Speaking of the two above, I'd really like to see some reasonable discussion on this interpretation of Fargo. I never knew what the Bunyan/ox thing meant but I think this answers it.

"Asked outright whether the film will explore the question of Deckard’s humanity, Villenueve says, 'not necessarily.'"

The hosts are the good guys in this show.

Tons of people are mentioning it, just not the reviewer.

Yeah. For most anyone paying attention, episode nine revealed William as MiB, and it was pointed at in too many ways to ignore going back much further.

I'm not sure this show wouldn't have been much better if it did the Lost thing of letting us know very clearly and early on what the flashbacks are and when it's present time. There were sooooooo many times in this episode where some character goes "oh, so this happened?" and (usually) Ford goes "…No. That's just what…

Looking at the subtle clues is an important part of reviewing. I'm with others here who think the grades have been way too high. But it's very clear, i.e. Sonia with Leftovers S1 or Zack (again) with Fargo S2, the reviewer and the show do not match.

Funny, I think his reviews are cynical for the sake of being artificially simplified.

Jack White drinks and is not a stranger to drugs, but I always saw him as more like Frank Zappa when it comes to expectations for those who work for him than the Grateful Dead. This is an artist who once toured with two separate backing bands and then would not inform who was playing each night until some hours before…

Give this whole blog a read if you haven't. It's another show where someone taking Zack's approach is intentionally missing a big part of the artistry involved.

Have you seen Fargo, specifically season 2? It's not quite Inland Empire Lynchian, but it definitely withheld a lot, and the attempts to unpack that have been fascinating.

Fargo as well. Also Handlen territory last year.

I don't think Handlen is an idiot at all. His opinion about what he wants and finds useful is his.

Another big forecast is Julian Jaynes and the bicameral mind. I don't believe Zack has discussed this at all.

Oh no, I agree. But if Zack is required by his own logic to use this many words against having understood the simple progression of Bernard = Ford's secret host to Bernard = Arnold, next week's review will either be brutal or just won't even try.

I was a little surprised, after an overwrought diatribe against fan interpretation, that Zack doesn't even consider what we saw this episode as a confirmation of MiB as William.

You didn't, it was just a bad joke like the majority told on Weekend Update. Before you can take that up with someone who cares you'll have to find them.

Not even close. The joke is that having precisely 39 genders is a ridiculous concept. And guess what—it is! Tinder did not list 37 new genders, it's a bullshit line their PR came up with. Listed among these 37 options are many such as "questioning" and several variations of "transgender"/"trans" and different types of…

Good lord. No it is not. Part of me was wondering if some of the ill-advised backlash to this has been people being so stupid as to think that was in any way part of the joke. I figured there was no way that was possible even though we're all on edge right now. It's quite sad to see otherwise.

The only other target of this joke that does not involve horribly misunderstanding it is Democrats. This left-leaning person certainly would like to think that Democrats are not "down" from SNL. Otherwise we're in worse trouble than I thought.