avclub-c54f5f8a49b7aaa610854a9a20092414--disqus
Honey Bunches of Goats
avclub-c54f5f8a49b7aaa610854a9a20092414--disqus

Yeah firecrackers work. It's all about the oil in the spread. I like an unsalted natural peanut butter, the really goopy peanut kind, and Ak-Mak cracker, toast those fuckers up in the oven, you are GOLDEN. Perfect if you're going to a show or like having a nice day in the park and just want to be toasty for hours.

Was I the only one reminded of "My Neighbor Totoro"? Lost little girl, distraught older sister, giant mythical rabbit-like creature? I kept waiting for the Cat Bus to show up.

Let me put my critique a little more pointedly, Dr. Kaufman: this reads more like you wrote it for a film class and not as a feature on critical website. I get that this is a feature about the visual language of film—awesome, cool, and you clearly have the training to do it right. But this wasn't a particularly

Yeah and Kaufman writes like he's the only person in the world to ever have taken a film class. The hyperbole is also annoying—this movie is both one of the WORST of the last decade and also PERFECTLY shot? What? Neither of those things are close to true. Too bad Slate doesn't accept resubmitted Film 101 term papers,

She ain't that great to listen to either, the woman is 100% creaky vocal fry.

Seeing as Jost is pretty clearly in charge of the segment, perhaps it was more Jost's answer to people complaining he is too bland. I think he's a shitty Update host but let's not forget that he's head writer and it's not like he lacks all self-awareness.

Seriously, that sketch was an abomination. While a pretty lame concept to begin with, the only way that scene would work was if Kenan was capable of capturing the folksy warmth of Morgan Freeman and making it a credible Shawshank parody, which would have made the initial reveal of him being an unrepentant cannibal

I agree that this episode as a whole relied too much on the Bevers caricature and wasn't the best ever, but I oppose the case for critical backlash or a general slide in this show's humor or quality. I submit as evidence:

I have now watched the Abbi dancing sequence at least six times. There was just something so PURE and TRUE about the naked-in-your-own-apartment-dance-like-no-ones-watching GLEE. It just captured the essence of how this show celebrates guilt-free pleasure and the glorious silliness of youth.

I am a huge Jamie Foxx fan—I just find him endlessly fun to watch—so it was always going to be a hit with me. But yeah, it's a real 90s throwback mashup: think Dave or the American President meets The Rock or Independence Day. And with similar depth, sentimentality, and happy stupidity as all those movies. I have

I think this is an immensely fair response to an admittedly dismissive comment and a good description of Girls's strengths. Ultimately, the potential of the show and its strengths are in its interest in nuanced parts of relationships, anxieties, insecurities. Not always a strong spot for Broad City. I think for me the

Yet Girls feels phony, and Broad City feels real. I know everyone tries to resist the comparison here, but jesus, if you can't compare these two shows, what CAN you compare? These are two shows both set in 2010s NYC created by young Jewish women telling the experiences of young Jewish women dating, working, and living

I thought that was more like Latina tough make-up, building off her comment that the heat makes her more ethnically ambiguous.

Have you seen "Kicking and Screaming"? Because he once had a lot more sympathy and forgiveness for his characters.

Having just binge-watched "Broad City" for the first time this weekend, I feel like I haven't earned the anticipation that everyone else has endured waiting for months. Also, I realize that they are constantly compared to "Girls," which isn't entirely unfair, as they both are about raunchy female Jewish 20-something

I'll believe you since you said "surprisingly"—maybe he got high with Doug and that helps?

Wow, thanks for clearing that up for me, clearly I was genuinely confused by the premise and not slightly incorrectly describing it. So tell me, how much does being the Internet's Editor pay? Is that a good gig?

Also, the Pequot writer and historian William Apess was reclaiming "native" in 1829 so yeah… not simple. Indians are really diverse and pretty much any blanket statement you make about them is going to be wrong.

It's a genuinely contentious issue. I've noticed a lot of the tribal members I know in academia like "indigenous" and capital-N "Native" these days, but most people I've met from an urban or reservation community prefer plain old "Indian." I regularly read "Indian Country Today" which is basically the indigenous New

Well ok then, bonerland, I must have a special private Hulu feed that just showed me Jost saying it and everyone else saw Che do it. My bad. But hey, why don't you check the clip yourself and then get back to me?