Netflix Sells Out Its Subscribers

Don't let the chumminess distract you. Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX  ) and Time Warner (NYSE: TWX  ) were high-fiving and fist-bumping yesterday over a deal that will give Warner Bros. four weeks to sell its Blu-ray discs and DVDs before making them available through Netflix's service, in exchange for some sweetened conditions. But subscribers are getting hosed.

Time Warner is trying to secure a 28-day window from Netflix, Coinstar's (Nasdaq: CSTR  ) Redbox, and Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI  ) because the movie studio thinks it will maximize its sales if it's not competing against discounted rentals. Warner Bros. claims that 75% of its DVD sales come during the first four weeks of a film's release.

In other words, Netflix is going to start offering you Warner Bros. DVD rentals after most of the demand has gone away.

Time Warner throws a lot of money behind its theatrical releases, only to embark on a marketing campaign several months later, when the flick is out on Blu-ray and DVD. Netflix subscribers are now going to be kept in a penalty box -- for 40,320 minutes -- until they get a crack.

I'm moving Network to the top of my queue
In Netflix's defense, it's securing a few extra goodies for keeping its members in the dark as a film's home release is peaking.

  • Netflix will get more copies of month-old Warner Bros. releases, but the spike in supply will be ironically accompanied by what's likely to be a shriveling up of demand.
  • Netflix will pay less to Time Warner, but don't expect to pay lower monthly subscription rates as a result.
  • Warner is expanding the number of older catalog titles and direct-to-video releases available through Netflix's online streaming platform. Hooray! More of the old stuff that's probably showing on some cable channel right now.

OK, that last point actually does benefit subscribers. It would be great if Time Warner had agreed to license its new releases for online streaming, but that's still a small step in the right direction.

In a nutshell, just as book publishers like to space out the releases of hardcover books and their eventually cheaper paperback offshoots, Netflix subscribers are about to become paperback riders.

You know what's going to set them off, though? The press release claims that this move will allow Warner Bros. to "get the most from the sales potential of those titles" and "maximize VOD usage."

In other words, cable companies -- including Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA  ) and Warner offshoot Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC  ) -- come out as the real winners if their video-on-demand offerings are now not competing against Netflix for the biggest month of any Warner Bros. release.

The 30% lie
Something I saw repeated often by the media outlets covering yesterday's news is that Netflix subscribers don't care about shiny new flicks.

  • "How much will it hurt Netflix," Silicon Alley Insider asks. "Maybe only a little, because Netflix does not rely on new releases as much as movie stores like Blockbuster and kiosks like Redbox."
  • "I don't think most people join Netflix specifically to get DVDs on the street release date," Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos tells Reuters.
  • "But because the majority of Netflix's shipments to customers are catalog titles, it is less dependent on new releases than its DVD-based competitors," writes MarketWatch.

It's certainly true that Netflix isn't as new-release driven as the $1-a-day Redbox machines are, but let's put this claim into its proper perspective.

"New releases from all suppliers account for about 30 percent of Netflix shipments," claims Netflix in yesterday's press release.

That's quite a claim, but it ignores something that should be glaringly obvious to any active Netflix subscriber: The company stocks a limited number of new releases. The vast majority of new releases requested through my own queue are listed as having a "long wait" or "very long wait." Since they aren't available, Netflix just ships an older catalog title that's further down in my queue's priority. It irks me, but not as much as if Netflix buries the lack of access to new titles within the first month or two and plays it off as some success story in shipping out older titles. If Warner Bros. claims that 75% of the movie buffs who buy its discs pick them up during the first four weeks following release, why should the appetite of the DVD renter be any different?

Netflix can use its recommendations engine to suggest worthy catalog titles that are readily available, but let's not assume that 70% of its members have catalog titles at the very top of their queues. I'll bet CEO Reed Hastings a month of rentals that I'm right.

Oh, and I did ask Hastings about this when I had a chance last year.

"It's hard to know, if we had unconstrained new release inventory, what it would be," was his response. "It would be a little higher, but not dramatically."

Well, now that new-release inventory is going to be even more constrained, I wonder how ridiculous that metric will be.

In Netflix's defense
The one thing that Netflix has been adamant about in its efforts to build out its library of digital content is that it wants to parlay any savings in release-window concessions and postal-shipping savings into securing more licensed streams.

I just don't think Netflix realizes what it's doing by turning its subscriber base into second-class citizens in the home-video space. Once it lets the retail world have dibs on a new release's first four weeks, it's simply opening up the door to companies such as Blockbuster and Amazon.com (Nasdaq: AMZN  ) that can both sell a DVD and stream it a month later to become bigger full-service players in this game.

And here I thought that 28 Days Later was a fictional horror flick.

Amazon.com, and Netflix are Motley Fool Stock Advisor selections. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days.

Longtime Fool contributor Rick Munarriz has been a Netflix shareholder -- and subscriber -- since 2002. He's also part of the Rule Breakers newsletter research team, seeking out tomorrow's ultimate growth stocks a day early. The Fool has a disclosure policy.


Read/Post Comments (39) | Recommend This Article (30)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 11:10 AM, Fool wrote:

    It's anecdotal I know but waiting 28 days for a new release doesn't bother me a whit. If its truly a hot movie, I probably saw it at the theater and I've waited six months for it to come out on DVD. I can certainly wait another month. In fact I've had new releases from Netflix at home that it's taken me a month to get around to watching. I think it is another example of the shrewd management at Netflix maximizing their profit potential. Management is why the stock has had such a banner year and looks to continue it in 2010. Keep up the good work Reed.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Fool wrote:

    Considering that Netflix is th most bang for your entertainment buck of any entertainment option out there, it's surprising to me that you took time out of your day to write an article complaining about Netflix. How about writing an article about all the shenanigans that service providers such as Comcast pull on consumers, especially in markets where they have a monopoly so consumers don't have any choice?

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 11:33 AM, jsarma wrote:

    When I read this news last night, I had the opposite reaction. I've just started using streaming heavily to watch TV shows. It's practically replaced my cable box! No more PITA DVR setup/priority management. I rarely end up renting new releases through netflix like I used to with blockbuster, because I find their recommendation system to be truly helpful at finding undiscovered movies. Netflix has done a great job at carving out a unique niche. In a recession, I look at this as a great stock, because it allows people to ditch their expensive cable boxes for cheaper netflix subscription. Might be a pipe-dream, but over the long term, it's possible.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 11:34 AM, dvena wrote:

    Rick, you and I will just have to disagree on this one. More than 70% of Netflix rentals are of the older titles - not the new releases, so the majority of Netflix customers don't care. Further, Netflix was able to bring even more of the older catalogue to streaming, which is the future. I don't believe that the churn is going to increase as a result of this deal. Finally, deals such as these will barely move the needle for Netflix, but this may be a death-blow (or at least a crippling blow) to the likes of Redbox - who lives off the new release centric consumer. This is a strategic move in that area as well.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 11:57 AM, millsbob wrote:

    i agree with the other posters, Rick: you're waaaay off base.

    maybe trendy sorts who have to follow the crowd and see whatever is popular this week care about this, but i don't, and it seems most NFLX subscribers don't either, from the stats.

    i'm far more interested in the increased availability of older titles online, so this sounds like a real win to me.

    smart move, NFLX! i may go long on you yet.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Dima wrote:

    I think all the previous commentators are missing Rick's points. You should reread the article. Netflix matrix of used DVD mailings vs. new releases is a COMPANY controlled metric (NOT consumer controlled one!). This is because Netflix is the one controlling the number of DVDs available for new releases. So customers are FORCED to get an older title until the new release is no longer NEW. Only a set number of people actually get those new releases and those are tied directly to the number of DVDs available. Others get the older titles by default from their queue.

    Great article Rick! I am with you.

    Still a great stock though and this move just adds to the reason to buy them. The only caveat in that 'buy' endorsement is for people to watch the subscriber growth numbers. If growth in those starts falling, then you know people are getting annoyed at such TWC deals.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 12:45 PM, SteveTheInvestor wrote:

    I have to agree with most the others here....... this is meaningless. I subscribe to Netflix and don't care in the least when a movie becomes available. I don't give a rip if someone else saw it a year before I did. Why would I care? It won't affect my decision to use Netflix services.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 1:25 PM, napikoski wrote:

    Netflix is so not the bad guy! I suggest, Rick, that you expand your movie horizons beyond new releases. The greatest things about Netflix for me and everyone I know who uses it are building a queue and discovering all sorts of old, recommended, and under-the-radar flicks. If you're all hopped up about seeing only new movies - which seems weird to me anyway - go to a theater, don't blame Netflix. I only have the "long wait" or "very long wait" once in a great while. I invite you to be my Netflix friend and explore my 500-deep queue!

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 3:05 PM, stan8331 wrote:

    Hot new releases have never been a major Netflix selling point. A majority of people use Netflix to get access to good movies they will really enjoy and might never have discovered otherwise - not stuff that's smokin' hot off the presses. Adding more content to the streaming bin may not matter to the author of this article, but I know it matters to me and I suspect I'm among a majority of Netflix users.

    The very first day a movie comes out on DVD, you've ALREADY waited a few months to see it. Netflix is run by some very smart folks and I see this change as adding significant new value to the majority of their customers. There certainly are some people who are more interested in access to hot new releases versus high quality films of any release date. With this move, Netflix is saying that pleasing those people is not critical to their business model. As a satisfied Netflix user, I see it as a very smart move.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 3:33 PM, phdh wrote:

    I have been a member of Netflix since 2004 just so I could get their old catalogue movies. I currently have almost 300 titles in my queue. This deal will not bother me at all. Sometimes I do put new movies I missed at the theater in my queue and get the "long wait" or "very long wait" message but I still receive them when they come up next in the queue or after another movie or two is sent to me. I think Reed Hastings is a smart manager and this move will most likely work to the customer and the company's benefit.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 3:59 PM, Melaschasm wrote:

    Netflix is trying to become a dominant provider of video over the internet. As such, they view the DVD rental business as a dying industry.

    If they can get much better access to streaming video, this will not be a big deal. However, not having access to streaming video as quickly as cable TV, makes this a less than impressive win for Netflix. By making a deal that does not include new content for streaming, Netflix has set a precendent, which will likely be followed by the rest of the industry.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 4:24 PM, BrianBristow wrote:

    I signed up for Netflix the day that I went to a Blockbuster hoping to rent the 1975 distopian drama/thriller Rollerball. Of course it wasn't there... there were walls and walls of Vin Diesel movies that you couldn't pay me to watch. Eventually I did find a copy of Rollerball. It was in the action section. It was a 2005 remake, staring Vin Diesel. I left the store, signed with Netflix and streamed a movie I really wanted to see. Two years on I've never once waited for a movie (Including a few new releases).

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 5:48 PM, TMFBent wrote:

    I'll take the larger on-demand library over the faster turn on new releases any day of the week. This was the right move for netflix, and only cements the position of the studios as anachronisms who are behind the curve and out of ideas.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 6:19 PM, jm7700229 wrote:

    Occasionally, my wife gets excited about a new movie (like the Lord of the Rings series). When that happens, we go to the theater to see it. If it's that good, it's probably worth seeing on the big screen anyway. And we can rent it to see it a second time.

    On the other hand, on gloomy days (rare here in Tucson) when we might want to go out to a movie, we often can't find anything worth leaving the house for. Same problem we used to have at Blockbuster.

    Because of Netflix, I see 50 to 60 movies a year. Before Netflix, the number was probably more like 12 to 15.

    So no, as long as the Netflix pricing remains so absurdly low, I can't see a lack of new releases having any negative effect whatever on my life.

    I still think the stock is fully valued. The moat that Netflix has around the rental market won't carry over into streaming video, where anyone can do it with a minimal investment and price competition will be murderous.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Fool wrote:

    asd

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 7:33 PM, Fool wrote:

    dasdasd

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 7:51 PM, hportofino19 wrote:

    Rick boy has a valid point here...My wife is upset we can't get the new releases right away. Last night we watch a 10 year old movie, which was the newest in the comedy category. I might reconsider NFLX

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Fool wrote:

    After reading this article, I am tempted to buy NFLX. Forget that I love Netflix, and do subscribe, I want to focus on this article.

    What is the goal of this article? Trying to make a point that NFLX is short changing its customers in some way. This is not logical.

    Any person, who watches movies has many options - cable ppv, theater, rentals, etc. So what if NFLX does x or y. Anyone can do as they please, including buy the DVD. So what is the point of writing this article?

    It did reveal to me that this company is well managed, and is finding ways to make more and more movies available to users from it. That should be good enough for entertainment. At least for me.

    Good day 'all.

  • Report this Comment On January 07, 2010, at 10:24 PM, jlanganki wrote:

    I like the additional streaming content, but I wouldn't buy the stock. Netflix doesn't have any control over their fate. Someone else can offer the same DVD by mail service (which Blockbuster does), Netflix is forced to pay whatever the postal service charges; Netflix is forced to pay the studios whatever they want to charge for online streaming. Therefore Netflix doesn't have much actual control over their success, and it is just a step in the digital era that will someday be forgotten (like America Online).

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 12:15 AM, rmitchell101 wrote:

    I seem to be on the side of most posters. Don't think this will make a dent in NFLX business. I think it's pretty shrewd that Redbox will have to yield to the same submission hold, thus undercutting everybody else. What the movie studios could do to make me happy is put A Thousand Clowns on DVD. I've been wanting to watch it for years. On NFLX I love the queue system. I know exactly what's coming. I absolutely hate going into Blockbluster etc to not find a movie I'm looking for or find a movie I'm not looking for, pure blind luck.

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 5:19 AM, KeitaiOtaku wrote:

    Netflix is for viewing old movies. However, looking at the survey most of us agree that this does cheapen Netflix's image.

    Probably we should be saying this solidifies Netflix's image, as a delayed gratification for movie watching. Netflix is accessing a massive catalog of content, at your fingertips (and then eventually watching it). And frankly, that's what's most compelling about Netflix.

    If you're someone who can wait for the DVD, you're someone who can wait another month to watch the movie.

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 6:20 AM, pocketrocket1 wrote:

    fool-The goal of the article is to tell you that netflix will sell out its customer in the short term to retain a competative advantage over other services.I am a netflix and blockbuster subscriber, and think this is a bad move.I don't think the total conversion away from dvds is that close yet as netflix apparently does.I still want new releases on the tuesday they come out,and still like trips to the video store.The only thing this does for them is position themselves earlier if...blockbuster and redbox have no choice but to agree to terms with WB.If this is the case , it will push people back to the bricks and mortar stores.Not a good move.

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 7:23 AM, paulwsmart wrote:

    I was happy to hear this news. I want movie studios to make great movies so I want them to make money. I think this is fair. Those who can't wait pay more to buy the DVD right away. Those who can wait get a lower price ($8/month) and the added convenience of online streaming. I'm all for it.

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 12:29 PM, prginww wrote:

    i agree with the 1st post

  • Report this Comment On January 08, 2010, at 2:12 PM, kodi68 wrote:

    I'd consider this a feint on the part of Netflix, especially with regards to shareholder value.

    I got rid of my cable about 5 years ago and rely solely on mail delivery, streaming media and now over-air digital signals for content. With such a massive amount of content at my fingertips for cheap, I could care less if I see the hot movie du jour as soon as it comes out. And with an increasing trend started by TiVo/DVRs and other On-Demand content delivery systems, I find that less people I know these days are in such a hurry to watch everything as soon as its released.

    If this deal allows them to get streaming media faster, I'm all for it. Netflix, IMHO, is on the cusp of being a true replacement for Cable/Satellite companies for many users. If the price for subscription is $18 for Netflix and $100 for cable, I think most rational people would choose a significantly lower price point for what amounts to the same content delivery because cable companies aren't usually publishing new DVDs on their channels unless it's Pay-Per-View.

    Oddly enough, Time Warner is making it even easier for Netflix to destroy it in the Cable delivery arena unless TW takes that time window to deliver new DVD content at a competitive price. I'd say this is a win for Netflix. They sacrifice the twitch users for the endurance users. Who would you rather have as a customer as a publicly traded company?

  • Report this Comment On January 10, 2010, at 3:54 PM, GyroDynasty wrote:

    I believe it's fair to the movie studios. They need to make as much money as possible for the benefit of the shareholders. Netflix needs more copies to avoid the annoying "very long wait" on expected availability.

  • Report this Comment On January 13, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Fool wrote:

    Rick, not sure where you live but in the DC area I RARELY ever have to wait for a new release in my queue. It may say long wait but if it is #1 that is what i receive. I have also been a member since 2004 and have a mix of older movies, tv shows and new releases.

    I also find it strange that someone stated that the newest comedy was 10 years old. They obviously aren't using the lists generated by members of upcoming releases, etc.

    28 days will have no ill effect on my 300+ queue. It'll give me time to finally catchup on True Blook and Big Love :)

  • Report this Comment On January 13, 2010, at 11:08 AM, imkul2003 wrote:

    I can't help but think that this Rick "Aristotle" is a contrary indicator. Time and again he's misunderstood and gotten things wrong in the most curious of fashions. As a Netflix subscriber, I could care less about the new releases being available 30 days later in larger quantities. The real great thing about this is that they will get more streaming content. That's the main thing I use these days! It's awesome! More and better stuff is the thing to do here. I can't remember the last time I had a movie in my queue that had any "wait" on it. I simply don't care if the movie is brand new or not. Give me a good movie over some new piece of crap any day. I'm not even a Netflix investor, so no "party spirit" here. Just objective analysis of the deal. Hope it helps!

  • Report this Comment On January 13, 2010, at 5:24 PM, balaray wrote:

    I am a bit disappointed in the slant your article has taken based on your Netflix position. I think what Warner is doing is fine. In the movie value chain, the studios are king. Netflix is one of numerous channels to the consumer and has limited influence on the studios. Netflix should be glad that Warner gave them something in return rather than only choking new releases for 28 days the way Warner did with redbox. Also, you are incorrect in your statement that Blockbuster will also be subject to the 28 day window. Warner has explicitly stated that BBI will not be subject to this constraint as BBI has a revenue sharing agreement and pays Warner for every rental. So, this boils down to how the pie is being shared and I think the owner of the content has every right to ask for more and particularly can do so when the provider (Netflix) is not an exclusive channel to the consumer. Net net, BBI has probably cut a better deal with Warner than Netflix and Netflix made a call on profitability and hopes its customers will not notice.

    I also see a lot of comments about the death of cable and satellite etc. I think folks take it to an extreme. Netflix will never be more powerful than the company that owns the electronic pipe into your house. When the market does move in a direction where content can be streamed into your house wirelessly (such as Wimax), then the cable and DSl providers will lose their control on the consumer. Until then, they may exercise control on you by choking the GBs you can download or do something along those lines to maximize their profit.

  • Report this Comment On January 14, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Patricia013 wrote:

    Hands down, I LOVE my Netflix. There really is nothing like it. I love seeing the instant movies because I'm an old movie hound. I can wait for new releases - no problem. What does irk me is the "long wait' and "very long wait" in my queue that never seems to go away. I was so tired of waiting for the new season of Dexter that I finally called and complained and then they were shifted to the top of my queue! That's my only irk with the company though I understand you can't serve everybody at one time- otherwise their service and their attitude toward me, the subscriber are simply perfect.

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 1:59 PM, artistx wrote:

    What the author fails to talk about is the fact that a release is "new" doesn't means it's good. Netflix has more quality movies in their catalog than the competition (Blockbuster or cable tv). That is the number 1 reason I subscribe to Netflix. This new release scenario only matters to companies like Blockbuster because they have such a poor catalog and I'm always looking for a new title there because of that.

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 2:01 PM, LewisLovesLife wrote:

    I love Netflix. I have been a subscriber for 8 years or more. I am always amazed they can provide such a great service for such a low price. I don't have cable so I use Netflix alot. For $20, I used to get 12 movies a month. Now with Roku (instant viewing), I get half as many movies in the mail, but we using instant viewing all the time. More instant movies sounds great to me.

    I think it is funny how cable users seem to send so much time saving programs and trying to skip commercials. With Netflix instant viewing, everything is available without commercial and without need to save program. I just hope they expand there TV shows available for instant viewing. I don't mind waiting a month for new releases. I don't usually end up watching new releases until they have been out for a few weeks or a month anyway.

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 2:27 PM, efhouse wrote:

    More streaming content!

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 4:18 PM, KickBackAt40 wrote:

    I took the poll, and voted that I think management made a mistake. I'm worried that it'll drive subscribers away and I'll ultimately suffer.

    However, in reading the comments, I see that the vast majority of them are in line with my thoughts. New releases are not a major draw to me. I go for weeks at a time without even knowing what's coming out on DVD. Of course that's probably because I watch normal TV (DirecTV) through the DVR and haven't actually sat through a commercial in something like five years.

    Speaking of TV. I'd much rather find more stuff available to watch on Instant Play via Netflix because I completely despise surfing through the satellite guide looking for something to record.

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 4:35 PM, Muralpainter wrote:

    Do your homework Rick. I actually see the arrangement as a benefit for Netflix users.

    While before you could theoretically get a new release without a delay, the waiting list was so long it would take longer than a month anyway. By increasing the amount of copies available it will effectively get a new release in my mailbox even sooner. Netgain!

    Like the other posters if I urgently wanted to see a movie I would go to the theater anyway.

    Netflix just keep on fattening up your online streaming catalog with older titles. There are some real gems in there, and if you find something crappy you can be watching another movie in less than a minute. Ain’t technology great..

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 4:36 PM, Muralpainter wrote:

    Do your homework Rick. I actually see the arrangement as a benefit for Netflix users.

    While before you could theoretically get a new release without a delay, the waiting list was so long it would take longer than a month anyway. By increasing the amount of copies available it will effectively get a new release in my mailbox even sooner. Netgain!

    Like the other posters if I urgently wanted to see a movie I would go to the theater anyway.

    Netflix just keep on fattening up your online streaming catalog with older titles. There are some real gems in there, and if you find something crappy you can be watching another movie in less than a minute. Ain’t technology great..

  • Report this Comment On January 15, 2010, at 6:43 PM, olddrun1 wrote:

    I agree with Rick. My course of action will be to unsubscribe until the wait is over and then reup at a later date. No use paying to wait for the newer movies.

  • Report this Comment On December 03, 2010, at 9:51 PM, coolarrow10 wrote:

    Still a great deal no matter how you look at it. And based on Netflix's current stock price (186) compared to when you wrote this in January (50) I have a feeling you won't be writing any more about how Netflix is "selling out" to its subscribers (I see on your profile you own stock in Netflix). They've done nothing but constantly improve relations with their stakeholders. Remember when Blockbuster ruled the in home video entertainment market? I say hold your tongue and be thankful for what you have.

    New releases? I can wait.

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Drinda wrote:

    I find it odd that The Motley Poll indicates a great deal more of dissatisfaction with Netflix, yet the comments indicate hardly any dissatisfaction with Netflix. This seems really odd to me, especially because usually people that are upset about something, usually do more whining in the comment boxes.

    Anywho, I do not care if I see a movie right after release or 10 years later, as long as it is a good movie.

Add your comment.

DocumentId: 1078953, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 4/19/2014 3:52:38 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement