I would have to to the sort of person who buys her bullshit.

For the same reason the Men Gone Wild genre is so stale? For the same reason—apart from Wonder Woman-the superhero genre is so stale? Hollywood finds a formula and repeats incessantly, originality is considered dangerous and few people in the business have any connection to "average" people, and so can't replicate…

She literally never considers the process by which movies are conceived or realized at all. The disconnect between reality and this "think piece" tells you how little thinking is going on.

It's funny to me as a gay man reading this bullshit. If gay ensemble comedies were made even just a tenth of the time these major, star-studded releases were, I'd be content, indeed grateful.

Disagree about the revenge fantasy sequences, but otherwise, yes.

Edit. I guess I don't have enough fondness for the book to really discuss it fairly (I was really eager to read it before I started, but I never got very far with it), and I had thought it was more allusive and incomplete as a work unto itself. Reading Dave's post, I see I am wrong about that.

I know Boogie Nights is his best received work, but I didn't like it at all. I was disappointed by how, under the surface images, we were given a fairly typical Victorian tale about the dangers of "going down the wrong path."

Must admit I'd be okay with that. For some reason, your description seems to bring David Lynch into the mix for me, and I'd be fine with that, too.

I don't think he has contempt for most of the people who write in, and I think the stunning success of absolutely mediocre people like Tyler Perry and RuPaul shows that phenomenon knows no color bounds, at least in the gay community.

This material had no chance no matter who the director was, and Ignatiy's Nerd Director Power hypothesis is bafflingly outdated (the "I'm such a nerd" humblebrag has thankfully run its course). The series never really found a way to shape its material, and ultimately kind of petered out. I don't think any director…

You get that the "women" part has nothing to do with it, and most powerful industries victimize people, right? (Wall Street, Hollywood, Big Oil, Politics.) Somehow the price of being an adult in the adult world becomes "victimization" when feminist theory is invoked.

I think this is true. I'm not sure why it should be true, since he's just a lucky slob who made it with a sex column, he wasn't born rich or anything, he's probably not rich now. But, yeah, your statement seems about right.

People in power are not pleasant aught to be understood as a universal. Also, nothing in life is fair, regardless of races, gender or sexuality.

There’s also the issue of how sexism exists in industries that are seemingly controlled by women. Bolin writes:

So these magazine stories, in the end, are about the precariousness of women in power and the dilemmas of the creative life: do you make something small, for and by yourself, or make something grand, and have…

Not entirely true, since his column is syndicated here, and for a long time had the unique privilege of no comments section.

He also is the chief editor of the Stranger, or was. Yeah, there's a kind of, not sure nepotism is the right word. It's like a Coppola scoring for their documentary on film a "great, in-depth" interview with Francis.

Cigarettes kill you if you use them and nicotine is literally addictive, sodas hurt you if you misuse them and your body cannot literally develop a dependency.

Vadim’s Les Liaisons Dangereuses is one of the most underrated, underwatched movies ever.

The Riddler was basically nothing until the t.v. show, so I think you've got a point.

It looks like a rare, actual Bob Kane—the angularity and stiff quality resembles his work—though I wouldn't be surprised to find it's a Jerry Robinson.