Suuuuuuuuuure.

Isn't it sort of the premise of this show that it's up-ending the idea of what a talk show should be, so by making Kid Cudi its bandleader it is therefore up-ending the idea of what a talk show parody in the form of a talk show should be?

He just got cast in Netflix's Jessica Jones series. Dude is blowing up!

I'm going be really mad if Mac doesn't come to terms with his sexuality before this show ends. Just for the visual possibilities of such a thing.

The guy playing his seeming love interest is Eka Darville, who is a pretty cute Australian dude. Looks like he's in every episode til the end of the season, if IMDb is to be believed.

I think half of them were TVs, half were microwaves.

"Ordinarily I wouldn't say this, but they're dogs."
"Well you just lost one star on Dog Yelp."
"No!"

At least it turned out she didn't have cold paws.

WANNA FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHCK?

30 Rock's only season that might fall below 'great', if only just, is season four. Seasons five and six hold up really, really well.

We all know the final scene is going to be the reveal that everything post-season 2 took place in Mark Brendanawicz's dream.

This whole show should've been about Kay, instead with Annie as her fiancée. As much as I love Ken Marino, almost nothing here worked for him.

I miss Karen Gillan so badly. That performance was network sitcom heavyweight class.

Yes I know, which is why I stated my issues with the term!!! And yes, that is how privilege affects people's actions, colouring how they approach and fear difference. It is almost as though these are all matters the show has been exploring for a season and a half.

Just because it's an academic concept doesn't mean I'm not allowed to take issue with it (doing so is sort of built-in to academia, no?). Don't worry, the conversation ended with "incremental growth isn't growth", but I was trying to be charitable.

Eh, whatever. I tend to think that 'sex-negativity' and 'sex-positivity' are generalised buzzwords that amount to little more than another needless dichotomisation of complex opinions, so what you're describing just sounds like a hypocrite to me. I just fundamentally disagree with the premise of your judgements of…

Patrick has spent most of his adult life cowering behind the shield of his repression. That is really not uncommon, I assure you. But you need to revisit season one if you don't think he's matured by this episode. (Also, your last sentence is such a Patrick thing to say; the implicit judgement of anyone who identifies…

Oh sure, it's more the hypocrisy of it than anything else.

You can absolutely take it seriously, my point is that imposing this particular kind of seriousness on it is unproductive and irrelevant to how the show has worked for several seasons.

[points at his other comments on this topic further down the page] If you're too lazy to find those, the tl;dr version is: it's Archer, don't take it so seriously/the show's internal logic dictates that AJ will never come to harm so the baby literally cannot be put in danger/evidently Lana trusts Archer enough to keep…