comment #1

Travis Crabtree says ...

Firsties! Oh. Wrong site.

So I'll be the first at least to ask the inevitable question.... where will they find ten good films? Has actionman taken over the Academy? (just kiddin, brotha!)

Ten?

Really?

comment #2

Chase Kahn says ...

I know the Oscars are tainted in the view of many (including me), but this is great. It reminds me of 1939 when you had 10 nominees in arguably the greatest year ever for cinema.

Now, perhaps a "Children of Men" or "Assassination of Jesse James" or "Zodiac" will have an easier time without giant campaigns and politics. Then again, who really cares about Oscars anymore?

comment #3

George Prager says ...

This is a gift from God, HE-wise. I can't wait for all of the strange debates that will come out of the 2009 nominee list ("I can't believe THE HANGOVER was nominated but not BRUNO!!!!!!")

comment #4

bluefugue says ...

I'm pretty sure there used to be more than 5 Best Picture nominees, back in the olden days. I recall, in "Adventures in the Screen Trade," William Goldman listing the nominees in '39 (which he felt was the best year for Hollywood films), and there were around 10. Don't know when the change was made, though.

comment #5

bluefugue says ...

Doh -- too slow.

comment #6

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Will this apply to acting and directing categories too? They're going to need to have the ceremony outdoors to accommodate all the nominees.

Kind of ridiculous, but I suppose it'll make sure TV audiences have seen at least ONE of the ten films nominated. I bet more commercial films will get noms this way. The Dark Knight would have made the cut on a list of 10. I'm sure that's the rationale behind it.

comment #7

Chase Kahn says ...

"So I'll be the first at least to ask the inevitable question.... where will they find ten good films? Has actionman taken over the Academy? (just kiddin, brotha!)

Ten?

Really?"

True. But maybe this will open the door for more dark horse candidates -- plus with 10 nominees, maybe for once we won't know whose going to win in January.

comment #8

btwnproductions says ...

It's to get THE DARK KNIGHTs in and goose ratings. That's all.

comment #9

Travis Crabtree says ...

I'm too pessimistic, I suppose.

Many of you assume that the Academy will use the extra five nominations to open it up to films like "Assasination of Jesse James" and "Children of Men".

I see the five slots taken up by the likes of Nora Ephron movies, "Mama Mia!", "Kingdom of Crystal Skull", that sort of thing.

comment #10

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Problem is that unless they expand the Best Director category too, you'll pretty much be sure that the 5 nominated directors' films are the front-runners for Best Picture. So the added 5 will just look like window dressing.

I know occasionally the director of a Best Picture nominee isn't nominated individually, but not very often.

comment #11

btwnproductions says ...

It's been five nominees since 1944.

comment #12

Joe G says ...

I dunno, it might shake things up. Some stranger stuff might start to sneak in, make things less predictable.

Can the Golden Globes follow suit and nominate 20 films over comedy/musicals and dramas to maintain their bellwether status? I think they just got kind of screwed.

comment #13

corey3rd says ...

this will add 2 hours to the ceremony

comment #14

Chase Kahn says ...

Travis, well obviously a voting body that continually gets it wrong will still get it wrong even with 5 more chances -- but at least the odds are better for under-the-rader, truly great films that are victims of studio indifference.

If only Universal had propped up "Children of Men" in 2006 or Paramount with "Zodiac" in '07 releasing it in November instead of March, they would have a better chance.

Some people are expecting that this means films like "Star Trek" will now get in. I'm thinking more "Revolutionary Road" and its ilk.

I like change and I'm a little optimistic -- the Oscars have been so damn predictable or disgustingly unpredictable recently -- I see this as a good thing, a tougher race, and a bit more of a wild card.

comment #15

Ronald McFirbank says ...

What they really need is a popular movie category versus one for indie films.

Oh wait, they do: Best Animated Feature versus Best Picture.

comment #16

Joe M. says ...

Obviously, both things will happen: a couple of summer's big commercial films will now be acknowledged, but also a couple of more commercially underwhelming but critically praised efforts will be, too. Interesting, to say the least.

comment #17

DarthCorleone says ...

I had to do a double-take when I read this. This has to be April 1st, right? Right?

If true - I'm sorry - but this just sucks. The Oscars have already been devalued, but I still enjoy them. Way to go on devaluing them even more.

comment #18

FWickman says ...

Between the 1920s and early 1940s, nominees numbered from 3 to 12: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Picture#1930s

comment #19

Floyd Thursby says ...

Pulls rug out from those who claimed Public Enemies and Shutter Island aren't Oscar material.

Obviously helps Hurt Locker's chances.

comment #20

RustysaGoodDog says ...

Problem is that unless they expand the Best Director category too, you'll pretty much be sure that the 5 nominated directors' films are the front-runners for Best Picture. So the added 5 will just look like window dressing.

You're exactly right Bosh!

comment #21

Halhillco says ...

With over 6,000 members of the Academy at least with ten nominees the winner can be assured that it will still win with a decent plurality. The Globes have something like a 125 member voting block so one winner out of five can conceivably win with around 26 votes. (BABEL anyone?)
Clearly this is a move to create more ad revenue for the trades and the L.A. Times and perhaps give the shrinking Oscar viewing audience a reason to tune in and root for a film like THE DARK KNIGHT, which most assuredly would have been nominated this year if this rule were already in place.
The true test here would be to take a random year out of the last ten (or even twenty) and try and find ten worthy of "Best."
This ain't the 30's or the 70's anymore...

comment #22

Floyd Thursby says ...

Here's press release: http://tinyurl.com/mrt2z4

comment #23

Mark says ...

What a boom for Jeffrey! Ad revenue just went up. If ever one wanted to be a Hollywood blogger, now is the time.

comment #24

Pinko Punko says ...

I love Prager sometimes.

comment #25

Josh Massey says ...

Awful, awful, awful, awful, awful, awful idea. Instead of spreading the wealth, it will just dilute it.

The Academy Awards have officially become The Golden Globes.

comment #26

Terry McCarty says ...

Assuming THE UGLY TRUTH and NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 2--among others--are gearing up their tradepaper campaings.

comment #27

creepingmalaise says ...

"Best Costume" has just been expanded to twenty.

comment #28

rr3333 says ...

APRIL FOOLS!

comment #29

DarthCorleone says ...

Since this is really happening, here's an idea to spread around that maybe the Academy will take to heart while there's still time.

With ten nominees, they're never going to come even close to catching a majority on a single ballot. The process will become even more political and fragmented with results that seem even less like what actually represents the "favorite" (much less "best") film. Thus, the Academy should seriously look into instituting INSTANT RUNOFF voting for the Best Picture category. Each voter ranks their favorite films in order of preference (need not be all ten - perhaps three or four), and then you let the computer crunch the numbers.

Per Wikipedia:

If no candidate is the first preference of a majority of voters, the candidate with the fewest number of first preference rankings is eliminated and that candidate's ballots are redistributed at full value to the remaining candidates according to the next ranking on each ballot. This process is repeated until one candidate obtains a majority of votes among candidates not eliminated. The term "instant runoff" is used because the method is said to simulate a series of runoff elections tallied in rounds, as in an exhaustive ballot election.

comment #30

Floyd Thursby says ...

While they're at it, why not rename the category since it's been decades since anyone in the public called films/movies pictures?

comment #31

Rich S. says ...

So, in year's like 1994, when Four Weddings and a Funeral was nominated, that means we'll get 5 more just like it?

The cynics have this exactly right. They'll nominate 5 movies that no one has seen - one of which will win - and 5 movies that everyone has seen - none of which has a ghost of a chance.

If the Academy hadn't jumped the shark before now...

comment #32

YRG says ...

Why don't they just create a new category for "second best movies"? I hope this doesn't mean 10 minimum. They should also trot out the producers of the last ten years previous best movies to comment on the nominees for the current year's best movies in a big half-circle on the stage as that worked so well this year with best actors and actresses.

comment #33

MikeSchaeferSF says ...

What, no post yet about Mark Sanford admitting an affair? Jeff must be out and about this afternoon.

comment #34

DavidF says ...

If they're going to do this they might as well do what the GGs do and separate drama from comedies (though, like the GGs, it will still cause stupid categorizations) and hand out two awards?

Otherwise, yeah, it seems to be entirely about generating more "for your consideration" and "best picture nominee" ads and not much else.

comment #35

Jeremy Fassler says ...

Are there really going to be ten great movies to nominate this year? I can't even remember the last time five great movies were nominated. It definitely hasn't happened in this last decade.

I really have no idea if this change is for the better or for the worse. We'll have to wait and see.

comment #36

Breedlove says ...

WOW. Unbelievable, my jaw hit the floor when I heard this. I hate the idea. It's obviously done for financial reasons, but it just waters everything down. Ten is way too many. Five is perfect. Bizarre. I'm not psyched.

comment #37

lipranzer says ...

I have mixed feelings about this. The cynic in me agrees this is just a ratings ploy, and will mean pressure to nominate blockbuster films regardless of their quality (and yes, I am aware films like THE FUGITIVE, FOUR WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL, and the LORD OF THE RINGS MOVIES were all blockbusters that were considered quality, and I loved all of them and think they were good BP nominees), while the hidden optimist in me thinks yes, this might allow a CHILDREN OF MEN to sneak in.

comment #38

corey3rd says ...

They should get rid of Best Foreign Film and Best Animated feature and just let them all fight it out in the big arena

comment #39

great scott says ...

David Poland thinks it's a bad idea.

That means it's a good one.

comment #40

Travis Crabtree says ...

Alright, you people, (and you know who you are). Quit sucking up to Wells.

i.e.
"Maybe it will allow more deserving movies to get a Best Pic nod, like 'Children of Men', 'Zodiac', 'Miami Vice' and 'The Hurt Locker', just to randomly name a few."

comment #41

FWickman says ...

More complete coverage of the press conference here:

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/oscars-to-go-with-10-nominees-for-best-picture-instead-of-five/?hp

comment #42

Rich S. says ...

Travis, don't forget Public Enemies.

comment #43

sumo-pop says ...

One year too late for the Dark Knight and The Wrestler. Seriously though, ten. Fucking ten! Sounfd like a way to goose the grosses of prestige films.

comment #44

Chase Kahn says ...

"Children of Men" and "Zodiac" (and I believe I also used "Assassination of Jesse James") are three of my favorite movies of this decade. I wasn't thinking of Wells in the slightest when I mentioned them.

comment #45

BoshBarnetWonkyDonkey says ...

Imagine the thrills and spills if they just did away with nominations altogether. All of Hollywood crams into the Rose Bowl for a night where literally any film released in the last 12 months can win. The "For Your Consideration" ads for Paul Blart and G-Force resurrect the flagging fortunes of the trade papers.

comment #46

Scott Feinberg says ...

Over/under, say, three minutes until someone blames this on Obama?

comment #47

Josh Massey says ...

One hopes this would have led to nominations for Children of Men and The Assassination of Jesse James - my two favorites of the last five years. In reality, it would have led to nominations for Iron Man and Gran Torino.

The problem isn't with the number FIVE, it's with the five they are selecting. Stop nominating the Crashs, Benjamin Buttons, Junos and Finding Neverlands of the world, and the problem would be solved.

comment #48

Mark G. says ...

I don't know, I think it could deliver some nice surprises...

In theory 20.01 % is enough to win under old rules, this drops to 10.01 % under new rules.

Theoretically upsets are becoming easier...

comment #49

62Lincoln says ...

The TV telecast will turn into the Jerry Lewis MD Telethon in terms of length. Not Good.

comment #50

George Prager says ...

This might be good news. Crap like CRASH, ENGLISH PATIENT and GLADIATOR will have less of a chance of winning if there are 10 nominees. And, since you will need more time to show all of the nominees during the broadcast, it will mean that the trust-funders and their best short, best animated short and best documetary short will have to give their silly little speeches at the technical awards.

comment #51

DarthCorleone says ...

Mark G. >> Yeah, more surprises - and potentially some surprises that would please me, I'll admit. But it's also more chaos and winners that aren't truly representative of the voters' sentiment. Hence, my endorsement of an instant-runoff. (Also, theoretically, the indie supporters could knock off the studio bully by ranking the arthouse films 1-2-3 in an instant-runoff.)

comment #52

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

I'm cautiously optimistic. I think this will, yes, see more popular pablum, but also a few smaller dark horses. After CRASH, CHICAGO, RETURN OF THE KING, et al. they couldn't do much worse.

I also DarthC has it right as well, they should do the instant run-off thing as well. Now THAT would lead to some interesting surprises, because alot of 2nd or 3rd choices that many assumed didn't have a chance suddenly would.

comment #53

MathewM says ...

I don't think it de-values anything. The Oscars are all about politics and favoritism anyway. Having ten best picture nominees opens up the possibility of smaller films getting in and making a few extra dollars around award seasons. I imagine a film like The Wrestler which would of been a shoe-in for a Best Pic nod could of made more.

comment #54

115thDreamer says ...

This is purely a ratings grab, let's be realistic. They've got the perfect response to fall back on - "hey, there used to be 10 nominees in the 30s & 40s - it's a nod to the past...it's classic!" - but come on. This is a perfect way to get some of your acclaimed-yet-actually-made-alot-of-money films ("The Dark Knight", etc.), aminated stuff (such as "Up" this year, which now seems like a lock suddenly) and other near misses into the conversation. That way, Joe Punch-Clock and Sally Housecoat (to quote Monty Burns) might actually watch, the Academy is obviously thinking. At the very least, it may add some unintentional comedy and make things more interesting, since there will be now be an additional five groups showing up to the ceremony even though they know that one of 1-3 front-runners is absolutely going to make them their woman, and that they have no chance in hell of winning. Just imagine coming down the red carpet knowing you're ranked between 8 & 10 on everyone's scorecard, and having to smile like crazy for Joan Rivers, with the sun beating down on you, wearing an itchy outfit....ouch.

comment #55

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

115th Dreamer - not only did you get the Burns quote wrong ("Joe Meatball and Sally Housecoat"), but you obviously have never known any nominees who didn't expect to win. The ones I have, said it was far more fun knowing they didn't have a chance in hell so they could just relax and enjoy themselves.

comment #56

heybub1 says ...

We can only dream what the nominated movies from 1999 would have been. . . now THAT would have been interesting.
I have a feeling that even with 10 nominations -- just like all the other years -- only 2 or 3 movies (at most) will be the front runners and the rest will be happy to say they went to the dance.

comment #57

Aladdin Sane says ...

"...but you obviously have never known any nominees who didn't expect to win. The ones I have, said it was far more fun knowing they didn't have a chance in hell so they could just relax and enjoy themselves."

Wasn't Juliette Binoche totally surprised when she won? Everyone thought it was Bacall's year if I remember correctly.

comment #58

dinovelvet says ...

I'm asking this in all seriousness :

What are the odds that Transformers : Revenge of the Fallen HAS A GENUINE CHANCE at a Best picture nod now? It's going to get 3 or 4 technical nominations anyway, and if the marketing campaign bombards enough weak minded voters whose kids enjoyed the movie, they'll throw it in on the ballot at No. 10.

This has added some genuine craziness to the Oscars, and I can't wait to see what the 1 or 2 "WTF!" picks end up being.

comment #59

Ronald McFirbank says ...

"Maybe it will allow more deserving movies to get a Best Pic nod, like 'Children of Men', 'Zodiac', 'Miami Vice' and 'The Hurt Locker', just to randomly name a few."

And Che. Che surely would have been nominated then!

comment #60

Chicago48 says ...

Smells of desperation.

Let me get this straight -- so 10 is going to do what? Help the 10 reach $100Mil in sales? If the movie stinks, the movie stinks and the public won't go see it. Let's reach a compromise, how about 6 and allow comedies be allowed in the game.

comment #61

Chicago48 says ...

From what I read, MOST of the actors/actresses/directors, et al. Don't even bother to see ALL the 5 movies. Now they're adding 5 more?

Smells Desperation.

comment #62

televisiontears says ...

"If the movie stinks, the movie stinks and the public won't go see it."

Don't tell me you actually believe this. You have far more faith in your fellow man than I ever will.

comment #63

MovieBob says ...

The first immediate effect of this is that the favorite subject of every Oscar Blogger for the next few years will be "which films are the 'real' nominees and which are the five sops-to-the-mainstream?" And for a few cycles, that'll be true.

However, after awhile this CAN potentially be a game-changer. Think about it: "Best Picture" can now be awarded to a film that needs only win 10.01% of academy votes. That A.) means more potential upsets and B.) heavily favors the kind of popular-but-acclaimed films (if you wanna be cute, call them "Sons of The Batman" maybe) that'll at first be "added" just for ratings.

comment #64

wda says ...

I don't buy the fact that this change will lead to a bunch of mainstream films getting Best Picture nominations. Had this system been in place last year, I believe the five extra nominees would have been:

Revolutionary Road
Doubt
Gran Torino
The Wrestler
The Dark Knight

Would last year's Best Picture race been more or less interesting with those films nominated? I believe it would have been more interesting.

comment #65

DeeZee says ...

The new Lita Ford.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005337.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
Michael Bay doesn't care about black robots.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090625/ap_en_mo/us_film_transformers_jar_jar_again
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2009/IJKLM/Inglourious-Basterds/trailer.php
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2009/STUVWXYZ/Ugly-Truth/trailer.php

comment #66

BurmaShave says ...

Wait who the fuck thinks MIAMI VICE just barely missed a Best Pic nomination? Yeeesh.

comment #67

Terry McCarty says ...

Maybe this means both UP and CORALINE have chances for Best Picture.

comment #68

StoneFan1 says ...

1932-1933
- Cavalcade (winner)
- 42nd Street
- A Farewell to Arms
- I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang
- Lady for a Day
- Little Women
- The Private Life of Henry VIII
- She Done Him Wrong
- Smilin' Through
- State Fair

1934
- It Happened One Night (winner)
- The Barretts of Wimple Street
- Cleopatra
- Flirtation Walk
- The Gay Divorcee
- Here Comes the Navy
- The House of Rothschild
- Imitation of Life
- One Night of Love
- The Thin Man
- Viva Villa!
- The White Parade

1935
- Mutiny on the Bounty (winner)
- Alice Adams
- Broadway Melody of 1936
- Captain Blood
- David Copperfield
- The Informer
- The Lives of Bengal Lancer
- A Midsummer Night's Dream
- Les Miserable
- Naughty Marietta
- Ruggles of Red Gap
- Top Hat

1936
- The Great Ziegfeld (winner)
- Anthony Adverse
- Dodsworth
- Libeled Lady
- Mr. Deeds Goes to Town
- Romeo and Juliet
- San Francisco
- The Story of Louis Pasteur
- A Tale of Two Cities
- Three Smart Girls

1937
- The Life of Emile Zola (winner)
- The Awful Truth
- Captains Courageous
- Dead End
- The Good Earth
- In Old Chicago
- Lost Horizon
- One Hundred Men and a Girl
- Stage Door
- A Star Is Born

1938
- You Can't Take It With You (winner)
- The Adventures of Robin Hood
- Alexander's Ragtime Band
- Boys Town
- The Citadel
- Four Daughters
- Grand Illusion
- Jezebel
- Pygmalion
- Test Pilot

1939
- Gone with the Wind (winner)
- Dark Victory
- Goodbye, Mr. Chips
- Love Affair
- Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
- Ninotchka
- Of Mice and Men
- Stagecoach
- The Wizard of Oz
- Wuthering Heights

1940
- Rebecca (winner)
- All This, and Heaven Too
- Foreign Correspondent
- The Grapes of Wrath
- The Great Dictator
- Kitty Foyle
- The Letter
- The Long Voyage Home
- Our Town
- The Philadelphia Story

1941
- How Green Was My Valley (winner)
- Blossoms in the Dust
- Citizen Kane
- Here Comes Mr. Jordan
- Hold Back the Dawn
- The Little Foxes
- The Maltese Falcon
- One Foot in Heaven
- Sergeant York
- Suspicion

1942
- Mrs. Miniver (winner)
- 49th Parallel
- King's Row
- The Magnificent Ambersons
- The Pied Piper
- The Pride of the Yankees
- Random Harvest
- The Talk of the Town
- Wake Island
- Yankee Doodle Dandy

1943
- Casablanca (winner)
- For Whom the Bell Tolls
- Heaven Can Wait
- The Human Comedy
- In Which We Serve
- Madame Curie
- The More the Merrier
- The Ox-Bow Incident
- The Song of Bernadette
- Watch on the Rhine

comment #69

bfm says ...

Does anyone know what the rationale was for moving away from ten nominations in the first place?

comment #70

Aladdin Sane says ...

If Transformers 2 is nominated for Best Picture, it will be the Academy's just desserts.
I have a slight headache from that silly film. Pretty impressive/oppressive (take your pick). Could have lost half an hour and nobody would have noticed. Oh well...
Then again I have been rewatching the first season of The Transformers cartoon, and it's pretty retarded at times - so I guess the movie theoretically is an improvement on the source material (giant balls and all).

comment #71

markj says ...

@George Prager:

Only an idiot would think The English Patient was crap.

comment #72

Movie Watcher says ...

This will help pixar, but it's too late for wall-e. Are there 10 films worthy of best picture, year in and year out? No. The academy awards show is too long as it is, and I can't even imagine how long it will be now! I will skip the show and get the results the next day.

comment #73

BurmaShave says ...

Wait what is this bullshit line "Are there 10 films worthy?" That would only make sense if the 5 nominees were the 5 best films of the year, which they never fucking are. The one relief that this change brings is the idea that once the studios and the politics get their slots, maybe something legitimately Best Picture of the Year material, like a PAN'S or a ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES, can slip in. Also fuck WALL E that was the biggest second half letdown in ages, and as much as the dystopia may have amused people, IDIOCRACY did it much more chillingly.

comment #74

Joe M. says ...

I just had a GREAT idea... okay, it's a possibly cheesy idea but it'll really play to the cheap seats: 15 minutes into the Oscar broadcast next year, announce the 9th runner up award in the Best Pic category, then 15 minutes later announce the 8th runner up winner, etc. It'll create excitement as the list slowly gets chipped away at. During the last minute or two of the show, there will be only two movies left standing and one wins. Of course, the downside is if popular favorites get the heave-ho early on in the show. But it might not be a problem, as a "Dark Knight" would have definitely remained standing for at least a good portion of the show if the 10-nominations thing was in force last year.

comment #75

hawthorne says ...

I actually like the idea. Every year a few good movies get totally lost in the shuffle. And yes I mean movies like Zodiac which happens to be one of my all time favorite movies. What this also means is that the whole idea of Oscar worthy movies opening in "Oscar season" may end or at least have to be expanded. You could actually have a few movies opening in the Spring or Summer that get consideration. And that is a good thing.

comment #76

Midwest Doug says ...

If there are 10 nominees, is the voting process just to vote for one choice only? That's frankly too many to choose from. While you could conceivably have a winner that gets 11% of the vote, it's still likely that the 'winner' will get less than 25% of the vote. I wonder what the winner vote totals have been under the five nominee system...

Maybe the Academy is doing it because they want more members to be 'bribed' by swag, parties, etc.? It's a lot easier to coalesce a passionate 25% than it is a passionate 50%.

comment #77

K. Bowen says ...

I don't know about this. A couple more might be alright. But a lot of the fun of the Oscars is screaming about the choices. If it gets some of the best films in, great, but if it ends up with Transformers 2, wehave a problem.

comment #78

George Prager says ...

"Only an idiot would think The English Patient was crap."

You're right. It was shit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxvUcmmElAE

comment #79

alan says ...

How dare anyone group The English Patient with Crash and Gladiator. For that matter, how dare anyone group Gladiator with Crash. For that matter, how dare anyone bring up the memory of Crash.

comment #80

air nike shoes says ...

Now, perhaps a "Children of Men" or "Assassination of Jesse James" or "Zodiac" will have an easier time without giant campaigns and politics. Then again, who really cares about Oscars anymore?

comment #81

free games says ...

This is a gift from God

comment #82

Lemonade diet says ...

The TV telecast will turn into the Jerry Lewis MD Telethon in terms of length. Not Good.

comment #83

Lemonade diet says ...

Over/under, say, three minutes until someone blames this on Obama?

comment #84

edhardys says ...

prom dresses
Bridal retailer, Wedding dresses,Bridal dresses,Cheap wedding dresses,Inexpensive wedding dresses,
Cheap wedding gowns,Bridal wedding dress,Wedding website
wedding dresses