TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Chat about non-baseball topics. No political discussions!
Post Reply
User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 30539
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: barely online

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by thrill »

JL21 wrote:The recorded interview thing was a heck of a plot device to show us everyone's state of mind.
I particularly enjoyed Carol's vice president of the PTA act.

Online
User avatar
ghostrunner
GOAT
Posts: 30868
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by ghostrunner »

thrill wrote:
JL21 wrote:The recorded interview thing was a heck of a plot device to show us everyone's state of mind.
I particularly enjoyed Carol's vice president of the PTA act.
And her fumbling with the gun. Not sure it made sense given that they've been watching them for a while.

Alexandria also built their walls backwards, but I'll overlook it.

User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 30539
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: barely online

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by thrill »

ghostrunner wrote:Alexandria also built their walls backwards, but I'll overlook it.
Thank you.

So wrong for so many reasons. Structurally, strategically, safety-wise, etc.

Suppose for a second that, unlikely as it is, those beams are anchored in sunken concrete piers, which is about the only thing that would give them structural value. That would mean that they had access to that much concrete and re-bar. That would mean they transported it in the middle of a zombie swarm. That would mean they knew how to mix, pour and cure concrete. That would mean they had the man power to do it. It also means they were working OUTSIDE of the walls during this long, complicated, labor-intensive process. EVEN if all that is true, support beams are more effective when pushing against force rather than being pulled by it. So they did it the hard way, the dangerous way and the least effective way.

Add on that they provide convenient climbing points of entry and egress for non-zombie threats and it makes zero god damn sense at all.

Vidor
You've just been hit by...VidorSmarm™
Posts: 22956
Joined: June 10 10, 7:50 pm

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by Vidor »

The glorious Alexandra Daddario had one scene in the pilot episode of "Last Man on Earth".

User avatar
stlouie_lipp
Hallelujah Brother
Posts: 13380
Joined: April 17 06, 7:36 pm

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by stlouie_lipp »

Best episode of Better Call Saul yet IMO.

User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 30539
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: barely online

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by thrill »

stlouie_lipp wrote:Best episode of Better Call Saul yet IMO.
Very good, but i'm ready for the full-on Saul Goodman action to pick up. Enough with the sad sack tire spinning and the brother stuff. I'm excited for next week which appears to be the beginning of his relationship with Mike.

User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 32057
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by go birds »

The whole brother story line is wearing thin on me

User avatar
stlouie_lipp
Hallelujah Brother
Posts: 13380
Joined: April 17 06, 7:36 pm

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by stlouie_lipp »

thrill wrote:
stlouie_lipp wrote:Best episode of Better Call Saul yet IMO.
Very good, but i'm ready for the full-on Saul Goodman action to pick up. Enough with the sad sack tire spinning and the brother stuff. I'm excited for next week which appears to be the beginning of his relationship with Mike.
I haven't seen BB, so I don't have that same perspective, but if it means Bob Odenkirk gets to loosen up a bit, which he did last night with a bit more comedy, then I'm all for it.

MrSaigon

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by MrSaigon »

jim wrote:I'm late to the game here, but we bought Mad Men last night and started watching that. 2 episodes in and I really like it. Is the general consensus that it's a pretty good series?
I found it pretty boring and every character unlikable. I liked the ad agency stuff. Didn't like the soap opera outside of it. I think I lasted two and a half seasons or so.

I believe it's still a critical darling though, but something about the pacing of the last couple seasons has sort of damaged the conversation.

Online
User avatar
ghostrunner
GOAT
Posts: 30868
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Re: TV Thread - beware, [expletive] can get spoilery

Post by ghostrunner »

Whichever season it is (5 or 6?) where Don has an affair with Linda Cardellini, that was a low point. I'd say before that and after it's been fine.

Post Reply