I'm not sure I'd characterize Daniel Desario as a fundamentally good person (see e.g., "Tests and Breasts"), but otherwise I concur with most of this.  

Regarding the idea of departure from what we understand makes an entertaining TV show, I think we have to be indulgent not because of who the creator is, but because the medium and delivery of this really is something new.  Because of that, I don't think we can judge this by the criteria of entertaining TV.

But it does make sense from the perspective of free-associating on the idea of the phoenix as a metaphor for rebirth/rising from the ashes, which is what Michael is trying to do.  University of Phoenix just happens to be an inappropriate method, as does moving to the entirely bland city of Phoenix.  Michael seems more…

So what exactly is a real-time sing-a-long to "Who are you?"  A sign of tight paced, non-padding?  What precisely did that have to do with advancing a narrative?  What exactly was the structural relation of that moment to the larger plot of undercutting Louie's desire to teach his children the value of old folks? …

Obviously I was sorely mistaken.

One of the reasons I never watched the show when it originally aired is that I saw Ron Howard's involvement and figured all of the critical praise for the show was the equivalent of all of the critical praise heaped upon many of his thoroughly mediocre movies. 

Maybe what they need is a third set of reviews reviewing it from the perspective of having seen the whole thing and watching indivdual episodes the second time through.  And then they could add a fourth review that reviewed the whole series from the perspective of two complete viewings.  And then they could add a…

See, I disagree with the premise that only "geniuses" deserve the charity of going along with what they're trying to do.  First of all, the term itself is completely loaded.  To me, the term simply means people who have created works that have endured.  You don't really know who the geniuses are until enough time has
p…

It's not a stand alone TV episode.  It's something new. 

Agreed Gleeth.  Though, there is something to be said for a breakneck pace in comedy.  It's been so successful not only for original AD, but also the 30s and 40s screwball comedies, particularly all of Hawks' comedies and Sturges' Palm Beach Story, Classic Simpsons, 30 Rock, etc., etc.

Michael's always been the audience surrogate, so it's appropriate to start with him. George Sr. is the patriarch of the Bluth family, and this show has always been an ensemble piece about the family.  As much as I love Tobias, he's peripheral as a Bluth.

And of course, in cinema, In the Loop!

Hurwitz actually did a guest appearance on the Workaholics according to the interwebs.  I'm not a fan of Workaholics, but I'm not going to begrudge Hurwitz whatever indulgences he wants to make.  Dude earned it.  I thought the one Workaholics dude comported himself better here than he did as Jeff Winger's long lost…

I don't want to be rude, but I didn't read your response.  I'm on a slow-watch regimen.  

Apparently Nichole Kidman talked about how much her own personal mood affects her viewing of movies recently at Cannes.  This kind of humble acknowledgement of the inherent subjectivity of one's own impressions, and the vagaries of external circumstances that can affect them, is something that many critics would do…

Except half of the strategizing was figuring out a way to soften the blow for P-Hound, so he wouldn't realize that George Michael had sided with his dad.  Classic Michael, who always wants to preserve the appearance of being nice/doing the right thing, even as he acts like a selfish Bluth. 

I don't know.  Sometimes, you notice distinctive flavors on the way back up that you missed the first time on the way down. 

I think it's both, though.  While the scheduling conflict seems to be the real world impetus, they've actually made the separation of characters essential to the story they're telling, which is what happens when the Bluths as a family really do fall apart.  Given where season 3 ended, this actually seems a perfectly…

OK.  This show does have pacing problems now that it's untethered from the sitcom format.  Sometimes the straight-jacket of an imposed structure can be liberating.  Just ask people who write sonnets.  You can even see the show struggling with this new found freedom.  It occassionally still winds down to add breaks,…

He was always the best of the Bluths and the audience's surrogate.  But I think the show did an ample job of showing the flip-side of the straight man character: his casual arrogance about his own normalcy, because all of the people around him are so screwed up.  There is something insufferable about that, and it…