Proclone

I agree that Jack obviously had long-standing mental health issues and I think music, in general, was his way of dealing with them, and part of his issues during the film was that his coping mechanism was slowing being taken away, both by his falling star and by his own body. If I had one minor quibble with the movie, I say that it also didn't make it clear enough, that at least to me, it seemed that part of Jack's depression and by extension what was fueling his substance abuse issues, was his hearing loss. The movie seemed very firmly set on showing and not telling and I applaud them for that, but a couple lines of dialogue about it from Jack as to how it affected him probably would have gone a long way. I mean could you imagine being a world-class musician and slowly going deaf? There are a couple of conversations about it, but I don't think it really makes it completely clear how devastating to him it must be. But then again, also part of his self-destructive behavior is to ignore warnings and perform without ear protection. Oh to be sure the manager is a complete asshole, but not just for what he said to Jack. To be honest, my hope is that if nothing else Jack's death spurred Ally to actually take his advice and use her music to say something. Even if that means going back "behind the piano" and being less popular. This would, of course, involve jettisoning the douchy manager.

YMMV, but I thought Ally was trying to play it cool when she met Jack but didn't really succeed. I also think that was pretty suspicious of him and his motivations until the scene in the parking lot where he takes care of her hand. It seemed that she had at least some familiarity with the business and stars like Jack, and probably thought he was just trying to get into her pants until then as well. I interpreted her being guarded around him as her trying to protect herself. As others have said, I doubt Ally will ever know what her manager said to Jack. And to be perfectly honest, even though he never should have said those things to a guy who just got out of rehab, he wasn't wrong. Jack certainly could have staged a comeback, but he probably would fall off the wagon eventually. He probably would have embarrassed Ally again publically. And while the manager was certainly an ass for voicing that out loud to Jack, he isn't to blame for Jack killing himself...Jack is. I liked that the movie had Bobby make it clear that Jack's suicide is only his own fault. I think there's a danger in romanticizing Jack's suicide. Which is why I'm really glad the film is rated R. The most of the f-bombs could have been excised and the nude scenes could have been cut and we'd have a P-13 movie that still would have been good...but it's not an appropriate story for 13-year-olds to watch without some serious parental guidance. Because on the surface it's, "Jack loved her so much that he killed himself so she wouldn't give up her career for him." But that's not why Jack killed himself. Jack had dozens of other choices. What the manager said could have spurred him to be more focused on keeping sober for Ally...he could have decided that he and Ally should separate for a bit so she wasn't always worried about him...he could have called her out on her lie and told her to do the tour anyway...there were so many choices he could have made. Jack killed himself because he was an addict who was depressed. In hindsight, he may have been suicidal even before the manager said those things to him. It's hard to tell whether the things he said to Ally and his brother were him making amends or him saying goodbye. I also give the movie loads of credit for neither showing his actual suicide or his body afterward. I agree what was shown was more than effective and doesn't turn him into some sort of martyr for love like a lingering shot of his body might. Apologies if I've gone off on a bit of rant, but the year anniversary of the suicide of a friend who killed himself in an eerily similar way to Jack (he took narcotics and then hung himself with his belt) has just past. Everyone who knew him has felt guilty for not realizing he was suicidal and wondered if they might have done or said someone that pushed him to that point. I know it took me a while to forgive myself and realize that while it was mental illness that caused his death, no can or should be "blamed" for his death....he made a choice. So, on another level this movie was painfully real.

I saw this last night and I completely agree. Gaga was really great, but Cooper was fantastic for me and I hope does get multiple Oscar nods (and wins a couple). His Jack is so screwed up but also such a lovely, kind, talented man that you can completely understand why everyone in his life forgives him over and over again. Heck, as the audience you kind of want to forgive him anything. There is something super endearing about him, and to be perfectly honest I really liked him from the moment his reaction to realizing he's in a drag bar is to chat with the drag queen sitting next to him, despite his outward appearance of a gruff rocker. I think the movie did a really good job at not excusing Jacks behavior, but still making him a likable character you are routing to get his shit together. Cooper and Gaga also have fantastic chemistry, and you totally buy that their characters love each other and also completely understand why they love each other. And can I just say that I praised Emily Blunt for playing drunk a couple of years ago in Girl on the Train and I have to say that Cooper is as good if not better at playing drunk. He's also pretty good at playing someone who has a hearing impairment as well. I absolutely loved that the acting was so naturalistic. There's a tendency in Oscar baity movies to have scenes of ACTING, where you watch the actors act as opposed their characters behave how people do in real life. I don't necessarily think ACTING is always bad, movies don't have be completely realistic at all times. But, there is no ACTING in this movie and I found it really refreshing. I felt like every moment was so super real, that it made it all the more tragic. And I completely give Cooper credit for that. I'm surprised that a first time director who's also an actor, didn't give himself at least one scene of ACTING, but his restraint made the film that much more compelling to me. I also liked that there seemed to be several "flubbed" lines that were kept in. Ally at one point calls Jack her boyfriend (after they had gotten married) during their fight, and then riffs of off that to say he's not treating her like his wife. And later she tells her father to eat his dinner when they're obviously eating breakfast and then quickly corrects herself. They're both little moments but it's so real not to say the right thing in a middle or a fight or misspeak when you're stressed out. I honestly don't if they were scripted or not, but it added this little level of realism to the film that once again just made it so much sadder and tragic. I felt like I was watching real people go through this as opposed to characters for most of the film. I haven't seen the two earliest iterations of A Star is Born (the 1930's and 1950's versions), but I did see the Streisand version (though at least 15 years ago), and I while I don't think that's a bad movie, this version just blew me away. I have to honestly say, I have never, that I can remember, cried at a movie in the theater. I've occasionally gotten teared up at home, but the something about being with strangers removes me slightly and while I feel sad I don't cry. I got more than a little misty at this movie. It started with Sam Elliot and his damned red-rimmed eyes in the scene in the truck when he drops Jack off. I can't honestly think of a movie I've seen this year that's a better or more deserving of the title Best Picture. I really hope it is nominated for all the awards and that it wins most of them. It's just a good movie, with excellent music. At the very least Cooper should win Best Director because he took a plot that's been told three times before and elevated it, while also starring in it. And on top of that, having a co-lead who wasn't that experienced in acting, and he got great performances out of everyone in the movie. If that doesn't equal Best Director, I really don't know what the category is rewarding.

I think that Emily's "friendship" with Stephanie was real to a certain extent. I think she liked Stephanie despite herself. I actually think the whole incest thing played a part in that. In her own different way, Stephanie was just as messed up as Emily, and I think Emily recognized that. She was also using Stephanie for free child care, one of the parents comments, "[Stephaine] doesn't know she working for free." So Emily was definitely manipulating Stephanie the entire time, but I don't think anything about her disappearance was pre-planned when she met Stephanie. I also do think Emily was a sociopath who liked or cared for anyone only insomuch as they were useful to her, so she only liked or cared for Stephanie to the point she got in her way, but I do think she did like Stephanie. Given that Emily wasn't dead, no, I doubt Sean got any money. It also says in the text at the end that he and Nicky were living in Californa, so I would assume that Stephanie did indeed buy the house. Given how much she coveted it, it makes sense. I saw this the other night and I enjoyed the heck out of it. I was a little hesitant at first, I really like Anna Kendrick, but the previews made it seem like it could go either way and be very good or terrible. I'm glad it fell on the very good side. I thought it was fun and funny while still having the dark undercurrent of a thriller. I thought Kendrick and Lively were excellent and had great chemistry with each other. Henry Goulding is also very good, and I'm surprised it's just his second movie. I liked all the characters or at least found them compelling. And I've seen several people comment that Stephanie's relationship with her brother doesn't play a role in the plot, but I think it just adds a layer to the thriller aspect of the movie. None of these characters are what they seem. And as I said above, I also think it's part of the reason Emily and Stephanie connect. It's also part of the reason that Stephanie is so desperately lonely and why she strives to be super mom. She feels guilty because of her brother and husband's death. She wants to make her son's life perfect because she's the reason his father isn't there. That all plays into how Stephanie gets caught up in Emily's web and therefore is integral to the plot.

I am really late to this party but I just watched this. This is both a really thought-provoking and disturbing documentary, and despite being from New York (not the city but I'm close enough, we usually hear about these types of cases), I hadn't heard about it before. I don't think that everyone that has violent sexual fantasies will act on them. But on the other hand, Valle's fantasies seemed to directed at specific individuals (his wife, the women he looked up), which at least in my opinion, make it more likely that he'll act on them. It's different to be aroused by the abstract idea of killing and eating (I can't believe I typed that) someone, then it is to be aroused by killing and eating a specific individual. And he also did take steps to make his fantasies reality. You don't have to google how to make chloroform in order to write a fantasy about using chloroform. And how many times do you google it before you actually give it a try? That being said, I don't think googling should be considered an "overt act" for legal purposes (or I may be going to prison because I've googled some strange stuff in service of writing fiction at times). I don't think what he actually did warrants a conspiracy charge. I think there should have been an investigation and perhaps a sting to see if he would actually take steps in the real world to further an actual kidnapping. Would he actually make chloroform? Would he actually put a pully in his basement? Would he gather tools for a possible abduction? For me, he needed to do something real and tangible in the real world to warrant a conspiracy or attempted kidnapping charge. I'm not a huge fan of Alan Dershowitz, but I do agree with him in this case, that Valle would have probably done something at some point is not enough to send him to jail for the rest of his life. It is just too Minority Report, where we're guessing at what people's actions will be and treating them as inevitable. I can't really fault the NYPD for taking swift action, if Valle had actually done something could you imagine the headlines, "NYPD Ignores warnings of Cannibal COP!" But I really do think the jumped the gun and there should have been a full investigation. I really don't think given what they showed of his chats that they could have gotten him to do something real and tangible to further a conspiracy. For what he actually did, which is misuse NYPD databases, I think the time he did was fair. I'm honestly not sure if the Maryland trip was an actual furtherance of action or if the trip happened and he just used it to continue his fantasy. In any case, I seriously hope his former wife has a restraining order against him. And I hope he doesn't have contact with his child, especially since she appears to be a girl. The fact that he doesn't think having fantasies, and telling others those fantasies in detail, about raping, killing and eating his wife didn't affect their relationship is just astounding. I honestly don't know if he believes it or it's part his "I'm not a bad guy" schtick. I would have a lot more...I don't really know if sympathy is the right word, but I'd be less worried for his family, if he at least admitted to being seriously screwed up and that his fantasies are potentially dangerous. If he said at any point that he's now seeking therapy, I would also feel better. He acts like these fantasies can be turned off or that he's in control of them, which isn't true. Violent sexual paraphillias can't be cured but therapy can help those that suffer from them avoid actually acting on their urges. The fact he acts like he was just a husband who liked porn a lot and his wife just overreacted his disturbing to me. And I really don't have any doubt that part of his attraction to the NYPD is that he gets power over others. I don't want to psychoanalyze (but I will anyway), but it seems to me that he has issues with feeling powerless and perhaps inferior, which is why he's never self-critical in any of the documentary and seems to insists that he was a good, husband, father and cop when he patently wasn't any of those things. In his fantasies he's powerful, he has power over the life and death of a woman, in fact, he literally consumes them, in his fantasies he's the alpha male that maybe he isn't in real life. I have no doubt without help those fantasies have the potential to escalate especially when he's under stress and feels more inferior. He mentioned being monitored (not the ankle bracelet ) and I hope that's for an extended period of time. Unfortunately, I doubt he'll have a hard time finding a girlfriend, but she'll likely be as messed up as he is.

So I'm probably in the minority that I actually liked the ending, or at least didn't mind it, though I totally get why it ticked people off. I haven't read the book either though I might now (I didn't read Gone Girl but that's because I really didn't want to be in the head of Amy Dunne, but I did like Dark Places). But I liked that the end scene was such a punch to the gut. I would have liked to have seen what happened next, but I'm ok with not. I do think that the flashes of what happened should have occurred before the credits because I had switched it off and actually had to go back and watch after I read there was stuff interspersed with the credits. I think, "Don't tell Mama," crash to black and then the flashes start would have worked better. I also think the flashbacks could have been bit clearer and not so short and fragmented. Ashley's little sister was one of Amma's rollerskate friends so I assume they killed Natalie in that room prior to John even staying there. I doubt Ashley knew anything about it. I also don't think that it was technically Ashely's bedroom, it was the carriage house, more like a guest house, and the family was just letting John stay there. I doubt that anyone in Wind Gap would let a boy actually stay in his girlfriend's room. I think Amma had the "naked rage" anytime she was jealous. Anytime Adora paid attention to Camille she acted out-heck anytime she wasn't the center of attention she acted out. From the rather minor incident of the lollipop in Camille's hair because she wasn't paying attention to her, to running out in the woods because of the fight at Calhoun Day. What better way to have everyone focus on you but by running away? I'd even bet that she pulled Camille's clothes away in the store so she would have to come out either in her underwear or a skimpy dress. I don't know if she knew about the scars or not, but even if she didn't Camille obviously didn't want to put on those dresses for a reason, and I'd bet Amma wanted to force her to do just because for a moment Mama was paying more attention to Camille. I think they could have made it clearer in the story that Adora was getting close with both Natalie and Ann (I think a couple flashbacks with the girls still alive would have gone a long way), but I think Amma killed them because she was jealous. As I look back at the series what seemed on the surface just the actions of a messed up possibly abused girl (I called the MPD thing early) slowly becomes darker. She was even willing to let Adora kill Camille. She could have got out of the house, but she was jealous again and she knew Mama would kill Camille sooner or later and she'd have her all to herself. You also see her get angry at her "friend" in St. Louis when the girl says she wants to be a writer and Amma thinks it's to impress Camille. *Edited to Add* I see lots of discussion on whether Amma is a psychopath and I fall firmly on the side of she is one. That being said, psychopath doesn't necessarily equal murderer. Most estimates I've seen say that about one percent of the population is a psychopath or has psychopathic tendencies. If you've ever had a boss you thought was a psychopath, well they might have been. About 3-4% of those working in the business world are psychopaths or have psychopathic tendencies. The majority of those people don't commit crimes, though this isn't generally because they think crime is wrong (amorality is a hallmark of psychopathy) but because they don't want to be punished. I even read an article about a researcher who was studying the brains of psychopaths using a fMRI and also did a scan on himself, thinking he could be part of the control group only to find that his brain was eerily similar to those who had scored high on psychopathic checklists. After examining his actions over the course of his life and interviewing friends and family about how they felt about him, he came to realize he was pretty much the textbook definition of a psychopath. He was married with kids and had never committed a serious crime. My point is that Amma was probably born or at least predisposed to psychopathy, but that Adore's abuse of her probably made her violent. It's also possible that whatever Adora was doing to her may have damaged her brain (traumatic brain injury patients can sometimes develop psychopathic behavior). If Amma had grown up in a stable home with a loving mother who wasn't abusing her, Amma might just have turned out to be amoral and narcissistic, but not necessarily a murderer. That being said, I'm not sure that after three premeditated murders where she took trophies that there's really any hope of rehabilitation for Amma.

Funny I've never assumed Jeremy has powers, just that he was recruited for Black Badge because of his brain. Perhaps I missed something that hinted at Jeremy having powers...but I always just assumed that he was recruited because he was brilliant, perhaps a little strange, and likely someone no one would particularly miss. He doesn't seem to have a family so, the brilliant, single, scientist with no family to miss him seems like the perfect recruit to the shadowy government organization. I don't assume that everyone involved in Black Badge is supernatural in some way. Lucado didn't seem to be, other than being able to go toe to toe with Dolls, which I think was rule of cool fight rather than any indication of her supernatural abilities. I mean I think they go out of their way to find people with supernatural abilities (or they just make them supernatural like in the case of Dolls), but I didn't think everyone involved was supernatural. YMMV

I am also not on the Doc as a vamp train. I'm hoping that it can be reversed, perhaps there's some other action he'll have to take to make the change permanent that he'll choose not to go through with. There's certainly precedent for there being things like killing or at least feeding off of blood that makes a person permanently a vampire and prior to that action it can be reversed, in some vampire lore. If it is a permanent change I really don't like it. First of all it seems like a total step back from the Doc at the end of the last episode, who told Bulshar to shove it despite promises of a get-out-of-hell-free-card. It also seems like a total step back in Doc's entire character arc, and not just for this season. Doc made a deal with Constance because he was scared of dying, he got punished for it by being in a well for over a hundred years but his fear of dying remains (hence his hesitancy to give up his ring last season). He despite being a great gunslinger was/is a coward. You would think that his arc would be to get over his fear or at least do what's right despite it, right (which is what Dolls was trying to tell him to do just before Dolls died)? And making him mortal again last season seemed to be taking steps to have him do that. Having him turn himself into something that can't die seems like poor character growth and poor storytelling unless they're planning to turn Doc into a villain or reverse it. I'm seriously hoping for the latter. If the vamp thing sticks and Doc isn't a villain then...I won't say I'm necessarily out, but I will say I wouldn't be surprised if the next twist involved a shark and some waterskis. Doc seemed to want to put a label on their relationship or at least make it someone what clearer what they are to each other. He asked Wynonna to admit that she loved him, and by doing so implied that he loved her. On the other hand, the whole thing seems like a typical play out of Wynonna's playbook. When things get messy, or scary, or stressful, she runs off and gets drunk and/or sleeps with inappropriate men. At least this time she made sure it wasn't a revenant first. That being said, I hope hot fireman guy doesn't hang around long. He was pretty but I didn't think his acting was that great and it sticks out because whatever the other faults of the show, I find the acting to be good generally speaking. That being said, on the other hand, I really liked the actor playing Robin and I'm glad he seems to be sticking around. He was great with the kid and seems a really brave good guy, but he still has a mysterious side. He had the green goo around his mouth when they were rescued. What did Bulshar do to him? Why was he coughing up dirt even before that? He and Jeremy are cute together though. I'd also like to add I really liked Doc and Jeremy's talk earlier in the episode. I love that despite being older than the state of Colorado Doc does seem to be quite open minded and not at all judgy. I also really like Mama. I like how much Wynonna is like her. I liked her quest to make up for all the Christmases she missed. I would have liked to have seen a little more friction between the sisters (or at least Waverly) and her over it. She might not have wanted to leave her girls but she wasn't there and they were left with an alcoholic father (who in Waverly's case was only kept from harming her by the threats of Bobo). I would have liked to some airing out of the laundry on that one. The catalyst for some of that could have been the arguing over Christmas "traditions." Because her fault or not she wasn't there for her daughter for a big chunk of their lives and she doesn't really (especially Waverly) know them that well. Perhaps it'll happen just more slowly. I'd also like to see more of her reaction to Waverly and Nicole. Does she feel the same a Wynonna does about Nicole, sort of ambivalent? Does Nicole being a cop and now Sherif bring up stuff for her because of Ward? These certainly didn't all have to be addressed fully this episode but I would have loved them hinted at. I'd also like to know how much Mama knows about the events of the last two seasons. Wynonna told her Wynonna had a daughter, but does she know Willa was alive and is now truly dead at Wynonna's hand? As cute as the WayHaught scene was at the end, I'd rather have some of these other things included in the episode than watch Dom dance around scantily clad. And I say that honestly, as a queer woman for whom WayHaught is a big draw to show. WayHaught moments work when they either both drive the plot forward or are at least character moments. I didn't really think that scene was either. It certainly didn't do anything for the plot and it didn't really do anything to tell us about Waverly or Nicole as characters. The scene in the beginning with Nicole as the elf worked better since it showed how their relationship has grown and how comfortable they are with each other now. Fanservice is fun, but it's kind of like candy, you shouldn't fill up on it and it shouldn't have it instead of your veggies. I feel like we were given a bit a fanservice when we could have had a bit more plot.

There's really only one moment I found overly on the nose and that's when Ron is talking to the Sargent about someone like David Duke getting elected president and Ron seems incredulous at the prospect. It seemed just short of a wink at the camera. The other allusions to today I think were organic and simply stem from the fact the country is pretty screwed up right now and a lot of the same racist rhetoric that was being used in the 70's is back with a vengeance. I mean "America First" was used by the KKK. So none of those parallels are exaggerated. I also thought there was a fair amount of restraint used in how much racism Ron faced. I haven't read the book this was based on (yet) but I think it would have been easy to paint every other cop Ron meets (besides perhaps Flip) as an overt racist. While Landers was especially gross and creepy, I think the movie did a good job showing that most systemic racism was and still is more subtle. The use of the term "Toad" to describe suspects for example. It's dehumanizing and makes them the "other." It's easier to shoot and kill a "toad" than it is to kill a person. Nor does the film, in the end, give an answer to the question on how best to solve the problem of systemic racism from the inside as Ron thinks is the right way, or from the outside as Patrice thinks. I'm honestly not sure the last Spike Lee movie I've watched in its entirety. The 25th Hour is the last one that comes to mind, but I would think there has to be something after that...Regardless, I thought this movie was excellent. I agree that it had the right balance of drama and humor. I actually think it was funnier than most straight comedies I've seen of late. I loved the scenes of all the cops cracking up at Ron on the phone with David Duke, especially the last one. It also did a good job of highlighting how the KKK and other Neo-Nazi groups are both a real danger and kind of a bunch of buffoons at the same time. I mean these are the people who cause riots and mayhem, but they go out and buy Tiki torches first. They are morons, but they are really dangerous morons that are a real threat. And I think this movie did a good job showing that. I also thought the acting was excellent across the board. Washington was great, as was Driver. I even loved the actor who played the Sargent, I thought his reactions to Washington and Driver were great. And I did have to go to IMBD and look up who played Flip's partner because he sounded so much like Steve Buscemi, it turns out it's his brother Michael. I haven't read the book on which the movie is based, but I downloaded on to my kindle when I got home from the theater. I too am interested in learning more about the real Ron Stallworth.

I thought the actual execution (no pun intended) of the scene of Dolls' death was poorly handled, but I did like this episode and I appreciated that they actually let the character grieve on screen in (what I thought were) realistic ways. I like that Wynonna is often a big screw-up and can particularly mean when she's upset (it makes her seem more like a real person to me), so her reaction to Jeremy didn't bother me that much. And I did like their hug at the end at Dolls' grave. The entire funeral scene seemed painfully real to me and I thought the acting was really good from everyone. As was the montage scenes of the wake. I like that they included happy smiling moments as everyone remembered Dolls' life. Waverly actually didn't bother me that much in this episode. Her ranting at the mirror about Nicole being the strong one while Nicole was having a full-on panic attack in the bathroom stall, in the first episode, did. That seemed particularly insensitive. Waverly isn't actually my favorite character, but I do appreciate that's she's supposed to be young and that Gus probably raised her kind of sheltered. That being said, I while she's seriously grown on me (I actively disliked her in the pilot), she still annoys me at times, especially in relation to how she treats Nicole. That being said, I think she was actually trying to be funny and lighten the mood with the "I thought you were normal," comment, but I'd have to re-watch to see if I still have the same interpretation. I second that I really liked Nicole in this episode. It figures that she handled Dolls' death better than anyone, as she is, the cult of Bulshar notwithstanding, the most normal of the bunch. I liked her smackdown Wynonna and her behavior towards Jeremy. I think Wynonna needs someone to tell her when she's being an ass and Waverly is too often a Wynonna apologist and Doc and Wynonna have too much baggage for it, but I think Nicole works nicely in the role. I like the evolution of Wynonna and Nicole's relationship too. It seems that Wynonna has finally accepted Nicole as part of the "family". She doesn't seem as irked by her presence and actually includes her decisions. I'm interested to watch them become friends, especially since we were cheated out of a Nicole/Dolls friendship. And now that Dolls is gone, I think Wynonna really needs a friend. Especially someone she's not related to, or her baby Daddy. I also liked that during the fight Nicole managed not to get severely hurt or knocked out (she was seriously in danger of turning into the Giles of the group). It always kind of annoyed me that a trained police officer was the one who got beaten up when there are civilians around. Wynonna at least trains, but there's really no excuse that Waverly was often shown being better in a fight than Nicole. I did find the whole "leave me out for the vultures" to be more than a little creepy and a bit out of character. I think that scene existed solely for the later scene of Waverly telling Wynnona that Nicole wanted to be "pooped out by vultures," and Wynonna's response of "Hardcore." It was a funny scene, but the earlier one that set it up didn't quite work IMO. And I know I'll that the ton of WayHaught fans that have already GIFed the image, will disagree with me, but I didn't like the hand kiss in that screen either. I get what Nicole (and by extension Emily) was trying to do with that scene, but something about it just didn't work for me. It came off as rather possessive and Waverly looked a little uncomfortable. It seemed to say less, "We're together," and more, "She's mine." I think just calling Waverly "Babe" would have gotten the same point across, or even a quick kiss on the hand or cheek without that glare would have worked better, YMMV.

Not to continue to go off topic, but I did see it and it's, first of all, a pretty terrible film and Johansson is pretty terrible in it, which does her no favors (for better or worse it's easier to forgive some unfortunate implications if the performance is at least good). But also a big issue with the movie is that she is actually an Asain character, her "ghost" or brain was placed in the robotic body that looked liked Johansson...which actually multiples the unfortunate implications in my mind. Her creators could have made her look like anyone and they chose to make her look like a white chick...yeah. Back on topic, I do think the reaction to Johansson being cast was colored by the perception that she's done this before, taken the role that probably should have been played by a minority. I'm not sure that all the criticism was completely fair, but her response really did her no favors. While I think more trans and LGBT actors should play LGBT parts, I don't personally think that a cis or straight person should never play an LGBT character. Like I said earlier I think that especially in the case of trans characters it depends on where in their physical or medical (if there is one) transition they are. I can understand casting a cis actor if a chunk of the story takes place before the character comes out or medically transitions. And I'm not sure if this movie was planning on depicting the character prior to transitions, but the implication in all the articles seemed to imply it focused on the running of the massage parlors after the character had already socially (and perhaps medically) transitioned. So it makes Johansson seem like a poor fit for the role even discounting the unfortunate implications her casting causes for the moment. Even more than cis-washing (I'm not sure if I just made that term up or not) the part, it seems a case of attractive-washing (I'm pretty sure I just made up that one) the part. They cast Johansson because they didn't think anyone would want to watch a movie with someone who actually looked like the person who was depicted looked in real life. Which happens all the time in biopics, but seems exceptionally ickier when casting an attractive cis woman to play a transmasculine part. It seems to say, "it's okay to be trans, but if you kind of still look like a conventionally attractive woman, that would be great."

I don't think Andras is tone deaf enough to not understand how killing off Dolls would come across, but on the other hand, if Shamier wanted out, I'm not sure she had another choice. I think you're right as it was a bunch of different factors that went into the derailment of Dolls character and not just the derailment of his relationship with Wynonna. Part of it was the pregnancy. I'll probably be in the minority in that I liked how the show handled it and actually thought it was one of the few times a show incorporated a real-life pregnancy well. And while they could probably have shot around it since Melanie Scrofano seemed to be one of the lucky few that only gained weight in the midsection while pregnant, I still think it would have been very obvious what they were doing. I actually liked what the pregnancy and the birth of Alice does for the show. The entire storyline gave Scofano a chance to really show off her acting chops (seriously the scene where she gives up the baby is one of a handful of times I've cried at a TV show). It also gives Wynonna a concrete reason to break the curse, so her daughter won't have to be the heir, YMMV. I also think a big part of Dolls' derailment is his absence from the first bit of season 2. Like I said I don't know if the choice was creative or due to circumstance (Shamier has two movies coming out, I wouldn't be surprised if one of them filmed during that time). Even if he was separated from the rest of the team, glimpses of what he was up to would have helped keep the audience connected to his character. But his absence just let other characters come to the forefront and Dolls just didn't quite fit back into place as well as he did before the absence. Now I think a better job could have been done with his character and I was actually looking forward to perhaps he and Nicole doing some investigating into the cult as the first episode seemed to imply they were going to. It would have been nice to see the evolution of Dolls and Nicole becoming friends and partners after his initial reaction to her was to threaten her with treason if she didn't knock on his office door. I don't think Dolls' story needed to revolve around his relationship with Wynonna. And maybe the writers would have found something for Dolls to do this season beyond pine after Wynonna, but if Shamier wanted to leave I can't entirely blame them for writing him off as they did. Though I do agree that there were problems with the execution of that scene that somewhat blunted the impact of Dolls' death. I wonder if something happened during filming because they seemed to be missing (at least) the shot of Dolls falling to the ground dead. And yes, from the things I read, I think his departure is pretty permanent. And I also think that Wynonna is already depressed and certainly already an alcoholic and Dolls' will only further that, not cause it. As a side note, while I'm aware of the somewhat rampant racism (not to mention misogyny, and homophobia) that exists in genre TV and movies, I've never really seen anything in the Wynonna Earp fandom. I'm not saying that it doesn't exist, but I've never seen it. So I wouldn't say the creators "caved" to pressure from the fandom, they just perceived (as I said either rightly or wrongly) that Doc/Wynonna was more popular. And I think the popularity of Doc/Wynonna stems from factors that have nothing to do with the race of the actors, but YMMV and I am very aware that my perspective is somewhat skewed as a white woman.

I'm not going to comment on the race issues because...well I'm incredibly white and don't feel qualified to speak on it. So, divorcing it from the unfortunate implications having to do with race for a moment, in the first season I think Dolls was the second (or at least third, behind Waverly) lead, but I think the show shifted as the creators' perceptions of which characters and pairings were more popular changed. I think that originally Dolls' and Doc's relationship with Wynonna were meant to be reversed with Dolls being the more will-they-won't-they, and Doc being second fiddle. I think that's why Wynonna and Doc wound up knocking boots so fast, as the relationship was not meant to be the more significant one for Wynonna and the writers didn't feel the need for a slow burn. However, I think plans changed after the first season aired and what the powers-that-be perceived (whether rightly or wrongly) to be the more popular characters and the popular pairings. So in the second season, the focus shifted away from Dolls in general (he was absent for a chunk, which I don't know if it was a creative choice or because of circumstances) and definitely away from a Dolls/Wynonna pairing. I think some of the shift in focus to Doc was the unavoidable byproduct of the Wynonna's pregnancy and his being the father. But some of the shift I think was due to the writers thinking that Doc and Wynonna were the more popular pairing amongst fans. That shift left the writers unsure what to do with Dolls as their plans for his character had changed. Which is a pity because I think there was a story to tell with him apart from his relationship with Wynonna. But that being said, given that his character had been underwritten for a while, I can't say I was crushed that he's gone. Nor can I blame Shamier for wanting to leave. I actually think to give him a heroic death is preferable to having him wander around aimlessly in the background, only coming to the forefront when Wynonna needs support. I think the latter has it's own worse unfortunate implications, YMMV. I hardly think Wynonna Earp is a perfect show. Sometimes the special effects are wonky, the story is sometimes a bit muddled and the pacing can be uneven. That being said I do continue to enjoy it for what it is, a usually funny, sometimes dramatic, sometimes legitimately spooky show. I also generally think despite story and pacing problems the acting is generally top-notch (at least from the core cast) and I mostly keep coming back for that. Both Mel and Dom were outstanding (I thought) in the scene with Dolls' body. So I will forgive them their missteps with the character of Dolls and give the writers and Shamier Anderson credit that they realized the character no longer fit and didn't continue to try and pound a square peg in a round hole. *Edited to add* On a completely unrelated note (and super shallow), can I just say that I vastly prefer Nicole's uniform this season to last season (since I can't remember if we caught more than a fleeting glance at last episode). I actually liked that Nicole looked like an actual sheriff's deputy in the first season (even with the kind of dorky hat). And I might be in the minority, but I wasn't overly fond of the "sexy" one she wore last season. It didn't appear to be anything any police department would ever let an employee wear not to mention it didn't seem at all practical for Canadian winters. This season's one is much better an actually looks like it could be an actual uniform without being quite as buttoned up as the one in the first season. I actually think the button down shirt with a few buttons undone is much sexier than the skin tight, deep v thing she had going on last year anyway. And I agree with Wynonna that I like the boots.

YMMV, but I'd find it dumber if she ran around the jungle barefoot was wound up with her feet unscathed. I didn't get the vibe that Claire was being objectified from the first one. She seemed like she was dressed like someone who worked in the corporate world and happened to be dressed for work when everything went to crap. As I said she's not wearing four-inch stilettos. The reaction to how she was dressed, on the other hand, I found very sexist generally. It's not that I think running around in heels is super practical or realistic, it's that there are a hundred other bigger issues with JW and people like to fixate on a tiny aspect of a female character, that I find to be rather sexist. I don't hear a whole lot of commentary on how Owen realistic it would be for an animal behaviorist to also be a former Navy Seal. Especially given Owen's age and how long it takes to become a Seal and how much schooling he would need to become an animal behaviorist working for a major corporation. There are huge nits to be picked with both of these movies, the fact that Claire's footwear is the one that gets brought up the most makes me roll my eyes. I would buy the shot of the boots as a shot at the previous movie's decision makers if they weren't generally the same people in charge of this movie. Trevorrow didn't direct but he was a producer, and I believe involved in the script (or at least the story). I also think it bothers me because it's essentially the same shot that introduced Claire in JW. So the implication is that they are showing how the character is different or has grown from the first one, and I don't know what they were actually trying to say by that, but what I took was, "Hey, look she's smarter this time, no heels." Even if it is meant to be meta-commentary on the first one, I still think it's playing to those people who focused on the issue in the first place. Some of my biggest issues with JW and even more so in this one is the disconnect between what Claire actually does and how she's presented, of which the whole shoe thing is just a symptom. She doesn't generally do stupid things, but she's kind of presented as a character that you assume is going to do stupid things. I didn't mind in the first one as much because it served to subvert expectations about her character. You assume the woman running around in heels in the jungle is going to be useless, but she's not. In this movie, on the other hand, we already know she's not useless or stupid your not subverting anything, you're just telling us what we already know. Which makes it unnecessary in my book at best. It also frustrates me that they wrote at least a potentially (I think the characterization of all character is lacking in these movies) interesting, female character who smart, capable and brave, but they don't actually treat her like she is smart, capable or brave. And yes for the record, I do realize that if you are more comfortable in heels than flats you have shortened your Achilles tendon. That doesn't mean it's uncommon in women who wear heels daily. And as someone who can barely walk in heels on a good day, I still don't think I would want to walk around anywhere in heels that have been converted to flats by breaking the heel off. Depending on how flexible the sole was you'd have to wind up walking on the balls of your feet anyway (or walk with your toes flexed) only without the heel to support you.

That's not really how most high heeled shoes work, they're designed to have a heel. Breaking the heel off would make them more awkward to walk around in, not less, at least in my experience. And walking around barefoot in the jungle or even in the park (where I'm sure there were broken glass and other debris) isn't really an option or at least not a good one . She happened to be wearing heels when all hell broke loose, she kept them on and got around perfectly fine. The fact that it was made such an issue annoys me in general, and I find it more than a little sexist. Who cares what was on her feet? Was it hindering her in any way? Was she whining about them? No, the answer is no. I know plenty of women who wear heels daily and actually find them more comfortable than flats, so Claire being able to run around in heels doesn't seem unrealistic (and the shoes she were wearing weren't exactly four-inch stilettos). Why do the conversations about her have to be about what was on her feet, and not what she did? Why don't we talk about how brave it is to let a T-Rex chase you, rather than she did it in heels? In a movie about dinosaurs running amuck and the government wanting to use dangerous predators as soldiers, a woman running in heels is what is beyond the pale in terms of being unrealistic? I walked out of JW with a ton of nit-picky problems, Claire's shoes were not in the top ten of them. And for the record obviously, Bryce Dallas Howard actually did run in heels (She wasn't CGI in the shot) albeit without the T-Rex, so it's obviously not impossible. The shot of her boots has shades of, "At least she's not dumb enough to wear heels this time," which I found irksome, YMMV. If they were going to address it I would have preferred if Claire herself making a joke, "At least I'm not stuck wearing heels this time, do you have any idea the kind of blisters I got?" or something to that effect.

I think you may be thinking of the first season when Bobo threw the party and poisoned the town. Wynonna and Dolls kissed there, but as Roctavia said it was after Doc had supposedly left town (Though he did come back just in time to witness the kiss) and before Doll revealed himself to be (to quote Wynonna) a tiny super sexy dragon. So that I think leaves the relationships nebulous again. Dolls and Wynonna did have the cuddling in bed scene last season after Wynonna came back from the dead...or never having existed...so definitely nebulous. As I said, I find it rather refreshing that both men seem content to let Wynonna make up her own mind about which one she prefers...or not to make up her mind as it doesn't appear to be happening anytime soon. As a side note, I think that set was the same as the one they use for the Gardner house (the same house they had the vampire party in). I don't think Nedley was so welcoming of his own volition. I think the vampires threw a whammy on pretty much everyone they came into contact with, except Wynonna because of Peacemaker, Dolls because he's a dragon, and Doc because...he's immortal? As soon as Wynonna started to kill them, and the thrall over everyone was broken Nedley was staking vampires too. Like I said I don't think the premier was the best time to have your characters act out of character. I think Dolls may have run-ins with vampires before with black badge, which would explain his knowledge of them. It doesn't really explain how Doc had knowledge of them though, other than he's 130 some-odd years old. Oh good, I thought I might have misremembered the end of season two, but that's my recollection of it as well. There do seem to be promotional photos of Wynonna and Mamma Earp standing outside in a place similar to the one shown in season two, so maybe it was a flash forward farther then we all thought (though the cutting of scene made it appear concurrent with Nicole, Waverly, Jeremy, and Dolls all having a coffee outside just after the events of season two so....).

I think Wynonna's relationship with both of them is still nebulous at best. Though she and Doc share the added connection now of having a daughter together...even if they aren't raising the child. But she also kissed Dolls on the cheek when he took out a revenant so... Though I have always appreciated in the show that both men the "triangle" seem to respect Wynonna and never seem to act like she owes them anything or pushes her to make a choice between the two of them. And while they certainly didn't like each other at first, I think that stemmed how different they are from each other rather than jealousy over Wynonna. I find it refreshing, and I'm glad there isn't a whole lot of angst about who Wynonna will end up with. So I don't think Wynonna is the most enlightened person in the world about sexuality and I think she has a decidedly heteronormative worldview. Her complete cluelessness about even the existence of WayHaught in the first season, when everyone from Aunt Gus to Dolls had already figured it out, certainly shows that. It's obvious that she never entertained the idea that her sister might be attracted to another woman. She also didn't know how to refer to Nicole, when Waverly had to introduce Nicole as her girlfriend and her knee-jerk assumption that Nicole was married to a man when Waverly told her about the marriage in season two. It actually doesn't bother me and I say that as a queer woman. Firstly I think Wynonna is more than a little self-centered, and often doesn't bother to look at the world through any lens but her own and she's straight so she just kind of assumes everyone else is too. And secondly, given when and where she grew up it makes complete sense that she wouldn't be completely enlightened about sexuality. That being said I don't think she's homophobic (Willa very obviously was IMO) by any extent and her missteps stem more from ignorance than malice. I do think Wynonna is sort of ambivalent about Nicole. She doesn't really dislike her but she's not a big fan either. I don't think this has anything to do with the fact Nicole is a woman dating Waverly, but rather that Nicole is a human that is dating Waverly. I think Wynonna is predisposed not to like the person (any person) that Waverly is dating. Part of it is because, I think like many siblings, she doesn't think anyone is good enough for Waverly. I also think another part is that she is jealous of Nicole and Waverly's relationship. I don't think that Wynonna is fond of not being the most important person in Waverly's life. I also think she worries that Waverly's relationship with Nicole will take Waverly away from her. I think she has a big fear that Waverly will abandon her and doesn't realize that Waverly can love her and love someone else too. She showed jealously over their relationship before she even knew it was a relationship in the first season when she sarcastically asked if Nicole was Waverly's best friend now. Now, none this makes her the world's greatest sister, but I do think it makes her an interesting character, YMMV. And I'd like her and Nicole to spend more time together and maybe get to a place where Nicole's relationship with Waverly doesn't threaten Wynonna as much. Their Pussy Willows escapades last season seemed like a good start. So I wasn't blown away by this episode. I do like the idea of other supernatural baddies showing up in Purgatory for Wynonna to kill. But I thought this episode was a bit choppy and I realize part of that was to highlight the effect the vampires had on the town, but I still wasn't a fan. I also kind of felt that way about the second season premiere and I really liked the season overall, so I'm not worried. Though I'm not sure having most of your character act out of character for big sections of the show was the best move as a premiere episode. I don't know about anyone else but I want to see the characters I like again not them acting bizarrely, at least not in the first episode. And It did seem to be filmed differently than either the first or the second season. I don't know if it was a one-off thing once again to highlight the trippiness of the vampires or it's permanent. I'm not sure how I feel about it yet. I'm not sure how I feel about Nicole's apparent connection to the cult of Bulshar either. On the one hand, I like her character and would like to see more of her, on the other I always kind of liked that she managed to be an average person without a dark and twisted backstory and still be an interesting character. And as a side note, how long did they leave the bodies at Pussy Willows? Nicole goes back after the whole vampire party and the bodies are still there, that must have been a bit ripe. I am looking forward to more Mamma Earp. I like the brief interaction between her and Wynonna. It also ties in nicely to Wynonna's fear early in the first season that she was crazy now not only because of her own history of being in and out of mental institutions but also because her (or at least she believed) mother was crazy. Though if she's in jail or a facility how did scene last season of Wynonna talking to her outside happen? Was that in the past, or the future? Was just a production OOPs? I'm looking forward to how the season plays out. The crash was jarring and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens in any case.

Thank God, I thought I was the only one that felt that way. Everything I've heard about what that scene supposedly was, seems less like a character moment for a supporting character and more like just another way for the movie to tell how great Pratt's Owen is. As if those movies need any more of that. He's not only a former Navy Seal, who trains dinosaurs, and rides on motorcycles next to raptors, even lesbians want him...ugh. I wouldn't have minded if maybe Zia had hinted she had a thing for Claire as Howard and Pineda (even in their limited screen time together) had more chemistry than Howard and Pratt did IMO. After seeing pictures of the real-life person, the casting decisions baffles me even more. I can kind of understand casting a cis actor of the same gender the trans character in the project is assigned at birth if the character is supposed to be very early in their transition and maybe not have transitioned medically or physically. As it might be difficult to find a trans actor early in their transition who's comfortable being on film; doesn't necessarily make it right but I can at least understand that argument. But after seeing the images of this person...I can't imagine Johansson is the best person for the role. Hell, it seems that a cis man would be a better fit for the role than Johansson. There's absolutely no reason not to cast a transman in the part.

Not to get off topic, but schiesse definitely literally means shit, but is often used as an exclamation in German in the same context as an American would use f*ck. So it depends on context and if you are literally translating it or going for more of the spirit. Something similar happens in Spanish where the word Puta, which literally means whore, but is often used to mean f*ck. Back on topic, I don't think Bill was 100% sure of who Villanelle was he just was suspicious and stopped her from getting on the train just in case to keep Eve safe. He then started following to see if his hunch was right.

YMMV, I didn't really see her struggling with it, she certainly had her hands on the door in the scene though but she didn't seem to frantically doing anything but screaming to me. She also had no problem popping in and out of those dumbwaiter doors up until that point. They should have set something like up by having one stick earlier so it would be a payoff to a set up instead of, "Of course it sticks the one time it's a life or death situation." As it's presented it's just a callback to original for the sake of having a callback. This movie in generally over used the call backs in my opinion. Some of them worked liked the scenes with the Brontosaurus island as the first dinosaur they encounter and the scene where it assumes the iconic pose it took in the original as it's overwhelmed by the volcano as it highlighted the end of Isla Nubar. They others were mostly just there so you could say, "Hey that looks like that scene from Jurassic Park." I actually didn't mind Maisie speaking with a British accent. She's being raised people with British accents and it didn't appear that she left the estate to go to school. I don't think it's that unusual for those that speak with a British accent to want their children to also speak with one, even if living abroad. Emily Blunt often jokes in interviews how she hates that her daughters have taken to saying "water" in an American accent and how she would prefer them to speak with her accent as opposed to her husband's. So as far as that goes it seems pretty true to life.

I just got back from seeing it and I am firmly on the meh side of the fence. There were things I liked better than JW and things I didn't like. One of the things I continue to dislike about these movies is the disconnect between how Owen's actions are presented and how Claire's actions are presented. I will continue to give these movie's credit that Claire is neither whiney nor ever really the damsel in distress. That being said, Owen's actions are almost always framed in a big damn hero sort of way, which is fine he is the hero of an action movie. Claire, on the other hand, is actually generally more badass and impressive, but her actions aren't often framed that way or at least aren't commented on. Owen jumps between the Rex's teeth to save himself, it's "Did you see that?" Claire climbs up God only knows how far with a hole in her leg to save Owen and the girl and it's never commented on. Also once again children are drawn to Owen despite never seeing him before in their lives and having no reason to think he's more capable than Claire. The girl runs to and hugs Owen instead of Claire (whom she'd at least seen before and knew wanted to save the dinosaurs) when they find her. Not to overly harp on this, but I help teach a sport to small children and in my experience, they don't tend to latch on to men they don't know. If a kid is hurt or scared, they won't come to a male in the class, they will come to me, a woman. I'm sure it's that kids are socialized to see unknown women as less dangerous than men, but my point stands. It just seems like a way to make Owen seem even more heroic without having to have him do anything. Even kids that don't know him can tell he's a hero that will protect them. And on a slightly random note, the close up of Claire's boots (proving she wasn't wearing high heels this time) really irked me for some reason. As if the character was ever presented as stupid enough to run around in high heels in the jungle if she had a choice (it's not like she had time to find new footwear in JW). It would be the equivalent of zooming in on John McClane's feet in Die Hard 2 to show he had shoes on. I'm also not thrilled that Owen is presented as the protagonist when it's really Claire's story that drives the narrative. I couldn't really care less about Owen and Blue. He never really shows that he cares for the animal that much or that his bond with her is any stronger than say a dog (it actually may be less than most people and their dog's) he used to have. The fact that their supposed bond keeps being a plot point is annoying to me. Claire's arc of first seeing the animals as commodities in JW to feeling responsible for them and their existence seems like a more compelling story, or at least it would be if they explored it. The original Jurassic Park was willing to be a bit talkier and let characters have real conversations about the implications of the existence of dinosaurs, these movies just want to get to the explosions and dinosaurs eating people. They only give the briefest of sound bites to make it all seem more philosophical than it really is. Having some downtime between set pieces to have the characters have real conversations would have been nice. I bemoaned that Jurassic World wasn't at all scary like Jurassic Park was, when I first saw it. This one certainly tried to be scarier, but it still didn't manage to invoke any fear or nervousness in me for these characters. It's not because I just don't believe that any of the characters I like will die (though it is true that I don't), I've seen the original probably twenty times and there's still tension in the scene in the kitchen for example despite knowing what happens. I feel those kids' fear of being stalked by the nigh-unstoppable killing machines that are the Raptors. I never felt fear on behalf of any of the characters in either JW or this one. I think it's because they're all just by the number's characters. Chris Pratt is a good actor and I enjoy him, but there's nothing about Owen that sets him apart from any other wise-cracking character Pratt's ever played. He managed to make me feel emotions as Starlord in both in the Guardians movies and Infinity Wars, but there's nothing compelling about Owen. Claire is much the same. I think her character has more potential, but they don't do enough with her to really make me care. There are few character moments for either of them and nothing that particularly endears them to me, outside of them being the "good guys." Grant, Malcolm, Hammond, and even Ellie were interesting compelling character that seemed like real people, I can't say the same for Owen or Claire. This movie also seemed almost completely bloodless compared to Jurassic Park. A man gets his arm ripped off and there a spot of blood on the Indoraptors teeth. Not one drop on the guy who got his arm ripped off or the floor though. I remember there being more blood in JP when the dinos ate someone. There was even the scene where the stream turns red with Nedry's blood IIRC. It seems an odd step back in what can be shown in a PG-13 movie. That being said, I didn't hate the movie. And I did think it did a few things better than JW. Dinosaurs being something that Russian organized crime would be interested in buying seems more plausible than the US Army having a Raptor division like JW seemed to think would happen. The secondary characters I liked better in this one and they were some actual risk to them, though I honestly never felt any fear for them either. The little girl was much less annoying than either of the boys from JW. I'm of two minds about making her a clone, while it does seem to be a natural progression of the technology, it seems such a sharp turn away from what all these movies have been about prior, YMMV. That being said, she looked maybe ten. The original JP was made over twenty years ago, and assuming twenty years have passed in the movie's timeline, how many failed clones were there? If Lockwood and Hammond had a falling out over human cloning it stands to reason Lockwood was trying to clone his daughter over twenty years ago, so why is the girl only ten or so? I did like that it while it as it starts out it seems like it'll be a bit of re-tread of Lost World it really does do it own thing. That being said there was one call back to the original annoyed me. The girl in this one was running away from the Indoraptor and jumps in the dumbwaiter, she then holds the door open and yells for no reason before closing it at the last moment for the Raptor to slam into the door. This is obviously a call back to the kitchen scene in JP, where Lexie holds the door open to the cabinet she's trying to hide in and yells. But in JP she was yelling to distract the Raptor away from her brother, while in this one there is no reason for the girl not to just close the door the second she gets in. Its little things like that, that are the failings of both JW and this movie. They want things that look cool and maybe call back to something iconic, but they don't really think about how that fits into the story they want to tell. Actually, I don't think there's much thought about the story they want to tell at all. It just seems like they throw things that sound cool at a wall and see what sticks. Then sprinkle in just enough JP nostalgia and pseudo-philosophical sounding lines to make it seem like they having something to say, instead of it being a big dumb movie where dinosaurs destroy stuff.

Really? You don't think a show about a woman who wrote, "Because I could not stop for death, he kindly stopped for me," is going to be a knee slapper? Next you'll suggest the Bronte sisters wouldn't be a good for a sitcom with a laugh track.

Well, to be fair she implied Lando wanted more than a close friendship not that there actually was a romantic relationship and I actually found that mildly amusing if only for Qi'ra's reaction to that implication. I think it was pretty clear it was meant as a joke that she was misinterperating his feelings towards her. I don't think L3 was quite to Jar Jar levels but yeah I wasn't a big fan. Like I said treating everything she said as a joke made for a muddy offputting tone. I think after K2SO they were looking for their next funny droid, but K2 would have been funny even if he was a human character, L3's "humor" depended on her droid-ness and it just didn't work by in large. I think mostly because she was the butt of most of the jokes instead using her to poke fun at the rest of the characters like K2 did.

I saw this last night and I overall enjoyed it. I do agree that deep down even the Han of the Orginal Trilogy was a good guy. And it makes total sense that a younger Han would be happier and more optimistic. That being said, I kind of thought that this movie would show us how Han became the grumpy cynical person we all know and love came from. Yes Beckett betrays him (but he expected it) and Qi'ra leaves, but neither of these events seems to "break" Han in any real way. He seems just as happy and optimistic when playing cards with Lando at the end as he did throughout the rest of the movie. I get that in real life that it's rarely one event that makes someone makes someone cynical and world-weary, but when you have a character kind of known for those things it seems odd when telling their origin story, not to show how they got that way. I did like Ehrenreich as Han and I thought he did a good job playing the character without falling into an impersonation of Ford. I also like Clark as Qi'ra and I like the character of Qi'ra. She wasn't the femme fatale I was kind of expecting her to be, but she also wasn't naive in any way. She had the right mix of world-weariness and hope that things might be better (even if not for herself) that I really liked. Her connection to the Sith is certainly interesting and I'm wondering how it connects to the larger Star Wars Universe. I also quite liked that she's not really that similar to Leia so, it makes it clear that Han fell for Leia for Leia and not as some replacement goldfish to his lost love. I have mixed feeling on L3...I feel like the message she was preaching raised interesting ideas that have been largely ignored by the Stars Wars Universe so far, such as are droids fully sentient? Are they slaves to their programming or to humans? But it was treated as a joke by the movie in a way that left me a bit uncomfortable. If you had a character railing against human slavery, would it be treated as "There goes L3 wanting people not to be slaves again, that scamp," like it was in this movie? Anyway YMMV but I thought it didn't fit in with the rest of the tone of the movie and was inappropriately used as a joke. That being said, I enjoyed this movie way more than I thought I would. When I first heard they were making a Solo prequel I wanted no part of it but after Rogue One I softened to the idea, but they re-shoots and I was on the fence again. But this was solid if not spectacular movie that I enjoyed.

I quit OUT quite a while ago (and this weird soft re-boot that is season 7 seems really bizarre to me) but I really loved the first season. I thought that it was actually a genuinely good show with surprisingly mature themes for a show filled with Disney princesses, cheesy special effects notwithstanding. I really liked Emma as a character on her own (and I think Jennifer Morrison is an underrated actress) and like her interactions with other characters, especially her growing friendship with Mary Margaret. I also liked her growing relationship with Henry and her learning to be a mom, and that her "true love" at the end of the season wasn't a romantic partner but rather her son. The second season didn't start that bad but it never really paid off any of the things it raised at the end of the first. How do you now relate to a woman your own age who was your best friend and now is your mom? How do you deal with the dude who broke that same best friend's heart, but now you find out he's your dad? What do those relationships look like? Not paying off those things were really only the start of the decline, then came the "redemption" of Regina. One of the themes of the first season seemed to be that while villains aren't born they are made, people are still responsible for their own actions and decisions. This seemed to be completely thrown out the window and we were expected to forgive Regina for all her sins simply because she said she wasn't evil anymore. She never actually did a single thing I can remember to try and even apologize for the horrible things she did. Even worse the show insisted in later seasons in treating Regina and the Evil Queen as two different people, as if Regina wasn't completely aware of every evil deed she ever did and wasn't responsible for those actions. And you were expected to be on her side and feel bad for her if the other characters didn't instantly forgive or were even skeptical of her. Then some of the hero's actions are treated as just as bad if not worse than Regina's and that's was when I peaced out for the most part. I get that Regina was a fun character. She did have some great lines. I also get that the kid who played Henry was really attached to Lana Parilla who played Regina and the writers decided to use their relationship dynamics in the show. But they ignored the fact that it was completely at odds about what the show was about and the only real way to continue the show was to keep Regina as a villain or kill her off and bring in a new big bad. Honestly, I think OUT would have made a really good miniseries or one season limited series. I'm not sure the initial premise had the legs to last more than one season, it certainly didn't have it to last seven freaking seasons.