You're a trickster spirit incarnate.

There's also the fact that in the later stages of the show, when you point out most of the reports are from, he was more sickly. I've seen old relatives of mine start to make racist or sexist comments as their faculties deteriorate. They were brought up in a time when that was normal, and even though they since…

Yeah. The third one is the best for the reasons you give: it takes what was an entertaining YA dystopia and uses it to take a bleak look at war and its psychological effects, as well as the compromises of revolution. The second is just a disappointing retread of the first.

He is. It wouldn't surprise me if he was the guy behind the epilogue idea. I've seen him talk about his campaign for driver safety and he's obviously extremely proud of it - rightly.

They also don't show up when you click TV Club anywhere other than via the top menu (i.e. through the 'types' searches). It's really weird.

It'd be great if the reviewers could include the title of the show, not just the episode, in the main-page image.

I was referring to the faux-contrarian content of Slate. I still like a lot of stuff here, but I fear it is going to go the same way as the rest of these sites. It's got to the point where I'm thinking about giving money to Andrew 'Bell Curve' Sullivan just because he seems to make some sort of effort.

You need to tell your TV reviewers to include the title of the show at the top, not just the episode. At the moment, for most of them I can just see a picture and the episode title. Even hovering the cursor over the picture doesn't tell me the name of the series. I need to guess from the image what program it is.

Yeah, although in the case of Slate I was grateful. It weaned me off a habit that was bad for the brain. But that's what worries me about this redesign: at Slate it wasn't a case of just needing to get used to it. It's a genuinely worse format.

Nailed it. It looks very pretty, but TV Club's functionality has been hit really hard. I used to make pretty heavy use of the follow function, and searching by show titles seems to bring up every article they're mentioned in rather than the list of reviews.

Man on Fire is really good, and what's more impressive is that if you watch the deleted scenes on the DVD, it's obvious it came really close to being very bad indeed.

Last week I wondered about Charlotte's hatred for Emily and someone explained it like this:

I wondered that last week and another commenter replied:

I think Emma Rigby is just getting more shades to play.

Yeah. I remembered those games and the memory of that team was still fresh when the movie came out. That ending didn't feel like a tragedy at all - it was considered a huge victory that they got there and competed, and walking over the line was a testament to their grit.

Yeah. My main concern about bringing NotDetective Lance into the fold is that it makes Dig superfluous. I like Dig.

So why is it that Charlotte hates Emily now so much? I remember there was something, but not exactly what.

Well spotted. I don't think it was explained. I guess you could assume that someone stalking Gregson was listening in on police communications or something. But that's definitely a plot hole, as-is.

I think the stalker played a bit more of a significant role than acknowledged here. It's important for plausibility reasons that the characters not assume any case Gregson is involved in is typically baroque. Most crimes are by idiots and the chances are this one would be too. We might know that the story requires…

I liked how Rudy says the girl scouts were an "abomination" and it's initially just a sign of how shallow Rudy is, then…