avclub-a433cd348b2b9b4731cb4ea6aaa33934--disqus
whitey_5600
avclub-a433cd348b2b9b4731cb4ea6aaa33934--disqus

BRING BACK NASHVILLE COVERAGE PLEASSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. I WILL WRITE THIS IN CAPS IN EVERY COMMENTS SECTION ON EVERY ARTICLE UNTIL IT'S BACK

Gave this episode a B+, primarily on the strength of the music, but I liked seeing seeds of soapiness being planted. There is a potential for a lot of drama between Gunnar and Will, in particular, and I can't wait to see it.

It's a little presumptuous to think people were going to flock here to defend Nucky. I don't think his actions are defensible, but I think it's strange that you presume people are just going to run to their computers and blindly defend Nucky's behavior, rather than intelligently discuss it.

I could not agree any more with this post.  This essay barely transcended mediocrity because of the bizarre use of superlatives and hyperbole.  Walt is certainly an anti-hero, but we're not bearing witness to some unprecedented portrayal of pure, unadulterated evil.

Does everyone's obsession with how "evil" Walt is annoy anyone else?  It seems to me, while he's obviously not a *good* person, I would contend we've seen much more evil characters not only in other television shows, but in this show itself!  Walt's not a great guy, but he has some redemptive features, and this show

Agreed.  Although, as the reviewer mentioned, Gunnar's song about his brother was pretty great.  I really dug that song.

Did anyone else feel like the show looked a bit different and felt a bit different?  I still enjoyed it quite a bit, but it looked and felt a bit off, a little less polished, almost cheaper.  I'm not sure…

This is fantastic: "Kurt Sutter's philosophy must be, if it ain't broke, smash the fuck out of it until it breaks."

This is, strangely, a very accurate comp.  Well done.

This is, strangely, a very accurate comp.  Well done.

Probably the funniest internet comment in weeks

I was thinking that, too.  It seemed pretty thoughtful, and he articulated his points well.  I thought this line was great: "The camera just follows along handheld-style, neither emphasizing nor deemphasizing anything, content merely to catch the raw brilliance of Rockwell’s agonized response. Generally speaking,

Do you work for Warner Bros. or CAA?

I think we're in the minority on this.  I agree that she's terrible.  She's not funny, nor is she a good actress.  This could all be symptomatic of her character, and not necessarily a reflection of her true talent, but my god this shoe reflects poorly on her.

This episode was absolutely terrible.  Overbeaing, smothering, saccharine sweetness.

Beautifully put.

Am I the only one still rooting for Walt?  Surely, I can't be..can I?

Agreed, but there is this pervasive negativity in his criticism (which I really don't mind all that much) that doesn't always feel particularly warranted, or backed up by solid examples.  I'm not asking for lowers standards, but perhaps a more contextual approach to criticism

Yeah it's well-done, but it's not funny.  It's also way too long.  I wanted to like it.  I started out excited, but I could literally feel my smile morphing into a confused frown

I really do agree with you, and I rarely, if ever, get upset when a film by one of my favorite filmmakers is torn apart by critics; however, Dowd's coverage of the festival seems to be marked by pretty remarkable glumness and pessimism.  I understand that he is a critic, and it's his job to judge a film on its own