Oh, yes, that makes more sense. So, the "show" is basically the things that he and his friends get up to, which used to take place primarily at a community college.

I thought this episode wasy much better than last week's. Pierce's crazy sex room was great, as was Shirley's reaction to it, and Troy's innocence.  It's always nice seeing Giancarlo Esposito, and, for once, Pierce actually had a proper storyline in an episode.

Yeah, exactly. I personally liked the initial Brian sighting -  I thought it added a nice moment of human connection. However, when Brian started appearing in every episode afterwards, and it was revealed that Pam and Jim somehow grew close to him over the years without us seeing any hint of it, I lost my faith…

1. I'm pretty sure the Governor didn't say "Heisenberg".

I agree that the Abed TV thing went on far too long, and was barely even remotely funny, but I'm still going to stick with it. Who knows, this might just be a stumble as it slowly but surely climbs back to its former heights :) .

I think the reason so many people are calling it pointless is because, since it's the last season, this just feels like a cheap way to generate tension, and get people saying and thinking things like "Oh no, Jim and Pam might break up! I'd better keep watching", when it's obvious that they won't split up in the final…

I think the reason so many people are calling it pointless is because, since it's the last season, this just feels like a cheap way to generate tension, and get people saying and thinking things like "Oh no, Jim and Pam might break up! I'd better keep watching", when it's obvious that they won't split up in the final…

I see that people are thinking that this episode suggests that Brian is merely a way for Jim and Pam's issues to come to the forefront, but, like you, Noodly Appendage, I definitely thought there were manipulative overtones to their lunch.

I see that people are thinking that this episode suggests that Brian is merely a way for Jim and Pam's issues to come to the forefront, but, like you, Noodly Appendage, I definitely thought there were manipulative overtones to their lunch.

I'm struggling to figure out what we're meant to think/feel with regard to Jim, Pam and Brian. Introducing these marital difficulties may be realistic, what with Jim's new job etc., but, coming in the final season, they're going to be ultimately pointless: Either Jim and Pam end up staying together (most likely), in…

I'm struggling to figure out what we're meant to think/feel with regard to Jim, Pam and Brian. Introducing these marital difficulties may be realistic, what with Jim's new job etc., but, coming in the final season, they're going to be ultimately pointless: Either Jim and Pam end up staying together (most likely), in…

I forgot to mention the Dean's "Toooooooo" joke. That went on far too long, wasn't funny in the first place, and reminded me of a lot of below average "comedies". But apart from that, I don't think there was anything out and out terrible.

Dan Harmon leaving, and all the behind the scenes changes were so highly publicised that it's difficult to tell whether I'd have noticed any difference if I hadn't been aware of them, but this did feel slightly weird.

Jim was completely in the wrong, and not only was he barely apologetic, he then acted as if he was the one being wronged. Were we meant to sympathise with him at all? It also annoyed me when he was partially vindicated at the end when Darryl went to the dark side and threw the can on the floor.

Jim was completely in the wrong, and not only was he barely apologetic, he then acted as if he was the one being wronged. Were we meant to sympathise with him at all? It also annoyed me when he was partially vindicated at the end when Darryl went to the dark side and threw the can on the floor.

Yeah, that's another point, actually.  If they wanted to get Brian fired for helping Pam, couldn't they have made it make more sense? I refuse to believe that doing his job "correctly" would involve standing there watching a big warehouse worker with anger problems assault another person.

Yeah, that's another point, actually.  If they wanted to get Brian fired for helping Pam, couldn't they have made it make more sense? I refuse to believe that doing his job "correctly" would involve standing there watching a big warehouse worker with anger problems assault another person.

I feel like I'm being slightly unfair to the writers, since lots of people have been saying for years that they should acknowledge the documentary crew or involve them somehow, but now that they have it just feels silly and not organic at all.

I feel like I'm being slightly unfair to the writers, since lots of people have been saying for years that they should acknowledge the documentary crew or involve them somehow, but now that they have it just feels silly and not organic at all.

Clinically depressed? Asperger's Syndrome? Really? He's not just a regular guy, who doesn't covet being a "celebrity" to nearly the same extent as actual "celebrities" and therefore doesn't feel the need to over-enthuse about everything?