Yeah, other people have pointed out various other exceptions, some of which probably fall under an “immediate defense of innocent life” exception and some of which probably don’t. All the more reason not to draw explicit attention to the issue, it seems to me, if it repeatedly fails to hold up under scrutiny.

Even Nolan sort of biffed the “Batman doesn’t kill” thing in Batman Begins, turning the character into a rule-grubber who gets away with killing his enemy on a technicality: “I won’t kill you, but I don’t have to save you.”

Yeah, I think that attitude involved several different forms of ignorance, some potentially innocent but others clearly willful. I think it’s possible that a lot of people at the time didn’t realize that statutory rape was the charge Polanski pled down to, and that he was in fact accused of forcibly raping his victim.…

Eh, I don’t mean to oversell the brilliance of the source material, which has its own problems, but I’d argue that GRRM leans toward excessively complicated politics, where the narrative grinds to a halt to discuss eight new characters or give names to the geographic features of a place we’ll never visit.

More specifically, it’s not very good because D&D essentially stopped trying to dramatize most of the political nuances of the source material, reducing the drama to (admittedly impressive) visual spectacle justified mostly by inane plot twists like “Sam discovers that there is a mountain of volcanic rock on a…

“Gaiman is said to have wanted a showrunner to come in and produce a straight take on his novel (which would include ignoring the cliffhanger from season one).”

So hold up—at some point Empire changed its name to Empire Today? That’s why they tacked on the spoken word “Today” at the end of the jingle? I thought it was just an unnecessary intensifier: “Call Empire—today!”

I can’t speak for Ruprecht, but my sense is that we don’t need to feel guilty and culpable for other people’s terrible choices—but it’s also sort of silly to get all righteously indignant about how we would never ever do anything so heinous. For those of us with age-appropriate sexual desires, it’s hardly a moral feat…

Tom Junod’s profile of Mr. Rogers is literally my favorite piece of writing of all time, so the fact that the film is apparently based on Junod’s work is a promising sign.

So . . . if you genuinely believe that your sweet and blameless costar was smeared with false accusations, maybe don’t dredge them up again twenty-five years later during a media frenzy about unaddressed sexual misconduct allegations?

There’s one particularly gruesome incident of self-harm right at the end, yes? (*thud*)

Though depending on how much stake one puts in some of the subtext surrounding the character, the interest of the young ladies may in fact be another source of “Am I a freak?” turmoil for the poor little guy.

I thought it was up and down all the way through, but on balance up much more than down. Ironically, I thought the show was at its least compelling and most baffling when it tried hardest to be crowd-pleasing and accessible, and at its best when it leaned into its complicated character arcs and mind-bending…

It’s a more nuanced view of the issue than you normally get, though. Ordinarily there’s just an assumption that the poor kids’ parents are clueless naifs or complicit fame whores—which I know is sometimes the case, but in the case of Eliza Dushku almost certainly isn’t. Her mom is Judy Dushku, who even at the time was…

I just took the comment to mean “I hope Milano wasn’t also molested.” There’s no point in hoping Dushku had sufficient protections at this point, because, well . . . she clearly didn’t.

Garret bumps into one of the many Milkshake Duck decorations adorning the dance hall. The hastily affixed milkshake falls off, revealing the racism concealed underneath. He reels in horror:

It’s unfortunate that the popularity of milkshake duck has overshadowed @pixelatedboat’s most important contribution to sociopolitical discourse in the past year:

When Marti Noxon came out in support of Kater Gordon’s allegations against Mad Men’s Matt Weiner late last year, claiming that he was one of a number of men she’d worked with in the biz with a tendency to abuse their power, a lot of people thought she was taking a veiled swipe at Joss as well—but she was quick to add…

What particularly got me (beyond the general high levels of horror here) was his implication that she’s lying because her account is detailed. What the actual fuck?

Done and done, it appears: