Teti really seems to get this show. I'm sure he has a lot of responsibilities now, but it would be nice to have him on regular N4U duty.

I give this one an A too— the best Nathan For You episodes aren't about the feasibility of the scheme or the exact role of Nathan's culpability; they're about the unexpected moments of insight you get into people, and what people are willing to do or say when they're on camera.

I really wanted to believe this was a dull data-driven piece that attempted to quantify how much one might "love" a long-form article.

Are those people also interested in television articles that shill for corporate partners and overlords?

ESPN was the wrong place for it. For some time now the corporate culture there has been stiflingly conformist, promoting sports-shouting entertainment, without room for nuance or quality or things that didn't immediately turn a profit.

In a South Park section? Never.

I personally thought Harry Shearer's reading as Flanders of "Ya did? Hold on a second" at the end was also restorative, but that's me.

We’ve seen them as the Jackson 5 and the Obamas. What great (possibly black) family will the Johnsons take on next?

Dre’s obsession with toughening or “blackening” his kids up up makes perfect sense in episodes where their sheltered, somewhat spoiled upbringing clouds their judgment. But sometimes it’s just plain nonsense, and that’s what you get here. The word “roughhousing” is used a lot in this episode, but it ultimately comes…

Yeah, I guess it's just a matter of degree then. It makes sense: Simpsons fans have several different opinions about when the classic years started coming to an end, and I think it depends on your tolerance for their willingness to go ugly, sell out characters for the sake of a joke, etc., which they do increasingly…

I just run into so many of the type of comment I paraphrased here nowadays— the "If you didn't like this part of this particular show, you have to not like anything superficially similar in any show ever or you're a hypocrite." I don't know if that was your intent, but the disingenuous attitude I'm describing has been…

Yo!

People born in 1994 are of legal drinking age. I've been really starting to feel a generation behind the cutting edge in the last year or so.

93/99. I got all three Bond movies wrong, I didn't recognize The X-Files, and I got My Best Friend's Wedding wrong because I didn't see Cameron Diaz, Rupert Everett, or Dermot Mulroney in the shot. Oh, I got Tarzan wrong too.

It certainly made the quiz a lot easier. I'm pretty sure that's Pretty Woman and not Eat Pray Love because one isn't a "90s film." Also because in that screenshot, Julia Roberts looks younger than I do now.

Sigh. I refuse to answer any more questions along the line of "Oh, so you said Element X doesn't work in Show Y, that means it must never work for all time?" I'm burned out on that AV Club sarcasm.

Not sure if this was clear or familiar, but there's an old joke about the difference between Methodists and Baptists; I think the punch line is "Methodists say hi to one another at the liquor store," but I'm sure you could apply it to any two denominations where one is perceived to be more judgmental than the other.

Yeah… Let's just say the reason she stopped making us go was that she was too preoccupied with doomsday preparation.

Which denomination is the one that says hi to each other at the liquor store?

A Blatholic Mass to Rememblack