I caught this playing on TV and was pleasantly surprised, it's not earth shattering but it's more clever and endearing than it has any right to be. Shame about that abysmal poster though.

Shame there's a 1st and 2nd place prize, pretty sure in the original Japanese show you won if you simply made it to the end, and I'm pretty sure two people have won during the same year. Wish they would still air that over here, there's too much fluff in the American version.

If Groening had any balls he would hire Ted Cruz to replace Shrearer's parts just to fuck with people. This show is such a zombified corpse it would actually be entertaining to see such a fucking mess like that, sort of like the wonderful mess that is Mike Tyson Mysteries.

It's okay Katie, you can just say it. You can just say, "I don't like Seinfeld, I think he's a creepy old man and I'm offended by his viewpoints," instead of beating around the bush with all this passive aggressiveness.

The passive-aggressive subtext of this article is pretty hilarious. Something tells me ol' Jerry has struck a nerve with the writer.

I'll concede that I was wrong on this particular issue but it just irks me at my core when people make such a big deal out of storytelling tropes and archetypes. In film they're a necessary evil used to convey information or certain emotions in as little time as possible. There are certain characters that simply move…

I suppose, but isn't that "you aren't complete without a relationship/a good dicking" thing just as common for any gender? It's an unfortunately limiting standard that the media has helped facilitate for both sexes, I mean look at all the shitty teen sex romp comedies that tell teenage boys they're just pathetic,…

Hmm, I never considered looking at the archetypes in isolation. Though, to be fair (and I know this isn't even part of my original point), there's the logical extreme of the indiana jones type, the fabio, which is impractical in every way shape and form and only exists to sweep the female lead off her feet, but as I…

So wait, why is the manic pixie dream girl a shallow, empty character that only serves a functional purpose to the male character, but the same doesn't go for the male counterpart? Why do you see these two situations and instantly assume that the female character is the dehumanized robot in both? Sounds a bit like…

So what you're saying is that one of those fantasies is sexist against men, right?

So wait, when an uptight, sexually repressive woman is swept up by a masculine indiana jones type who gets her to loosen up, it's a sexist male fantasy, but when an uptight, sexually repressive man is swept up by a manic pixie dream girl who gets him to loosen up, it's also a sexist male fantasy?