avclub-383d3906a81567a4790639391dc4ecd7--disqus
Vader47000
avclub-383d3906a81567a4790639391dc4ecd7--disqus

The big crossover question of the week is exactly what was that manifestation of Darla? Was it a message from the Powers That Be? Or was it The First Evil attempting to stop SPOILERS Jasmine's plan, which is to make everyone a happy zombie who worships her, which I assume would generate too much "love" energy for The

Next week … Nathan Fillion on Buffy. Let the games begin

SPOILERS

What, no mention of where Ruxin's ring eventually ended up? "Forever unclean"

I liked his semi-disgust over the idea of someone using a library computer to watch porn. Of course it's Taco

My main problems with the episode:

there is a non-Fleming Bond novel called SeaFire. Close enough?

'Property of a Lady' was at least referenced in 'Octopussy' as the name of the Fabrege egg Bond has to bid on at auction.

Why does everyone hate on Quantum of Solace as a title? It comes straight from Ian Fleming and is thus the definition of a Bondian title. Skyfall is rather silly by comparison.

They're basically the filter for DNC talking points these days. So I guess if you're a Liberal you'd respect them very much. But any paper that runs Paul Krugman columns can't have much credibility.

What are the most successful truly terrible shows? You'd have to define both quality and successful. That article "American hates everything you love to watch" was mostly complaining about the shows the author personally likes not being watched by the masses.

No comment on the parallel structure of the beginning and ending? Bridget dreams that Andrew discovers her secret, and in her fear of being discovered moves to recover that evidence by staging a trip to the Hamptons, which ends up causing one of Siobhan's secrets to be revealed and results in Bridget revealing her own

Modern superhero TV shows are caught up in the notion that geek TV has to be serialized. Which means they can't really get past the origin story because that's where everything originates.

The New York Times is collapsing, too, and probably not respected too much.

That's part of the charm of the 1960s Batman show, in how it makes fun of these conventions.

And since people in Hollywood have almost no capacity for self reflection, they believe everything they do is creatively perfect. Thus, if something doesn't work, it is because the audience doesn't want it, not because it sucks. Ergo, they tried a superhero show, people didn't watch, so there's no point in trying

What's interesting is that these failed shows are deconstructions of the superhero mythos, focusing on original characters rather than adapting from the comic books.

Quite a moment when Mendelson orders his thug to kill House … much more tension than we've seen on the show in a while.

Well, that was a harsh review.

It's not necessary for the characters to grow if they have a good interaction. The procedurals bring that out of them.