At their best they're like listening to an audiobook with well-chosen pictures and videos that you might not see otherwise. At their worst, they're gushy and sappy. All you have to lose is time, which admittedly is valuable. I'd go with Baseball, seeing as you're a fan.

Thanks for the reminder — the absence of the US-Philippines War is another reason the minus rating is well-justified for The Roosevelts. I was surprised it wasn't really mentioned. I still think it deserves the A, though.

A- is fair. They went easy on FDR at Yalta (I'm not saying I disagree) and on the question of whether the New Deal really worked as intended (I'm not saying I disagree), and there was a little too much eulogizing of FDR in the last episode, but other than that I thought it was thorough, balanced, well-written, and…

She has opinions that defy the internet-approved tastes of dudebros and overgrown adolescents everywhere.

I watched WarGames (1983) (and the bizarre tic-tac-toe video on the DVD special features, as well as an earnest look at the history of hackers featuring none other than Steve Wozniak), and finished season 1 of Breaking Bad because I never watched it while it was on the air.

I think there's a sizable portion of the community that prefers Joel as host, hence the once-common but now-shunned Joel vs Mike debates.

The most recent time I watched it, which was about two years ago, it didn't have the narration, but I can't remember what the distinctions are between the non-theatrical versions. Does one of them have a longer death scene for Daryl Hannah or something to that effect?

Oh, all of them; three is a little bit of a low-ball estimate, because I had a friend who insisted on exposing me to every variation, but I kinda counted that as one time. Trust me, it doesn't matter which cut I watch, it's just not for me.

I love Annie Hall, but you're wrong. It's perfectly fine for a cultural commenter to dislike things that rank highly in the critical canon and to love and promote things that don't.

I'm with the question-asker here, I'm not a fan of "Last Picture Show." But I do like "Hud," which is really just a darker, more mature version of LPS, and which is based on a McMurtry novel.

I really like this topic.

I think Tom Waits is a good candidate. For me it would be "Stone Blind Love," but I think I like "Clap Hands" and a couple of others too well to put him on my list. It's close though, I wore out on him pretty fast.

It might have been realistic to have Harry be more than "something of a bigot," perhaps dropping the n-word, but we didn't get that, and it's partly because we didn't get it—the very fact that Ben's race is hardly commented upon despite it being 1968—that the movie has received such critical attention and praise.…

The Roosevelts: A Ken Burns Joint

"We are talking about entirely different things."

"It had nothing to do with Romero. The name wouldn't ring a bell with them if it was attached to one. Well, it may now, but still."

All fine points. But my point was that, going into "a fucking George Romero movie," I would absolutely not, on the basis of his first movie, expect his female characters to defy horror movie stereotypes. As you point out, the first one is just one movie, and perhaps an aberrant one, but because of its (largely…

"(hint: Fran never falls down and remains able-bodied throughout the film, because it's a fucking George Romero movie)"

And with strange eons, even fast food may die.

*tentatively takes a bite*