It just points up the injustices of life and art, because Mike, Rich and Jay are so smart and so interested and so creative, and so steeped in Star Trek...but of course nobody like them is anywhere near the production of new Star Trek shows. (And you can extend the comment to their critiques of superhero movies; Star…

I’m always a fan of the old Silence of the Lambs “It’s a different door” fake-out.

But that doesn’t match up with any of the “rules” as they’ve been given to us.

Look at Toasterlad’s comment (following ours) -- he puts it very well.

Whoosh

Not at all. It’s Richard Price’s approach.

That’s the point. It’s pure science (with the specialists looking at the CAT scans and muttering “There’s nothing here” in disbelief). She’s screaming at them...and they finally start tentatively recommending that she go to the church. They’re saying it because they think the ritual may snap some psychological switch…

All the scenes between Ellen Burstyn and the doctors (in The Exorcist) are still the high bar for that sort of thing.

None of it was clear -- which is why this episode was, simultaneously, the least satisfying and at the same time the only one to deliver any genuine scares (since the show’s laborious exposition/disbelief pattern finally got broken).

Yeah, he was. He’s terrible. He delivered the same “performance” he always does -- a television-style pantomime. He isn’t any good; he just superficially meets “movie star” criteria. Absolutely the worst movie Batman of all of them. Kilmer and Clooney were both more interesting, and Keaton was Brando in comparison.

The snotty tone of this article — the implicit suggestion that King’s ideas are utterly absurd; that there’s no issue here at all — is part of why the whole set of questions is, I think, becoming more and more unsettling.

Maybe I’m alone in this, but I just can’t stand Affleck and never could — his whole stardom seems like a fluke to me. He’s never been an appealing onscreen presence: he projects weakness and discomfort — maybe not as much as Hayden Christiansen did (and yes, I know that was exploited brilliantly exactly once, in Shatte…

It’s just actorly “business” to make us care about the camaraderie of this group, but the bad way (actors are always being asked to do this; contrive little gimmicks to make it look like the central main characters are an amusing little gang of buddies who “razz” each other, etc. — it goes back to the Bowery Boys and…

I’m really trying with this thing, but I just can’t get past this sinking feeling that it’s just all wrong and can’t be salvaged.

Thanks for responding. Obviously it’s not a hard and fast rule, and there’s lots of room for interpretation. I guess what I’m saying is that, for characters this iconic and indelible (meaning, by extension, any time a big star gets identified with a repeating franchise-star role) there’s just so much room for…

I think Zack is right and this isn’t really the same character, but Stewart is so skilled (and is riding such a wave of affection and nostalgic familiarity) that it doesn’t make any difference.

The problem is that Soji (and her sister) are just bad. The actress is very camera-ready, but she can’t talk.

Too loud!

“Would you like to see a long arm? Would you like to see a very long arm?”

They mention abortion. Those people are so awful.