Classic movie site with rare images, original ads, and behind-the-scenes photos, with informative and insightful commentary. We like to have fun with movies!
Archive and Links
Search Index Here

Saturday, July 23, 2011

A Recent Weekend's Watching

Company down last weekend and we ran six features, plus innumerable shorts (is that overdoing it?). First was A Woman Of Paris, aka the Charlie Chaplin feature people watch least. It was his attempt to go sophisticated, tell truth of cafe idlers he observed on Euro triumph touring where such types presumably sucked up to him. There'd also been an affair with Peggy Hopkins Joyce, who must have rocked CC's world as she had innumerable husbands/lovers. Chaplin hadn't been long admitted to this club, so Woman Of Paris is maybe less relaxed about decadent lifestyle than imitations that would follow (and maybe surpass it). Too bad a lot of those are lost now, especially Ernst Lubitsch's contributions. The stopped-being-funny-man spent a year on A Woman Of Paris --- did Doug/Mary resent UA partner Charlie blowing time back of cameras rather than tramp-ing for profit on behalf of the venture he had launched with them?

Good as it turned out, A Woman Of Paris had not a chance before crowds used to Chaplin merry-making (domestic rentals stalled at $648,000). Part of reason he'd done WOP was to golden parachute Edna Purviance off his lot and to dramatic triumph elsewhere. Her girlish days were gone; there's little remnant left even in opener part where she's innocence not yet defiled. I had a boy crush on 8mm Edna --- how many ingénues from 1916 were this cute? --- she being dream girl to beat in Mutuals like Behind The Screen (in cap and overalls --- my favorite), The Rink ... numerous others. They say Purviance read about Charlie's first marriage in newspapers, this after several years the two were offscreen intimate. Too bad Edna didn't leave her side of that story.

Also read that Oona talked CC into reviving A Woman Of Paris after fifty years it went fallow. Made me wonder if there were even surreptitious runs in the US prior (checked Everson's index ---  Woman Of Paris wasn't there --- and if anyone could have scored a print, it would have been WKE). Re-editing/scoring was done when Chaplin was eighty-six --- imagine revisiting a thing so long unseen (even by him). Buffs were hot for A Woman Of Paris though, it being #1 curiosity and rarest of all things Chaplin. I'd love knowing what rentals WOP has collected since going back into 70's circulation. Hulu Plus offers it streaming in high-definition as part of their Janus package. I'll be surprised if Criterion follows up with Blu-Ray availability, but odder things have happened.

Ed Wood was next by guest request. I watched this marveling that Disney would front such a movie geek indulgence, EW a losing by-product of studio business done with hot-off-Batmans Tim Burton, whose pet project this obviously was. You get a feeling of those involved figuring of course we all know about Ed Wood, and that a film based on his exploits would be just what Burton's eager public would be waiting for. This one's indeed an object lesson in overestimating other people's interest in what you're interested in, a hazard known but too well by those of us immersed in old films/stars familiar to precious few others.

There were veterans of Ed Wood wars spoiling still for fights when Ed Wood was released in 1994 (several angrily declaring he never wore women's clothes while directing, but how could Burton have passed up creative-licensing such a hook?). Others took up cudgels for long-departed Bela Lugosi, much too much the gentleman, they said, to have ever used language as Martin Landau does here, he being an otherwise near-dead ringer for late-in-life BL. Again, this was coarse 90's sensibility visited upon the 50's --- purists could take it or leave it. Being seventeen years past '94, just about everyone associated with Wood or Lugosi has gone eternity's way as Ed Wood takes on its own charmed antiquity. Big studios aren't likely to bankroll more black-and-white, extended insider jokes so taken with themselves as this hangover from too many late shows.

Pepe Le Moko is streaming too on Hulu Plus, thanks to that provider's Janus deal. To see a 30's French film in HD after years enduring basement-level dupes is revelation plenty. Finally making sense too is exalted critical rep Pepe developed among those few with access to decent prints. Pepe Le Moko was figured good enough to break out of French confines and maybe splash in US markets, a distinction that would prove its undoing after producer Walter Wanger simply bought the pic outright so he could domestic-do a copy with Euro exotics already settled stateside. Charles Boyer thus replaced Jean Gabin, and recent import Hedy Lamarr romantic partnered him. Good as photo-finished Algiers turned out, it would lack appealingly rough edge of France's original that by dint of Wanger's remaking, wouldn't get US play beyond art and repertory venues.

I've yet to make total peace with sub-titled movies, try as I might, and for years striving toward skill of speed-reading translations w/o missing visuals crucial to the show. My guest proposed but a glance to get essence of words and never mind close perusal of what's at bottom of the image ... but ... I can't help lingering on printed words when they pop up, which is reason I wish they'd use sub-titles only for indispensable narrative info. There's a skill to viewing non-English speaking films that some have and others, like me, never will. Many can't abide a film they have to read. I came off Pepe Le Moko feeling I'd missed part of it, and indeed I had, just for adhering to printed instruction I really didn't need to understand most of what went on. A best watching of foreign films is perhaps the second and beyond times when you know the story and sub-titles can be turned off forever after, a benefit of digital delivery where such option is on most menus.

Last among our program I'll mention is Home Before Dark, of moody 1958 Warners origin just lately (and finally) available on widescreen disc, being a story Bette Davis, or more appropriately Ida Lupino, might have done fifteen years earlier for WB. Its overlong probe of mental illness and domestic trouble resulting is enhanced by locations shot in snowy New England --- director Mervyn LeRoy makes picturesque use of these. Jean Simmons goes for broke of emotional inside-outing actresses wouldn't enjoy much longer as studio manufacture limped toward final decline. Home Before Dark comes of Autumn season for Warner pics that were recognizably theirs. For old time's sake, we're given encore of Now, Voyager themes on the soundtrack. HBD was adult-themed drama kids were likely barred from seeing when new, not that most would have an interest, but for times emerging when most tickets were youth-purchased, it's near unique in appealing first and foremost to grown-up patronage.


Blogger James Corry said...

John, I had to LOL at you DEAD-ON assessment of overrated Tim Burton's screwey masterpiece (at least to me) "Ed Wood." I can WELL remember sitting in the theater with my youngest Son 17 years ago watching this thing and both of us just cracking-up.....much to the consternation of the other patrons who ALL sat there stone-faced (and the place was full as I recall)wondering what the hell was so funny. But then, my Son and I KNEW who Ed Wood was and what he had done.......and we were, very likely, the ONLY ones in the theater who did......
Sounds like you guys had a GREAT weekend!!


10:30 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Reader Griff e-mailed some interesting observations about "Ed Wood" ...

Dear John:

I was in Chicago on business the weekend ED WOOD opened in 1994. I had been looking forward to the film for some time. As I sometimes hate to go to the movies alone, I begged/cajoled a coworker to accompany me to a Loop multiplex to see the picture at the end of a fairly trying day. "What's the movie?" she asked. "Oh, it's the new Johnny Depp movie," I said with studied carelessness. "It's a comedy about a... bad filmmaker." "Sounds like fun," she replied.

It goes without saying that I thoroughly enjoyed myself that night. So many perfect nuances and details. The wonderful performance of Martin Landau. The excellent casting of actors like G.D. Spradlin, Clive Rosengren, Norman Alden, Mike Starr and particularly Jeffrey Jones (as Criswell) and Vincent D'Onofrio (seen but not heard as Orson Welles). Outside of the film's unique capturing of the ambiance of off-the-beaten-track parts of '50s Hollywood, perhaps the picture's finest single moment is the scene in which the Warners executive screens GLEN OR GLENDA and erupts in a long, long torrent of laughter.

You are of course completely right that anyone not terribly familiar with Wood's oeuvre might have been at least a bit lost during the proceedings, and the near dead silence of my co-worker during the film tended to bear this out. But she surprised me. After the show, she said quietly, "You know, he was kind of a hero." "You think so?" I said. "Yeah. He got to do what he wanted to do." We walked along. I pointed out that although the picture was sort of a true story, the big premiere at the end of the film didn't really happen. "Doesn't matter," she said. "He wanted to make that stupid movie -- he got to make the stupid movie."

I stopped. "So you liked it," I said, a little relieved. "Yeah, I did. It was different, but somehow it was inspiring," she said. "Stories like this are important."

Back in the office a few weeks later, my coworker stopped me in the halls. "I did really like that ED WOOD movie we went to see in Chicago," she said. "It was strange, but good. You know, I even found and rented that movie the director made --"


"That's the one. It really must be the worst movie ever."


4:49 PM  
Anonymous Scoundrel said...

ED WOOD is a love letter from someone who had the pull to get it done... for someone who deserved to be remembered as more than just a genre critic's bad joke.

Rick Baker's stunning make up and the dedication of Martin Landau helped to resurrect Bela Lugosi once again for a new wave of film goers..For that I cherish ED WOOD in spite of it's creative license.

Besides, we finally have the chance to hear Sarah Jessica Parker say what we all knew all along...

" Do I really look like a Horse...? "

4:50 PM  
Anonymous DBenson said...

Throughout "Ed Wood", it's hard not to reflect that any single scene, even allowing for inflation, probably cost more than Wood's entire career output. And don't even start on the ironies of Landau's success from portraying Lugosi at the end of his painful slide from star to unemployable joke.

As for "Woman of Paris", I'll have to dig around, but pretty sure the fancy Chaplin set of a few years back had a trailer for it. Recall it included a violent encounter between Edna and her true love's mother that not only didn't appear in the finished film but didn't seem to fit anywhere. Guessing Chaplin reshot and replaced a fair chunk rather than merely trim.

1:21 AM  
Blogger MDG14450 said...

"Throughout "Ed Wood", it's hard not to reflect that any single scene, even allowing for inflation, probably cost more than Wood's entire career output."

I remember thinking the same thing during the title sequence.

I've probably only seen half his output but it's the only Burton movie I've seen that seems to have "real" characters (and a decent script).

12:12 PM  
Blogger Dave K said...

Sounds like you had a great time! Always thought what little box office WOMAN OF PARIS made was generated by all the screenwriters and directors in Hollywood. This was one instance of a film making virtually no commercial splash, but leaving endless creative ripples. Was imitated for years.

Loved your observations on subtitles. Jean and I just caught up with the GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO trilogy on instant view. I had read all the books, she hadn't and we kept pushing the pause button so I could help her through all the convoluted plot twists and confusing Swedish names ("Wait, wait! Who is this guy again?" Björck. "The guy with the tattoo?" No, that's Bjurman.) She pretty much lost patience with me when I was getting a little too much in the process and started using these little intervals to tell her what the movie makers left out of the original novels. Needless to say, each film was a multi-hour marathon.

ED WOOD. Great movie, and kind of a family favorite. Like James, I too brought the kids. We all laughed and had a great time in a half filled, half interested house. As to the idea that this one was too much outside the average Joe's frame of reference, I think things like MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 3000 and even the SIMPSONS prove you can get away with a lot of inside-baseball material if there's plenty of easy access humor around the edges.

5:37 PM  
Anonymous Kevin K. said...

Slightly offtrack... I had a friend who swore he knew someone who saw "Woman of the Sea" -- produced by Chaplin, directed by Von Sternberg -- at NY's Museum of Modern Art many years ago. I explained that this was impossible, since Chaplin destroyed the negative to settle an IRS dispute. "Could it have been 'Woman of Paris'? I asked?" No, he replied, I know the difference between the two movies, and he saw "Woman of the Sea." I think it's impossible. Any thoughts from you?

8:52 PM  
Blogger radiotelefonia said...

When I was still in Argentina, I was able to get access to some trade publications in which there were a lot of images and commercials for A WOMAN OF PARIS, which I should have xeroxed. Instead I did manage to save, from microfilm, two adds that appeared in newspapers even if they are not very attractive.

PEPE LE MOKO is a terrific movie that I love, in fact, last week it was shown on Filmoteca and it was available to be seen for free. For that reason, I captured only the introduction by Fernando Martín Peña and Fabio Manes, but since the stream went down a few minutes before the show started, I only lost less than a minute of it:

11:09 PM  
Blogger Christopher said...

LOL@ "Tramp-ing for profit"
I finally saw A Woman Of Paris not too long ago and while I enjoyed it alright,I couldn't help imagining that this kind of sentimental drama is just the thing the "little fellow" would direct if Chaplin was playing a film director as his famous tramp character.
If I'm not mistaken..Ed Wood was the second movie I saw in the same theater in practically the same seat where only a year before I'd seen Downey Jr.'s CHAPLIN..ED WOOD IS to this date my fave Burton film..and the only one I would watch again and again..My fave shot..all the Wood groovy ghoulies packed inside a hearse on the way to the Bride of The Monster premiere.

5:01 AM  
Blogger 42nd Street Memories said...


You can't leave us hanging...what else did you watch????


9:01 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

To your question about "Woman Of The Sea" being shown at MOMA, it seems unlikely on one hand, but at the same time, if they had access to such a print, it couldn't have been exhibited in a public manner, since there would certainly have been legal complications arising from such a run ... is it possible someone there projected this rarity to a very private group sworn to secrecy as to what they'd seen? Being that such things could happen, I'd not discount this story out of hand, if for no reason than the fact we'd all like to imagine "Woman Of The Sea" still exists somewhere.

9:29 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Weekend guest himself Dan Mercer weighs in via e-mail on several of the pics we watched in this and following comments:

Edna Purviance’s beauty had faded by the time she made "A Woman of Paris." The figure had become fleshier, the face softer, its features less defined. The difference between her appearance in her earlier shorts and this film was probably not so great, given the orthochromatic film used in the shorts and their pragmatic lighting. Some portraits from that period, however, are stunning. What remained appealing though, was a certain yearning. Chaplin had gone on to other affairs, and she probably wondered why it couldn’t be the same for them as it was before. It was this desire to be found attractive that makes her so, in this film. As it is, however, it is a subtle, nuanced performance that is the equal of Adolphe Menjou’s, who is superb as the roué. In many commentaries, I’ve read that his character simply gives a shrug of indifference in that last scene, when asked whatever happened to her. That isn’t quite so. There is a thoughtful pause, and his face reflects his memory of her. From what we’ve been given to know of his character, there was a genuine affection for her and a delight in her company, but only within certain emotional limits. If that limit could not be maintained, then they would have to go their separate ways. He shrugs, but it is gesture not without regret. As his goes one way, it passes the cart on which Purviance’s character rides with the children. In a lesser film, this coincidence would have allowed a conventional happy ending, as the characters realize their love and need for each other. It would have been false, however. "A Woman of Paris" is a skilful drama which remains true to itself. There are coincidences in it, as there are in life, but not merely to resolve tricky moral issues in a manner that would be acceptable or pleasing. Chaplin knew heartache and loss in his own life and had some understanding of why it was so. Thus, life is mirrored in this most serious of films. Purviance’s character has changed, or at least come to terms with herself, Menjou’s has not, but then, he had always understood himself. Their paths have diverged, for they do not need each other to complete their life’s journey.

9:33 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

More from Dan, this time on "Pepe Le Moko" ...

I’ve preferred subtitles to dubbing, because when you give an actor the voice of another actor, you rob his performance of authenticity. Whose voice would be truer to Jean Gabin than his own? I love opera, but most operas are in language I don’t understand, aside from the odd word or phrase. I found, however, that familiarizing myself with the libretto beforehand was sufficient, because I only needed to understand the plot, while the music itself told me all I needed to know about the emotions or passion of the characters. Many operas today are accompanied by supertitles on small screens, and thought there is only time enough for a glance, only a glance is necessary.

I can appreciate why you haven’t a problem with the intertitles used in silent films. When used as a mere substitute for spoken dialog, they can be quite disruptive, but properly used, when only the telling lines are translated, they create a little bit of suspense, as to what is said. There is the image, with its own emotional content, and we wait for the title, which reveals or confirms it, or adds its own depth of meaning, and then the image again. These breaks and resumptions can be propulsive, like the beat of a heart.

The most significant difference between "Pepe Le Moko" and "Algiers" is the use of space. In the earlier French film, the director, Julien Duvivier is at pains to show that the Casbah is close by the sun-drenched Mediterranean, with panoramic shots of its rooftops facing the sea. Of course, Pepe cannot leave the Casbah, and the roof tops will be the scene of chases by the police, but we understand that it is part of the world at large, and only the arbitrary constraints of law and society prevent him from leaving it. In "Algiers," however, there is virtually nothing of the world outside the Casbah. This may have been due to the practical difficulty of matching those exterior shots within its budget constraints, but the effect is to make the Casbah an interior space removed from the world. Pepe remains trapped, but within himself, as though within a nightmare of his own making. Only by reaching out towards what he loves, in the woman or in the France she personifies, can he leave it even for a moment. Only in death can he go beyond that moment. The ending of this film is much superior, in that Pepe does not kill himself in a gesture of despair, but runs to certain death, shouting the name of his beloved.

9:35 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

More of Dan's thoughts from the weekend marathon, this time on "Home Before Dark" ...

"Home Before Dark" is a “woman’s picture” in the worst sense of the term, in that it tells a story intended to be of interest to women, with their concerns of yearning and commitment, but does so with a glossy surface hiding a lack of substance. The location photography is an advantage over the studio-bound settings of similar stories and adds whatever sense of reality it has. I especially like the shots taken at twilight, the shapes of the old New England houses shadowed and silhouetted on their winding streets. The break down scene in the film, with a garishly dressed Simmons almost floating as she drifts through a stylish restaurant—time seemingly extenuated, as in a dream or a nightmare, by the increased camera speed—is effectively done, though obviously Mervyn le Roy had seen "Sunset Boulevard." The performances are also quite good, especially by Jean Simmons, who is a much lovelier and better actress than her predecessors in this sort of thing, Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. If we were going to take it seriously, though, as a story of mental illness, we would have to know a lot more about the Dan O’Herlihy character, whose rejection of Simmons supposedly brought on her break down. There is psychological validity to the conception of a man who will not come to terms with his antipathy towards another person, and who consistently deflects anything that would bring the focus to it, but he is so self-contained yet so utterly without introspection, that it is impossible to tell what brought this on. There is only Simmons’ reaction to it, or rather, over reaction, for she seems so rational in her analysis of what has happened that it is difficult to understand how she could have been overwhelmed by it in the first place, if that was all there was to it. She is so devastatingly attractive, however, that I almost wanted to grab O’Herlihy and give him the Howard Hawks treatment, slapping him around a little or throwing a drink in his face, to get him past this mental block. I mean, this is Jean Simmons we’re talking about, only one of the most beautiful, sensual, and intelligent women ever to appear on screen. And he can’t bear to be kissed by those lips. Those lips? Or feel that figure press upon him? But of course, this is a picture for women, who are all beautiful and misunderstood by men. And perhaps they are, but for reasons not to be found here. The most troubling character, however, is actually the one intended to be most sympathetic, played by Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. He is a Jew from New York, in itself a telling detail, though evidently anti-Semitism was still considered a topic of importance, but despite this background, he is also a waterman with skills one wouldn’t have mastered in the navy, since we see him in a seaside shack in watch cap and pea coat, helping an old-timer with his traps. He wants to remain at the college and we’re given to believe that it would be terribly unfair if he was not, yet he is always making critical comments about the school, the faculty, and the town. In that respect, he is like the Thomas Keefer character in "The Caine Mutiny." However, he is also understanding and sympathetic towards Simmons, who he apparently regards as misfit like himself. It is rarely so one-side, though. He could be a prince among men, with everyone else too stupid and bigoted to realize that, or he could be obnoxious and untrustworthy. In real life, he would probably be something in-between, but then, this film isn’t about real life, despite the care in presenting its settings. He is obviously attracted to her, but never takes advantage of her weaknesses. At the end, he drives he away so that she can go to the city, where a former boy friend will put her in touch with a psychiatrist. Zimbalist is so warm and sincere in his playing, that this almost seems plausible, except that the pieces don’t fit together. The character is an impostor.

9:39 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Jerry, the other ones we watched included "The Mummy" (1932) in HD, which was fantastic, as it's been since my first viewing 8-7-64 on Channel 3's "Horror Theatre." Thing is, I've written a lot about that one previously.

Also looked at "The Captain Hates The Sea" aka, "The Projectionist (me) Hated This Movie" --- if not for John Gilbert, I'd have been for switching off.

9:49 AM  
Blogger Kevin Deany said...

I caught "Ed Wood" on its opening weekend too and that Saturday night crowd in Chicago's north suburbs was filled with Lugosi fans. Martin Landau's first appearance elicited audible aah's and during the post-script when it shows what happened to the film's principals and the credit reads something like "Lugosi's memorabilia now outsells Karloff's" a robust and hearty cheer erupted from the Lugosiphiles in the audience. It was a fun evening.

I have some non film buff friends who have expressed an interest in seeing "Ed Wood" and "Plan Nine from Outer Space." I told them I would be happy to accommodate them but wonder which one I should show first. Any suggestions? Would they appreciate "Ed Wood" more if they saw Plan Nine first? Or vice versa?

12:02 PM  
Anonymous Steven Smith said...


Thanks for another wonderful post.

Re. A WOMAN OF PARIS - Michael Powell saw it at 18 and told Kevin Brownlow it was one of his most influential movie experiences: "Suddenly the whole medium grew up before my eyes...suddenly there was a grown-up film with people behaving as they do in life... It's directly responsible for my own rather over-serious attitude toward making films."

Perhaps someday you might write a post on what first-generation films and filmmakers influenced those who immediately followed?

2:06 PM  
Blogger radiotelefonia said...

A few things about A WOMAN OF PARIS that I didn't mention before. One of the biggest problems that the film has is the fact that it is obvious that the film originally had tints which are lost today. For that reason it is annoying to see how entire scenes that were filmed in exteriors with very bright sunlight being followed by others filmed in very dark interiors.

Long before that this film was unearthed by Chaplin in 1976, audiences in Argentina had access to the film because film collector Enrique Bouchard was able to locate a Czech print that was frequently shown in Cine Clubs.

1:24 AM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Thanks for that info, Radiotelefonia. I well remember Enrique Bouchard's ads for rare 8mm prints in the old "Classic Film Collector" paper. Fascinating to hear he had "A Woman Of Paris" at a time when practically no one else did.

1:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are so right about Edna Purviance's extreme cuteness in those Chaplin Mutuals, the scene where he kisses her (dressed as a boy) in Behind the Screen being a longtime favorite of mine as well. I recall reading somewhere -- the source escapes me -- that one reason her career didn't take off is that she'd hit the bottle rather hard. What do you think of rumors that she appears as an extra in M. Verdoux?

2:47 PM  
Blogger John McElwee said...

Hi Dr. OTR --- I've certainly heard about Edna being among extras in "Verdoux" and have read about fans who've searched frame-by-frame for her without success.

I don't doubt she was in the film, but am inclined to guess her footage was excised before release.

2:57 PM  
Blogger John Field said...

Back in the mid 1990s, I was driving Forry Ackerman home to Horrowood Karloffornia (Beverly Hills)after a hoor film fest. The subject of the film Ed Wood came up. He was concerned about the portrayal of Bela Lugosi. Among other facts, Forry stated that Bela never cussed. And he did not like others cussing around him. Plan 9 From Outer Space premiered at a small theatre quite a ways from the depicted Pantages. Bela Lugosi's funeral was very well attended. He said that Tor Johnson was openly weeping the whole ceremony. The church where the ceremony was held, was standing room only. Etc. Etc. Forry was rather miffed, that he was not asked to participate as a consultant. I know that 99% of all film bios, miss the mark historically, but gee whiz, are we not in a time where fact checking should be important?

2:59 PM  
Anonymous kamagra said...

Charles Chaplin was brilliant, no doubt! I love his films and consider him one of the great artists of this century.

6:20 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • July 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • July 2008
  • August 2008
  • September 2008
  • October 2008
  • November 2008
  • December 2008
  • January 2009
  • February 2009
  • March 2009
  • April 2009
  • May 2009
  • June 2009
  • July 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • October 2009
  • November 2009
  • December 2009
  • January 2010
  • February 2010
  • March 2010
  • April 2010
  • May 2010
  • June 2010
  • July 2010
  • August 2010
  • September 2010
  • October 2010
  • November 2010
  • December 2010
  • January 2011
  • February 2011
  • March 2011
  • April 2011
  • May 2011
  • June 2011
  • July 2011
  • August 2011
  • September 2011
  • October 2011
  • November 2011
  • December 2011
  • January 2012
  • February 2012
  • March 2012
  • April 2012
  • May 2012
  • June 2012
  • July 2012
  • August 2012
  • September 2012
  • October 2012
  • November 2012
  • December 2012
  • January 2013
  • February 2013
  • March 2013
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
  • July 2013
  • August 2013
  • September 2013
  • October 2013
  • November 2013
  • December 2013
  • January 2014
  • February 2014
  • March 2014
  • April 2014
  • May 2014
  • June 2014
  • July 2014
  • August 2014
  • September 2014
  • October 2014
  • November 2014
  • December 2014
  • January 2015
  • February 2015
  • March 2015
  • April 2015
  • May 2015
  • June 2015
  • July 2015
  • August 2015
  • September 2015
  • October 2015
  • November 2015
  • December 2015
  • January 2016
  • February 2016
  • March 2016
  • April 2016
  • May 2016
  • June 2016
  • July 2016
  • August 2016
  • September 2016
  • October 2016
  • November 2016
  • December 2016
  • January 2017
  • February 2017
  • March 2017
  • April 2017
  • May 2017
  • June 2017
  • July 2017
  • August 2017
  • September 2017
  • October 2017
  • November 2017
  • December 2017
  • January 2018
  • February 2018
  • March 2018
  • April 2018
  • May 2018
  • June 2018
  • July 2018
  • August 2018
  • September 2018
  • October 2018
  • November 2018
  • December 2018
  • January 2019
  • February 2019
  • March 2019
  • April 2019
  • May 2019
  • June 2019
  • July 2019
  • August 2019
  • September 2019
  • October 2019
  • November 2019
  • December 2019
  • January 2020
  • February 2020
  • March 2020
  • April 2020
  • May 2020
  • June 2020
  • July 2020
  • August 2020
  • September 2020
  • October 2020
  • November 2020
  • December 2020
  • January 2021
  • February 2021
  • March 2021
  • April 2021
  • May 2021
  • June 2021
  • July 2021
  • August 2021
  • September 2021
  • October 2021
  • November 2021
  • December 2021
  • January 2022
  • February 2022
  • March 2022
  • April 2022
  • May 2022
  • June 2022
  • July 2022
  • August 2022
  • September 2022
  • October 2022
  • November 2022
  • December 2022
  • January 2023
  • February 2023
  • March 2023
  • April 2023
  • May 2023
  • June 2023
  • July 2023
  • August 2023
  • September 2023
  • October 2023
  • November 2023
  • December 2023
  • January 2024
  • February 2024
  • March 2024
  • April 2024
  • May 2024
  • June 2024
  • July 2024