The Shining - The Meaning of the Photograph Explained
Summary
TLDREl guion del video analiza la película 'El resplandor' de Stanley Kubrick, cuestionando la interpretación de los espectros y la reencarnación como elementos sobrenaturales. Sugiere que, en realidad, la película es una historia de abuso y fracaso de un alcohólico en recuperación, aislado con sus fallas. La visión de los fantasmas es una distracción, mientras que la verdadera historia se centra en la psicología del protagonista y el ciclo de violencia y abuso que se repite a lo largo de las generaciones.
Takeaways
- 🎥 La fotografía al final de 'El resplandor' sugiere un ciclo de reencarnación del mal, pero no se explica completamente.
- 👻 Kubrick nunca afirmó que existieran fantasmas en su película; se centra en la psicosis y la manipulación del espectador.
- 📜 La cita de Kubrick sobre la 'reencarnación del ciclo del mal' a menudo se interpreta mal y se toma fuera de contexto.
- 🤔 La película plantea la posibilidad de que las visiones de Danny, Wendy y Jack sean producto de su mente y no de apariciones sobrenaturales.
- 🧐 Kubrick utiliza la técnica cinematográfica para representar la locura y no el sobrenatural, sugiriendo que los 'fantasmas' son creaciones de los personajes.
- 👨👩👦 La historia subyacente de 'El resplandor' está en la historia de abuso y fracaso de Jack, un alcoholico en recuperación y aislado.
- 🍷 Jack no ve ningún fantasma hasta después de haber abusado de su hijo, lo que refuerza la idea de que sus visiones son producto de su mente perturbada.
- 📚 La película es una crítica a la idea de que los fantasmas son la causa de los problemas, en lugar de las acciones y emociones humanas.
- 🔄 La 'reencarnación del ciclo del mal' puede interpretarse como la repetición intergeneracional de abuso, tanto de sustancia como de personas.
- 👪 La dinámica familiar en 'El resplandor' muestra la negación y el abuso, con Wendy defendiendo a Jack y Jack proyectando su fracaso en su familia.
- 🎬 'El resplandor' es una obra maestra del horror que se centra en la psicología del personaje y la representación de la violencia doméstica.
Q & A
¿Qué implica la fotografía al final de 'El resplandor'?
-La fotografía al final sugiere un ciclo de reencarnación del mal donde Jack ha sido parte de la historia del hotel.
¿Cuál es la interpretación de Stanley Kubrick sobre la fotografía de 1920 mencionada en la película?
-Kubrick sugiere que la fotografía implica un ciclo de reencarnación del mal, donde Jack ha sido parte de la historia del hotel en una vida anterior.
¿Por qué algunos espectadores creen que 'El resplandor' es simplemente una historia de fantasmas?
-Algunos espectadores usan la cita de Kubrick sobre el ciclo de reencarnación del mal como evidencia de que la película es una historia de fantasmas, aunque Kubrick nunca afirmó que hubiera fantasmas en la película.
¿Cómo se relaciona la escena del baño con la idea de reencarnación?
-La escena del baño, donde Jack habla con Delbert Grady, se usa para sugerir un ciclo de reencarnación del mal, aunque no hay una conexión directa entre la existencia de fantasmas y la reencarnación.
¿Por qué algunos creen que las visiones de Danny, Wendy y Jack son reales?
-Algunos espectadores insisten en que las visiones son fantasmas reales basándose en la novela de Stephen King y la cita de Kubrick sobre el ciclo de reencarnación del mal.
¿Cuál es la teoría de que no hay fantasmas en la película de Kubrick?
-La teoría de que no hay fantasmas en la película se basa en que ninguna de las visiones de los personajes se basa en un personaje real o histórico, y que son más bien fantasías creadas por sus propios temores e insanias.
¿Cómo se relaciona la historia de Jack Torrance con el tema de la abusividad?
-Jack Torrance es un padre abusivo y un alcohólico en recuperación, cuya soledad y aislamiento en el hotel provocan que su insania y resentimiento se manifiesten, llevándolo a fantasear sobre el asesinato de su familia.
¿Por qué la interpretación de que no hay fantasmas hace que 'El resplandor' sea aún más aterrador?
-La comprensión de que no hay fantasmas hace que la película sea más aterrador porque muestra la naturaleza cíclica y perpetua de la violencia y el abuso, lo que es un reflejo de la realidad más que de lo sobrenatural.
¿Qué es el 'Narrador Inconfiable' y cómo se relaciona con la película?
-El 'Narrador Inconfiable' es una técnica utilizada por Kubrick para hacernos entender que no siempre podemos confiar en lo que vemos en la película, sugiriendo que los fantasmas pueden ser ilusiones o fantasías de los personajes.
¿Cómo se relaciona la cita de Kubrick sobre la reencarnación del mal con la teoría de la abusividad?
-La cita de Kubrick sobre la reencarnación del mal puede interpretarse no solo como la existencia de fantasmas, sino también como la repetición cíclica de la violencia y el abuso, que se perpetúa a través de las generaciones.
¿Por qué algunos espectadores pueden encontrar la película más fácil de entender si asumen que no hay fantasmas?
-Al aceptar que no hay fantasmas, los espectadores pueden centrarse en las complejidades del comportamiento humano y la psicología de los personajes, lo que ofrece una comprensión más profunda de la historia y sus temas.
Outlines
😶 'El Shining': La Foto y el Ciclo de Reencarnación del Mal
El video analiza la misteriosa fotografía al final de 'El Shining', que muestra al protagonista en una época anterior. Kubrick sugiere un ciclo de reencarnación malvado, pero también deja entrever que es mejor no explicarlo todo, sugiriendo que las visiones podrían ser alucinaciones o un estado mental alterado más que fantasmas reales. Se argumenta que la película no muestra fantasmas en el mundo real y que las visiones son parte de la psique de los personajes, en lugar de entidades sobrenaturales.
🤔 La Teoría de la Reencarnación y sus Malentendidos
Se discute cómo algunos espectadores malinterpretan la idea de reencarnación en la película, creyendo que implica la existencia de fantasmas reales. Se argumenta que la apariencia de Jack en una fotografía de la década de 1920 no sugiere que los fantasmas sean reales, sino que podría ser una metáfora de que Jack ha vivido vidas pasadas en el hotel. Además, se señala que no hay conexión lógica entre la reencarnación y la existencia de fantasmas, y que la historia podría ser una representación de la locura y el abuso, no del sobrenatural.
👤 La Realidad del Abusador: Jack Torrance y su Ciclo de Violencia
Este párrafo explora la teoría de que 'El Shining' es una historia de abuso y fracaso, en lugar de una de fantasmas. Se sugiere que Jack, un alcohólico con un historial de abuso, se vuelve loco debido a la soledad y aislamiento, proyectando sus deseos y resentimientos en visiones que parecen fantasmas. Se argumenta que la película no presenta un patrón de abuso basado en personajes reales, sino que los 'fantasmas' son creaciones de la mente de los personajes, influenciados por relatos del hotel y sus propios temores.
🔄 El Ciclo de Violencia y la Reincarnación Metafórica
Se analiza la cita de Kubrick sobre el 'ciclo de reencarnación del mal', sugiriendo que puede referirse a la repetición intergeneracional de abuso y locura, más que a fantasmas reales. Se argumenta que la película muestra cómo la soledad y el aislamiento pueden empeorar los problemas de un abusador, y cómo la historia de Jack se vuelve un ciclo de violencia que se repite, simbolizando la reincarnación del mal en forma de conductas abusivas.
🎬 'El Shining': La Maestría de Kubrick en la Narrativa de Horror
El video concluye argumentando que 'El Shining' es una obra maestra del horror porque, al no tener fantasmas reales, se centra en la psicología del abuso y la locura, lo que hace que la película sea aún más aterradora. Se sugiere que la película es una representación del ciclo de violencia que se perpetúa a través de las generaciones, y se agradece a los espectadores por seguir el análisis.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡El mal
💡Reencarnación
💡Escepticismo
💡Abuso
💡Aislamiento
💡Locura
💡Ciclo
💡Narrador poco fiable
💡Interpretación
💡Fantasmas
💡Cineasta
Highlights
The ending photograph of The Shining suggests an evil reincarnation cycle.
Kubrick's quote about the 1920s photograph implies the film is a ghost story.
Critics argue that the movie's ghosts are hallucinations, not supernatural beings.
Kubrick's full quote on reincarnation is often taken out of context.
The Shining can be interpreted as a story about the cycle of abuse and madness.
Jack Torrance's character is an abusive, recovering alcoholic with a history of failure.
Isolation at the Overlook Hotel exacerbates Jack's abusive tendencies.
Kubrick uses filmmaking techniques to depict psychological breakdown, not the supernatural.
The film's ghosts may be manifestations of Jack's guilt and resentment.
Kubrick's hedge maze sequence hints at the unreliable narrator technique.
The Shining explores the idea of an endless cycle of evil, possibly tied to generational abuse.
Understanding the absence of real ghosts deepens the horror and impact of the film.
Kubrick's commentary on the novel vs. the film adds ambiguity to the reincarnation theme.
The Shining can be seen as a masterful depiction of the cycle of violence and abuse.
Critics believe The Shining is a horror masterpiece that becomes scarier when recognizing the absence of ghosts.
Kubrick's intentional ambiguity allows for multiple interpretations of the film's themes.
The movie's horror stems from the psychological torment of the characters, not supernatural elements.
Transcripts
That photo at the end of The Shining? Whatever happened there?
I'm sorry to defer with you, sir.
But y ou are the caretaker; you’ve always been the caretaker.
That photograph at the end of The Shining is a bit of a head scratcher. It is
almost like the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey, where on the surface at least,
it appears to make little logical sense, leaving the closing of both films largely unexplained.
When specifically asked about the 1920s photograph, Kubrick stated "Well, it was
supposed to suggest a kind of evil reincarnation cycle where he is part of the hotel’s history.”
Since then, a lot of people use this quote from Kubrick’s phone call with
Jun'ichi Yaoi as evidence that the movie was simply a ghost story. Stanley made mention of
an “evil reincarnation cycle”. Kubrick recalled the bathroom scene referenced in the beginning
of this video, and then Kubrick continued: "One is merely suggesting some kind of endless
cycle of evil reincarnation, and also — well, that's it.”
Interestingly Kubrick cut himself off before elaborating. And then
he revealed this key that is often omitted when discussing the quote in question.
“It's the sort of thing that I think is better left unexplained, but since you
asked me, I'm trying to explain." From these cryptic phrases and other
interviews where Kubrick discussed the subject matter of the novel specifically,
many have insisted that Kubrick’s movie was a ghost story and that the visions Danny, Wendy,
and Jack see in the hotel must be real ghosts, rather than visualizations of their mental state,
hallucinations, or some other non-supernatural explanation. Note, for our purposes here, we are
excluding King’s books and also the so-called sequel movie Dr Sleep. These have nothing to do
with Kubrick’s telling of the story. Regardless of the source material, there are simply no
ghosts on screen in the real world of the film as we have said before and will say again.
We believe the quote is being taken out of context, much like Kubrick’s words from another
interview that are often taken out of context in support of the belief that there are indeed
ghosts in the film. The truth, as we see it, is that there are no ghosts in Kubrick’s movie,
and Kubrick never said that there were. In the interview in question, Kubrick is explicitly
referring to his thoughts on the novel, not the film as we have covered before. The full quote is
far more ambiguous and does not directly address how to analyze his work. The quote was not a quote
about Kubrick’s cinematic masterpiece, the quote was in reference to Stephen King’s novel.
The quote about reincarnation is a little different, but the end result is much the
same. Between the scene of Jack in the bathroom with DELBERT Grady, and Kubrick’s mention about
an “evil reincarnation cycle” - many observers mistakenly form a connection when there is none
to be found, somehow reasoning that reincarnation must mean the ghosts are real because both are
supernatural, I guess, and therefore this is a simple story about evil ghosts being reincarnated.
But is it really that simple? To begin with, there is no connection between the existence
of ghosts and the belief in reincarnation. The one does not imply or say anything at all about
the other. Jack appears in the photograph at the end as a real person at a real party. There is
nothing to suggest that he is a ghost at that point, or that there are ghosts at that point.
The only suggestion one can glean if you take the photograph at face value is that Jack visited the
hotel in the 1920s and was somehow reborn after, only to return to the Overlook in his next life,
perhaps being pulled there by fate or destiny, or whatever. If you believe this is the case – and
to be clear, we do not take it at face value, believing it’s another example
of Kubrick playing with the audience – it says absolutely nothing at all about the existence,
presence, and nature of any ghosts that might or might not haunt the hotel, or the Shining
phenomenon in general. You cannot logically assert that because Jack was reincarnated
all the ghosts we believe we see are real. Those who believe the ghosts are real still have
to contend with other logical and sequential problems in the movie, all of which indicate
Kubrick is intentionally manipulating the viewer. He is really using his filmmaking craft to depict
madness, not the supernatural. The Delbert Grady that Jack believes he sees was supposed to be rom
some earlier era based on the clothing and overall setting. Jack appears to have made this up in his
own mind because the other Grady mentioned in the film, during the opening sequence, was from
a much more recent time period and had a different name. The man in the interview was CHARLES Grady,
who was said to have gone mad and murdered his 8 and 10 year old daughters back in the 1970s,
some 50 years later. We might even stretch so far as to believe that Charles is the
reincarnation as Delbert somehow, but even that is not really a valid explanation because
Jack has “always been the caretaker.” Charles would have been the caretaker in the 1970s.
Is Charles supposed to be Jack? Further, Danny does not see an 8 and a 10 year old,
he appears to see twin girls. In order to believe there are ghosts, one must believe that Jack sees
the ghost of someone never mentioned in the film before who happens to have the same last name
and Danny sees the ghosts of two other completely random people, who just happen to be young girls.
How many murders were there in the hotel over the years that Kubrick simply forgot to mention?
Generally speaking, ghost stories unfold by learning who the ghost was in real life,
believing some aspect of their lives or death, influences their behavior as a ghost. Essentially,
it's a mystery after death. Kubrick, however, intentionally chooses to introduce a potential
ghost in Charles Grady that is never mentioned again, then spins off at least five different
possible ghosts that are completely unrelated and created entirely in the characters heads’ – Lloyd,
Delbert, the Twin Girls, and the woman in the bathtub. There are more if you count
Wendy’s visions towards the end, but the point is unchanged: None of these so-called ghosts is based
on any character that we know was alive at some point or did anything at some point during the
film. They are more obviously the fantasies of the characters in the film, picked up from bits
and pieces that they’ve heard about the hotel and assembled from their own fears and insanities. The
alternative is to believe that either Kubrick made a lot of mistakes or didn’t know how to
tell a ghost story in the first place. This is why knowing there are no real,
literal ghosts is the key to understanding and fully appreciating The Shining. That is
what makes the film truly horrifying. It also proves key to understanding
Kubrick’s cryptic remark about reincarnation. Throughout the movie we are given various clues
that Jack Torrance is an alcoholic and a loose cannon. We know that he had a drinking problem,
and we know that he once injured his young son Danny when he was drunk. Danny started talking
to his imaginary friend Tony around this time, and the doctor informed Wendy that episodes like the
one Danny had are often brought on by emotional factors. We learn that Jack is an aspiring writer,
and he believed some peace and quiet acting as the caretaker of The Overlook would afford him a
chance to complete his writing project. All of the evidence going in, when taken together logically,
strongly suggest an abusive alcoholic father who previously failed as a writer. That is the movie,
right there, and what ultimately transpired was all spelled out
directly in the opening interview. For some people solitude and isolation
can of itself become a problem. And that is exactly what happened. You had
an abusive recovering alcoholic with no access to booze, locked away without human contact,
where Jack Torrance the failed writer reemerged on full display. He had no outlet, no human contact,
he resented his wife and his son believing they held him back, an obvious psychological defense
mechanism for his own failures. He starts losing grasp of his own reality, with fantasies of having
a drink, having a nice conversation where he could vent about his family, and he even fantasized
about a beautiful attractive woman representative of the wife he wished he had. Before long,
his resentment of his family reached the point that he fantasized about murdering the two people
who held him back, preventing him from realizing his full potential - his wife and child.
It was the perfect storm scenario, all spelled out in the opening interview combined with everything
we knew about Jack Torrance - an abusive recovering alcoholic who lacked the talent
and skill to make it as a real writer. Wendy was in denial, defending Jack when explaining how
Jack had mistakenly injured Danny after having too much to drink, and she insinuates Jack has roughly
handled Danny that way many times previously. But while in isolation, Wendy herself became
distanced from Jack, providing both with added isolation. Jack seemed irritable around Wendy,
and she was looking for a human outlet on the radio once the phones had gone out.
Note that Jack never saw a ghost prior to him again abusing his son Danny. This was foreshadowed
two days before it happened, the creepy scene where Jack seemed on the verge of again hurting
Danny. Danny asks his father if he would ever harm him or his mother. Jack becomes resentful,
and asks if his mother told him that. By the end of this discussion, Jack looks as if he’s
losing his temper as he tightly grabs Danny’s left shoulder. This is the last time we actually see
Danny with anyone before the incident. Wendy hears Jack yelling in agony,
he reveals that he had the worst nightmare, a terrible dream where he killed Wendy and
Danny and chopped them up into little pieces. Wendy tries comforting Jack, and that is when
Danny first reemerges with his injury. It’s his left shoulder and the left side of his neck that
are injured - the exact area where Jack had his hands when we last saw them together, which was
foreshadowed in the creepy scene 2 days prior. Wendy immediately blames Jack for hurting Danny,
and Jack looks completely dumbfounded. He never denies it, however. Jack instead still looks as
if he’s woken up from a horrible dream, and he has! Because he’s just come to the realization
that he once again abused and injured his son after losing his temper. Wendy was correct to
blame Jack. Note that prior to this point in the movie, Jack never saw any so-called ghost.
It was not until after that breaking point that he ventured into the Gold Room.
In Jack’s first encounter with Lloyd, he fantasizes that the drink he wants would
be his first drink in five months. In that very same conversation,
with regards to an instance where Wendy was mad after Jack had injured Danny, he says THIS:
That was three God damned years ago! That little fucker had thrown all my papers all over the
floor. All I was tried to do was pull him up! This also strongly implies that there was more
than one incident of past abuse, establishing a pattern of abuse when taken with Wendy’s earlier
comment. This acts as further confirmation that Jack was the one who injured Danny, not some
mysterious crazy ghost woman in Room #237. Jack’s resentment toward Wendy is on full display
throughout. Jack looks aggravated when Wendy tries offering him some loving encouragement after his
initial writing struggles. Jack is angered when she intrudes his workspace and interrupts him.
Jack was mighty perturbed at Wendy when Danny asked him if he’d ever harm either of them.
And then there is this doozy. I can really write my own ticket
if I went back to Boulder now! Couldn’t I? Shoveling out driveways. Work at a car wash.
The language here reveals EVERYTHING he always believed about Wendy! All of his
resentful attitude explodes out here in this quick exchange revealing his TRUE feelings about Wendy,
and how she ruined his life. O have let you fuck up my life so far,
but I am NOT gonna let you fuck this up. Jack blames Wendy for him not having a better
life, refusing to accept his own failure and passing on the blame. It strongly implies that
not only was Jack abusive toward Danny, but that he may have likewise had a long history
of abusing his wife - where past mistakes were blamed on his overindulgence of alcohol, but in
reality it was an inherent part of his character brought on by his own shortcomings, where the
alcohol was merely another coping mechanism for his many failures in life, and his inability to
live the life he believes he deserves. Kubrick provided us with the key to this
early in the movie, with the key sequence we like to refer to as the “unreliable narrator”.
We see a model of the hedge maze, we see Jack looking down on it, and we’re led to believe
the next shot is a point of view shot of Jack looking down at the model. But in fact, this is
actually an overhead view of the maze itself, with Danny and Wendy exploring it, after Wendy
was previously warned that navigating the maze was quite the daunting task. Kubrick is telling
the audience that you cannot always trust what you’re seeing, and this is a key to understanding
that there are no ghosts in Kubrick’s movie. How does this relate to the two competing themes,
ghosts and/or reincarnation vs abuse? The foundation of information that the entire
reality of the film was based on all happened prior to the family arriving at The Overlook.
Trust the information Kubrick is providing you here. The ghosts are the distraction, and we know
this because Jack does not see a single ghost until after he abused Danny and injured his
shoulder at The Overlook. The ghosts do not exist. No ghost in the movie, real or imagined, has any
impact whatsoever on the story. The reality of the film is that Jack was a recovering alcoholic with
a track record of failure and being abusive. Every single discussion Jack has with an imaginary ghost
ties directly back into that, and the isolation and solitude itself becoming a problem was laid
out right in the opening Interview. So what is Kubrick REALLY saying here:
"One is merely suggesting some kind of endless cycle of evil reincarnation,
and also — well, that's it.” And then before deciding NOT to
finish his thought, Kubrick concluded: “Again, it's the sort of thing that I think
is better left unexplained, but since you asked me, I'm trying to explain."
First it is interesting that he stops himself, stating it is better left unexplained.
Translation, he has not fully elaborated, he is letting us know there is far more to it than what
he already said. And also note that he qualifies the statement with the word “SUGGESTING”,
which corresponds with the key to the mint, the unreliable narrative. Knowing that there are no
ghosts in the movie, and knowing that it’s really a movie about a history of abuse and failure from
a recovering alcoholic who finds himself in total isolation with his own shortcomings
flailing before him - the endless cycle of evil reincarnation, if taken literally, it could mean
a ghost. But figuratively it could just as easily be madness, which in the context of this movie,
is directly tied into the cycle of abuse, both substance abuse and child abuse, and also likely
spousal abuse. If there is some kind of endless cycle of evil reincarnation, that is it. Kubrick
masterfully depicts the cycle of violence, which is in a sense something that is reincarnated over
and over again, with the individual and often through the generations. The abuser never goes
away, and the cycle is capable of repeating down the line, forever and ever and ever. He or she
might hide or suppress their abuse for a time, as Jack has done here. The first phase of the cycle
appears before the movie begins. Repression of rage, however, can only last so long,
and so the cycle repeats itself. The repetition is what Kubrick presents on screen, as the very same
feelings of failure, resentment, and anger recur again, only more magnified this time in isolation
with no booze. Jack has always been the caretaker because he has always been an abuser, and it will
only be a matter of time before the cycle repeats itself. It is also often a generational thing,
where the endless cycle of evil reincarnation perhaps indicates that Jack himself had an
abusive father, and a mother in denial. We believe that The Shining is the greatest
horror film of all time, and once you realize there are no ghosts in the movie, it truly becomes
a far more horrifying cinematic masterpiece. Thank you very much for watching everyone, I hope
you enjoyed, and have a wonderful night. Well that just happens to be exactly what I’m
looking for. I’m outlining a new writing project, and five months of peace is just what I want.
Purely an accident. My husband had been drinking and he came home about three hours late.
For some people solitude and isolation can of itself become a problem. Not for me.
On this particular occasion my husband just used too much strength and he injured Danny’s arm.
I know all about cannibalism. I saw it on TV. See! It’s okay, he saw it on the television.
Well something will come. It’s just a matter of settling back into the habit of
writing everyday. Yep! That’s all it is. Whenever you come in here and interrupt me
you’re breaking my concentration. You’re distracting me! And it will then take me
time to get back to where I was! Understand? Did your mother ever say that to you? That I
would hurt you? No Dad. Are you sure? Yes Dad. I killed you and Danny. But I didn’t just kill
you, I cut you up into little pieces. You son of a bitch! You did this to him!
Didn’t you? How could you! How could you? I did hurt him once, okay? It was an accident,
completely unintentional. It could have happened to anyone.
It’s his mother. She interferes. It was three God damn years ago! The
little fucker had thrown my papers all over the floor! All I tried to do was pull him up!
There’s a crazy woman in one of the rooms. She tried to strangle Danny. Are you out of your
fucking mind? (CLATTER)
I could really write my own ticket if I went back to Boulder now, couldn’t
I? Shoveling out driveways! Working a carwash! Have you ever thought for a single solitary moment
about my responsibilities to my employers? Has it ever occurred to you that I have agreed to look
after the Overlook Hotel until May the 1st? Wendy! I have let you fuck up my life so far,
but I am not going to let you fuck this up! Stay away from me! Wendy. Stay away. Give me the
bat. Stay away. Give me the bat. OWW! God damn! Wendy, listen! Let me out of here and I’ll forget
the whole Goddamn thing! It will be like nothing ever happened!
Just give me one more chance to prove it Mr Grady. That’s all I ask. Yes Dad.
That’s why I’ve always tried to avoid interviews and explanations about the
films. I think the film should, you know, be able to speak for itself.
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
Las Ventajas de Ser Invisible | ANÁLISIS PSICOLÓGICO | Explicación Psicológica
La Naranja Mecánica: La Historia en 1 Video
Análisis de "El gato negro" de Edgar Allan Poe – (con La Llave de Plata)
Planeta Salvaje: Una distopía psicodélica - Análisis - Cuttoon
Wall Street (1987) | QUE estás DISPUESTO a hacer por DINERO
Construcción social de la realidad
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)