Feel like you're really lowballing the number of unanswered questions there.

Do we think that a character named Steven Crane who writes horror fiction is meant as a King/Rose Red reference?

So the star of the series is playing a character that isn't in the original story? That's not a good sign.

Why doesn't In-N-Out sell their burgers at Carl's Jr. and Hardees?

I could never play Hunters because I'm left handed.

Dammit, I forgot this was happening! (Meaning E3 in general, and Nintendo's conference specifically, not the game.)

Shame, Crow! Metroid doesn't have levels, and I know from the rest of your reference pool that you know that.

Welp, thanks for convincing me to stop scrolling, I guess.

On that much we definitely agree. I just feel like that other method, of grading Ghostbusters against The Deer Hunter against Super Mario Bros., better fits the definition of 'objective' to me.

I said outright that it's okay to dislike things, and obviously it's okay to say so.

Only Jesse would have deserved to take up that role. Gus is interesting as a villain, but his deadpan hyper-competence makes him SUPER boring if he isn't the one creating the problems. That's a big part of my issue with his scenes this season.

I'll allow it, but only if Todd gets arbitrarily assigned to co-lead status and 40% of the third season ends up ignoring Gus completely to tell stories about Hank.

True, which is most likely why he had to do it the way he did.

The more ethical unethical thing to do would have been to tell Irene outright that she and the other residents wouldn't see any of the higher payout, and that the firms are holding out for their own benefit.

No, I think it was Gollum. As in, he's willing to snivel and debase himself to get what he wants. I don't know what Jimmy would have in common with a clay statue brought to life by a rabbi.

All this talk of what's objective vs. subjective and which one of those things is good vs. which one of those things is bad is making my head hurt, so I'll say this:

Can I have this without the Rabbids? Or at least a version where the Rabbids are exclusively the bad guys?

I guess I just don't understand how so many people in this comment section think that recognizing the film's appeal to women is off-base to begin with, let alone critical malpractice.

No, keep ignoring them.

Gal Gadot is pro-Israel and is a former member of the Israeli army (because, you know, she's Israeli).