Does this mean we can PLEASE start using the gender-neutral "they" and "them" to refer to both the singular and the plural in written English (like most people already do in spoken English)?

I remember having a similar assembly when I was in middle school. They didn't segregate us by sex, but they wanted it clear that there was a dress code (no boobs, butts, or belly-buttons). I was near the front and had recently started developing in a big way (um... really big way), and my family was broke so I hadn't…

Wait. People actually do this?!

You should feel good about the comparison. Again, I'm not saying Spacek wasn't a pretty actress; she just wasn't your typical beauty. There was an otherworldly quality to her that was capable of being very creepy. And from this trailer and the actress's appearance in general, I'm finding it hard to believe we'll see a…

Exactly. I look at Moretz and I... just see "pretty." There's none of that intensity, or that otherworldliness.

No, but it's still a part of the characterization of Carrie. It's supposed to REALLY mean something to her when she finally stands up for herself a little—it's her burgeoning self-confidence that people start to react to when they see her at the prom, not a naturally pretty face or just a change in wardrobe.

But Fanning seems REALLY overused. And she's also just too classic-pretty. I'd love to see an unknown in this role. Someone who was fairly plain. Heck, even a slightly overweight girl (while not real true to the source material) would be more believable in this role.

Uh, no it literally "thuds" into her (they, uh, weren't real subtle with their sound editing in this movie). And then there's about ten seconds of it moving around in her while we see her struggling to get free. I think you must have seen an edited version.

I think this girl was miscast. She seems to be a fairly decent actress, but Chloë Grace Moretz is way too pretty to play Carrie. Yeah, Sissy Spacek's pretty too, but she also had kind of unusual features (her eyes especially). Moretz is gorgeous—I just don't really buy her in this part.

I know, right? The racial stereotypes, and the even the regional stereotypes, combined with the rather shallow dialogue—ugh. I'm just tired of people going on about how much they love this tripe.

Eh, I guess you'd know. Like I said, didn't watch past the first season.

Aw, they didn't even have baseball bats to defend themselves—they stood around (or sat around) screaming in the episode I'm thinking of. It was pathetic. And yeah, I know it's based off a comic—don't care. Would've been cool to see them mix it up.

I stopped watching this show with anything close to interest when, in the first season, there was an episode where there was zombie attack on the camp and all of the women grabbed the children and inexplicably SAT DOWN. Not a frickin' one of them even had a weapon! I think this was around the same time there was that…

I never got sent home from school, but when I was that girl's age I had a (somewhat) similar problem with stinky sneakers. My parents were both angry alcoholics, we were broke, and I mostly wore hand-me-downs that didn't fit (and were from the wrong gender). Not having the right sized clothes also meant, in my case,…

I never said he was anti-feminist. I even said he seems to have good intentions. I still don't think that makes him a good writer of female characters: I think he falls back on tropes far more often for his female characters; I think he uses rape (or the threat of rape) as a character-building tool; I think most of…

Why thank you. Apparently you do, too. ^_^

Hells yes, I'd love to see it done as an old-school hand-drawn animation a la The Last Unicorn, or Watership Down. I'd also watch literally anything Miyazaki was involved in, but the throwback style might be neat.

Yep, there's the Jesuit training in action I'd been hoping to see.

It's not a dodge. I don't watch the show so I'm not going to offer a critique on it.

Sorry, I don't watch Girls.