truthful

My new theory is the reason they don't talk about Bruno is not because of Abuela but because Pepa would get upset whenever someone talked about her brother that she would produce storms so fierce that it would ruin crops and parts of people's homes.

I want to know more about Dolores. How does her super hearing affect her? How can she isolate many different voices she's hearing from far away? Does she wear ear plugs to bed or is her whole room soundproofed?

Ok movie. Some good songs. I liked all the different characters and their different powers the best. I think this movie lends itself well to a spin off tv series exploring life in the area.

I've been unsure about the concept of Kang, having not read anything about him in the comics, and if course the impact of Thanos in the MCU. However recently I've been watching a children's television series called The Animals of Farthing Wood and I finally saw an angle on this Kang character. I won't go on about what the show is about, you can easily google it. Anyway in the last series the animals who live in this English wildlife park have to deal with these plague of rats. Now all these animals could easily kill these rats. But the problem is with these rats is once they kill a hundred a hundred more will just take their place. And it made me think how Kang is like a rat. By himself I think the hero's could easily dispose of him. But how do you defeat a guy who if you kill a hundred of him a hundred more of him could take his place? And he only needs to kill the heroes once. I don't know about you but the concept of this seemingly endless battle against this Kang rat like character is more intriguing and thrilling than them battling Thanos.

I wish they were brave enough to let Shelly Long go before she actually left in season five finale. To me the best time to get rid of her would have been the season two finale. A perfect, devastating arc between Sam and Diane. With anything after that not really telling us anything new. Of course if Diane had left by the end of season two we wouldn't have got one of the greatest television characters ever in Frasier Crane. So I guess I can tolerate Sam and Diane having their millionth argument so that eventually Kelsey Grammer can lead in one of the most successful spin offs ever.

From what I remember I think it was that which made me struggle to finish the series last time. In fact I'm not sure if I even did finish it, but I'm not sure it was because of that, or the fact that I had lost interest in the show, or a combination of both. I think even Ken Levine on his blog said that Sam going after Rebecca like that was an awful look. But yeah from what I remember Sam's come on's to Rebecca were just so constant, and Rebecca wasn't interested at all. I don't know what it was considering we all had been exposed to Sam and his lothario antics over the last few seasons, but it just made me feel quite uncomfortable watching it.

In terms of comedic value, I would have to say Cliff Clavin is definitely the MVP of the show so far. Norm is close but there is something a bit sad about him. Cliff is just so ridiculously self serious in his delusions that even his sad moments are hilarious.

Apart from herself?

Been rewatching Cheers again. Just started on season four. For some reason the whole Sam and Diane relationship and subsequent destruction of said relationship didn't really interest me all that much anymore. Apart from looks I never knew what Sam saw in Diane. She was always mocking his intelligence and his taste in women. And when they were together she was always playing mind games with him. No wonder it seemed like he was deliberately ruining that relationship with his behaviour by the end. As for what Diane saw in Sam, I guess it was an unconcious choice on her part, or maybe deliberate, to go for someone who was the complete opposite of the men she normally dated. They probably had the second greatest chemistry in television behind Ross and Rachel from Friends, but their fundamental incompatibility meant that their relationship was doomed. What was more interesting to me was seeing the relationship between Diane and Frasier. From how Frasier kept going on about Diane leaving him at the altar one would think that it was one of the greatest love stories ever. But watching the third season I couldn't help noticing how awful they were together. They didn't really have any chemistry and were bound to fail. Frasier should have been thanking Diane for leaving so that he could meet Lilith. Though of course maybe she should have found a better way of doing it. Speaking of Frasier, it's clear why he lasted so long as a character and eventually got his own hugely successful spin off. Who do you think was Diane's true love?

I really liked how Ross went crazy after his Emily divorce because it had Schwimmer do his best work on the show and enabled the writers to stop trying to make us see poor Ross as the good guy instead of the angry, selfish person he truly was. I also found it intriguing how Rachel was the one doing most of the chasing after their break up but I thought it worked better than Ross pining after Rachel mainly because Jennifer gives her character Rachel such a likeable quality. Also Ross and Rachel have the greatest chemistry in tv history, with maybe only Spike and Lynda from Press Gang coming close to them. No wonder the writers went to that well so many times. I'm not sure they would have worked out though because I don't think Ross had outgrown his jealousy issues by the end.

It's tricky because people like Jane and they want her to get her happy ending. Yet they want to see more of Jane on the show in the upcoming revival. But to do that Jason and his writers will have to come up with a scenario that enables Jane to continue on the show without ruining what she had with Mike. Is like Guy ok with making a couple of appearances in the show to help set up the next chapter of Jane's life? Or will their relationship be just a couple of throwaway lines? I'm also interested to know the new budget of the revived show? Will it bigger or smaller than before?

I found the character of Margot boring and predictable. All the other characters were way more interesting than her. I think because, and I'm not sure how else to describe it, but it's like the writers wrote her to have the winning moves all throughout the movie. She does the right things, she says the right things, and she makes the right moves. In a film where the other guests fail so horribly, having her basically be seemingly perfect at everything stood out to me. I wonder when the guests accepted their fate? I think it must have been after the men were recaptured. Overall an ok movie.

The overly dramatic stuff happened in season 4.

I meant in the show, like simplify her life for the narrative and themes that they want to choose to convey.

I don't know how unpopular this is, but I reckon that because of the popularity of the US adaptation of the show, and people getting tired of Ricky Gervais, that the Office UK has kind of become underrated.

The only thing I can think of is that they wanted to represent how truly alone Diana was when she married in to the firm.

It's so bizarre, whilst Carol Kenyon did perform on that night in front of the Queen, there is no proof anywhere that I could find that she performed the "For one night only" song. Even though she was known for singing that song before. But she sang other songs too in her career so unless I can see or hear irrefutable proof that she sang that song from Dreamgirls I will keep my mind open on the matter. What makes it annoying though is that finding out what song she sang on that night should be an easy thing for the internet to find out for me. It should be dead simple. I shouldn't have to put effort for such a simple question. Clearly though this query about the mysterious song is too much for the internet to handle.

Disagree, both Charles and Diana crave the spotlight.

Not the best picture.

It's amazing how the charm of Vanessa Kirby was able to put Margaret in a better light than she probably truly deserved.

Well she was manipulated into doing the Bashir interview though. That was the reality of it. They played on her paranoia so they could get one of the biggest news interviews ever. That wasn't Peter Morgan trying to write drama just for the show.

Has Diana ever not been disempowered during her time on the show? For me, Diana's storyline this season, and I don't know if Peter Morgan meant this, is about how she thinks she has agency but really she has no agency at all. It's a sad and depressing arc.

I was referring to what happened in real life to indicate why the marriage of Charles and Camilla was important in terms of how it changed the thinking of the Queen. If at least the bit where the Queen doesn't send her secretary to try and break up Charles and Camilla doesn't appear in season six I shall be very disappointed.

But it's the change in the Queen's thinking that is important. I mean she literally sends her secretary to try and break Charles and Camilla up. She refers to Camilla as that wicked woman. She deliberately made it so that she didn't have to be in the same room as her. So how did she go from that to giving consent for her son, the heir to the throne and church of England, to marry a divorced woman. I mean even if her reasons come down to realising that no one cares about those antiquated morals it still represents a significant shift in her thinking and that is something that is worth exploring. Because in season after season the show has shown us how duty over love can cause great pain to people. By having the Queen realise that love and duty can co-exist without the whole system crashing down would be a grand way to end the show.

I just think they've spent so much time focused on the Charles, Camilla, and Diana triangle that to not make the wedding between Charles and Camilla a big part of the last season would be poor writing.