What's weird about this finale for me is that, going into it, I felt like this was a tremendously balanced final six—all had reasonable narratives, and I would argue there were no "true" goats. Anyone could sit at tribal and make a reasonable case, and that meant that I wouldn't end up mad at the winner.

Tony is bad and should feel bad.

Last line acknowledges this, and rightfully notes the reason why that happened (and, let's face it, the wrong woman won).

I think I can agree with this on a global level—Hannah did not put those people on the jury.

What is her alternative here? The removal of the opening and closing statements basically makes interruption your only way to address specific issues if you want to be able to tell your side of the story, turning this into a debate even though you're right that the interruptions are never going to be a productive…

David definitely put the note from one of his in with it—you can see it when he pulls it out.

But that's not playing "passively"—it's not playing "overtly," maybe, but there was nothing passive about Hannah's gameplay. She was an active part of each of those decisions, but was never the person who was actively positioning themselves as the mastermind.

But that's precisely why the Columbine talking heads were so frustrating to me—this is nothing like Columbine! The school was never on lockdown! He shot him almost accidentally! And yet the show then goes ahead and places it in that context with the interview elements. It was a bad choice. Very bad. (I also disliked…

I still think "Battle of the Bastards" is just good, not great, for the record. I watched it, and rewatched it, and I couldn't get over the narrative dimensions of the episode falling so flat.

Which aired in 2015, just so you know. (It's going to be a common issue, as it was RIGHT at the end of last year, but it was on last year's list).

And fell apart when it pushed that Columbine comparison, as far as I'm concerned. The choice to frame that as a school shooting on that scale derailed the story for me, and kept it from ranking higher on my list (though it made my list, FWIW).

Giving him that line of dialogue was a cruel thing to do to Barry Sloane.

Fixed—thanks for catching (and to everyone for finding it fun instead of careless—names can get mangled so easy when working on these).

So here's the thing: I love listening to music while folding clothes (and would all the time), but it was the public dancing that started to make me feel this was veering into absurdity. There was just something so EARNEST about their enjoyment of it that made me uncomfortable.

Given that Ian's bast struggles were undoubtedly tied to his bipolar disorder, and the camerawork in the bathroom makes the case that Ian is in the midst of an episode when he gets in the car with Mickey, I absolutely think the show is making the claim that Mickey is a trigger for his disorder.

I don't think Ian should be with Mickey, honestly—I agree that Mickey would be a step back, but the argument should have been "dude is an escaped convict, and you'll spend your entire life on the run unable to see your friends and family and do the job you care about" not "remember how bad things were when you were…

That's why I note that the show, in my view, is already arguing that he is in the midst of an episode when he gets in the car with Mickey.

I describe HGBP as a movie where I read the annoyed IMDB and Netflix reviews and they described what I liked about it.

Contrived? Sure. But I don't think it goes against the character—it's a clever way to organically re-introduce the character, which tracks enough with her previous career goals that it didn't strike me as particularly troubling.

My faith in humanity is restored.