I think in that situation, the Dothraki would have obviously took losses (maybe even significant), but Dani was willing to take losses in relation to the Lannister army to take Castle Rock, and the losses in this battle would have been even less.

How would they not be able to successfully caravan the grain home after destroying the entirety of the Lannister army, not to mention being able to guard it from above with three dragons? Also, given that John is at Dragonstone and seemingly allied with Dani (even if he won't bend the knee), I doubt the north would…

Yup, which is what makes the Dothraki so dangerous (and Dani so reckless for risking herself *** and burning a shitload of food that's going to be in short supply soon because a dragon's going to dragon *** when the Dothraki could have gotten the job done in the first place with little trouble).

The whole time thing can be hard to swallow, but the Dothraki catching up to the Lannister army isn't that hard to believe. The Dothraki are all on mounts, while the Lannisters are marching in full battle armor (and apparently slow enough that Tarly wanted to start whipping the stragglers).

Curious how Jon's decisions plays out, but there's a valid tactical reason to do it as well. If you simply give those houses to loyalists, the Karstarks and Umbers (and any men loyal to those families) simply remain enemies, and you're stuck with a divided North.

Apple, the company that won't unlock a terrorist's phone because it cares so much about your freedom, but is willing to develop an app that allows your overlords to exercise control over you in ways they never had before! Thanks for looking out for us guys!! #withfriendslikethese

I disagree on the whole Bane's final defeat point being misguided. You have Bane and Batman both grounded in a black/white code of the League of Shadows, which directly results in Batman not being able to do what needs to be done with Bane. And then you have Catwoman, who's more than comfortable recognizing the gray…

I get that HBO sets a high standard, and I wouldn't call Ballers the best thing on TV, but this show is nowhere near as bad as the reviews seem to make it out to be. Sure, it's mindless entertainment, but it's miles better than the mindless entertainment that constitute 90% of the shows on network TV.

True, and looking back, it's basically just another assumption on my part regarding an extremely underdeveloped character.

Speaking for myself, I'm not attacking the veracity of the idea that encouragement can make a big difference in a POC's (or anyone's really) life. What bothers me a bit, though, is that white savior stories tend to be almost all we get out of Hollywood. And while I agree with what you say above, I think people take…

No one is saying the Mom character should feel "guilty" for providing encouragement. Or that Linklater failed because he didn't convey some sort of "white guilt" on the Mom's part when the comment was made.

The problem is that out of the likely scores of people who told the kid he was smart—-probably including his whole family—-the only time he took it to heart and made changes was when a educated, white woman said it when he meet her for literally 15 seconds. Say what you will, but that basically cuts to the heart of…

The problem, though, is the idea that this guy only believed in himself and made a change once an educated white person told him he was smart smacks of the impact of white privilege on this world. Nor does the fact that it's a story which may or may not have roots in reality change the fact that it represents a…

Avclub might be right here, but the fact that he had pretty significant societal/political rants regarding the role of social media in the modern world undercuts to me the idea that he wasn't trying to make any grander political/ societal points in this movie. The rant in the truck against facebook was completely…

I disagree that they're inextricable. You could tell a story with the same type of 12-year coming of age arc—-and many movies have, though not as in depth arguably—-without having to use the same actor and film for 12 years. I would agree the use of a same actor over a 12-year period was a brave artistic choice, but…

And that's the rub for me. Other coming-of-age stories have been told better IMHO without having to follow the same child over a period of 12 years to tell it. The "boy" actually changes in appearance so much over the 12 years in the first place that, if the promotional material hadn't focused on the fact of how it…

I'll admit it was an unprecedented feat, but I think it is fair to question whether a movie should be considered best-picture worthy when the way it was filmed—rather than the story it told—is what captivates people the most.

I say give Birdman the best pic, while giving Linklater the best director nod (which pains me as I'd like to see Wes Anderson win). I appreciate the effort and dedication that went in to Boyhood, but, outside of that effort and dedication, I thought it was just an okay pic. Remove the filming over 12-years aspect,…

I get that you're ranting regarding the general misunderstanding surrounding copyright law, and I get the frustration. While I'm not a composer, I do understand the difference between a chord progression and a melody arrangement. I also understand that Smith likely would have lost in this instance under copyright…

True, because the world would be a much better place if the pirouette had been subject to copyright/trademark for 70 years…..