I’m not sure Marvel was counting on Nomadland-stans for box office returns.

I think she’d have succeeded if she’d been allowed to focus on a singular hero/property.

The title of this article and then the content make no sense.

It was his first big budget action directing gig, but not his first directing gig. He had a long history of directing dramas (largely Shakespeare adaptations), dating back to 1989's Henry V, which is why he got the gig for Thor. They wanted a Shakespearian feel to the Asgardian Thor/Loki drama. Though, he also…

Agreed. Moreover, children do even better in a multi-generational, extended family household. The more caregivers upon which childcare can be divided upon the better...

This is 100% correct. Moreover, the tax is likely an unconstitutional tax on wealth.

No, no one is breaking the embargo.  The embargo was lifted by Disney/Marvel.

Right, the issue here isn’t Rebecca Ferguson’s casting as Lady Jessica. She’s age appropriate for the role. She’s also age appropriate for the role of the partner of Oscar Isaac’s Duke Leto (Iasaac is 42, only 4 years older than Ferguson).

You’re right, I misread the sentence. My lizard brain added *not* between “does” and “explain”.

However, this decision does explain why the ship Gaal landed upon was locked against her, which thoroughly discredits my thesis from last week’s review.

Paradox was so bad, the 10 seconds of Cloverfield tie-in at the end ended up being the best part.

Sounds like you went to a “test” show where he was simply testing new material. Comedian shows that go on tour and get recorded are the result of a great many test shows where the comedians refine their material by editing (or throwing out) their material based on the live audiences’ feedback.

Having no debt is nice, but not always the only smart financial plan.

People with low incomes won’t qualify for the loans OP is comparing and no one should be taking out high interest rate loans on 84 month terms. OP’s discussion presumes the buyer qualifies for 0% (or close to 0%) loans. People with low incomes should be buying less expensive cars on shorter terms to minimize their…

Right, I bought a car last October. They were offering 0% on up to 63 months.

Seems counter intuitive to me, since what we’ve demonstrated over the last couple decades is the ability to not only live within our means, but under it.

If you can afford to pay the car off in 24-36 months at 0%, but have the option of 0% at 84 months, I’d rather take the longer term and save the difference between your 84 month payment and what your payment would be on a 24 or 36 month term in a rainy day fund.

There is a gap in GAP insurance though. GAP will cover theft or damage (where the damage exceeds the car’s value). It doesn’t cover selling the car while its still underwater. So, while GAP covers the risk of damage or theft, it doesn’t cover the risk of needing to sell it (eg, because life changes require you to sell…

100% correct.

Further, anyone buying a new car on such a long term should seriously consider getting gap insurance (I’ve never had a car insurance company that didn’t have it as an option).