Totally had to add this in here. You'll notice that Angel can "sleep" with anyone he chooses, but sleeping with Buffy causes him to loose his soul. Buffy is the ONLY person who could give him the "ultimate happiness". Which, thus, he must love her. I'm not saying that he didn't have feelings for others, just that the feelings and comfort he got from Buffy were stronger. Kind of ironic, the one person he loved completely, would cost him is soul.... he he he
That's what I always realized. The soul-loosing thing only ever happened with Buffy. Because Buffy is the one that gave him perfect happiness. The others were just your every day happiness; the kind that most of us get in life. But Buffy was the one that completely made him forget what he was and all the awful things he had done hence the soul lossage
Totally had to add this in here. You'll notice that Angel can "sleep" with anyone he chooses, but sleeping with Buffy causes him to loose his soul. Buffy is the ONLY person who could give him the "ultimate happiness". Which, thus, he must love her. I'm not saying that he didn't have feelings for others, just that the feelings and comfort he got from Buffy were stronger. Kind of ironic, the one person he loved completely, would cost him is soul.... he he he 🙂
To be fair, it only happened that once - and hadn't she just had a very near death experience? I always thought that the sex thing sort of masked the real issue. I thought the real thing that had led to his perfect happiness was the same thing that led to the sex: them taking pleasure in the fact that she was alive. That would explain why it never happened with anyone else. In part because of his fear of the curse and in part because of circumstances, we never saw him grab onto that life-affirming joy with such abandon after that. When he found out that Connor was alive, for example, he also found out that his son wanted to kill him. The writers were sure to not only make it so that sex was always more emotionally complicated after that, but that other moments of possible emotional euphoria were always complicated by emergencies or accompanied by opposite emotions and circumstances. So basically, my theory is that it wasn't sex in general or even sex (or near sex, as with Cordy) with someone he loved that made him so happy he lost his soul; it was the emotions brought about by that particular sexual experience, and that particular sexual experience had a lot to do with being very life-affirming (at least affirming of Buffy's life).
At least, that was my take on it. I might be fanwanking. I always thought it would be too cheesy and shallow if it was just that banging a 16-year-old Buffy made Angel's soul sing the Hallelujah Chorus. I wanna like Angel, and I can't do that if I think he's such a perv that the greatest happiness he has ever or will ever know is his first time with a teenage girl who is more than two centuries his junior. I mean, eww. That's pervy.
I always thought that the curse was a bit lame too. It's important to his character but it becomes such a burden! I mean i get how finally getting with the girl of your dreams, experienceing souled love for the first time could lead to perfect hapiness. But what about the second time? i don't know and they don't know either because they never gave it another shot. Instead it contributed to the mythos of 'Buffy loves Angel' (i don't mean this as in their love was mythical, i mean in in the sense that their love was of mythic proportions) and their inability to consumate the relationship only heightened this. Surely if they had commited to a relationship, regardless of the curse, then the day to day 'mundaness' of their relationship would have reduced the risk of perfect happiness - if you get what i'm saying. And then, when Connor arrived, surely as a parent his perfect happiness would have become tied up in Connor rather than his ex-girlfriend. I'm a parent and this certainly conforms with my experiences. And also, i don't think it was just Buffy - I think that episode where Angel has his fantasy perfect day (name??, season four, the fang gang use it to bring out Angelus) certainly implies that Cordelia has the potential to produce perfect happiness (since Angel's perfect happiness seems to be intrinsicly linked to sex) and so therefore would suggest real love equitable with what he felt for Buffy.
Sorry for the rambling, haphazard nature of this post. I can't seem to get my thoughts in gear
At least, that was my take on it. I might be fanwanking. I always thought it would be too cheesy and shallow if it was just that banging a 16-year-old Buffy made Angel's soul sing the Hallelujah Chorus. I wanna like Angel, and I can't do that if I think he's such a perv that the greatest happiness he has ever or will ever know is his first time with a teenage girl who is more than two centuries his junior. I mean, eww. That's pervy.
I agree with the other point you made, I do- it's a good theory as regards to Angel losing his soul. But as I saw it on a pure giving-into-love-in-the-most-physical-way-possible level I never thought that the concept of sex with 17-year-old Buffy making him so deliriously happy he lost his soul was pervy. Quite the contrary; it showed that it wasn't just sex and that he was getting the yah-yahs from doing her, but showed this was an expression (and oh god, I can't believe how cheesy I'm going to sound saying this) of their love. Their love was so great and so powerful that to be able to commit to it and express it on this intense passionate level allowed Angel to forget every evil he had ever commited as right then all that mattered was Buffy and the two being in each other's arms.
If you ignore the drama cheese there you might reach my point, haha. Basically I'm saying that I never interpreted in a pervy way. As for the age difference thing; there's been creepier couple age gaps. At least Angel looks like a college boy. Haha. And you have to remember Romeo and Juliet (Okay so it was written centuries ago, but still) in which Juliet was only fourteen whilst Romeo was an adult.
And okay, so admittedly Buffy's whole seizing the moment thing was a really big mistake, but it all worked out in the end. Mostly. Eventually. Not at all.
I agree with the other point you made, I do- it's a good theory as regards to Angel losing his soul. But as I saw it on a pure giving-into-love-in-the-most-physical-way-possible level I never thought that the concept of sex with 17-year-old Buffy making him so deliriously happy he lost his soul was pervy. Quite the contrary; it showed that it wasn't just sex and that he was getting the yah-yahs from doing her, but showed this was an expression (and oh god, I can't believe how cheesy I'm going to sound saying this) of their love. Their love was so great and so powerful that to be able to commit to it and express it on this intense passionate level allowed Angel to forget every evil he had ever commited as right then all that mattered was Buffy and the two being in each other's arms.
If you ignore the drama cheese there you might reach my point, haha. Basically I'm saying that I never interpreted in a pervy way. As for the age difference thing; there's been creepier couple age gaps. At least Angel looks like a college boy. Haha. And you have to remember Romeo and Juliet (Okay so it was written centuries ago, but still) in which Juliet was only fourteen whilst Romeo was an adult.
And okay, so admittedly Buffy's whole seizing the moment thing was a really big mistake, but it all worked out in the end. Mostly. Eventually. Not at all.
Hehe. I thought it was funny that you kept interrupting yourself to excuse the cheesiness. lol.
Anyway; I can see that side of things. I do think Buffy and Angel were deeply and powerfully in love (that's a Xander reference; man, does Xander have the best lines, or what?). I do think that the physical expression of that love could have been touching and wonderful and made Angel temporarily forget his past horribleness. I think it's kind of sweet, actually.
I've got an Angel side and an Angelus side when it comes to Bangel. lol. Part of me sees the romance; the other side sees the dysfunction. I just tend more toward the Angelus side. 🙂 I still think it's a little pervy, though. I always did. There's just something creepy to me about the Angel/Buffy connection. I mean, she's a Freshman in high school when he watches her "get called." That's... well, guys in the 200+ category should *not* be falling at first sight for high school Freshmen, even if they are romantic and genuinely on the up-and-up about it. I know Angel's not really going to find many folks in his age bracket, and so the age gap might be softened by the idea that the couple of years between high school and adulthood don't really amount to much when there are centuries in the mix, but still... I think it's the teeny-bopperness of it all that bothers me. I mean, Angel is really, really old -- too old for puppy love. He didn't just look like a college boy; he acted like one (or, possibly like a high school one). That, I think, it what really seemed pervy to me.
But I don't think the losing-his-soul-because-of-it thing was pervy. I think that had to do with the aforementioned life-affirming goodness of sex and, like you said, the strength of their love. Because yeah, it was a pretty strong love, and it definitely was written and played in a grand, sweeping, epic love sort of style that would make the physical expression of that love also be a grand, sweeping, epic sort of thing.
Oh yeah, I agree the whole watching her outside Hemery was a little high on the creep factor. And it was the fact he was in that old worn down car as he seedily wound down the window and slipped down in his seat to watch her. The Mise-en-Scene there was all wrong and screamed 'Evil pervert!'. It would have seemed entirely appropriate if at that moment an entourage of overly defensive mothers dragged him out of the car, beating them with Soccer Mom purses whilst calling him a creep.
I mean, Angel is really, really old -- too old for puppy love. He didn't just look like a college boy; he acted like one (or, possibly like a high school one). That, I think, it what really seemed pervy to me.
And I think that kinda links to how Angel was in life. I mean Liam was definitely as immature as they come and a 'drunken, whoring layabout'. Angel will never be too old for puppy love because that's all that Liam ever knew, could ever bother to know. Because I think, as I saw it anyway, vampires get stuck in the same perceptions they had when they were killed. As Spike became stuck in his romantic, caring, 'Mummy's Boy' nature as that's what he was like when he was sired. I mean he only machoed up to impress Dru and to become equal to Angelus. It would also explain why he was softer than Angel even when Spike didn't have a soul- falling in love with Buffy, crying over Dru, bonding with Joyce, caring about Dawn. And wow, I've gone off topic there. Haha.
What I'm saying is for Angel- no matter how creepy it may seem- instant love-at-first-sight infatuation was and always will be possible for Angel because Liam never grew past that.
I hope that made sense, I think I babbled for Sunnydale there. Haha.
palabravampiressOooh! Good point about vamps getting stuck in their mortal frame-of-mind when they die!
Oh yeah, I agree the whole watching her outside Hemery was a little high on the creep factor. And it was the fact he was in that old worn down car as he seedily wound down the window and slipped down in his seat to watch her. The Mise-en-Scene there was all wrong and screamed 'Evil pervert!'. It would have seemed entirely appropriate if at that moment an entourage of overly defensive mothers dragged him out of the car, beating them with Soccer Mom purses whilst calling him a creep.
And I think that kinda links to how Angel was in life. I mean Liam was definitely as immature as they come and a 'drunken, whoring layabout'. Angel will never be too old for puppy love because that's all that Liam ever knew, could ever bother to know. Because I think, as I saw it anyway, vampires get stuck in the same perceptions they had when they were killed. As Spike became stuck in his romantic, caring, 'Mummy's Boy' nature as that's what he was like when he was sired. I mean he only machoed up to impress Dru and to become equal to Angelus. It would also explain why he was softer than Angel even when Spike didn't have a soul- falling in love with Buffy, crying over Dru, bonding with Joyce, caring about Dawn. And wow, I've gone off topic there. Haha.
What I'm saying is for Angel- no matter how creepy it may seem- instant love-at-first-sight infatuation was and always will be possible for Angel because Liam never grew past that.
I hope that made sense, I think I babbled for Sunnydale there. Haha.
Oooh! Good point about vamps getting stuck in their mortal frame-of-mind when they die!
I think you're onto something. Angelus drove Drusilla insane before he killed her... because he knew she would then be forever insane after she was vamped. I believe he called it "an eternity of torment." So your theory doesn't just apply to Spike' it applies to Dru, too, and Angelus even practically said as much. Good theory.
I think you're onto something. Angelus drove Drusilla insane before he killed her... because he knew she would then be forever insane after she was vamped. I believe he called it "an eternity of torment." So your theory doesn't just apply to Spike' it applies to Dru, too, and Angelus even practically said as much. Good theory.
See : points to own head: Not just a hat stand my friend. I hadn't consciously acknowledged how it applies to Dru- but yes that is very true. And yee gods, Angelus agrees me, haha. That might not be a good thing....
It also theoretically applies to Darla also. Darla was definitely one of the most sensual vampires we came across- she just oozed 'Hey look I have sex appeal' vibes- and we all know what her profession was before she was vamped. She also had a very bitter outlook on life saying how God has already forgotten her, which would explain why she was the one that killed so viciously out of the fanged four 'Picking fruit off the vine'. I mean her personality and view of the world was only allowed to change when she became human again in Angel- she was alive again and so was allowed to grow once more.
I'd like to go into this more but beyond the fanged four I can't remember any other vamps. Except Dracula and well, we only know him as Dracula. Haha.
Oh yeah, I agree the whole watching her outside Hemery was a little high on the creep factor. And it was the fact he was in that old worn down car as he seedily wound down the window and slipped down in his seat to watch her. The Mise-en-Scene there was all wrong and screamed 'Evil pervert!'. It would have seemed entirely appropriate if at that moment an entourage of overly defensive mothers dragged him out of the car, beating them with Soccer Mom purses whilst calling him a creep.
And I think that kinda links to how Angel was in life. I mean Liam was definitely as immature as they come and a 'drunken, whoring layabout'. Angel will never be too old for puppy love because that's all that Liam ever knew, could ever bother to know. Because I think, as I saw it anyway, vampires get stuck in the same perceptions they had when they were killed. As Spike became stuck in his romantic, caring, 'Mummy's Boy' nature as that's what he was like when he was sired. I mean he only machoed up to impress Dru and to become equal to Angelus. It would also explain why he was softer than Angel even when Spike didn't have a soul- falling in love with Buffy, crying over Dru, bonding with Joyce, caring about Dawn. And wow, I've gone off topic there. Haha.
What I'm saying is for Angel- no matter how creepy it may seem- instant love-at-first-sight infatuation was and always will be possible for Angel because Liam never grew past that.
I hope that made sense, I think I babbled for Sunnydale there. Haha.
Liam is an interesting one but I don't believe vampires are static by nature. spike held onto traits on his human life but his experiences as a vampire have also shaped him. I think Angel's the same. I do think that Angel is about idealistic expectation. As Liam, he was always looking for someone exciting and interesting, he thought he found it in Darla. Definitely, who they once were informs what they have become as Darla said, but I always felt the age thing was irrelevant to Angel. He had a much more 'grown up' thing with Cordy. I think it was more about what Buffy respresented to him as a person.
I think Buffy will always have a special place in her heart for her first love, Angel although its fair to say that shes moved on.
Did Angel love her? well, I'd like to believe that but I think he's moved on as well. I really loved his scene though! "I started it! " when buffy mentions spike has a soul now. Maybe they're not really in love anymore but they certainly still have feelings for eachother.
I mean, feelings, yes... I think it's safe to say that I will always have feelings of some sort toward my ex. But it's been two-and-a-half-years since I've actually physically laid eyes on him (in person, not just in pictures on the internet). We keep in touch via e-mail maybe once every six months. No matter what I felt for him once upon a time ago, I'd be hard pressed to say that is any level of love now. Sure, when we see each other every couple of years, there's something there. It's something that I can't quite define. Loyalty, maybe? Shared experience? I just don't think it's love.
I think Buffy and Angel kind of fall into the same category. I mean, what they had was intense, but what they have barely exists. Angel's human and fighting demons in hell. She's Queen Bee Slayer and has a new bed warmer. They've both had other relationships since. Sure, there's something there when they see each other. But is it love? On any level? I really don't know. I don't know if it's possible to love someone with whom you have no real present day relationship.
It's defintely possible to love someone with whom you have no real, present day relationship. I mean, do you stop loving someone just because they have passed from this life. Does a child stop loving a father or a mother, just because they live in seperate house holds and may only see each other a couple of days out of a month. Do you stop loving your best friend just because you haven't seen them since graduation?
I think the thing is, there are many different types of love, and some are more deep than others. Just because they aren't together now and have no relationship, doesn't mean he doesn't love her and vice versa. It may not be as stong and as passionate as it was 10 years ago, but it's still love. I mean, yeah I have a few exes that are still friends and that I still care for, but none I would up and passionately kiss when I see them the way Buffy and Angel do. Because I never really knew love with them, so I don't harbour that kind of emotional attatchment to them.
I think that if given a second chance to build on their feelings, Buffy and Angel could have a real shot at a normal, healthy relationship. The love is there, they just have to let it grow.
I have to agree with Evilyn, not just becuase of Bangel but because I personally know what she is talking about,I have felt and continue to feel love for people who are no longer in my life. I have a friend who I love as much as you can possibly love someone your not related to. Not in love but I suppose Xander/Willow(ish)? just without the naughty touching😉 Just his presence makes me happy, like goofy grin happy. I'm a better person for knowing him. The thing is we go through stages where we barely even acknowledge eachothers existence. Crazy I know, but it's true. Until January we had NOTHING to do with eachother for a year but I still loved him as much as ever. Love really is blood. Just cause someone is out of sight doesn't mean they are out of your heart.
Time does seem to matter for me. It does dull emotions. Most of all, it dulls memories. I have a pretty bad memory, so... if someone's not in my face (or at least on my computer screen) at least once a week or so, I tend to forget and move on without feeling any real sense of loss. The relationship just sort of... fades out very naturally. Kinda like when someones dies.
Well this clinches it, we will always analyse such situations based upon our own feelings.
It reminds me a little of the ep Heartthrob on Ats. James and Angel both had different views on love but that doesn't mean one was right and one was wrong. Personally I take these things at face value most of the time. If Angel says it's a forever love then, well, ok. I'm not Angel, I can't say "No you don't feel that way " just because I've never felt like that.
Some people are very much, when it's over it's over but I've always felt Buffy and Angel are both reflective idealists, as lovers and as warriors: Mission definers who both feel or felt loneiless of being a Slayer or the burden of being the vampire with a soul (Spike notwitstanding because he's never had to be *THE ONE*) both leaders. If possible, they both probably understand the plight of the other better than ever before.
He's what I wrote about them in another forum (don't worry Spuffy fans I wrote something about Spike and Buffy in the same post)
The Metaphor: What does this represent?
Admittedly this is my own feelings on the matter however it is mixed in with the intentions of the writers so..
For me Buffy and Angel typfies the first romantic ideal. It's the dream of falling in love as much as falling in love itself. They are all the other can see and I definitely relate to that in my teenage years. Breaking up feels like the the whole world is ending and hence Acathla. Oh first love...
It's also the idea of sleeping with a guy for the first time and wondering why he's acting different. The confusion of 'is it me?' I suppose really encompasses the uncertainty of first love. Often Buffy wonders if Angel is the control and everything is else is the variable. Well, often at first. Is it a wonder why the episode is called innocence in which Angel loses his soul? Buffy is innocent to the effects of sleeping with Angel (compare to Spike and Buffy's relationship).
What I also noted is that more so than with Spike it was about 'holding hands'. Despite how unconventional the relationship was, she did call Angel her boyfriend and reflected upon the idea of how it could be normal. (And so again we get this romantic ideal, the dream, the fantasy she mentions that in IWRY of him becoming human). Also when he is with soul thy are dating. When he is without soul they are enemies so in that respect the lines are more defined (compare with Spike soulled and soulless states)
Definitely it fits Angel as he is more idealistic or reflective than Spike. If Spike is great at seeing what is, Angel likes to see what could be.
Match?
Where Buffy and Angel connect is that they are both reflective idealists, mission definers. Buffy needs to know what it means to be a Slayer and Angel reflects on what it means to be a champion. They both need to know what it means to them and that's a connection in itself. They reflect in each other with their respective initiations, well this is more Angel. He sees his path in her to become what he wants to be: someone. If both of them have the same mission they could be great match because they both understand the burden of leadership and value meaning in the mission beyond the simple "Do the right thing". They questor types and if they arrive in the same place, this could be a solid match.
Mismatch?
The above is dependent on the two of them arriving in the same place but I'm not entirely sure these two fit in each others world anymore. Others have talked about Buffy outgrowing Angel but it maybe that both of them are so fixed upon their mission that it will be heavily dependent on where they are in their mission. This is crucial for the two of them because we know how much their missions mean to them. On at least occasion Angel went against Buffy because he believed in something different so more so than with Buffy and Spike, Angel and Buffy could clash. This was established as early as Season four of Buffy/Season 1 of Angel.
Also, what about the curse? That is always a danger. If Buffy is still how Angel defines happiness then we have a problem. If not then that may be indicative that Angel's moved on anyway.
EDIT: I still look at the curse because I'm not up to date with Angel Season 6. As far as I know Angel's human state isn't necessarily permenant
EDIT: I couldn't resist posting about Spike and Buffy for comparisons. Sorry if off topic.
Spike and Buffy
Metaphor: What does this represent?
I think this was meant to typify a more adult relationship. While an idealistic view of love can follow us closely throughout our years I personally focused more on the realities of relationships: Sex can mean just sex, etc. Also the tone of an abusive relationship is more adult in it's nature. Life stops becoming the dream. When Angel was turned it was like it wasn't really him, something different and evil and Buffy was innocent. In this relationship at least in S6, Buffy was not innocent. She instigated this. She was not only the abused but she was the abuser. The loss of innocence seems inevitable in adulthood but they took it to the extreme. (Compare this to Cangel. Look at the scene in Provider. It's almost a representation of the other way an adult relationship can go. Building a family)
Also when we grow up we find that lines become more blurry. Things aren't as simple as they was. If the concept of Angel started the whole idea of moral ambiguity when it comes to vampires then Spike brings it to a whole new level. Spike is a soulless vampire and Buffy kills them on a nightly basis. Why is Spike special? This seems more adult because it deals with complexity of relationships, something we tend to understand more as we get older due to experience.
When he is soulled however, things are still blurry but in a different way. They have this 'connection' but she states on many occasions (even to Angel) that he isn't her boyfriend. If they are sleeping together when he was soulless does that make it a relationship? Spike seems to think so whereas Angel doesn't (see Wes/Lilah for more of the sex vs relationship debate).
Match?
I think Spike's adaptibilty really serves him well. He can fit in Buffy's world because honestly Spike can fit in most worlds. He cannot help but connect with what is going on around him and this connection and support of Buffy is what she needed in S7 (at the end). Spike doesn't seem to mind deferring the decision making to Buffy, he even managed it with his old rival Angel. I can't see Angel doing that as well especially as he's so caught up in his own mission. (Compare this with Cordy who although she didn't agree with Angel's mission still had faith in his leadership and that he can work his way out). Spike wont push his 'own mission' as strongly as his grandsire and a leader like Buffy needs that. She needs support, not another cook spoiling her broth. Spike can be that, imo. Lover, companion, supporter. Also he isn't cursed.
Also Spike is more available to her than Angel was, emotionally and otherwise. Whether soulled or soulless he had that emotional honesty and connected with her in that respect.
Mismatch?
Well, although I believe Spike has the best chance with Buffy he needs to get over his whole "I'm not worthy thing". If he can't respect himself in that capacity then I doubt she'll respect him in the long run. Spike luckily is growing out of his whole "Everything I do, I do it for you" mentality. This was one of the problems had with their relationship, is that lack of balance and part of this was down to his lack of soul and the other was his lack of personal development beyond 'the girl'. I think time apart from Buffy did him the world of good. But there is still the question of feeling worthy.
A lot of people say "Oh but Spike earnt her love but Angel didn't" My response to that is, why should he have to? Yes Angel didn't earn her love but she didn't earn or ask for their love either. Shouldn't it work both ways? This is what I meant by balance. Of course Buffy has to resolve the whole superiority complex thing in either case. She got insight into it which is a start.
palabravampiressI'm not worthy! I'm not worthy! Fabulously insightful analysis, Kana.
Yeah I think he loved her. I think, in some way, he always will. I mean their love was monumental. It almost ended the world.
I think Nina is a non-issue. I don't like her (sorry) and I don't really think that there was any potential between them. Cause who ould compare with Buffy and then Cordy.
I'm not really a Bangel supporter (Spuffy all the way for me), so my opinion might be a little biased. But there is a difference between loving someone and being in love with someone. I'd like to believe that Angel still loved her but wasn't in love with her, because for the most part they both moved on and are seeing other people.
But she's still baking... so, somewhere down the line, who knows what will happen?
Well this is one of those big male/female differences. When a man truly falls in love with a woman, he will love her forever. If he doesn't see her for 46 years and she left him for his best friend, his heart will burn with hatred so pure it has to be love. (Contrary to popular opinion, apathy is the opposite of love, not hate).
Women on the other hand have an amputee effect with love. A woman could have spent twenty years with a man, have six kids and when her heart turns off, its off. She could see him on the street and struggle to remember his name.
But the key is, that this only happens when the woman decides she has had enough.
Women are forces of nature, like tornadoes and hurricanes. No one knows where or when they're coming, they can't be predicted or controlled and they just have to run their course leaving all kinds of devastation in their wake, as well as that incredibly beautiful rainbow.
Whoah I don't know about all women being like that. 😉 I don't find men predictable.
Got to agree though that once you've really connected with someone you always love them on some level. At least that's how it works with me. Especially when we're talking about Buffy and Angel.. she was the only person who could give him perfect happiness.
I'm sure Angel still had feelings for Buffy. She was very important person in his life,his first love. He'll never stop caring about her at all.
Does he still love her? I don't know, maybe yes. But surely not in the same level as he did before he left her. I just can't believe that after all that happened with Cordy, his feelings for Buffy didn't change. He loved Cordy, he admitted that himself. I even think that his feelings for Cordy were deeper than those for Buffy. Cordy was the one who knew him better, who was by his side in the hardest moments. She loved him and he loved her back, he proved it many times. And then she's in a comma, Angel comes to Buffy and asks her if he have chance for a cookie? I just didn't get it. I think it was just caused by this moment, he haven't seen her for a long time, then they met and it reminded him about old times. I don't think that Angel really wanted that much to get the cookie...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
