their message in the most appealing way possible.  A little humor from comedic genius Dave Chappelle, among others, also helps the medicine go down.  Chi-Raq took me through a full octave of emotions, appealing to the head and the heart, often in the same scene. 
​
On top of the earnest factor, Lee is also pushing a unique lyricism on his audience.  As an adaptation of an Aristophanes ('Stophanes for short) play, Lee keeps theatrical elements like the Greek chorus of the men's club and Dolmedes' expositing directly to the audience.  I expect these choices to be divisive, but again, they worked on me.  I talk about show-don't-tell a lot on this site, but THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, as the opening and closing text blares.  For Lee, that kind of urgency takes precedence over subtlety and subtext, and if he wants to have someone as magnetic as Samuel L. Jackson tell me how the world is reacting to the sex strike, I can go along for the ride.  On the dialogue, I went in wary, but fell under its spell, thanks to the passion in the delivery and the rhythm of the words themselves.  I expected some hackiness to shine through on occasion, but my corn radar never pinged.  I count the theatrical approach as an asset.  Lee's experimenting, and I admire the effort, doubly if that effort's as successful as I believe it is.

The delivery system for Lee's message worked on me.  The message itself is where things get more muddled.  Directors like Judd Apatow use a lot of pop cultural references in their films, such that people in thirty years are going to have to be reminded of what Munich was about when they revisit Knocked Up.  Lee does the same thing in Chi-Raq, but uses of-the-moment news stories instead of culture.  That's perfectly fine, as names like Tamir Rice should not be forgotten after they've cycled out of the news, but Lee is anything but surgical.  Police brutality is very much a side issue in this film, shifting focus from Lysistrata's central goals, and the Confederate flag is a side issue to a side issue.  I feel like the bizarre interlude with the Lost Cause commandant of the local National Guard armory was only included so Lee could get Lysistrata swiftly ripping the Stars and Bars off the wall.  The Chicago murder rate, mostly localized in a handful of districts, is enough for a film.  Lee muddies the waters when he branches out.

When he is drilled into this one specific issue, Chi-Raq is at its best.  I can't have been the only viewer whose eyebrows were raised at the sight of John Cusack, but he converted me with his long, enraged sermon.  Framing the crime in South Side Chicago, among other places, as the end result of a racist system is something Lee's been making movies about for decades.  That he goes on to add a masculine-feminine dynamic is fairly inspired, and right in my ideological wheelhouse.  We talked about masculinity in Boyz N the Hood, where poor black men are constantly emasculated by the police and the economy, and then lash out at their equally oppressed peers for the smallest slight.  The same thing is on display here.  The women of the Spartans and Trojans can sit down with each other and drink wine, while their boyfriends plot to kill each other over text messages. Toxic masculinity and fragile egos, combined with easily accessible guns and plentiful guns-as-penises metaphors, leads to a bloodbath, and attacking it at its source is the only avenue left for the women who don't want to play this game anymore.  Multiple characters acknowledge how pointless all this is, with all their energy directed against each other when it could be better pointed in a different, more productive direction, though Cannon's Demetrius demonstrates the prisoner's dilemma inherent when everyone's not paddling in the same direction.  Lee allows several characters to be mouthpieces who describe this game as pointless and small, including real-life victims of gun violence and mothers who have lost children.  Again, the urgency of the message works on me.

I bought the message and how it was delivered, though I wish Lee was a little more focused.  However, there are definitely some fumbles.  Isaiah Whitlock's a good actor, who deserves more respect than just as a deliverer of his sheee-it catchphrase.  Some of the dialogue is used as ham-fisted exposition.  No person should ever be allowed to say, "As a lawyer..." or the equivalent.  In the biggest critique, the characters don't feel like they have lives outside of the film.  Lysistrata's minions have no problems occupying the armory for weeks, like it was totally reasonable to abandon whatever their lives were before.  I get that they have bigger goals, but hearing them be more conflicted would've humanized them.  My last complaint is that the church hymn sang at Patti's funeral was a cinematic failure.  It left me cold in a way those kinds of scenes never do, as they often work on me.  I remember having to defend a good grade I gave to the Ladykillers, and I can't go less than a C+ on a movie that has such invigorating scenes inside a black church.  In Chi-Raq, I think I wanted Irene to stand up and yell about the bow being put on her daughter's coffin, and maybe it was appropriate to have a more mournful song instead of this joyful one.  The dichotomy of the song with Irene's utter misery just made me uncomfortable.

Lee swung for the fences, and the home-run hitters don't knock it out of the park every time.  This is a gamble that worked far more often than it failed.  I loved all the main actors, and several of the down-sheet ones, too.  It leavens its desperate message with plenty of jokes and outlandish scenarios, has scenes of bracing choreography, and ultimately strikes me as a respected friend who grabs you by your collar and screams in your face to pay attention.  I don't want every movie to be a civics lesson, or an earnest appeal to my conscience.  The times when that kind of filmmaking works are extremely valuable, overburdened message be damned.  B+
22 Comments
Admin
3/15/2016 03:57:50 am

Reserved for responses to initial review

Reply
Shane
3/16/2016 10:41:40 am

I balked at the hymn at Patti's funeral, but Blair quickly informed me that that is how some churches celebrate their funerals. It's jarring coming from a somber Catholic upbringing world. It may leave you cold, but to reject its use is rejecting how a different culture celebrates death.

Reply
Jon
3/16/2016 12:30:51 pm

I have less of a problem with the hymn than with how unmoved I was by the performance. I thought it was sub-Sister Act.

John Robert Peters, Jr.
4/24/2016 01:39:01 pm

Yeah, that's exactly what funerals look like for people in black churches. We also don't call them funerals they are called Homegoing Celebrations. It goes all the way back to slave times when the death of someone was celebrated by slaves because they were no longer being beaten/raped and the like. It has evolved from that to a celebration of life and a celebration of what is yet to come for them instead of mourning that they are gone. It's just a little difference in philosophy, mourn because they are no longer with you or celebrate because of the time you had with them. For instance, at my grandpas funeral we had actual church, my uncle is a pastor and he preached for hours and the choir sang for hours...it was basically a black church service.

Jon
4/26/2016 03:50:00 am

Late reply to a late reply, but I totally get what you're saying, especially in the context of a similar scene in 12 Years a Slave which depicts exactly the dynamic you're talking about. I think in this specific case, Hudson was playing it like she was in a typical, solemn funeral service while everyone else around her was in a boisterous black church service. That disconnect just made me uncomfortable. In 12 Years a Slave, everyone's essentially on the same emotional wavelength, so the scene's more coherent.

Joe link
3/22/2016 08:49:30 pm

John Cusack's appearance and funeral sermon were absolutely fantastic. I want to dig deeper into your "eyebrow raising" comment, because I think you are absolutely correct. His appearance caught me off guard for a couple of reasons. First, when was the last time we saw John Cusack?

Second, and more importantly, what a cool role. In a movie dominated by black culture, black themes, and black actors and director, here is John Cusack playing an important spiritual role. I have quite fleshed it all out, but I feel like Spike knocked it out of the park when he selected Cusack for the role.

Reply
Cooker
3/16/2016 02:46:32 pm

Black Lives Matter: The Movie (A Modern Day Lysistrata)

First, some quick background info. I grew up in Carmel, IN, which was like South Park as for minority breakdown back in the ‘80s. There were maybe 7 or 8 black kids in my graduating class of over 700. Therefore, I didn’t have much interaction with black culture. In my mid-20s I worked at a comedy club whose primary owner was black. His business strategy was to give out hundreds of free tickets, fill the showroom and overcharge for food and drinks to make up the difference. Unfortunately, he did not bring in the best clientele and it was during this time that I got a very negative impression of black culture instilled in me. From that standpoint, would I say that black lives matter and that I should care about anyone in this movie?

Here are a few of my more favorite notes I jotted down while watching Chi-Raq (and I’m glad they frequently used the title to remind me what I was watching.)

(during the opening credits) Um, this guy needs to learn how to speak properly. Is this whole movie a YouTube video?

UGH. He’s still singing.

Did he really say gooder? SIGH

Is that Wesley Snipes as Kano from Mortal Kombat?

John Cusack looks really out of place.

It took nearly half an hour for someone to say, “Oh hell, no.” I don’t buy this accuracy.

Oh no, it’s that annoying song from the opening again.

General King Kong? Really? General King Kong has problems.

“Bitches and hos, come out to play!” Classic.

I’m a fan of Shakespeare’s work and I’ve always wondered how iambic pentameter would translate into the modern world. I know now. Not so much. It wasn’t that it was annoying, but once I got the gist of a conversation, I simply just stopped paying attention to the dialogue. The story was okay. The modernized Lysistrata kept my attention, and I thought John Cusack put on a great performance as the preacher. It was funny at times, dramatic at others, completely stupid a good chunk. The bottom line simply ties back to my opening background info; I simply just didn’t care about anyone in this movie. In fact, it started giving me nightmares about the time my TomTom lead me into South Chicago and we got stuck in traffic for hours at some kind of drag racing showdown. I thought I was going to die. “Lock the doors and don’t look at anyone.”

To sum it up, Spike Lee films (or joints, as I think he calls them), just aren’t my cup of tea. The movie was okay and definitely better than some of the crap I’ve selected. I think I’ll give this a B-

Reply
Shane
3/16/2016 03:53:28 pm

I understand the criticism that aspects of this (anti-police brutality) are more or less preaching to the choir, but the larger message, I thought, was that Lee is pointing out the violence that Chi-Raqians were doing onto themselves. It's a narrative that says, "Yeah, other bullshit exists and is important, but you can also change how -you- act. You can stop killing each other."

Reply
Cooker
3/16/2016 04:00:11 pm

"Yeah, other bullshit exists and is important, but you can also change how -you- act. You can stop killing each other."

But will that message sink in, or will the "other bullshit" take priority? I thought that was the overall message too, but who knows how it gets interpreted? People just need to be gooder to each other.

Shane
3/16/2016 04:27:39 pm

I'm not sure why one or the other will necessarily take priority (or needs to). That's a false dilemma.

Jon
3/17/2016 12:35:24 am

I have an older relative who doesn't trust all gay men because one hit on him when he was in his 20's. This argument gets as much respect from me as that one.

Reply
Sean
3/16/2016 05:37:05 pm

As a Pacers fan Spike Lee was public enemy #1 back in the 90s. I was reminded by my facebook timehop recently of just how bad Pacers fans looked in the Reggie Miller 30 for 30 documentary winning time. All the fans shown on tv has t-shirts tucked into jeans with no belts and whispy mustaches. It was sickening and Spike was pushing that idea hard.
Outside his basketball fandom Spike has also put out plenty of evidence to be a talented writer and director. Chi-Raq does not make the greatest hits anthology.

Making a blanket statement for reasons Chi-Raq didn't work for me is difficult. I'm sure its possible to make a modern take on the Lysistrata and pull it off through either avenue being light hearted and humorous while still pointing out the problems of gang violence. It would also be possible to use Lysistrata more as a rough outline and ignore the comedy and go full on serious with world building and have the women still go on strike and deal with public reaction to the airing of private activities and how that could affect the machismo of gang culture and violence that even began this movie with a shooting over a text message. Chi-Raq couldn't decide which way to go. It tried too hard to play the serious angle while surrounding it with the ridiculous. Their combination of worlds caused both angles to suffer. Adding to that suffering was the insult to the viewers that they choose to push Samuel L Jackson out front as not just a narrator but an apologist. Hey everybody, this is the Lysistrata retold today in not Chicago but Chi-raq and we're going to tell it in that old style just so you dont get confused. I hated that. To tell the viewer this is to tell the viewer if you don't get it that's on you and to let the author off the hook for not doing a better job because this is the reason.

Positives, Spike's skill in direction has probably improved over the years, the color palette used with the orange and purples is obviously gonna work on this UE grad. With the the film looked very good. "I dont live in no fuckin Chicago I live in Chiraq"- that line is still in my head. It is representative of a very real divide that exists in many cities across America. What I compliment Spike Lee for is while addressing that disconnect he pursues it from the angle that this is the position we are in and it is within ourselves to improve that position despite ludicrously racist National Guard generals or inept police or government.

Failings- the aformentioned Samuel L narration. The ludicrously racist national guardsmen was so out of place as were the police and mayors. If you're not worried about the real world just leave all these people out of the movie. They were in there to be comic relief but provided zero comedy. The big final scene where Lysistrata an ChiRaq meet...she's a pushover. He's just so ruggedly manly that she can't possibly resist him and is saved by Wesley Snipes. What the hell. Did Spike decide to make a movie so centered on the power women have over men then decide to strip that power from his main character at the moment of truth- fail.

I'm hoping others have some additional thought provoking comments for me to comment on later. Some positives in the message but ultimately a number of failings in execution left ChiRaq fatally flawed C-

Reply
Jon
3/17/2016 12:32:39 am

The line in Cannon's song that you quoted really reverberated for me, too. It got dusty when it came up again during the montage of downtown Chicago.

I'm not certain, but wasn't the final showdown between Chi-Raq and Lysistrata a set-up on her part? Like she was working with Snipes' character to get Chi-Raq there, and she was acting so turned by him to get him to drop his defenses?

Reply
Sean
3/17/2016 07:59:54 am

If that was the case it was super unclear- she looked shocked he had arrived

Joe link
3/22/2016 08:56:01 pm

Just curious, but did she not say "I envited Cyclops here." I mean, that's pretty fucking clear, no?

Joe link
3/23/2016 10:05:34 am

*invited

Lane
3/20/2016 03:23:59 pm

Everything in “Chi-Raq” is about the immediate. The here and the now. From the opening emergency siren going off to references of recent news events (Charleston), “Chi-Raq” is a film that clambers to capture the feel and tone of its year. Which is probably smart for a politically minded movie, because while the problem of guns and violence isn’t going away, the politics of it seems to ebb and flow depending on how many kids were shot in schools that week. If you’re going to make a movie about race and violence in the first quarter of the 21st century, it’s best to not make that a five year project.

That Spike Lee would take the immediacy of these issues and frame them within a drama that’s about 2500 years old is pretty brilliant. Lee is making a statement (in a movie chocked full of statements) that what we’re really talking about isn’t just one political issue like race or guns, what we’re dealing with is human nature. The downfall of inner-city Chicago isn’t a high capacity magazine, it’s misplaced machismo and unfair power dynamics.

But the immediacy of the film—the need to tell this story as quickly as possible—also has its downsides. For me, it meant I just wasn’t as captured by the story. While the acting is quite good throughout (with high praise for Teyonah Parris, Wesley Snipes, John Cusack, and Sameul L.) the characters seem pressed into a two dimensional format. There’s so much to say in this film and so many people to say it that character development suffers.

There were also several moments where I felt as if I were being forced to feel something I didn’t. Jennifer Hudson’s story arc is the prime example for me. One of the really powerful things that film does is make us voyeurs in places where we couldn’t or shouldn’t be. I wanted to experience the murder of her child; I wanted to somehow see the moments of parental tenderness that would have made the murder all the more horrifying. Instead, we only see stained pavement and hysteric crying. While this is what you have to do in theater to make things realistic, the beauty of film is you can film it and cut it to put us there. I just felt too separated from any of it.

I was really pleased and surprised to see such an extended treatment of a sermon in a film. Sermons generally don’t film well since a good sermon takes quite a bit of time to develop narratively, so depictions of sermons in films tend to be quips and aphorisms that set a scene rather than deliver any kind of punch. So, it was fun to watch Cusack pull a fictionalized version of the South Chicago social rights pastor Fr. Michael Pfleger (FYI - go to YouTube and watch a Michael Pfleger sermon and it gives you some appreciation for how good a job Cusack did in that role). The sermon itself is a major piece of the film and adds the intellectual weight to the women’s efforts. The way it was filmed is also pretty brilliant--the camera angles adding to the tension of the sermon and then using a really interesting editing technique to cut different versions of the same lines from different takes to imitate the repetition that you see in black church sermons. While a good sermon in a black church takes 20 – 40 minutes to build and deliver, Lee was able to give it maximum impact in ony 6 or 7. Anyway…enough of the boring sermon stuff, I’m probably the only one that was interested in that.

I will defend Samuel L. and his part; not necessarily whether it was needed or not, but for the fact that there are few things in film as enjoyable as watching Samuel L. Jackson go over the top in a role. If anyone else had played that part, I would be on the bandwagon of throwing it out. But with him, I could watch it all day. All. Mother. F-ing. Day.

Final judgment: great film that kept me bogged down in the details and big ideas too much to make me care about the story. When the Spike Lee filmography is finally canonized one day, this one will probably sit in the middle somewhere.

Grade: B+

Reply
Shane
3/21/2016 12:02:06 pm

Ran out of time for a full review:

The movie did seem disjointed, but it didn't bother me as much when I thought of it as a play.

In a normal movie, I hate Sam Jax's part, but here it makes sense. It's based off of a play that was written for illiterate masses 2,000 years ago. The crowd needed a narrator to be so blunt.

The over-the-top line delivery was jarring at first, but didn't bother me towards the end as much. Teyonah Parris has acting chops, but I don't think Lee's direction did her any favors here as I found her flat in many scenes. Cannon had the better line delivery, which might make more sense with his music background.

Hudson was largely wasted. Her lines were pretty poorly constructed and most of her scenes we forced.

I got choked up during the final scene. And it was manipulation.

I don't think Lee always has the best timing on jokes. Many of the jokes were corny and just not funny. But I laughed out loud on some as well.

A on the music choices.

I loved the sub-themes that went into the bigger theme:

Big Theme: This is a god damn problem. It needs to be fixed.

Sub Theme #1: You have to take responsibility for what you're doing. You can stop the cycle.

Sub Theme #2: Police and politicians aren't there to help you. They're there to use and abuse. This deserves a light shined upon it. (Unfortunately, 20 years from now, the examples of Michael Brown and Tamir Rice aren't going to be powerful, but this movie was made for now.)

Sub Theme 3: Outside help is acceptable. I think Lee makes a bold choice to go with Cusack with Cusack being a white guy. Lee is saying we're in this together, no matter the skin color. There's a lot of "be a proper ally" and "don't comment on things you don't know about" talk out there that leaves many (myself included) confused on how to support movements from other groups/cultures. Lee lets Cusack play a powerful part of being a unifying siren. He gives Cusack some incredibly powerful things to say. If Parris and Snipes are the ones speaking to people of color, Cusack gets to slap the rest of us in the face with what's happening in Chicago.

B+

Blair gave it an A- and teared up. :)

Reply
Joe link
3/22/2016 09:34:40 pm

I was finally able to finish watching Chi-raq, and I am very glad that I did. By no means was it a grand slam for me, but I love what Spike accomplished with this film. Combining Shakespeare with modern movie elements is a tall task, that can often leave a movie with under developed or unbeleivable characters. See "O," a regretful Othello reboot. I think Spike embraces that complexity with Chi-raq with the right amount of rhythmic Shakespearian prose, and just a hint of slap-stick comedic relief. The combination of vulgar and sexual explicit content found in the dialogue seemed so out of place that it somehow fit perfectly, much like the John Cucacks preacher character.

Cusack's sermon scene I felt was beautufil. I just wish that Spike would have gone with one continous shot for the scene instead of breaking it up with cuts.

For the longest time during the movie I felt myself disappointed with Michael B. Jordan (who as some of you know I am a huge fan of), but then I realized I why. Nick Cannon doesn't make me believe like Jordan does. Cannon did fine in this role, but he was clearly overshadowed by his counterparts.

Wesley Snipes' laugh, probably my favorite randomness of the movie, but his character lacks development. His throwing down his guns scene at the end just didn't make sense to me.

A couple questions for you guys? Who were the good guys here? Chi-raq is portrayed is the protaganist, but no way is he a good guy. Snipes' Cyclop defintely isn't. Cusacks preacher is more of the middle man. It's the women, right? But weren't they just as much to blame as the men in the beginning?

Anyways, I had never heard of this particular Shakespeare play, but i enjoyed it. Not my favorite, as I did get bored at times, but it gets a solid B from me.

Reply
Sean
3/24/2016 03:15:41 pm

It's because its not Shakespeare, it's Aristophanes

Reply
Joe link
3/24/2016 07:39:06 pm

My point still stands. I'd never heard of them shits.

Bryan
6/13/2016 09:55:43 pm

The first half of this was catchy and sad. The second half was weird and dumb. I don't get it. D+. And whoever cast High Fidelity guy should stop casting.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Authors

    JUST SOME IDIOTS GIVING SURPRISINGLY AVERAGE MOVIE REVIEWS.

    Categories

    All
    2017 Catch Up Trio
    80s
    Action
    Adventure
    AI Trio
    Author - Blair
    Author - Bobby
    Author - Bryan
    Author - Chris
    Author - Cook
    Author - Drew
    Author - Joe
    Author - Jon
    Author - JR
    Author - Lane
    Author - Phil
    Author - Pierce
    Author - Sean
    Author - Shane
    Author - Tom
    Best Of 2016
    Best Of 2017
    Best Of 2018
    Best Of 2019
    Best Of 2020
    Best Of 2021
    Best Of 2022
    Comedy
    Culture Clash Trio
    Denzel Trio
    Documentary
    Drama
    Foreign
    Historical
    Horror
    Internet Docs Trio
    Mediocrities
    Movie Trios
    Musical
    Podcast
    Romance
    Round 3.1
    Round 3.2
    Round 3.3
    Round 4.1
    Round 4.2
    Round 4.3
    Sci Fi
    Season 10
    Season 2
    Season 3
    Season 4
    Season 5
    Season 6
    Season 7
    Season 8
    Season 9
    Shorts
    Sports
    Thriller
    Western
    Women In Men's Worlds

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014

    Click to set custom HTML