I haven’t criticized the movie. Not once have I said a bad thing about it. Wondering why they made it is not a criticism of the movie. “Why?” is a question, not a complaint. The closest I’ve come to criticism is expressing mild disinterest and, if anything, that would be a criticism of the marketing not the product.

Because he was an asshole, but he wasn’t a stupid asshole.

Yes, I fucking just did.

I agree with your argument but disagree with your arbitrary assertion. The right time to eat Thanksgiving dinner is 1am. You get first pick of the leftovers and you can avoid your family. Win/win.

Those questions were raised by the film’s very existence. In that respect, the sequels remained true to the original.

Wait. Is that Headmaster Ken the kind where it’s a little transformer Ken making the head or the kind where it’s an actual human Ken in a suit that makes the head? I have no earthly idea why I care, but I really do.

What questions were posed by the ending of Look Who’s Talking?

From time to time I do that (though I do so on recommendations from friends, rather than critics). This was not one of those times. Most times aren’t. That is the standard system of choosing. The one you wish we’d stop using.

What should they base their choices on? What the studios tell them they want? What critics decide they should want? Random number generation? I think I’ll stick with the current system.

I might watch it someday. I’ll just have to get drunk enough to enjoy it without remembering any details in the morning.

I’m still not sure who this movie was for. It’s like American Psycho 2. People who hated the first one generally don’t want more and people who loved the first one generally don’t want answers to the questions the ending posed. The only market left is the people who don’t give a shit.

US law doesn’t work on these issues at all. That’s kind of the problem.

Even the ability to sell makes it less like gambling. As it stands you can get stuck with duplicates that, if not entirely worthless, are at least worth less than you paid. The ability to sell them off and get your “wager” back reduces losses. It isn’t gambling if the worst you can do is break even.

And scoring big on the slot machine didn’t give you an advantage over other players that required them to score big on the slot machine to overcome.

How is it that if a random digital object I get out of a pack I purchase can be turned more readily into real cash, it’s less like gambling?

The difference between lootboxes and those quarter-turn capsule toy machines is that those quarter-turn capsule toy machines are almost always full of items that have about the same value. You can’t get less than you paid for and there is no jackpot to be had.

Her colon. It was just a big fart bubble.

People gamble for things other than money. Gambling is gambling whether you win ten dollars, ten dollars worth of crap you can sell, or a ten dollar haircut that can never be sold. You won ten dollars worth of something. Cash isn’t relevant.

It doesn’t take a genius to do that either. At least you can both agree that recognitions is no genius.

Yes it was. Teachers are often unethical. Much like any other group of people.