Most people don’t have an issue with a person being a Mormon. It seems you may.

Are people “obsessed” with him?  Jennings is the person most associated with the show apart from Trebek, and he had a very well-received tenure as guest host that a lot of people thought marked him as the most obvious candidate for the permanent position if he wanted it.

Travolta is too old at this point.

I have always appreciated how much this movie commits to the heroes losing. And not merely losing, they lose in a way that turns the standard MCU formula on its head, in that there are multiple threads about characters going through all kinds of development and making the hard choices, the things that are normally…

I thought it wasn’t that it lowered crime, just that it didn’t cause crime to go up (though even that is dubious from a criminological perspective).

Not really, because OnlyFans has no real material assets to leverage.

I don’t know about underperforming, but apparently the original creator wants to sell it now.

Sure (as I noted), but that’s a separate issue from whether it is “utterly useless”. Ceremonial heads of state perform a lot of functions. Britain is one  of the countries that continues to allocate those functions to a monarch.

Dominic West is being cast to play a role through into at least Charles’ mid-50s (we don’t know exactly where Season 6 of The Crown plans to stop, but I can’t imagine we don’t at least make it to the Queen’s Golden Jubilee in 2002, at which point Charles would be 54).

The monarchy, like all ceremonial heads of state (which also includes elected figures, e.g., the presidents of Italy, Israel, etc.) primarily exist to perform a vast array of ceremonial non-partisan functions.  In places like America these functions are combined with the office of the chief executive, but in much of…

Yeah, that sounds about right.

The glimpse of Santa I thought was hilarious just because of how audacious that was in what is otherwise a show in a real-world setting.

No, people can’t be blamed for things they didn’t do. That’s a pretty fundamental moral principle.

We’re discussing the characters here. A character can’t be blamed for things they literally did not do, or for things that the narrative explicitly gives them reasonable justification for. That’s why we’re given a scene of Shane learning that the hotel had just had a violent robbery occur against one of the other…

Who was cheering for him getting stabbed?

It sort of depends on what White sees as the core concept of the show (beyond it being set in a fancy hotel).  It’s even possible that he’ll completely switch things up and look at different themes apart from class, etc., if he really doesn’t want the series to just be repeating the same ideas in different locations.

I think Tanya probably did mean what she said in the moment, but she’s not exactly consistent moment to moment.  She spent much of the series having what looked like a mental breakdown, and one gathers this is far from new for her.

Shane was quite reasonably believing he was defending himself against a violent burglar.

Armond also told him he had not booked the Pineapple Suite, so I’m not sure why we should believe him on that point. You’re charged for the room that you book.

Generally speaking, a character’s actions are important in how one assesses them.  That’s not getting hung up on logistics, that’s the meat of the show.