Veliki režiser horora, Stjuart Gordon, umro je pre
nekoliko dana (tačnije, 24. marta). Tužno je znati da nikada nećemo videti novi film ovog originalnog,
divnog čoveka, najpoznatijeg po filmu RE-ANIMATOR. Povodom tog filma
svojevremeno sam napisao: „Gordon nas podseća koliko neukus i smrt i perverzija
mogu da budu smešni! Više memorabilnih replika i upečatljivih set pisova nego
ijedna druga zombi komedija! Džefri Kombs u jednoj od antologijskih uloga
vascelog žanra.“
Srećan sam što sam ga imao priliku upoznati i
intervjuisati na festivalu Fantazija u
Montrealu 2010. Tada sam se i naživo uverio koliko je on jedna topla,
inteligentna, talentovana, ljubazna, duhovita, divna osoba.
Iza sebe je ostavio klasike koji će se s uživanjem
gledati i u decenijama koje dolaze – pod uslovom da opstane neko čovečanstvo,
da neko preživi ovu, i predstojeće apokalipse. Gledaće se, što se mene tiče,
pre svega i iznad svih sledeći: RE-ANIMATOR. FROM BEYOND. DOLLS. DAGON.
STUCK...
 |
| pa odmah za njima i ovaj... |
Baš pre neki dan, razgovarajući sa Acom
Radivojevićem o trenutnom njanjavo-poludupastom stanju u horor filmu (mačku o
rep okačite te žvake o „renesansi“ koje vam pedluju horor sajtovi!), prizvao sam
primer Gordona kao reditelja vrste filmova kakvi danas nedostaju. I još,
umetnika čiji su horori, čak i kad su snimani sa jezivo niskim budžetima,
IZGLEDALI lepo, jasno, dopadljivo, za razliku od traljave digitalne
neosvetljene tmuše u koju imamo da škiljimo danas.
Sticajem okolnosti, više sam o ovom značajnom,
uticajnom i talentovanom reditelju pisao na
engleskom nego na srpskom, pa da ne bih prepričavao i prevodio samog sebe,
radije ću da od tih mojih tekstova za Rue Morgue i drugde načinim jedan
smisleni omaž ovom velikanu.
Dakle, sve ovo dole, (c) Dejan Ognjanović za Ghoul Inc.
In his rich career of a B-movie maverick, Stuart Gordon fought with censors,
producers and financiers, constantly struggling to preserve integrity of his
vision. Interestingly, almost all of his best horror films are inspired by
works of the two giants of horror fiction – Edgar Allan Poe (The Pit and
the Pendulum, 1991; Masters of
Horror: The Black Cat, 2007) and H.
P. Lovecraft (Re-Animator, 1985; From Beyond, 1986; Castle Freak, 1995; Dagon,
2001; Masters of Horror: Dreams in
the Witch-House, 2005).
I met him at Fantasia, Montreal,
where he presented The Raven, a play about E.
A. Poe which he directed and co-wrote with his old friend and collaborator,
Dennis Paoli.
Stuart Gordon has a unique talent to unite the
things which are either considered too disparate (like sex and horror) or those which are rarely blended with such an
unmitigated success (like horror and
humor). Nowhere is this mixture so successful as in his debut, Re-Animator,
a timeless classic which is at once sick,
depraved, hilarious and utterly what-the-funny. Many directors aimed for
that particular rainbow, but only a few (like The Return of the Living Dead, 1985, and Braindead, 1992) can parallel the insanity and unpredictability of Re-Animator's inspired splattstick.
Unity of
opposites? Hell, yeah! Rooted in literature and theater (where his
productions were nominated for many important awards), Gordon mastered B-movie entertainment of the horrific and provocative kind. The same
man who concieved the gleefully sadistic The
Dentist (1996) also wrote the kiddy fantasy hit Honey, I Shrunk the Kids (1989). With equal wit he adapts Lovecraft
and Mamet (in Edmond, 2005); he is as
inspired by the most outrageous fantasy
of From Beyond (1986) as he is by the
gritty reality of Stuck, 2007 (based on a true event).
From the depths of the Charles Band and Brian Yuzna produced exploitation he is struggling to be political, socially conscious and
subversive.
Gordon represents the true spirit of the independents which reigned in the bygone (?)
days. His ability to join the unjoinable
and make it enjoyable is all but
forgotten in this day and age where young horror directors can barely concoct a
story worth telling – far from imbuing it with wit, energy and subtext like Gordon so effortlessly could. As such,
he is both a relic from the past and
a lasting inspiration to all those
who can see beneath the surface right into the bloody beating heart of B-moviemaking.
Top 5 reasons to
love & respect Stuart Gordon
1. No one mixes sex, horror and humour quite like him! Case in point: the
legendary, much-censored scene from Re-Animator
in which decapitated and reanimated Dr. Hill is "giving head" to
naked and strapped Barbara Crampton.
2. No one does the body horror quite so fleshy,
gory and gooey. Just think of the unrestrained insanity of From Beyond: the flying creatures, the
mutated lecherous doctor, the protruding pineal gland, the sadomasochism, the
eels from beyond… all that, and more, in one single movie!
3. No one ever used
Jeffrey Combs to his full potential the way Gordon has – inspiring not only
his comic genius (in career-defining
Re-Animator) but also his drama potential, first in Castle Freak, then as Poe himself in The Black Cat, and ultimately (and even
more seriously) as Poe in the theater production of The Raven, directed and co-written by Gordon with Dennis Paoli.
4. No one honors
Lovecraft with so much freedom,
yet respecting his spirit and subtext the way Gordon does. Case in
point: Dagon (inspired by "The
Shadow over Innsmouth"), the
closest anyone has approached a proper HPL adaptation so far, capturing
both the decaying seaside town atmosphere and the implied sexuality + sadism
from between Lovecraft's lines.
5. No director from the 1980s has retained the true spirit of the
independents quite so consistently and subversively the way Gordon has.
This is obvious both in the films he's made (King of the Ants; Stuck) and the one he was not allowed to, because
of the touchy politics (The House of
Re-Animator).
U opširnom intervjuu koji sam uradio
sa Brajanom Juznom – producentom prvog Re-animatora (i rediteljem drugog i
trećeg dela) – on mi je sledeće imao kazati o saradnji sa Gordonom.
Brian
Yuzna: I think that Stuart Gordon
is an incredibly talented director, started as a theater director, and
RE-ANIMATOR was the first movie for both of us. The budget was very small,
under one million dollars. He always does what he wants, but we’ve always had a
lot of fun working together. Our ideas are very similar in the sense that we
both like excess. With RE-ANIMATOR we went with a number of versions of the script,
based on how extreme it was, did it go far enough. I thought that if the movie
was not good, then at least it would be shocking. But since Stuart is so
talented the movie turned out very good as well.
When
we moved to FROM BEYOND, that’s still a pre-digital age, and it was very
difficult to do monsters. In fact, when we decided on that story, we thought
that it had this machine in it that would sell it. We basically used the
Lovecraft story by the main titles. The whole Lovecraft’s story takes place in
the prologue to that movie, and then it becomes a kind of action movie with
explorers into this other dimension. For example, the great monster at the end
was our attempt to present a shoggoth from Lovecraft’s stories, based on the
drawings of Bernie Wrightson. Today you can really realize his visions. Back
then everything had to be plastic, and was very clumsy, but we had a lot of fun
doing it.
I co-wrote the story adaptation with Stuart Gordon
and Dennis Paoli, but only Dennis Paoli wrote the screenplay. They came with
this Dr Pretorius, who is taken from THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and who
inaugurates the new world of gods and monsters. This character was not in the
short story, but he exemplified the theme of a man for whom the senses are not
enough, who must go further - this became the theme of that movie. And we took
from the short story the idea of the pineal gland as something which enables
one to see another dimension. And the gimmick is, if you can see them, they can
see you, and they’re hungry.
I think it was a great writing done by the
screenwriters. Today when you watch it, the effects seem clumsy. We had to make
giant lamprey worms. Today you could do it digitally and it’d look really
great. We had to actually build it, and it doesn’t move very much. These types
of effects tend to be tricky.
The idea of pineal gland coming out of Jeffrey
Combs’s forehead – he always complained that we’re giving him a “dog dick” in
his forehead, and we assured him that it wasn’t that. This kind of thing would
also be much easier today; we had to put him a kind of helmet on his head with
a mechanism to move the “gland”. I think those movies work more because of the
good writing and directing than because of the effects. In BRIDE OF RE-ANIMATOR
we had to make the small fingers-creature with stop-motion, today you could
easily do it digitally. But I think there is a kind of charm in puppetry.
Ceo ovaj
moj intervju sa Juznom možete čitati
OVDE.
A kad smo kod intervjua, rekoh već,
uradio sam veoma opširan razgovor i sa Gordonom, pre 10 godina. Njegov veći
deo, mada ne u celini celosti, izašao je u knjižici intervjua HORROR
HEROES, spec. izdanju RUE MORGUE magazina. Za ovu priliku, u znak
sećanja na njega, za blog sam izdvojio njegove odgovore na nekolicinu mojih
pitanja.
(Uncut verziju ovog intervjua, kao i
moje razgovore sa desetinama drugih svetskih majstora filmskog i književnog
horora čitaćete, jednog dana, kad budem rešio da je vreme da podvučem crtu, u
knjizi STRAŠNE PRIČE...)
if you can
think it, you should express it
A Stuart Gordon interview
by Dejan Ognjanović
Horror
is still perceived by the media as a second-grade genre, immature, perhaps even
dangerous...
-
I don't believe it. I like what Stephen King says about it. He says that it's
the reverse spiral of death. We all think about death, and that's what horror
is all about.
So,
you have no problem being called a horror director? You don't feel ghettoed?
-
Sometimes I do, but I think that people who despise horror are snobs, those who
try to put it down. My feeling is that it may not be for everyone, just like
not everyone likes eating escargots, but that doesn't mean it's bad. All it
means is that it's not for them. What I think is funny, if you look at all the
greatest films of all time, the films that people remember, that are the most
popular, that made the most money, they're either science fiction or horror.
They're
certainly among the most memorable, thanks to the striking imagery that they
use.
-
Brian Yuzna had a very good point when he said that, if you had to pick one
image from all the movies of all times, the most popular image, he believes it
would be Boris Karloff as Frankenstein's monster. Everybody knows who that is.
So, horror leaves a lasting impression. What I think is really interesting about
horror is that people who scare us the most – we love the most. Which is kind
of strange because you'd think that people who scare you, you wouldn't want to
have anything to do with them, but it's the opposite, you want them to scare
you.
What
do you think about the notion of going too far in terms of movie violence?
-
I don't think you should ever censor yourself. That's a lesson that I learned
when I was working on From Beyond.
I'd say to myself: "Audiences are not gonna be able to handle this. This
is too much." There was a scene that was shot, edited, that existed in a
couple of cuts. It was a scene, right at the beginning of the movie, where
Jeffrey Combs's character is trying to call the scientist guy, and he opens the
door, and he's got a naked woman, all tied up, you know, and she has a nail
pounded through her tongue, and Jeffrey's character unties her and lets her go.
I thought a woman with a nail through her tongue was too much, and now every
other woman has a pierced tongue. (Laughter) So that taught me a lot: never
ever censor yourself. My feeling is: if you can think it, you should express
it.
What
about a director's responsibility? Could you damage minds, hurt people?
-
I don't think that's really the case. It works the opposite way. I think you
help people. When I worked in theatre I used to read Artaud, about his notion
of "The Theater of Cruelty", and his idea was that all theater should
be acts of violence, crimes committed onstage, because he felt that it's a way
for people to get these ideas out of their system, that it's a way to purge
these ideas, that it was a healthy thing, a cleansing. And I think that's true.
We all have very dark thoughts, and we think about murdering people, or
torturing someone or whatever, and to express that through a movie, which
doesn't really harm anyone, I think it's healthy.
When
you were making Re-Animator, were you
aware that you're pushing the envelope?
-
I wanted it to have something to set it apart from other films. And Brian
Yuzna, who produced the movie, had a film festival in his house, which went for
a couple of weeks, and each day he'd show me some movies. He wanted me to be
aware of the movies that were being made at that time. As the matter of fact,
it was Rosemary's Baby that had the
greatest effect on me. I read Roman Polanski's autobiography, and he talks a
lot in that book about how people see things, about vision and how the eye
works. And watching how he shot Rosemary's
Baby, how he made everything look subjective…
 |
| Gordon sa Denisom Paolijem |
What
is it that affects you most in horror films: is it violence, gore, chills,
suspense...?
-
This is how it works for me. Number one, it has to be a well-directed film.
There are tons of movies that are really bloody, but they're so badly made –
they couldn't scare anybody. So, yeah, it can be about the imagery, but it's
even more about the acting, caring about the characters, and if you care about
them and you get involved in the movie then you feel as if something's being
done to you. And that really is upsetting. For example, one of my favorite
movies is Cronenberg's Dead Ringers.
By the end of that movie I was on the floor, under my seat, I was creeping out.
Then I saw it again on the American television, and they cut out all the blood
out of it... at the end, when they're killing each other. None of that was in
the movie, and I was still getting upset because the acting was so good. Jeremy
Irons is so great in that movie. That's what was making me squeamish, really;
it was him.
What
exactly were your intentions with Re-Animator:
was it to shock people, to gross them out, to entertain them...?
-
Well, all of the above. What I think Brian was trying to get across to me was
that you had to have something in the movie that would set it apart from all
the others. That's when Dennis Paoli and I came up with the idea that the dead
people in this movie, and especially Dr. Hill, want to have sex with a living
person. That's something you don't ever see in horror films. Zombies always
wanted to eat people, but we thought: how about if they want to fuck people? It
was the sexuality of Re-Animator that
I think really set it apart. And when we wrote it, Dennis asked: "How is
he going to have sex with her if he has hid head cut off?" – and then he
answered his own question.
O
tome kako sam upoznao Gordona, kakav je bio uživo i naživo, možete detaljnije
čitati u mom slikovitom izveštaju sa Fantazije, OVDE.
A evo ga i tekst o RE-ANIMATORU koji
sam pisao za moj nekadašnji blog na engleskom, THE TEMPLE OF GHOUL. Izvorno izašlo OVDE.
RE-ANIMATOR (1984)
Director: Stuart Gordon
Screenplay: S. Gordon,
Dennis Paoli, William J. Norris
Music: Richard Band
Director of Photography:
Mac Ahlberg
Special make-up effects:
David Allen, John Naulin, Anthony Doublin, John Carl Buechler....
Starring: Jeffrey Combs,
Bruce Abbott, David Gale, Barbara Crampton,...
Running time: 87' (cut from
90' -also available on 97' but with less gore)
GHOUL'S
RATING:
****
4
Stuart Gordon began his
career with unusual stage productions in his Organic Theatre in Chicago, where the audience was treated with a
weird mixture of art and Grand Guignol. The latter is very much obvious in his
first feature, RE-ANIMATOR, which was originally conceived as a TV series.
Nothing strange there, since it's based on a series of short stories by the
great H.P. Lovecraft, published under the title HERBERT WEST - REANIMATOR.
Luckily, Brian Yuzna (the producer at the time; later also a famed horror
director) wanted to make a feature: only the big screen could do the justice to
a story that the British author James Havoc called "one of the most
gratuitously sick exercises in human dismemberment and degradation that I have
ever read". And rightly so. Lovecraft was not very proud of this early
effort (written in 1922), but the story remains one of his better achievements,
notable not only for its gruesomeness, but also for an element so rare in his
fiction - humor. Pitch black,
cynical, but humor nonetheless.
With a first-time director and a cast of
unknowns, Yuzna could rely only on Lovecraft's name attached to the title and –
gratuitous amounts of carnage and blood. He was so uncompromising about it that
he refused to submit the film to the Ratings Board: RE-ANIMATOR came to the
cinemas unrated - and took the
audience by storm. The cult status was immediate and, surprisingly for this
kind of film, even the reviews were mostly favorable.
The plot is simple and, by now, very
familiar: a young student from Zurich, Herbert West (Jeffrey Combs – in a
career-defining debut role) improves the serum to resurrect the newly dead,
invented by his deceased mentor, and comes to the Miscatonic University in
Arkham, Massachusetts (fictional university in a fictional town, both Lovecraft's
inventions). He continues his experiments, using the reluctant help from a
fellow student (Bruce Abbott) whose apartment (or, rather, basement) he's
sharing. Things are complicated by the unscrupulous and lecherous Dr Hill (the
late David Gale), who would like to usurp the discovery. It will cost him his
head, but that's exactly when he becomes even more dangerous...
Very little remained of the original
Lovecraft's story: names of the characters, the basic theme and situation, and
a detail or two. Still, RE-ANIMATOR remains the best screen adaptation of a
Lovecraft work, for it keeps the gleefully
macabre spirit of the original, and manages to be scary, gruesome, funny
and entertaining yet never reverts to cheap tricks, low humor or parody. It is
a straight-faced horror comedy, and it has found a perfect vehicle in Jeffrey
Combs, whose portrayal of Herbert West
is simply – excellent. His amoral, Faustian mad doctor sees no limits on the
road to triumph, and perceives people around him as merely more or less
suitable "specimens". As such, this mad doctor inevitably recalls the
classic portrayal of Dr Frankenstein by Udo
Kier in similarly outrageous straight-faced black comedy FLESH FOR
FRANKENSTEIN. Even his frail physique and the feverish, fanatical look of his
blue eyes remind one of Udo Kier's memorable character.
Similarly accomplished is David Gale's
role: this tall, slim actor with a creepy face and high cheekbones becomes even
creepier once he's reduced to a severed, bloody head which hisses, screams and,
in the end, fondles the naked body of a tied-up co-ed (Barbara Crampton).
Unfortunately, the latter scene (lasting some 2,5 minutes) has been cut from
most prints of the film. It belongs to the same scene which features the most
memorable quotes. "I must say, Dr Hill, I'm VERY disappointed in you. You
steal the secret of life and death, and here you are, trysting with a
bubble-headed co-ed. You're not even a second-rate scientist!" yells West.
A little later, upon Dr Hill's threat that he would steal his serum, West replies: "Who's going to believe a
talking head? Get a job in a sideshow!"
The perfect balance of humor and horror
and dynamic direction are Stuart Gordon's achievements which can't be
overpraised, as well as Mac Ahlberg's excellent photography. Much disputed
Richard Band's score, "borrowed" and adapted from the classic Bernard
Herrmann's PSYCHO score, is in fact perfectly functional in this context,
effectively underlying the grotesquerie of the events. Truth be told, in the
last 10 minutes, when all the bodies in the hospital morgue rise from the dead,
the grotesquerie attains a level of intense horror and pure delirium as the
living-dead intestines start wrapping around the hapless characters...
The great success of RE-ANIMATOR brought
about a momentary popularity of HPL in the movies, but the lackluster
"adaptations" that followed (FROM BEYOND, also by Gordon, THE
UNNAMABLE, THE LURKING FEAR, FOREVER EVIL...) were mostly misguided (in
Gordon's case) or shameless and talentless attempts to cash in on a trend,
never caring- or being able to- be faithful to the spirit of HPL, present in
every inspired frame of RE-ANIMATOR. Much later, Gordon would repay his HPL
debt by making the best straight adaptation in DAGON (based on the novella
"The Shadow over Innsmuth").
A pretty successful sequel followed
(BRIDE OF REANIMATOR, 1990, Brian Yuzna), while the 3rd part, also by Yuzna
(BEYOND RE-ANIMATOR) was much cheaper and trashier.
Za kraj ovog mega-omaža Stjuartu
Gordonu, evo i mojih osvrta na neke njegove novije filmove koji su bili bacani
na jedan forum u vreme pre pokretanja ovog bloga...
KING OF THE ANTS
***
3
Najnoviji film Stjuarta Gordona od mene ima jaku
trojku. To je ekvivalent vrlo dobrog filma, ali ipak, nekako sam razočaran -
očekivao sam više.
U godini u kojoj će dva revenge flicka da zauzmu
prvo i drugo mesto moje top liste možda je ipak bilo previše očekivati od
jednog Gordona da priđe tako blizu Tarantinu i Čanvuk Parku. Film je
iznenađujuće jednostavan i linearan, a svaka mogućnost komplikacije ili
inventivnosti regulisana je sa par pažljivo situiranih deus ex machina.
Film pokazuje naznake jakih potencijala u pojedinim
momentima (recimo u sceni u kojoj jedan od onih ružnih, debelih Boldvina
ubeđuje gl. junaka da se upusti u izvesnu 'amoralnu' akciju), ali ih brzo
zaboravlja, napušta, i ne čini bogzna šta od njih. Ključna poenta - kako
naizgled ok momak postaje plaćeni ubica - nikako nije obrazložena niti razvijena,
a slično prolazi i njegova transformacija u krvoločnog osvetnika, jednom kad ga
poslodavci zajebu.
Jedino mi nije jasno da li je Gordon uzeo banalan roman osvete i oplemenio ga svojim neodoljivim exploatatorskim momentima sexa i ultranasilja, ili je predložak bio genijalna analiza osvete od koje su u Gordonovim b-movie-flick rukama ostali samo nepovezani parčići.
U svakom slučaju, da nije gorenavedenih
revenge-flickova koji su me razmazili pokazavši kakvi se masterpisovi mogu
praviti na tu temu, i moja ocena bi možda bila MALO veća. Ovako, ovo je
pristojan, gledljiv, vrrrlo dobar, ali ni po čemu izuzetan film. Zapravo,
najzabavniji je po tome što se radi o krimi-trileru koji sve vreme oscilira na
granici horora, a nju zapravo nekoliko puta i prelazi, naročito u završnici,
gde je osveta izvedena ne u duhu akcionog, već pre horor filma.
Svakako preporučujem onima koji mogu da gledaju
mnogo brutalnog nasilja bez zaklanjanja očiju, ali ne očekujte ništa blisko
remek delu. U kontextu Gordonove filmografije, ovo bi mu bio treći najbolji
film (posle Reanimatora i Dagona). (Update: danas bih na treće
mesto ipak stavio From Beyond, a na čestvrto kasnije snimljeni Stuck).
EDMOND
**
2+
Ovo je strašno predvidiv i jednodimenzionalan film: mogu da pojmim kako i zašto Amerima izgleda mnogo pametniji i relevantniji nego što jeste, ali ne primajte se na priče o 'najinteligentnijem' i štatijaznam Gordonovom filmu. Mejsi je, NARAVNO, odličan, kao stvoren za ulogu, ali ta njegova odiseja je suviše iskonstruisana i zapravo najviše mi je smetalo što sve vreme imam osećaj ne priče koja se logično razvija nego lutke koju puppet master pomera po svom nahođenju da bi mi izručio neku relativno plošnu propoved.
King of the ants je bio 'pametniji' a uz to mnogo uzbudljiviji i
edgier film od ovoga, dakle, ok ali ništa više od toga. Nije nemoguće da će na
II gledanje, bez velikih očekivanja, da NEZNATNO poraste u mojim očima, ali ne
mnogo.
DREAMS IN THE WITCH HOUSE
**(*)
3-
Ehhh... Gordon je uzeo samo najkonvencionalnije
deonice iz inače odlične i groundbreaking HPL priče, i onda ih nakitio sa još
više klišea, a izbacio ono najbolje – međudimenzionalna putovanja i bizarne
pre-LSD kosmičke vizije i glimpseve neslućenih svetova koje niko pre Lavkrafta
nije ni sanjao – za razliku od veštica i banalnih žrtvovanja, koja su opšta
mesta žanra. E, sad – kad izbaciš skoro sve te momente vezane za modernu fiziku
i baciš se samo na uprošćenu žvaku o veštici – oseti se poveća rupa... Lepo je
sve ovo odrađeno, ali previše konvencionalno ne samo za HPL-a nego i za
Gordona. Lepo je što beba najebe na kraju, ali to nije dovoljno: od Gordona,
naročito posle KING OF THE ANTS, očekivao sam više edge-a, više smelosti,
najzad – više Lavkrafta...
*
Eto, čisto da ne ispadne da sam
nekritički hvalio sve što je Gordon ikada napravio, uvrstio sam u ovaj omaž i
nekoliko ne baš superpohvalnih rivjua.
Ipak, podsećam: svakog čoveka, a
naročito umetnika, treba vrednovati prema njegovim najvećim dometima, a najviši
Gordonovi, nažalost, danas su drugima praktično nedohvatljivi. Još gore, onome
što je on postizao čak i u svojim polovičnim filmovima niko više danas ne teži. On je uspevao da pravi nepretenciozno pametne filmove koji su
pamet držali tamo gde joj je mesto, između redova, a u samim redovima bila je
strava, akcija, humor, šok, splater, zabava. Današnje horor zvezde i „majstori“
najčešće odmah grabe metafore, simbole, poruke, propovedi, „pamet“ i to trpaju
u prve redove, nauštrb strave i zabave, tako da između svega toga odjekuje
šupljina...
Počivaj
u miru, dragi Stjuarte Gordone, divni čoveče i reditelju od sorte kakve više
nećemo imati...
