Yeah, if i'm going to sit through something like this, it needs to be on-fucking-point emotionally (or super-duper-ooper on point cinematically), or else I can't really figure out why I'm watching it and just feel nauseated. If the movie dove into the psychology of a kid who is afraid that he's alone now to the point…

Nah.

I actually think "Shaun of the Dead" is quite scary, in a way directly proportional to how good its comedy is. It was the first zombie movie that really got to me *because* the character deaths resonated so much more than when it happens to disposable meat-casings. Idk, I guess it wasn't "scary" so much as…

It's basically all we've got.

This is like the first time the AV Club has been relevant to where I live. Need to bump over to Charleston this weekend.

I've never seen the phrase "Snake People" so often in a comments section without appearing in the article itself.

So excited. Would also like to mention how visually (color-/light-wise) ambitious the show is considering it really didn't have to be at all, could have rested on its sitcom-laurels.

I was totally won over to the show by the theme. I blind-pulled Slothrust's cd from a huge bookcase in our school's radio station, fell in love, and tried to spread the good word to mah friends (no dice), so it felt like the show was my people.

I love Brian de Palma, and "Psycho," and, y'know, I like "Silence of the Lambs" well enough. "Dressed to Kill" played it REALLY fast and loose with its "schlock"—which word basically means irony justifies grossness. I don't think it does, and I think the other two were way more sympathetic to their character's…

Well, first, please, it's not its own form of racism, that makes no sense.

I sometimes feel ambivalent about (though way more often support) things like arson or violent defensive protest (like, say, the Black Panthers). In this case, though, the building was condemned, so I'm 100% fine with it.

100% agree, respectability politics (esp coming from outside the group) is complicity. I need to see it too, but I have a hard time imagining a ceiling of "ugly rhetoric" for anti-racist protest, so long as it doesn't exclude or set itself in opposition to other emancipatory agendas.

Scary and pathetic is a pretty comprehensive description of white supremacy's platform, from the KKK to Congress.

I don't know, people "alternating hysteria and profanity" seems like . . . justified during a white supremacist takeover? One of those times where it's pretty okay.

If I had a time machine I would not use it to kill hitler, I would use it to copyright all sans serif fonts and get rich forever and all of my children will be rich forever god there are only three fonts on the internet

What do you mean by "more inclusive than it should have to be"?

Ah, damn it! I'm the dumbest boy in school!

I do agree that it can, and occasionally does, become a performance to ingratiate oneself to identities and communities that one has systemic power over (white anger, cis anger, and so on). But overall, who gets hurt by SJWs? Who suffers? MLK was great, sure, but so was Huey Newton. Harvey Milk was great, but so was…

Yeah, plus I think "SJW" has become a way for progressives to buffer themselves against radical politics. Like, they argue that they just disagree with tone, the emotionality, the "bullying" or whatever, when it seems like it's really disagreement with politics that actually bear out what progressives only claim to…

Can you get specific abut what you don't like about SJWs and why you feel that they are not good for progressive or radical politics?