"In honor of a certain recent film we won't mention because it's still a spoiler..."

EYES OF THE DRAGON

"When we first heard Raoul from Eating Raoul was starring in a new Star Trek series, we were beyond excited."

This is both horrifying and hilarious.

I'd saying you're mistaking "missing" for "disagreeing", but the point to the article is not "it is needless and not part of the books" but more "I don't like it". Hence, there isn't even much for me to disagree with, which is why it seems rather pearl-clutchery to me.

This seems awful pearl-clutchery.

"By the look of things, we'll be seeing an older, less assured Batman, and a Gotham that's gotten complacent after eight years of peace after the death of Harvey Dent."

No.

Eh, I probably should care about that, but other people state it better and it's less my fight. We've done plenty to fuck things up, I don't care if people go on about it, even inaccurately.

Thinking you are helping is not the same thing and thinking you are saving.

If I described it as the greatest novella about a rich financier riding in across manhattan in a limousine and complaining about being unable to get a haircut ever, would that strike you as a good premise?

Dumping Sally Sparrow gets you a permanent "douchebag" rating.

Does anyone know who dumped whom in the Mulligan/Shia matchup? Curious.

Oh how I long for the old days....

whoops, wrong thread.

I took this headline literally, and cheered.

I think it would have been awesome if Daniel Day-Lewis had portrayed Lincoln in both upcoming films.

I could be wrong and you may be right, but from this trailer (and others), I'm not seeing it. I've always thought a work of this length (novella) is absolutely perfect for a movie adaptation (See Huston's the Dead), but for this it also means a lot of opportunity to take Delillo's bizarrely labored and dated…

I think Delillo can be brilliant. I'd recommend Libra, which I think is a masterpiece. I found this book to be beyond awful.

I'll say it every time: