"but Will Smith has always excelled at making seemingly stale genre pictures feel fresh again."

Chase has been playing these monkey games for years. Who can forget the ambiguous ending in the 1982 TV movie "Off the Minnesota Strip" I quote the original NY Times review for it: "Off the Minnesota Strip is little more than a homily on the futility of it all. The message of the ending seems to be, turn off the set,…

I'm sure Gilligan is relieved that "freaktown" is keeping an open mind

It's absolutely fraudulent misrepresentation. The whole "you signed it, and there was this hidden clause in it, too bad" schtick is itself a pretty hilarious parody of how contract formation actually works. With Nathan actually saying that on camera, there is really no conceivable way for him to enforce the terms of…

Jerry Sandusky might disagree with you

Not knowing anything about Buffy before starting the show a few weeks ago, I'm still having trouble understanding this perception. I finally started my watch after having a friend recommend it to me for quite some time. He would always paraphrase our discussions though by imploring me to "skip season one" because it…

Not exactly. It's difficult to explain without giving the game away so to speak so if you want to know more hit me up anonymously.

eat shit and die, port of call new orleans is legion

You seem to lack basic reading comprehension skills. I said criminal copyright infringement is theft, plain and simple, not copyright infringement. I actually agree with a lot of points you've made and find your opinions interesting albeit naive (which I think you would openly admit to). You're the one that brought up…

No one goes to jail for merely drawing a certain pattern of lines or printing a certain sequence of words. Criminal copyright infringement is theft, plain and simple. It's drawing a certain pattern of lines or printing a certain sequence of words for the purpose of private financial gain with the reckless disregard…

damn she's put on a lot of weight

15 times? You never addressed it. You really are a blithering hayseed. Malvo threw a knife into a guy's head. Malvo was next to a knife. Put it together, you simpering prat.

what blithering hayseed watches the 'good wife'

Unlike you, I can admit when I'm wrong (only in saying nobody stated the second glove dropped was a mistake). The interpretation that has been floating around on several other websites was "the first glove dropped was a mistake, the second was on purpose" in reference to Lester's wives. Hilarious that you still won't…

Right there in what dialog? The scene clearly showed him picking up the knife after shooting Malvo and moving it away from him. You really are a fool.

No one argued it was a mistake to drop the second glove, leading me to believe that you don't fully comprehend what exactly it is you are attempting to disprove.

You don't even seem to understand what self defense is, legally. Self defense is a subjective, not objective standard that changes completely depending on the facts and circumstances. A 90 pound, 80 year old woman with a knife versus Malvo, a man who was a deadly knife thrower are two separate things. Gus was…

Actually, I've read the above interpretation on several other websites. What's really, really off is telling someone they misinterpreted a riddle that was obviously meant to be ambiguous. You really are a dolt.

I like how you completely skip over the fact that Malvo killed a guy by throwing a knife into his skull and this was known to Gus. People like you always cherry-pick your arguments and leave out the stuff that is inconvenient. Whereas I've addressed every stupid and feebleminded point you've tried to make.

I'm completely logical. You're the moron who thinks he has a law degree.