Much stronger union. It's not just the money. How about the fact that, historically, NFL contracts are voidable in the event of injury. That's just the shittiest thing in a sport where everyone gets injured

I call my wife "stupe" sometimes when she's dumb. She doesn't like it

Agreed. They also have careers that last, at ABSOLUTE most, 20 years (baseball).

"Sapper" isn't a stupid name if he sneaks into enemy lines and blows stuff up

Ohhhhhhh man I should totally do that. There's almost certainly a district where they're simultaneously hiring a Latin teacher (my wife) and a history teacher (me) and will pay us both 150,000. Jeez glad you pointed that out to me.

I hate how much more people complain about athletes making a ton of money than actors. Paying athletes a lot at least makes some sense — they are the absolute best in the world at what they do. They have a rare talent/skill/ability. Further, the better they are, the happier their fans and the more money for the…

Well we're talking about the universe of the movie, not the record industry. If a poor Jersey girl finds joy in rapping, that's not appropriation regardless of what race she is

Agreed. If applied in the manner that the extremists wish to apply it, prohibitions on "cultural appropriation" would destroy culture as we know it. Culture is human interaction, not isolation

"A smarter movie might have interrogated her appropriation"

-Uses its historical basis in a disingenuous way
-Strays from historical fact when it suits him

I get that we don't like the politics of 300, but I respect it for how it tells its story. It's told entirely through a very limited perspective. So *of course* the monsters are 15 feet high and the enemies are grotesque and absolutely The Other (as enemies always are) and the heroes are ripped and perfect. It's a…

Finn: They say he hasn't slept in like over a year.
Danny: Bullshit!
Finn: Naw, it's true. I've never seen him sleep. Seriously.
Danny: Well, have you ever seen Queen Elizabeth sleep?
Finn: No…why, is she a tweaker?
Danny: [pause] Yes. That's my point.

Fair enough!

You do not appreciate Steven Soderbergh enough then, good sir

Yeah the book itself kinda feels like a rough cut. The town sequence is the only really well-written part of the book

True, it was made in 1984, but it's meant to evoke the serials from the 1930s. So the exotic areas are exotic, the foreigners are foreign, the British are thr light of civilization, etc. I have no problem with a movie that advances dated viewpoints, especially when it does so in a knowing way

Landmark theaters really are terrific

Yes, and that's what matters in 2017's version of film criticism

The fact that art made in a different time doesn't reflect the values in our current time is not problematic. It's, at most, something to note

Katie Rife should not be assigned to any movies that might be "problematic," for the good of her own mental health