willrikerssoggyfinger--disqus
Will Riker's soggy finger
willrikerssoggyfinger--disqus

Say what you will about the Daily Mail - and there's certainly plenty to say - it amused me no end when they nicknamed him 'serial polluter' Leonardo DiCaprio for his habit of zipping about the globe on his private jet to lecture everyone about saving the environment (in between porking his way through the Victoria's

I'd love a Black Widow movie. Marvel have one of today's few bankable movie stars already on board, a well-recognised character with plenty of scope for mysterious character development and pulp adventure, and fan enthusiasm for female-led movies waiting to be indulged. A more grounded spy caper within the Marvel

"And that’s the through-line to be gleaned from the Wieners-Out half of the episode: that many men fundamentally misunderstand or just don’t listen to women on a regular basis."

I can sort of see your first point ('Trump calling her a loser is rich when he himself is a loser'), which I hadn't thought of. Rewatching the clip, it could certainly be read either way, though my original interpretation (as a completely uncalled for knock) still seems more likely, albeit subjectively. For me, my

'You have something in common' means two people, Trump and Jones. She's saying that if Trump calling Jones a loser is true, then Jones and Trump have something in common, both being losers. There's no way to interpret that statement as being in reference to one person only, and there are only two people involved.

I acknowledged the difference with Hillary's involvement being, at best, secondary (as enabler) if true, whereas Trump's behaviour towards Machado was direct and has been effectively proven. Nevertheless, Clinton's fundamental motivation for bringing Machado into the discussion was as cynical as Trump's, even if her

Regardless of what one thinks of Clinton and Trump (in my case, 'very little' and 'horrible, pathetic scumbag' respectively), this is hypocrisy from Bee. Don't get me wrong: Trump's move in bringing out Bill Clinton's four accusers, at that time, placing them in the audience, was a scummy and exploitative move that

Paint what she used to be.

JJ Abrams? That man has nothing to do with any Star Trek I've ever seen.

Trump's a reprehensible, demagogic buffoon, but that was pathetic. You want Clinton scandals? How about the (at least) hundreds of thousands of people, mostly Muslims, who've died as a result of the kneejerk military interventions she's actively supported? How about the hypocrisy of claiming to support the black

I honestly have no idea how I'd rank the Trek movies I've seen (yet to get around to TMP or Search For Spock) because most of them are so oddly different from each other in terms of strengths and weaknesses that, beyond Wrath Of Khan being the best balanced, it's hard to make direct comparisons for the most part.

Outside the obvious nutballs, if you want to know why plenty of reasonable people are put off by political correctness, or whatever you want to call it, this pronouncement sums it up to a tee. There isn't an ounce of sincerity to be found: she could have addressed Beckham like a human being, admitted to having said

The names that really work for me are those just silly enough to let you in on the joke, without being too obvious about it. Casanova Frankenstein and any of the 'silly' names from the Will Ferrell and associates comedies are trying far too hard. John Matrix from Commando is great, maybe the quintessential '80s

Gawain't no justification for this Agravaine-tingly stupid idea, which is so bad it's giving me a m-Igraine. I'm going to bed(ivere).

"Now would be a good time to point out that even when this project was being referred to as a “reboot,” certain internet factions weren’t exactly crying about ruined childhoods in the same way they were about the Ghostbusters reboot. It’s almost like women in Hollywood are disproportionately scrutinized. Who knew?"

I know I should be talking about what a physical wonder Jackie Chan is as both action star and comedian, but I'm so glad the writer described Octopussy as 'deeply watchable' that it overshadows all of that. Despite the shit it gets - my theory mostly for the title - Octopussy is Moore's best, full of all the things

Glad I turned on my adblockers/anti-trackers before this, because I had a feeling it would be something clickbaity and imbecilic. Turns out, not only is the post stupid, but didn't even pick the most amusing tweets. 'You've Got Mail Privilege' and 'Snakes On A Mansplain' are pretty good pro-feminist ones; The Lion,

So, this person hijacked a Q&A in order to answer in a near identical manner to how questions would have been answered anyway? It is indeed a David vs Goliath story, assuming David's plan was not to defeat Goliath, but put on some stilts, hurry onto the battlefield before Goliath got there, then insult the Israelites

Got around to seeing Ghostbusters. It's not terrible, it's not good, merely dull and a bit saddening, barely a movie so much as a succession of callbacks and middle fingers to haters. Yes, a lot of the criticism of the movie and its stars during production was petulant, spiteful and immature. For me, that doesn't

For Your Eyes Only is… OK. Producer Cubby Broccoli wanted to (literally) bring Bond back down to earth after the ludicrous excesses of Moonraker, but in doing so ended up with a movie which drags badly in places (everything in Cortina) and never quite gets out of second gear. There are some jarring tonal misjudgments,