Good review, Todd.  I do like the pilot episode, but it's also clear they're trying some things out to see how different actors will play off each other, and I think - give how quickly and awesomely the series coheres - that it ends up looking like one of the weaker episodes.  Would that most television shows had a…

I guess I'm out of step with readers again… I didn't care much for this.  Douglas and Damon were fine (though Lowe steals every scene he's in), and I really enjoyed the tastelessly tacky ending, which was fitting, but the rest of the film felt … half-baked?   I didn't feel this offered much outside of a cliff's notes…

Do you mean Dance of Reality?  Here's a review from The Guardian,and here's one from RogerEbert.com/

Heh, that Zero Dark Thirty discussion is one of the few times I've been 100% in line with his reviews.  You mileage may (and apparently does!) vary.

Your timing's bad and you should feel bad!

I can't imagine a film with Tom Hiddleston and Tilda Swinton playing vampires would be anything but great, even in lesser hands than Jarmusch….  Seriously, have there been more awesome vampire pairings in film?  Maybe David Bowie and Catherine Deneuve, but that's about it.

One of my favorite television moments ever is Bill O'Reilly's anguish when he interviewed his childhood hero, Tab Hunter.

Well, no, you don't get to put words into my mouth: in fact, I like his unfussy worksmanship a lot.  My problem with Soderbergh's films - and I've said this many times before - is that the screenplay itself usually feels a few drafts away from where it needs to be, and that's why they tend to suffer from lack of…

Extra points if Cheyenne goes to open his mouth, and Liberace turns to him with frustration and complains, "Oh, now you have a thing?"

Eh, might have depended on your household.  My grandmother still talks about how surprised she was about Rock Hudson.  Liberace she'd probably call "a little fruity", but not in the gay sense… in the fruitcake, aka a little on the other side of normalcy.

I kinda agree.  I think I'd put The Informant! near the top as well, but Soderbergh's films always seem to me like a pretty decent meal that you realize, after you leave the restaurant, hasn't really filled you up.

She meant jean shorts and a wifebeater, but close enough.

Respectfully disagree.

Heh… for all the flak I gave him above, I don't think anyone's ever accused D'Angelo of having middle of the road taste.

Thanks, Mike.  No objection to questioning its right to be there: you're right that the charge of "tokenism" has a particularly ugly history.  I'm just trying to point out that there were other films you found unworthy of a competition spot, but you found other reasons why they may have been included, well within the…

Do you think it'll top the enthusiasm people seem to have for Adèle Exarchopoulos, or does the likelihood that Blue will win the Palme give Cotillard a chance at it, as a consolation prize?

the film’s presence at Cannes is hard to justify except as a case of tokenism.

@avclub-6c6094f256f51e83fe02bce6091163e7:disqus : For what it's worth, I think Solondz makes clear that Mark didn't molest anyone, and that it's a mark of Aviva's basic decency that she doesn't believe it.  But also that Mark's "thesis" at the end of the film is full of shit.

It's not too cynical.  Or at least: I certainly didn't see it that way.  I think it's obvious from the first two movies which personality traits of theirs were going to be grating on each other in the long run, but that their connection is so good anyway that it doesn't matter.

@LurkyMcLurkerson:disqus : If you do watch them backwards, I'd love to know your impressions are.