Yes, I loved the photography in Good Time, but the amount of setups in Good Time pales in comparison to the sheer amount of range of work being done in Blade Runner 2049. It’s like Deakins was trying to cover every one of his skillsets. And the way the light and shadow move in Blade Runner is just spectacular.

I suspect you’re just deliberately trolling for a reaction, but surely you see the benefits of how antitrust laws try to stop things like companies colluding to fix prices on products, or how environmental laws exist to prevent companies dumping toxic waste on your doorstep.

Nah I’m good

Ok then, all these people are dickishly responding to you and you’re laughing at them. Good stuff.

Right, sure. All these people are being dicks to you. Got it.

Nah, it’s cool. It’s the internet and we’re taking about a sitcom. It’s completely reasonable to act like a dick to people who disagree with you.

I think the whole point of P & R is that none of these characters were perfect, and they all, including Leslie demonstrated examples of idiotic behaviour. That’s kind of the point of it being a comedy.

If Deakins doesn’t win an Oscar for this film, it will be an absolute travesty.

A lot of your list is really pushing the limits of what can be considered a “character”.

oh no stop please don’t go

Yeah, I feel that whatever redemption arc there is for Rockwell’s character is firmly subverted by the conclusion of the film. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that subverting and playing with audience expectation and sympathy is pretty much the film’s MO.

Yeah, I pretty much thought that the story was a full-on subversion of a redemption arc and over-turning of audience expectation, if anything.

I can honestly say that while I don’t think these characters are perfect, I also don’t think of them as garbage either. I enjoyed the movie, I legitimately had fun. I’ve already listed the reasons why I think Rose works as a character and I honestly don’t see what’s so massively objectionable about any of the…

I read through your comments. What do you think the tone of the conversation is going to be when you start it off so contentiously and then say things like “It’s objectively bad”. You’re effectively shutting down anybody who disagrees with you.

Oh, honey, if you really are experiencing a lot of people accusing you of being some sort of low key sexist, then maybe you might want to think about how you come across when discussing Star Wars on the internet. Because you do come across as unreasonably angry about what is just a fun space battle movie.

So “Hey! Slaves are bad!” is a terrible motivation for a character? So in that case Spartacus, Solomon Northrop, Abraham Lincoln and Amistad are terrible characters for having the same motivation.

Dude, your argument completely rests on the writers creating a completely different character and then deciding to do exactly the same things with that character. What purpose would that serve other than abiding by the rules of this scenario you’ve created in order to win an argument on the internet?

It’s true. With every year that passes we all lose a link to the past, we lose people who experienced it firsthand, making the job of holocaust deniers even easier, as well as people trying to paint Nazism as a form of socialism.

Oh honey, are you seriously going to argue that national socialism is a brand of socialism? Because I thought we were having a sensible and rational conversation here.