I'm sure you think that was witty and wise, but…nope. Your initial comment equates the two shows with a false comparison. One is set in the past, one is not. Yes, nostalgia plays a part, as it does in virtually everything ever made on TV, but there's nothing to your comparison of Happy Days to this new show.

Um…how does this make GMW equal HD? Happy Days was set in the past while Girl Meets World is set in the present.
1974: Happy Days, set 19 years in the past
2014: Girl Meets World, set now (sequel to show from 19 years ago)

Not in a world in which "Modern Warfare" exists.

Sad but true!

I beg to differ, Captain. The original Halloween barely had any onscreen gore, but it had plenty of onscreen violence. Perhaps the violence wasn't graphic (especially compared to later sequels/remakes), but it was there—multiple onscreen murders (strangling, stabbing, strangling), Jamie's confrontations with the Shape…

I don't think that's hard to figure out. She's almost certainly thinking, "What the hell are you doing throwing out our only food?" Not much subtext to look for there.

A treatment is usually a prose version of the movie, written to be easily read by executives. It includes the basic plot (like a summary) but also has bits of dialogue and descriptions of scenes & action, all to make a sales pitch to the executives. Some treatments are almost like short stories while others are more…

That feature is two years old, and it only mentions this song twice—once in the story itself and once in a comment. That is not "heavily covered" by any stretch of the imagination. There's no reason for this article to reference that older one at all.

Then don't read reviews for movies that aren't in wide release. Many of us enjoy seeing reviews for films outside the Hollywood mainstream, but since you'd prefer to only read reviews of those films, go read those reviews.

What world do you live in? Even here in the U.S. south, women wear bathing suits without a sarong skirt or anything like it. Concerts, festivals, the beach, the park—countless women in bikinis without sarong skirts or anything of the kind.

That's why you should always check your own information before correcting other people on the Internet. Been there, done that, still embarrassed! :)

Actually, it showed exactly the opposite—that it was going to be very hard for them despite their quirks (or even because of them)—but it's a popular film to sneer at, so have fun.

Parsons isn't playing someone with Aspegers, as he and the show's writers have repeatedly said. So, like many people, YOU are projecting YOUR issues onto that character and performance.

"WHO DOES THAT?!" you ask?

Nobody should ever apologize for shit talking Nickelback. There isn't enough shit in the world to adequately shit-talk that group.

Small Wonder is the wrong decade—twenty years off. This is about supercomputers from the '60s, as hinted at by the title of the article.

I agree with both of you.

The '90s movie called Crash was, indeed, a '90s movie. It starred James Spader and Holly Hunter, and it made Scorsese's list.

No, this is genuinely one of the worst article in AV Club, PERIOD. Some articles deserve thoughtful critiques; this one deserves open ridicule.

This feature is weak. It might work better as LoveSong/HateSong, where people talk about a song they love unreasonably or as a "guilty pleasure" along with the hated song. That could be a fun way to learn a little about the celebrity in question, but the current feature is just a whinefest of gripes and sneers. BORING.