Uh, no one — except for AV writers — care about which dragon is which, because the show itself has not differentiated, in any way, between them. (Maybe one of them is slightly bigger in size than the others? That'd be about it.)

I like everything about the show, but Issa's white co-worker is way over-the-top mopey, beaten-down, and resentful — not to mention, as a technical matter, wholly different from how she was portrayed in Season One (all bubbly and oblivious). I don't buy that character/plot-line for a second.

Good recap (especially re: the mission's arguable inanity), but I don't understand the author's frustration about the failure to name/identify the doomed dragon. As near as I can tell, the show has portrayed them as three giant flying fire-breathing, Danny-worshiping lizards — with absolutely zero personality…

Um, yeah, — "in our world." Manifestly, I was speaking directly to the context, i.e., Westeros (and its VASTLY "different ethical codes"), as well as the particular scene (the conclusion of Danny's first battle, at which point she chose to establish/present a "choose your side" protocol to other lords of Westeros,…

Um, what's the author's (and Tyrion's) "moral confusion" about Danny killing Lord Tarly and Dickon about? She just viciously defeated their army in battle, dispatching hundreds (maybe thousands) of their soldiers — is she supposed to let the leaders walk away to fight another day? I just don't see the dilemma. …

Felt to me like the show was very clearly signalling Jamie's demise, what with the still-faced & frozen descent, which played out in slo-mo and culminated with a rare fade-out. (Not to mention the lack of end-credits music for a long beat.) But the recap suggests otherwise — plus, critically, the writers don't…

She held one hand behind her back at the start of every joust - definite Syrio shout-out (notwithstanding all her Faceless training), seems to me! good stuff

Favorite Woody Allen movie.

Don't mean to correct perception, but it seemed clear she gave a smile afterwards, and Issa confirmed it in the Winedown aftershow. (I.e., scene was played like it gave her character a bit of hope.) Not that it won't turn out unjustified! just sayin

Am definitely late to this party….but I've been re-reading a couple of recaps of the second season (as a refresher before starting the third).

Seems to me the pertinent plotline's satire of its manifest target — the cultish, stultifying, and censorious PC culture — was perfectly on point and satisfying. Multiple of the author's criticisms suggest that, given her affinity with the target's so-called concerns, she was simply hoping for some sort of…

Agreed- poor choice.

Agreed: didn't need more Patty. They gave her a more-than-grand sendoff in the alternate reality. As an aside, that drowning-in-the-well scene in Intl Assassin (an otherwise perfect episode) was overkill — no pun intended! — in my opinion. (I.e., most def should have ended with him pushing young Patty into the…

Agreed, as noted above — a rare misstep. Was i) way too Big Love reminiscent, ii) too "on-the-nose" in its ice-cream cheeriness, and iii) it's generally played out. Contrast to the brilliant usage of Take On Me (admittedly another well-recognized song) a few eps back.

Funny!

You'd figure that the producers would have figured that discerning HBO viewers (over a very modest age) would've watched Big Love as well. Which made it the wrong choice for multiple reasons (i.e., I agree w/ the reviewer's rationale for disliking it, too — a kinda too-obvious "cheery" song choice). One of the very…

It was pure Tim & Eric Awesome Show — with which Bob Odenkirk was heavily involved — I thought.

Totally agree- there was nothing original about that concept, especially given High Maintenance, in particular. Also, alas, I found the deaf-woman episode unwatchable (no pun intended). But I do really like the show generally.

With respect, it seems obvious that Chuck's "ultimate revenge" is disbarment. With that in mind, his proposing a GUARANTEED route to disbarment in his convo with the prosecutor — a signed confession — can't reasonably be interpreted as evidence of "conflicted" emotions (e.g., potential mercy towards Jimmy).
Am not…

The show is complex enough to justify different interpretations of events, but, in context, Chuck's scheme vis-a-vis the prosecutor — with the goal of finagling a disbarment via confession — was exactly that (and simply isn't open to an alternate "he was defending Jimmy" interpretation). His spoken objective since…