Ferguson should join Jane Lynch and Aisha Tyler in the noble quest to revive the US panel show. Dude could host a US version of Would I Lie To You? with Kumail Nanjiani and Chelsea Peretti as the team captains.
nzmccorm
nzmccorm--disqus
I think that honestly, the gameshow should fizzle out. America's pretty primed for a return of the Panel Show, what with Hollywood Game Night being such an off-season favourite and Whose Line coming back.
I dunno if I'd call him an intellectual, I think it's more that he's the only person in late night who actually finds interviews to be enjoyable and engaging. For others, especially Jay back when he was on the air, interviews are about drawing eyes. People tune in to see the guests.Peter Lassally backed Craig for the…
It would've conflicted with Dancing with the Stars
I dunno. If Leno weren't quasi-autistically obsessing over his ratings on a second-to-second basis, he might remember how to be funny again.
I got the impression whilst watching this that Linehan was just using up all his best ideas for the fifth series that will never be. Hence the janky structure that really feels like it needs to be split across multiple actual episodes.
Old comment, but tons of classic satire is based on implausible premises. Juvenalian satire in particular (think A Modest Proposal) tends to proceed from an absurd extension or exaggeration of what the writer sees as a social ill. Satire's always about going beyond the plausible in order to point out how fucked up our…
He said, implying that the sacrifice of Christ was not an apocalyptic event that fundamentally altered the conception of heaven and earth.
Sorry I can't hear you over the fact that you're indulging in a basic logical fallacy when constructing the sociological entity of "Science".
Uh, the accomplishment and fulfillment is his sacrifice on the cross in virtually all readings of that passage. Sorry that you're dumb, I guess?
So what you're saying is that No True Scotsman views science that way…. even though Cosmos very clearly does?
Oh wow look at all those edits. Seriously if you're going to add four paragraphs in an edit it should probably be a reply instead.
The couple of lines in romans… um, are literally just two lines in Romans that ambiguously imply that Homosexuality is an unnatural lust without explicitly saying so. So I guess I'm sorry for mentioning a thing?
This is kind of totally irrelevant to what I was saying? Especially since neither I, nor the person who started the thread, are advocating for fundamentalism. So basically you're constructing someone to argue against because you have some kind of boner for it.
Dude, people fetishize science in unhealthy ways all the time. Sagan talked about it in Demon Haunted World, where he reflected on the possibility of a world in which science and technology take on pseudo-religious qualities. So I guess Sagan took a shit with his clothes on?
Um, I don't want to step on your toes, but that's not just jettisoning things that are inconvenient. The obliteration of the old law in favour of the new law is basically the entire point of Christ dying on the cross.
Actually uh, there have been strong scriptural arguments against Leviticus and Deuteronomy being in force for like ages. Paul basically outright says they're no longer valid in Colossians 2, where he says that the sacrifice of Christ erased previous religious law. This is why many homophobic Christians point at a…
It's successful at being a decent enough episode while imitating the story beats of a Pertwee era story. Yeah, it is let down by the fact that Alaya is basically a pantomime villain and the fact that Nasreen is the only one of the humans other than the companions to be at all interesting.
Like her other two-parter, this is just an attempt by Raynor to recreate classic Who and it just doesn't work. Chris Chibnall would later pull this off fairly well in his Pertwee-era influenced Silurian two-parter, but here it just doesn't work with Rusty's hyper-bombastic take on human drama.