That is unfortunately not true. In the wild, animals can turn violent for no apparent reason. I’m not suggesting that this is an excuse for violence in art and entertainment, but nature is indifferent.

It’s been implied (in an earlier season) that this is a special program. The people in the program get a loan and a job so they can pay for their education. Students doing simple stuff is certainly not unusual.

The director has hired the same guy twice to give him a second chance, while suggesting that what he did was not so bad.

You might have missed the part where Shane Black actually suggested that what his buddy did, sexually grooming a 14 year old, wasn’t so bad.

Geralt isn’t supposed to look aged. This is the Geralt from the books and even in TW3 he is the same age as Eskel. Cavill will be 36 when filming starts, that seems to be the right age for a guy who hooks up with beautiful sorceresses.

The Tudors is tonally close to what The Witcher should be. Morally ambiguous and gritty. Cavill did a good job in The Tudors and now that he is a bit older, He seems to fit the part of Geralt as written in the books.

Here’s a thought. What if the thief had not called Jimmy but had simply hit the guy on the head with a heavy object, causing brain damage or even death? I’m thinking of the Breaking Bad episode that involved another ‘victimless’ crime involving a train and diluted chemicals… The whole idea was that nobody would know.

Jimmy is likable, but he is also consistently portrayed as a man who cheats and scams people. It really surprises me when people think he is a good person.

It is not a misstep by the writers. It is a major plot point. I was very clear that Kim understands that this is not a job for her alone and that the expansion offers great opportunities.

Just to be clear: consent is not the same thing as not expressing non-consent. Keep this in mind, it may prevent you from raping somebody. I hope you are just a troll, but you come across as somebody who lacks a working moral compass.

I understand the point. If she joined the MeToo movement to get justice for victims, she should have disclosed her own past as an abuser (provided the current accusations are true).

You realise that asking somebody if they understand a simple principle is often considered to be passive agressive, right? You do understand what a rhetorical question is, right?

I agree with you for the most part. But unfortunately people who work for technical support do not always do their best to help you.

I loved the second movie. More importantly, it made money.

For me the strongest part of the show is that the characters are continuously forced to move on and that the audience doesn’t always get emotional closure.

The big television is used to watch television and probably ‘movie night’ as well. Prepaid sims would make the most sense. Some prepaid plans have unlimited data.

This is an odd criticism. We are not supposed to care about Carol and Barb or feel sympathy for them. They symbolize the true difference between a minimum and a maximum prison.

To be honest, it looks like there is no longer a genuine intention to finish the game, which means the word ‘scam’ is justified. At some point, the focus should have shifted to delivering an actual product, even if that product falls short of the original expectations.

Did you actually read her tweets?

She called somebody a ‘rando asshat’. If you call that an extremely mild Twitter spat... If one of your employees calls you an asshat, would you see that as an EXTREMELY mild insult? I guess the word asshat doesn’t fit your definition of vulgarity.