disqusrjyxzuqqpw--disqus
Peter
disqusrjyxzuqqpw--disqus

I came to own that movie because somehow, I found it on sale for $2 at Big Lots. I really like Hitchcock and while it's neither his greatest performance nor Demme's best film, it was pretty cool to find that and watch it.

I registered as a Democrat to vote for Bernie in the primary but voted for Johnson in the general. The policies of those two guys are pretty far apart, but the one thing they had in common was that they didn't seem like phonies or politicians who would be mired in continuous scandals/investigations if elected.

I really liked this episode. If I had seen the three season premieres and no other episodes, this would have hooked me more than the first episode of season 2. Yet the slower start to season 2 was so, so worth it. I have complete trust that Hawley will be able to grow the rest of this season in a totally different

CHUCK! Michael McKean is great at being evil. I enjoyed the sequence where Howard had to leap over a wall, sneak through neighbors' lawns, and hide his phone and keys just to talk to Chuck. It was fascinating to see how the esteemed HHM partners are just as ridiculous as "Slippin' Jimmy" and his Cracker Barrel shtick.

He directed some good episodes of Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, too. But I guess now we can't blame Sony for stifling his genius with the Spider-Man movies.

I've liked a lot of latter-day McCartney, but I'd say his best two albums since the early 80s are Run Devil Run and Chaos & Creation. The first was barely-produced and the second was well-produced but was an intimate one-man affair.

The initial trailers for BvS looked kind of interesting and different (I'm thinking of the ones that featured parts from Batman's visions/dream sequences/whatever) and I was at least curious about what the movie would be like. This trailer doesn't really pique my curiosity. The cast looks pretty good, though.

Very fair. Maybe I'll watch the other 11 episodes someday. I saw potential for the show in the episodes I watched (which seems to be more than what many critics saw), but it wasn't executed particularly well in those episodes (which critics seem to agree with).

I'll always put a good word in for Wally Wood, Al Williamson, and Steve Rude, but Wrightson was certainly in the same rarefied league.

So I only watched the first episode and last episode of this series because I was curious about how bad it really was (spoiler: the finale is mediocre but not bad, too) and it seems like the show knew they wanted to make a show thematically centered on fathers and sons and the concept of legacy, but they didn't have

If you listen to some stories from Ann Nocenti and Louise Simonson, it's clear that Claremont benefited greatly from a good, collaborative editor. I think he is a great writer with a lot of ideas, but a prolific mind does need some quality control. It is a good thing that Nocenti told him to cut/tone down his idea

He would be perfect as Doom, but I do think he has enough range to be great as Reed. (Also, Reed and Doom should both be older anyways - they met in college, after all)

So I guess most people think Lenny is the Shadow King, and I still think that's most likely, but some stuff in this episode (the "I've known you since the womb" comment) make it seem like she could be a riff on Cassandra Nova. If that was the case, Noah Hawley would have even more undying respect from me.

When it comes down to it, any show with Lithgow is probably worth a watch, but the rest of the cast was very, very funny here, too. It's also cool that there is as much visual as verbal comedy in this show. It'll be good to have a TV show on NBC that's funny again (note: I haven't seen "The Good Place" yet)!

The Claremont stuff is really quite good. Not as good as Fraction/Brubaker, but fun and inventive.

Most of the Iron Fist comics that I read and loved had major themes of birthright vs. acquisition by force (or skill), how to deal with a not-fully-honorable legacy, and the like, so it's not like some deeper stuff isn't already in the source material. Also in the source material and missing in the adaptation by all

In general I'd say Catholics and Orthodox Christians like Tarkovsky are far more likely to make a nuanced film with religious themes, but Eszterhas is Catholic and I don't think "nuance" is in his repertoire…

There was a great article I read about two years ago that explored why the best, most genuinely spiritual films tend to be made by atheists, agnostics, or otherwise irreligious folks. I think the key is that evangelistic people go out of their way to avoid alternative interpretations (and thereby a sense of doubt) in

I thought Sarandon was great, but the episode as a whole was merely kind of interesting, far from revelatory. Not in the same league as the first episodes of American Crime Story, Fargo, or Legion.

Honestly, both the original article and Lonergan's reply were shockingly poorly-written. Lonergan says Wesleyan was "tauting" him as an alum. Aberle somehow drags Ryan Gosling/the "White Savior" narrative into this discussion about sexual ethics. Give me a break.