ICantDoThatDave

I think what's happened to the MCU is that the jokes, the humor, used to be naturally integrated into the story. Like, take Thor in Infinity War, when he meets the GotG: really watch that scene - he never makes a joke. It's all Star Lord being insecure & his lines are funny, & Thor's responses to Star Lord are funny, yes, but... Thor never breaks character to make a joke. But lately, in the more recent movies, like this one, they're like: "we have to insert a joke every X minutes". It's gotten silly, with poor writing, where instead of "the story just fits in a joke naturally", it's more like "the story has to be done to accommodate a joke".

I mean, yes, I posted them as examples of "the top", but I also gave ~400k as the normal, monthly, run-of-the-mill sales of Uncanny X-Men. EDIT: I was just originally replying to someone who claimed top sales for Uncanny X-Men was 100k "back in the day". Just showing that number was waaaay undercounted.

No, that's just recently. 100k is a good selling comic *today*. Go back in time & that would get you cancelled after 1 issue. For example, Superman #75 (The Death of Superman) sold roughly 6 million copies. Spawn #1 sold 1.75 million copies. Todd McFarlane's Spider-Man #1 comic sold 2.35 million comics. A random monthly uneventful issue of Uncanny X-Men sold about 400,000 copies. [all stats thanks to Google :) ] That was all 30 years ago, though. Not really comparable to today.

But very often... not successfully. It's a tricky decision, despite it occasionally successfully happening before, as evidenced by the *many* failures of recasting in the past.

True. It's the "Superman Effect". Why do you need, say Green Arrow or well, even Flash, with Superman around? Why do you need a Captain America or Black Widow with Carol & Wanda around? What's Mantis or Groot or Gamora gonna do with Captain Marvel & the Scarlet Witch on the field? Just watch, like the rest of us, while they solve all the problems? They have to be sidelined for some reason, to give all the other characters a reason to be there. And this was kinda an awesome way to sideline Wanda (better than "Captain Marvel is just... elsewhere *shrug*", which I get, but, same thing).

Oh, on an unrelated note: Pizza Poppa did nothing to deserve what Strange did to him! America stole from him, & he thought Strange stole from the "Strange Museum". F'd up to curse him to punch himself for weeks, if you ask me.,

Just watched this recently as well. I thought it was a combination of AWESOME!! and just... dumb & boring. Like a rollercoaster. The good parts were top notch, but the bad parts & the parts that just dragged were totally bottom-tier of the MCU. So overall: good, I guess. I enjoyed it. Wanda as the villain was completely earned, IMO. They'd been setting this up for a while. I like the comparison upthread to The Dark Phoenix Saga - they set the stage over several movies & the TV show. I don't think Thanos can be topped as a villain (we'll see) but Wanda comes seriously close for Best Villain Ever. And her heel-turn has parallels in the comics, which helps, at least for me, who likes when they keep them "comic-authentic" (although, side-note: I think the attempts to call the MCU Universe 616 is a misstep - that's the comics universe). The Illuminati stuff, while I get that it was kinda a contrived attempt to elicit OMGWTF!! reactions from the fans got me - I was very careful to avoid spoilers, so I didn't even know about Jim as Reed, much less Patrick Stewart showing up. When I heard Stewart's voice & they *even played a snippet of the X-Men cartoon theme* it worked on me. They got the reaction they wanted - I was all OMGWTF!!! On the downside, America was just boring as a character. She had no personality, no character development, & I don't know if it's the actress or the script, but I just didn't care about her. I've seen her called a "walking MacGuffin" & that seems a good description IMO. Towards the end, particularly when she took on Wanda & was like "Uh huh" & Wanda took the punch & was like "Nuh uh" I was kinda on Wanda's side. :) Don't care about Strange's love-life, the whole "the power was in you all along!" thing was dumb & cliche, they didn't actually do a whole lot with the "Multiverse of Madness" concept, & there were several eye-rolling scenes I thought (the "music battle" for example). But still, I enjoyed it overall.

I thought Bill did a good job of just *eyeroll*ing Conway for the most part. He could've done more, certainly. But that was one of the best, most insightful, New Rules in a while, IMO. EDIT: The one thing I wished anyone (including Bill) had pushed back on Conway when she was like "you're scared of Trump running again" was: We're not scared of him running again, we're scared of what happens if HE LOSES again.

I find the dialogue in this show completely cringe-worthy. Particularly Little Leia, who's basically "fully adult Leia" just in a 10-year old body. Having Obi-Wan comment on it doesn't actually make the problem go away.

I'm not sure I agree, but I am open to being shown differently. How often in the past has a winner who was a "challenge beast" actually won simply due to being a challenge beast? My recollection is that "winning at least one challenge" has been a fairly important part of former resumes, but I don't recall that being anyone's, ever, entire reason for being a "worthy winner". It may have happened once before & I'm just not remembering, but that certainly doesn't mean it's ever been a point of emphasis. As shown in this season: I don't think Lindsay or Jonathan could have won based solely on "I won a bunch of challenges". Even if either had won many more challenges than they did.

Or, because it's happening in one blue area but not another blue area, he did pick the right city.

Bill's prior show was called Politically Incorrect. I'd say he's had the same view of wokeness well before that's what it was called.

Unless the Byrdes feel like making the same "mistake" Ruth did, they are done with Clare. They have no reason to ever care about her again. They are out & done. The ended where I wish Ruth did - done.

I honestly think if, in these last episodes, they played that whole "car crash" scene exactly the same, with all the episodes right before it the same, but when we saw it "for real", like they were in the car, exact same dialogue, leads up to the "crash", but... they avoided the crash in real life & just kept driving, like "whoah! that was close!"... that would have been better screen-writing. Because that's what *actually* happened, in the show. Better symbolism I guess. EDIT: But clearly keep the earlier "foreshadowing scene".

I mean, yeah, it did, but that whole situation had already been dealt with. The kids were already talking about, even joking about, the future before the crash, & were pretty clearly back "in". Ruth dealt with it. It just didn't need the whole "OMG foreshadowing scene! when is this gonna happen?!?" treatment. It was overblown & ham-fisted. IMO at least. Still liked the final season as a whole, but that scene was not as pivotal as it was played up to be.

I agree on the car crash. That was a complete whiff for me. I honestly thought it was gonna be simply symbolic - as in, before these last few episodes, I did not expect to see that scene actually happen for real, but more as a metaphor for "they think they're going to get out, they are so close! but then... disaster strikes! dun dun dun" that the showrunners threw in that we could look back on & say, "ohhh... I get it now." So when the scene actually started (& granted it took me a few seconds to recognize it was happening) I was like "oh, huh, they're really doing this" & I was a bit let down just on that front. Then it just led to... nothing much really. So I was disappointed that 1) it was real, but more 2) it didn't much matter.

Same here - overall I liked the ending (as someone upthread pointed out, the Goodbye special called the Byrdes "an invasive species" & they tend to survive while everyone around them dies off) as well as the final season as a whole. Some parts I didn't like, but overall it worked for me. Nowhere near as bad as the Dexters or GoTs of the world, IMO. I've seen others express this but I don't think it was that unusual. I think she thought for the first time in a long while she was "safe", so let her guard down a bit (EDIT: although the interpretation above that "she knew it was over" is also valid). As far as being unarmed, she was going legit - she couldn't very well carry around a gun legally, either on her or in her car, & definitely not to that fund-raiser (a quick trip to Google tells me that getting your record expunged does not mean you can legally purchase a gun). The trailer where she kept the shotgun we saw get demolished, & I doubt she could have kept it on the construction site anyway. The gun she used on Nathan was in a safe at the hotel. I don't think she had a lot of options.

That is a fair push-back to Bill's take on masks. Absolutely (see below). I inserted the numbers into your quote. I think 1 is Bill's main point, & I sympathize with it. But 2 is a very valid rebuttal I do wish someone on his panel would raise. I honestly would like to hear his response to it.

Right, but you don't wear a seatbelt when you aren't driving. You don't wear a condom around during the whole day. You don't put on sunscreen first thing when you wake up. You use them in appropriate circumstances. No one goes swimming indoors with a condom, sunscreen, & a seatbelt on, for example, despite them being appropriate in other circumstances. I really think that's all Bill is saying in regards to masks, although he is doing it hamfistedly, I admit - wear a mask when appropriate, not performatively.

I mean, BCS season 5 topped out at about 1.6 million viewers, for the premier & the finale. That's "good for CW" numbers. So I dunno how much "hugely popular" plays in here. If Odenkirk felt like pushing his book, I can't really blame him. https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/better-call-saul-season-five-ratings/

I just assumed that was because Odenkirk was more pushing his book than Better Call Saul, except in how he got his role as Saul in relation to what he wrote in the book. I don't think actors go around doing press to push the 6th & final season of their show as much as "their latest project" (the book in this case). I don't think the interview guests come in "cold" to Bill's show, but rather that they set the stage (within limits) for what they'd like to discuss. I do get where Bill is coming from with masks, although I think he goes too far with it. They absolutely do provide protection, else why would doctors & surgeons wear them? However I also agree that it's time to start relaxing, or even removing mandates, but I just don't agree with him on stigmatizing anyone who *chooses* to keep wearing them. Who really cares if individuals choose to continue? Just let them. When my state removed the mandates, I stopped wearing mine everywhere (double-vax'd & boosted here, fwiw, as are my vulnerable parents) but I don't look askance at anyone who still wears one at the grocery store or wherever. I've also noticed it seems most comedians, even very left-leaning ones, have generally been for opening things up & relaxing restrictions, & have been for a while now. Bill is simply no exception here - Stephen Colbert is the same way. It's that they crave the audience experience. They need it. It's what validates them. They crave that feedback. I think that explains his attitude towards masks, even though, as I mentioned, I think he goes too far with it.

Finally saw this on HBO MAX. Just a long, dull, long, plodding, long movie. Probably the worst Bruce Wayne portrayal ever, & I'm including Adam West! Way too many coincidences for me & plot inconsistencies (Falcone was literally "in the light" for hours at that funeral). I did enjoy the Bat-Armor of Inconsistent Protection that provided however much or little protection to Batman as the plot needed for any particular scene.

She might be good at her job, but she's trying to bring way too much of her job into Survivor, which is a very compressed timeframe & where people don't act like their normal selves,. She's trying to "diagnose" people she just met a few days ago & who might not be acting like they would in "real life". It's fun to watch, certainly.

The video was interesting but the guy completely misses the point Bill tries to make on Wokeness. He's acting as if Bill is saying Wokeness is a huge problem in the world & the guy says it's not even Top 10. Well, duh. But Bill's point is that it is in the Top 10 reasons people vote for Republicans over Democrats.

I don't think there's any danger of that as long as Batman Forever & Batman & Robin exist. I have a soft spot for the 1966 Adam West movie, because of the pure camp of it (Bat-Shark Repellant! ftw!), so I feel like it should be in its own separate category.