Bald, bug-eyed, axe-wielding, skydiving, dragon-slayer gives Wooderson a run for the money for its sheer gonzo insanity.

Bald, bug-eyed, axe-wielding, skydiving, dragon-slayer gives Wooderson a run for the money for its sheer gonzo insanity.

The fact that it is Deakins will mean that he won't win, which is criminal. Guy should have a mantle full of the things.

The fact that it is Deakins will mean that he won't win, which is criminal. Guy should have a mantle full of the things.

Zombie Private Pyle.

Zombie Private Pyle.

Was actually a Venture Brothers reference, but your post made me look up S Club, so now I know what that is. Which is nice. I guess.

Was actually a Venture Brothers reference, but your post made me look up S Club, so now I know what that is. Which is nice. I guess.

(S)Phynx!

(S)Phynx!

Unless I imagined it there was a specific reference to Tapped Out an episode or two ago. Something mocking how long it took to come out.

Unless I imagined it there was a specific reference to Tapped Out an episode or two ago. Something mocking how long it took to come out.

Thumbs up for the MST3K reference!
Except now I have the whole theme stuck in my head. But then again that is usually the case anyways.

Thumbs up for the MST3K reference!
Except now I have the whole theme stuck in my head. But then again that is usually the case anyways.

One of my all time favorite late-night drunk/stoned cable movies. Absolutely required to watch it no matter at what point I begin to catch it.  The way Boorman used light (and the green reflected light) is absolutely amazing.  Mirren, Williamson, Terry.  Fabulous.

One of my all time favorite late-night drunk/stoned cable movies. Absolutely required to watch it no matter at what point I begin to catch it.  The way Boorman used light (and the green reflected light) is absolutely amazing.  Mirren, Williamson, Terry.  Fabulous.

Be-de-be-de-bee-dee.

Be-de-be-de-bee-dee.

They have actually screwed up the dilemma though. To be a true dilemma, if both parties defect, the result should be slightly better than the cooperator gets if the other party defects.  The way they have it set up joint defection and asymmetrical defection have the same result for one of the parties.

They have actually screwed up the dilemma though. To be a true dilemma, if both parties defect, the result should be slightly better than the cooperator gets if the other party defects.  The way they have it set up joint defection and asymmetrical defection have the same result for one of the parties.