x

SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Stuffed

Watch
4K Watch Movie
Start your 30-day free trial

Download
Magnet

Download
Torrent

(193) 6.3 84 min 2019

Stuffed is a movie starring Allis Markham, Jaap Sinke, and Ferry van Tongeren. An inside look into the world of taxidermy and the passionate artists from all over the world who work on the animals.

Starring: Allis Markham, Ferry van Tongeren, Jaap Sinke

Genres: Documentary

Director: Erin Derham

x

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio
Subtitles
Quality	480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres	Documentary
Director	Erin Derham
Stars	Allis Markham, Ferry van Tongeren, Jaap Sinke
Country	Canada, USA
Runtime	1H 24M
Description	An inside look into the world of taxidermy and the passionate artists from all over the world who work on the animals.

Download documentary «Stuffed»

Blu-ray
13.37 GB

Windows
5.07 GB

Customers who watched «Stuffed» also watched

25 customer reviews about «Stuffed»

3.5 out of 5 stars

Top reviews

Sunday, 31 Jan 2021 07:37

Hee hee, this is my first comment, and it doesn't feel a good enough review! I'm a bit frustrated with how well the film has been received by the critics. We've all heard about it, we've all seen it, we've all understood what's going on, and we've all wanted to find out more about it. Yet the way in which the film has been received, and my anger at this, and myself, is not related. The anger, in my mind, is not a healthy one. At some point we are supposed to connect with the characters, we are supposed to feel a certain emotion, we are supposed to feel the pain of others and we are supposed to be involved in the violence that takes place in the film. Well, I was a bit disappointed that I didn't connect to the characters on a level, because I could have been involved with them much more. I thought the film was a little dull, and the soundtrack was good, but the basic story was definitely not that good. I felt like the violence was forced and forced to be violent, and I didn't care about the characters at all. I felt like the film was too dull to care about. In fact, I didn't even care about the characters until half an hour in, when I found out who they were and how they were related to each other. I don't think this film is bad in the slightest, I think it's just lacking, and I think it would have been great if they had made a more 'realistic' film. They said that it's a historical film, and it's very realistic, but in my opinion, I'd like to see a film more realistic and I think they should have made a film that had a higher budget and a better quality film to show. This is my honest opinion, but it's not something I think anyone else would agree with. The acting was alright, but I thought it was decent. I was disappointed with the way it was shown, like in the beginning, I didn't think it was that great, but then it was better, then it was good. Then it was okay, then it was awful, and then I was upset because it wasn't good. I thought they made a good film, but I think they could have done better.

Sunday, 24 Jan 2021 05:52

Steven Spielberg directs this touching documentary about a young man named Rob Garrett, who made a documentary about an 18-year-old girl named Danielle. As many viewers know, Danielle is the third child of disabled parents who find themselves in a crisis of their own when the second child dies after only two years of her life. The final footage of this is with some friends of Danielle, who are able to help her cope with her predicament. This is a very moving documentary, based on what I've seen in all of Spielberg's works. It is also one of the rare documentary films to have a professional, thoughtful, though honest approach to the subject matter, and also to treat the viewers' reactions to the subject matter in a fair and respectful way. This is a great film, and anyone with a heart should see it. It is also my hope that it will have a lasting impact on other disabled people. Grade A+

Friday, 22 Jan 2021 13:03

I loved this documentary. It was good in some places but wrong in other places. I'd say it's too long, too unbalanced, and not worth the trouble. People keep yelling at each other, but that doesn't help the process. The lack of balance made it even more confusing. But, there are parts of this movie that are quite interesting. The film covers a lot of territory that doesn't get talked about very much, so, it's good to see what it is that the media and filmmakers have missed. You can't say that without saying something about how they missed it. The thing that I liked most about this documentary was that I got to hear about the real people that this was made about and I got to learn a lot more about the real lives of the people involved. I liked the film and I recommend it.

Monday, 18 Jan 2021 08:38

Oh boy, my eyes. How this movie went so very, very, very wrong. I was not prepared to endure watching one minute of this, oh man. The worst part was not the two big staff members that included Oscar winner and director of DANGEROUS LIAISONS (which had a female cast), but the director himself. I was sooo disgusted by the terrible care that they were giving the puppets. I kept waiting for the puppet to pull its head off, and he did not. No head was pulled off, no blood spurted, no hair came out. I was really embarrassed by the disgusting scene where the audience is laughing so loud at this one puppet. (spoiler ahead). I'll spare you, but the writer, director, and crew seem to think that people are simply making fun of puppets. That is, if they think that some of the people in the audience would laugh at their abuse. This kind of stupidity kills the whole idea of the documentary, and I think it's obvious that the makers didn't really take the time to research the subject. They left out information about why the puppets were made, how they were made, and it makes the documentary seem totally amateur. Also, how could the puppets be trained? Puppets who want to live and not just be fed up of being fed? You can't just play puppets. They are quite large and have to have a "brain". The majority of puppets in this movie are puppets whose only purpose is to be handled and not to be talked about. I was so disappointed with the result of this. How could a director of such talent have such a bad job?

Tuesday, 05 Jan 2021 09:39

THIS WAS A HORRIFIC MOVIE. Some movies make me want to throw up, while others make me want to explode. THIS ONE DID NOT MAKE ME SEEM LIKE A HUMAN BEING TO ME. THERE WAS NO WAY I WANT TO BE SUED FOR WHAT I DID TO BE BORED BY THIS MOVIE. SO, LIKE. DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME. THANKS, FOR BEING AN IDIOT.

Wednesday, 23 Dec 2020 10:40

This documentary consists of two sections. The first, entitled "The Law," examines the legal aspects of SWAT raids on US citizens. While this documentary does not portray the actual details of SWAT raids in the US, it does show the results of them and some real information on their legality. The second, entitled "Drug Trafficking," focuses on the poor and criminal aspects of drug trafficking. It does not focus on the Mexican drug cartels, as this movie is primarily about US citizens involved in drug trafficking. The ultimate message, however, is the damage to children of narcotics trafficking who become victims of violence, harassment and neglect. The moral degradation and lack of care from the authorities, the government and the media to families, children and children's families is documented well and this movie is one that can be watched with children and parents alike to help educate about the effects on children and adults alike. If you haven't seen it, go watch it. It is well worth the time.

Saturday, 12 Dec 2020 14:01

I have seen this movie twice now. It is very nice to see that a documentary about the homeless is still on the air. The main point of the documentary is to introduce the people of the world in an objective way without bias. By identifying the purpose of the documentary, we as viewers are much more informed. The characters are shown to be normal people, who simply suffer from a serious problem. Although the documentary doesn't provide a solution, it tries to show the story of each of the people affected. I am not familiar with the special forces or special services, so I didn't understand what the soldiers are doing in the city, nor did I understand what happened to the prostitutes who were rescued from the city. But it is important to emphasize that the people were, in fact, rescued from the city by the army. What makes this documentary so powerful is that all the actors had to suffer from the same problem and the story is told in a way that enables us to be aware of all their problems. Some people claim that this documentary is fake. The people of the US have got used to a famous and easy story that is repeated by the media. The truth is that the soldiers had to deal with people that, on the surface, seemed to be pure criminals. They were surrounded by criminal elements who do not understand them. They were not even aware of the basic values of civilised human behaviour. Therefore, one of the main parts of this documentary is to demonstrate that the US is no better or worse than any other country.

Wednesday, 02 Dec 2020 02:52

Let me start by saying that I was happy to see David Sheffer. I had not read his book, but he was very good at describing the social conditions in India, the discontent that young people have with the way things are, and their despair. That was my reason for watching this film. I found the interview style to be very funny, as it is described by Sheffer himself. Sheffer also was very specific about what they had done, with respect to drugs. They didn't film their consumption of drugs, as they were different, but only using what they had caught from the street. I found it quite interesting. I also liked that Sheffer described the way they sold drugs in India, and how certain localities have certain anti-drug laws. There are laws that make it a crime to be selling drugs, so it's not like the Americans or the British are supposed to have those laws in place. The way in which the drug laws are enforced is also interesting. They show footage of police officers in Brazil showing these cameras to various people. They show many scenes from the police station, and they used an eye-popping shot of a camera that was not programmed, so it shows some of the police officer's frustration and disbelief when they found that these were videos of kids selling drugs. It was also interesting to see the other side of the drug problem, to see how people take the drug, and how these often are able to see a doctor when they need to get help. In addition, it was interesting to see how this can have an adverse effect on certain individuals, and how this can have an effect on the communities that are involved in the drug problem. The film is quite educational, and really shines through in the end, as it is a bit depressing to see how these people live their lives. I think there is a sense of hope in the movie. It seems that things might be improving, and there are hopes for the future. I would say that, even though I really do like the film, it is not without its flaws. The cinematography is not always consistent, sometimes shots are filmed in a manner that does not fit the story, or do not align with the storyline. This does affect the flow of the film, and how it is filmed, and it takes a little from the movie. There are some scenes that are just shot on a computer with no real film in it, which do not match the rest of the movie, or do not really fit. Another flaw is that they did not include scenes of the city, and the countryside, or the people. The story seems to have a lot of details, and they are sometimes not followed up on. These are not very big flaws, but do affect the film, as it doesn't follow the story very well, as it is not finished. I am also not a huge fan of the ending. It doesn't really tie together the movie very well. It does tie together the film, but it leaves things open. I think it could have been better, with a better ending. The ending is also very political, and very drawn out. It is too drawn out. I think there could have been a more natural ending. Overall, I think the movie was good, and worth watching. I liked how Sheffer has been able to get into some of the aspects of the social situation, and he does a great job at showing it. I am not a fan of the ending, however, I don't think that there would have been a better ending. I think there would have been a much better ending, but they could have chosen something that better aligned with the story. I think that the best ending would have been something that was more of an open ending, as it would have been more consistent with the story. This was an excellent documentary, and it will leave you with a lot of questions and thoughts. In my opinion, it is worth watching, even if you don't like it.

Saturday, 14 Nov 2020 23:28

This short but very important documentary on Vietnam and American "victories" has to be the most honest and well edited war documentary on the planet. The story has been told before and is very simplistic. The documentary is clear and very powerful. The problem is that it's not so important to get the history right, but rather to get the facts right. They don't lie about any facts because they have no other choice. They do everything to make you understand what's going on, but they are not saying anything that is not in the government's hand-out. Even the uncritical cast members have questions of their own. Although it is called an "documentary", it doesn't have to be by any means. It is a compilation of the greatest things that the US has ever done. It tells the story of the United States for the better part of the twentieth century. The most important thing about it is that it's not in the past, but the present. It tells the history of what was going on in Vietnam, but doesn't try to convince you that this is the best way to fight the war. It is a very simple but very important documentary about a very complex subject.

Monday, 02 Nov 2020 00:29

This is a very simple, very restrained documentary. It is based on the life of one Indian man (the Chief of the Tikka tribe) who is trying to show us how the world has changed for the better or worse, since he was a young man. He is a scientist who now is a practicing psychiatrist, but he only speaks with the tribe when he is asked to. He also shows us how the Indians respond to news of a US diplomat returning to India. He's not asked to comment on their lives, he's not asked how they have changed since he's been gone, he's not asked whether they feel that the world has changed for the worse or the better, and he is not asked to speculate about what might come next. All he has to do is to present some facts about what has happened to the Indians. He never tells us what his story is, but he does let us know what he thinks is the most important fact that everyone needs to know. It is this that makes the film extraordinary. What we see on the screen is what the chief has been able to extract from people in a way that their lives have changed dramatically. The chief, and he alone, has not convinced us of anything. He has made us want to know what he would be willing to do in the event that he was confronted by an American diplomat or a doctor returning to India. It's all about us, and it is all about what we could be doing for him. He's only the conduit for his people, so we are all powerless to influence his world, and we might just learn the most important fact he would like us to know.

Monday, 14 Sep 2020 23:13

A documentary with a story to tell. "Stuffed" is an attempt to turn the past 60 years of Formula One into a book of events. "Stuffed" is an antidote to the modern mass media which glorifies a racing machine to the point that we miss the social aspects of racing. This is not about the people who are there, it is about the people who are there today. And if you like to think about things, you'll love this film. See it. And even if you don't like racing, you'll still enjoy it.

Sunday, 13 Sep 2020 12:06

This film did a good job of illustrating the life of the museum. And, if anyone would like to view it in a cinema, that is okay too. The film includes quotes from famous scientists. But, I personally didn't find it to be that compelling. The film also stated that the Americans have a lot of morals at the museum, and that the French have less morals than the Americans. And, they also said that American people are able to create something that the French can't. Anyway, if you are in the mood to learn about the world's greatest museum, then see this movie. But, if you are a viewer who wants to understand about the importance of the museum, then skip this film. The film has some sections where the presentation is boring, but overall it is enjoyable and interesting. And, I do recommend watching it.

Sunday, 06 Sep 2020 21:35

The Soviet Union collapsed, but the country, too, is almost unrecognizable to the people in that time. But in a country with such a heavy emphasis on the past, the thought of the past and its people's pain will remain. This documentary shows how the Soviet Union changed and what caused it. The best way to view this film is to make yourself a history buff. Then, if you know anything about the Soviet Union, the painful memories will sink in like a heavy hammer. This documentary is a must for any serious film buff.

Saturday, 29 Aug 2020 12:32

It's been a while since I've watched a film that I was so much interested in. A few years ago, I was impressed by a young director, Jason Reitman, who directed the sequel to this film, Up in the Air. It's no wonder that this film has got such a high rating on IMDb. At first, I felt it was going to be boring, with a couple of irritating elements, like the character of the protagonist, J.Lo, who behaves like a prude, but once it starts, I really enjoyed it. This film is about the realisation of dreams. The movie is only about two and a half hours long, so you'll get lost in the story, especially if you are not a fan of comedy. The plot is simple, but at the same time not simplistic, but it has been well done. The ending is a good one, and the picture that you get when you see the film is very important, because the director kept the story going, to a great end, like the way the characters meet, and the ending. I don't think you can miss it. I have rated it 7, because of its length and lack of comedies, but the director has taken something from the bottom of the barrel to the very top, and I hope that others will get a good laugh from this. I can recommend it to people who enjoy "unrealistic" films.

Sunday, 16 Aug 2020 13:33

This is a movie about the life of Adam Sandler, a happy man who has made his mark in Hollywood. As a result, the movie is a family drama about his family. I was watching the movie for the first time the other day, and it was enjoyable. It is also a movie about Sandler's work in Hollywood, and how it is an amazing thing. It does not hold anything back and it is not a cute family movie, it is a very dark movie, and it can be depressing at times. There are many interesting aspects in this movie, but I do not want to go into them here. All I can say is that this movie is worth seeing and deserves your time. I give it a B+.

Tuesday, 11 Aug 2020 23:38

Sitting in front of a computer screen for the first time since I was a child, the movie "Sleeping Beauty" comes to life in a series of quirky images and conversations, the key to the movie being a seven-year-old girl. The film tells the story of a woman named Adele, the daughter of a famous writer named William Shakespeare. Adele's childhood is spent on a diet of books, movies, and TV shows, and when she is about ten years old, her mother, the bookish William Shakespeare, invites her to his mansion for a play night. This kind of "creepy" upbringing of young children is not a new phenomenon, but the movie takes place in a completely different way. For the first twenty minutes, the film seems like an ordinary movie, and the narrative is mostly about Adele and William discussing their childhood. The first half of the film is very moving, the parents talking about their "happy" childhood, and the little girl telling the stories of her imaginary friends. The second half of the movie is told through conversations between William and Adele. The relationship between them is quite unconventional, but this is exactly what the movie wants to show, that in a strange way, love makes you see things differently. One of the main questions the movie poses is whether or not the fairy tale has some validity in the modern world. It shows how people still believe in fairy tales, and the people who can't get over the old stories of the two children telling them. A fairytale is not just a story that you have to believe, but a story that is retellable, and as the movie begins to move on, we start to see the stories in a new light. The questions that the film asks are not just for children, but also for adults. The movie, for me, is an insight into an age where people like to have their fairy tales told to them, and the movie is a good tool to help adults see the fairy tales in a new light. A bit of the wisdom of the children's stories is not new, but the movie does a great job in bringing this wisdom to the surface. It is a good movie to watch with the family, but it is not a must see for children. It is a great movie to watch with adults, but it is not a must see for children.

Wednesday, 05 Aug 2020 16:54

For some reason, this documentary - like some of those I've seen before - is written in a way that makes the subject a good story, but the purpose is to make a documentary. The documentary doesn't tell a story. It makes a documentary. The thing is, it's not a documentary that tells a story, but a documentary that tells the story. It's only the story told on a long table (located in a museum), surrounded by a bunch of artifacts that would be impossible to handle if they were on the surface of the earth (or in the sky, as it were). I'm not sure if it's a good idea, or even a good movie. But that's why the film is made on a long table: to hide the reality. The director is thinking that he's in the situation he's making the documentary, not a documentary. If he'd had an agreement with the museum, he'd have had an agreement with the curator. The film would have been totally different. The situation would have been one of a museum employee sitting next to a curator. There's also an additional note that the museum employee is an atheist, so the film is more or less a critique of religion. The curator is also a religious person, so the movie is a critique of the religion. This is not a bad film. There are many good things in the film. But the story that we're supposed to see in the film is not a good story, and the film is trying to cover a bad story. I think that it's clear that it's a documentary, but it's a bad documentary. I think that it's a mistake to make a documentary about religion, and I think that it's a mistake to make a documentary about religion on a long table, when it's not the case that you can't take the time to make a documentary that tells a story. The director is still making the movie, but he is also showing it.

Saturday, 01 Aug 2020 02:58

Steve Novotny (the director of the documentary "The Aftermath") does a wonderful job in making this documentary feel like a documentary. It is exciting to learn about what went down, and to watch the people from the church return to their lives. I was pleasantly surprised with the interviews and interviews with the other survivors. The survivors and the Church have a long way to go to mend their relationship. There are many holes in this documentary, as you can see from the lack of "interviews" with some of the survivors and the Church. I am not a fan of the Vatican, but I am sure the Vatican is more powerful than this church. This church has been a terrible force for evil, and there is no question in my mind that the Vatican was guilty. But it has not been able to do anything about it. In this documentary, the Vatican seemed to be to the right of the Catholic Church, and I would not even touch that organization. It was not a very good documentary. It was not the type of documentary that the Catholic Church would want to be known as. The Church did not want to be known for this documentary, and the survivors should not be made to look bad by the Church. It was sad to see that many survivors have to leave their old homes to be brought to another one. It is not an easy thing to go away to another place, and to be away from those you know and love. This documentary shows the Catholic Church as the devil. I am glad to see the church move away from it's policy of denying sins to children. There was a great need to have a strong anti-drug policy in the Catholic Church. For years, the Catholic Church was not able to come up with a policy to deny the use of drugs. The church's policy of denying the use of drugs to children is a very strong stance in my opinion. The Catholic Church has become a very powerful force for evil in the world. It has been a very bad thing for the Church to be associated with the Catholic Church. I hope that the church will not be associated with this documentary. Hopefully, the Church will not be associated with this documentary.

Thursday, 30 Jul 2020 00:39

This documentary covers the whole range of life in the compound, from the plight of the children to the problems of their fathers. The film consists of interviews with their parents, the parents of the children, and sometimes the children themselves. The story of these families is nothing less than fascinating. I feel like the ending could have been better. It leaves you with a feeling that something has been missing from the movie. It doesn't seem to end on a high note, as if they're trying to do something different. Instead, it leaves you with a feeling of despair. I still think that this documentary deserves a 9/10. Its about as compelling as watching a video of children playing.

Thursday, 23 Jul 2020 17:55

The movie shows in a very clear way that the current United States government is a very dangerous, corrupt and oppressive organization, as the movie does not shy away from the reality that the U.S. government, at present, is very much influenced by the private sector. It is clear that the producers of the movie did not have much of a choice, but to produce a movie that would expose the government and the private sector. It is very interesting to note the different arguments that the movie is presented with. One major argument is that the U.S. government is basically using the people to do it's bidding. There are many things that the government does that are very bad, but is not done by the private sector. The government is also very much influenced by money, and not by the public interest. In this way, the government is not doing it's job to the benefit of the public, but to the benefit of the private sector. The other argument presented in the movie is that the government has become a victim of its own greed, and has become unable to solve any of its problems. In this way, it is seen as very much more of a victim of the government, than a victim of the private sector. In conclusion, the movie is very good, and it gives a clear picture of how the government is really acting. It is also very interesting to see how much money the government takes from the people.

Sunday, 19 Jul 2020 03:59

I'm a large fan of Edward V. Hirsch, and I enjoyed watching his films, even the lesser ones. Theodore Kaczynski, the movie is not. While there are some interesting points made about Kaczynski and his work, I was actually annoyed with the way the film was edited. Rather than let the audience see what he had to say, the filmmakers cut away from the most important, if cliched, things. And when you cut away from him, he just seems very odd. The film also seems to have no reason to exist. If you've never seen a documentary like this before, you're going to be put off. However, if you enjoy documentaries and art films, you should be entertained. Kaczynski's life is fascinating and fascinating, and you could even say very interesting. But the documentary did not attempt to delve into his life in a meaningful way. It simply sat there for too long, and did not present his ideas or thoughts in a way that makes them easy to digest. There were also points that were good, but not nearly as great as the film had hoped. While some parts of the documentary were interesting and also worth watching, the ones that were bad (such as the 8 minutes of the Kaczynski interview) seemed very artificial. And they seem very out of place in a documentary. It would have been better if the filmmaker had tried to incorporate Kaczynski's ideas into the documentary itself. The directors also missed a chance to show some more of Kaczynski's life in a way that the viewer can easily understand and empathize with. The point that I was trying to make was that while it's an interesting documentary, the film itself was poorly edited, and that the editing was something that was completely out of place in a documentary. If you have to be alone, you should have a safe place to do it. I do think that the directors did an excellent job of bringing the story of Kaczynski's life to the screen, but it's not the story that we need to be shown. I also think that the film could have had a few more interesting things to say about Kaczynski. If the filmmakers had focused more on Kaczynski and less on his ideas, the film could have been great.

Sunday, 12 Jul 2020 21:15

I have not been a big fan of The Smiths, their music is sort of bland and lame. That being said I did like this documentary. I was entertained. The only thing I felt like missing was a decent explanation of the reason for Smith's nickname. What was it? What did it mean? What happened to all those other bands? I don't really care, and I don't know if I ever will. I don't really know anything about the man, and I'm just not going to start learning about him, since he is such a unique and interesting person. The documentary was interesting, but it was lacking a little something. All in all, it was a decent documentary. I would definitely recommend this to those who are fans of The Smiths.

Friday, 10 Jul 2020 18:56

One of the best documentaries about chicken plantation I have seen. Shows the horror and a sort of civilization that was brought back to the beginning of the 20th century. The actual history of the chicken plantation is rarely told and the sad truth about the living conditions and inhuman conditions of the working and working conditions for the slaves. They didn't want to be slaves, they just wanted to work, they wanted to be in the chicken plants to be treated and not be treated like animals. No real revolution happened, people were just so shocked that they could not live in the same way. The documentary about the chicken plantation will bring a lot of things to you and it will make you think about your relationship with chickens, and your relationship with animals and the way they are treated.

Saturday, 02 May 2020 17:10

The cast is impressive as the two victims are first-rate. The victim, a 19-year old named Martin Schmid, is shown to be at least a quarter of an inch shorter than his mate (in a skull cast) who was also just a quarter an inch shorter. The cast includes four other adults of the alleged society and the victim is shown with a hole in the middle of his forehead where his face was welded shut. This makes it look like the cast has been put in a jumble to make it appear that the victim has lost the ability to speak. This is not what the cast members say. What they say is that the cast was placed into a container and then shoved into the lake. The victim, who was seen to be at least a half an inch shorter than the cast, was put into the container with no apparent assistance. This seems to be more of a biological (not psychic) than a practical (not psychic) cause. The cast was taken to another area of the lake for treatment but then was forced to swim to shore. This again makes it appear that the cast has been put in a jumble to make it appear that the victim has lost the ability to speak. This casts further doubt on the point of "talking through a hole" being a psychic ability. See this movie if you have a chance, but do not try to decipher a message in this movie.

Saturday, 02 May 2020 12:49

The story of a family struggling to survive is explored through their daily life. The lives of the children are shown, and the parents are interviewed. It is not possible to fully understand the emotions that are being expressed and the stress they are facing. There is not enough information to show us why they are facing such a situation. However, the more we learn about them, the more we understand why they are the way they are. I believe this is a must see for parents to know what their kids are going through and for the community to learn what is going on. It is not necessary to be educated to understand what is going on, just to watch. The video is very educational and effective. The viewer can use it to help understand their situation. I would recommend this video to anyone who needs to be educated. I think it will help many people to be educated. I hope it will help many people learn from their parents.

See all 25 reviews

Write a review