Fair 'nuf, but disagreeing with something just because "It wasn't in the books" and nothing else isn't a good argument.
Vera
veratelor--disqus
"Game of Thrones" tonight did something insane, unthinkable, and heinous. It did something no other television show would do, that no one would ever really want to think about.
It answered a question: in a world where power, masculinity, and sex are all bound up into a crazy ass mixture where they don't make any sense…
The entire point is that they did not "throw away his story." This is not the stop point, the end of everything where the character becomes an inhuman monster. The ugly truth is that he's the exact same Jaime he's been all along, and after this he'll keep being the exact same Jaime, with the same mix of good and…
"It's not in the books" stopped being a good argument against the TV show a long time ago. In the books, Cersei is a two-dimensional villain, her and Jaime's relationship is uncomplicatedly reprehensible, and we only ever see Jaime's POV.
The show did something different, but the fact of the matter is that it's…
Man, give 'em a chance: the episode started less than three hours ago, and no one's even seen the next one! And no one puts that many "no's" in a script if they don't think it's rape.
That, or "only people rape people."
Someone on Game of Thrones has been raped. Oh my god. I can't believe it. This doesn't happen in just about every single episode at all. But look: this character has a name and an arc!
More importantly, the rapist is a person we all kind of like. The rape has happened in a relationship that actually seemed quite…
If I pulled that quote out of context, it would become totally meaningless.
Do you know what "advice" is?
That's…actually a cogent and legitimate point.
I'd say the traditional happy ending and the end of the adventuring still undermine any progressive measure, though.
Second Half Of The Quote. She calls herself just as gay as John. She's messing about with him. She's not exactly an honest person.
"I know one of the policemen. Well, I know what he likes."
"There was an MOD man, and I knew what he liked."
"I had one of the best cryptographers in the country look at it, though he was a bit tied down."
And. The. Second. Half. Of. The. Quote.
Here, I'll help. And I'll ignore the places where it's really obvious, like the openings of the first and last episodes, his behavior in Baskerville (where his military knowledge helped decode the password), his initial conversation with Sarah.
1) Have you ever noticed that Watson walks weird? Look how he stands in…
Second. Half. Of. The. Quote.
Also the context of the entire rest of the episode, where she flirts with men and women and explicitly talks about having sex with both.
One brain against another is not the story that "Sherlock" tries to tell. It's not about the mysteries: it's about hearts and souls. And she doesn't "baffle him with her boobs," she turns what for Sherlock is a weakness and humiliation into a strength and intellectual defeat.
It was, most definitely, good for ACD to…
What "Sherlock" did was have Irene confront Sherlock at both an emotional AND an intellectual level. That made her more human than Sherlock—which, as he pointed out, was a weakness in the "game."
Well, there's the layers of emotion in every scene between Watson and Sherlock, a combination of competition, of emotion vs. reason. There's the feelings of distrust of Watson towards Sherlock, the awareness of manipulation and the need to apologize, but the enduring loyalty and love between the two. There's the…
Nope. But it's certainly not "less progressive than the original story," as he says in this article.
Try watching again.