rexbanner1989
RexBanner
rexbanner1989

I don't agree with the 'a good story doesn't need to rely on surprises' argument; while that's true, surprises still add to the experience. I don't understand people who feel put out or irritated that they are expected to keep details of a story from people who might want to experience that story fresh. Like, what

It's one of those songs that's immune to overuse for me. My only complaint about the new series is that they don't have the sinister synth part of it slathered over every second scene. The scene where Andy was investigating the hit and run - with the establishing shot of clouds coming over the mountains - used it, and

I get a bit irritated when ASoIaF and GoT are charged with using deaths for cheap shocks because all of the deaths are realistic consequences of circumstance and/or the characters' decisions.

I would have been surprised by the William/MiB and Bernard reveals had it not been for reading the reviews and comments here. It's a shame - a good surprise requires set up and some sort of sense, both of which, as Harmon pointed out, will be quickly picked up on by the internet hive mind.

"Surprise is fun, but it's so ephemeral. Stories need more if they're going to have any lasting impact."

No, a perfect show succeeds at balancing all those things. GoT - an extremely good show - has managed to do it with most of its characters across most of its run - and it has continued to do so. A few dumb moments or less interesting story threads - Arya's training, Dorne - don't warrant a backlash.

There's a lot of zero-sum gaming going on in the comments here. It's not character OR drama OR shocks and surprises. All those things are good. I will enjoy a sci-fi story with a lot of twists and turns a lot more if I care about the characters; I will have more fun reading or watching a story with interesting

I think that was bullshit - it's like people claiming J.K. Rowling ripped off Troll because it has magic and a character called Harry Potter in it. The concept of 'The Village' - an isolated village is surrounded by monsters/an old timey village is actually just in the present - is general enough that many people

I've heard him talk about LotR a lot, but never as an inspiration for his emphasis on 'anyone can die'. I remember a specific interview when he mentioned that one of the few things he wishes was different about The Lord of the Rings is Gandalf coming back - Martin cited Gandalf's apparent death in Fellowship as an

"Of course, with the caveat that they do have that early 90s difficulty still left over from the 2D days. But there's nothing inherently wrong with that."

Nah, Sansa - like Danerys, Jon, Tyrion, Arya, and Bran - will live until at least the finale. Jaime and Cersei will live to the last season; Davos, Melisandre, Sam, Missandei, Grey Worm, Theon, Asha, Littlefinger, Varys, Qyburn, the Hound - these are the characters who could go at any time.

No one's arguing that people shouldn't be able to voice their opinions; people are arguing that certain opinions are wrong, and people shouldn't choose to express them. There is a pretty massive - and obvious - difference, one that a dispiriting number of people fail to wrap their heads around.

They are the textbook examples of Flanderisation… other than Ned Flanders. They're characterised *beautifully* in the Pilot: Andy crying at the scene of Laura's body; Lucy trying to describe which phone she's going to use. Andy was dim, but he wasn't a simpleton; Lucy was a ditz, but she wasn't child-like.

Jarring but so good. I first watched Twin Peaks in 2006, when I was in my first year of university, and I remember how quickly the peaceful, gentle opening credits accrued a very sinister vibe. The jarring shifts made everything more intense because you didn't know if something beautiful was about to be interrupted by

I slightly resented a little of the negative reaction to the acting in the hit and run scene - I'm a teacher, and while it's hardly like being a paramedic or a firefighter, you do end up sometimes being on the scene of broken bones, serious fights, faintings, falls, etc. Basically, in real life, when something

It's a real shame, because while Elysium's not great, it's hardly awful, and Chappie's a harmless dud. I hope he recovers.

I think once you intend to humiliate someone or embarrass them, you're no longer doing it to accomplish good. There are ways to change unpleasant or backwards points of view without making it an attack on the person - and these are more likely to be effective.

'The offended demographic' - which, to be clear, isn't the homosexual community - is making too big a deal out of it. They don't need to calm down, because they're pretending for the sake of piling on a stranger - or for the sake of clicks, or for attention - rather than actually feeling angry.

Nope - it's a bit garbled, but I mean that getting on a high horse and attacking someone is done to make you feel good, not to improve things. Almost all the instances of public grandstanding which involve shaming someone - celebrity or otherwise - happen because of people wanting to bully under a veneer of protest,