Haha. Both great, but I have a special love for Henry the IV because Falstaff is just so magnificent. Truly one of the finest characters Shakespeare created, to go along with the many, many others.

Yeah, there's only a couple translations in print at the moment, so looking forward to seeing some more of his work translated in the near future.
Cool idea though, and 65 is a pretty damn fair effort so far!

Haven't had a chance to watch much, so just been reading Guy Davenport's translations of 7 Ancient Greek poets, and some other poems on and off.

It'd be nice if the AV club would actually get some new writers with a bit of nuance in their views and understanding, not just of the world, but especially of art in general. I mean, fuck me, the quality of writing and criticism around these parts is at an all-time low. This was terrible.

Well if Hitler had painted something of genuine worth, I wouldn't have a problem with acknowledging that, no.

OH MY HEART! RIGHT IN MY HEARRRRRT!

Which isn't true in the slightest, but cool!

Art is art. That is it. I have no intention to retroactively apply my social mores or morals to a different time when judging it's art (we'd miss out on about 95 per cent of great art from the past if we did this), nor does 'bad morals' equal 'bad art', especially in cases like this where the implications aren't clear…

Bridesmaids is utter shit. You were too kind.

So it's gonna be absolutely terrible then? Which would be expected, considering Feig has never made a good film and The Heat was utter trash.

Well, when the technical side of the movie is only very briefly mentioned, and the review is relentlessly focused on how 'icky' it made him feel (to the point of purposely interpreting scenes in a way to back up his central theses, despite being massive stretches), then it's hard to really know, especially when I've…

Well, there's lots and lots and lots of other reviewers all around the web that don't see it as a romance, which tells me that it's not so clear cut.

Sure, if you're totally self-absorbed.

Yeeeeah, and when the review is so 'content' focused to the point of only briefly mentioning something technical, I can't help but think that it made him feel 'icky' and that's dominated his central critical thesis above all else (especially when he's specifically interpreting scenes in a way that they're not…

Talk about an 'icky' review.

I'd love for this to happen! Gibson is a very talented director and could do something genuinely interesting and exciting with the film.

OHHHH! LOOK AT THAT! A MRA/REDDIT JOKE! HA HA HA HA! You humorous fellow you! Because ya know…anyone who thinks a writer is terrible is automatically a sexist pig if the writer happens to be a woman, right? Because that's the level of intellect we're working with here: "If someone disagrees with me about someone they…

Same. She's a terrible writer and frankly, a really obnoxious and immature human being. She's got a ton of growing up to do…though I doubt that'll happen writing at Salon.

Definitely do it. There's some amazing stuff in there, a great cast, technically proficient, looks gorgeous, and is at times darkly funny and at others tragic. Also, Michael J. Anderson plays one of the great television roles.

I still can't get over the fact that The Master was referred to as 'film noir'…seriously, some of the writers on this site just make me shake my head. I'd think a basic freakin' understanding of film history and styles would be a prerequisite for writing about fucking film!