Aurelio in John Wick. Great supporting role for John Leguizamo. Great supporting character. Could have kept the series just grounded enough. But no, they give him a throwaway cameo, and lean into the Assassin World of Assassins from the Planet of Assassins instead.

Edit: Also Karl Urban's Judge Dredd.

Haha same here!

> I don't buy into the excuse that she was a bad actress because the majority isn't good either. I mean, Jean Claude Van Damme was hardly good. And I don't think Jet Li was great either. But they are given credit for their fight scenes.

For me, it was never about the acting with these types. It was about on-screen presence. Van Damme and Jet Li aren't such great actors, but they sell a larger than life image when they're on screen. I never really got that from Rothrock. She has the moves, but lacks the charisma.

Haha no.

I'm reading a very enjoyable series right now. Each book is great, except for the industry-mandated sex scenes. So I skim those bits.

You should consider more than the all or nothing use case.

That's what I'm talking about! I can respect someone who has the courage of their convictions.

Written language - conveying meaning through abstract symbols - seems to be unique to humanity. If you're not reading, you're just a beast that wears pants. Why even bother?

I disagree.

If it's going to be a detective story with some sex in it, I expect it to lead with exposition, plot points, and character development related to the detective story. I expect the sex scenes to be introduced later, organically, as the story develops. And I expect a story that is presented as a detective story to follow this pattern.

On the other hand, if it's going to be a sex story with some detection in it, I expect it to lead with sex scenes, etc. And I expect it to be presented as a sex story.

I don't think it's judging a book that's presented as a detective story to instead open like a sex story. That's a bait-and-switch, in my opinion. And a weird one, too.

You're confusing a figure of speech for a literal description. Book addiction is seen as good because nobody is talking about literal addiction, when it comes to books. They're talking about a great enthusiasm, that is both healthy and beneficial for the enthusiast. Nobody thinks a literal addiction to books is a good thing. Nobody says that.

I'm curious: Do you find that you struggle with literal versus figurative meanings generally, or is it just that this particular figure of speech slipped past you somehow?

Haha fair enough!

Counterpoint: As my mom once told me when I dropped the good china, "sometimes you have to mean not to."

It's not invaluable. It's valued at ~$1,000.

In hindsight, I feel like most real-world young adult romances are tacked on, even though all the ones I was involved in seemed incredibly central to my life story at the time.

It's because Americans are stupid and wrong, but Europeans are cultured and chic.

I mean it really sucks that you borrowed a rare book documenting some iconic commercial designs, and then lost it. Now none of the other patrons of your library will ever be able to enjoy or benefit from that volume. They'll have to find one of the other increasingly rare copies, or else go without.

Your carelessness is depriving your community of good things. I'm so very much not sorry that paying the fine might not be in your budget. I wish very very much that you had thought about that more carefully before you lost the book.

Also, when you fuck up, it's customary to use language that clearly identifies the actor in the scene. "I lost the book." Not "the book is lost." I'm not asking you to excuse your behavior, but I do wish you'd fully own it.

Depends what you mean by "better". The sequels lean waaay more into the whole Assassin World thing. So if you wanted a lot more about the gold coins and Hitman Hotel and whatever shady organization apparently runs the whole world on that basis, the sequels may be for you.

But no, if you didn't care what happens to John Wick at the end of the first movie, you'll probably not care what happens to him in the second and third movies.

TBH I thought the premise of the second movie was solid, but all that High Table bullshit needed to be thrown in the trash where it belongs.

A Most Wanted Man

> I guess im afraid somewhat of Authority and Acceptance over explaining all the mystery and ambiguity that i loved about Annihilation, and in such a clinical way that robs you of the awe and wonder it left.

You may have some problems with Authority and Acceptance, but this will absolutely not be one of them.

Use bookends to hold books straight so they don't warp.

> Actually a genius postmodern technique

Yes, exactly!

> that illustrates how the stories never actually end. We'll carry them on in our minds and speculate our own ideas of what the ideal ending could've or should've been.

Oh. Never mind.

Generally no, for the same reason I don't read forewords, introductions, or prefaces. I want my relationship with the author to be whatever is in the text itself, not other ideas from outside the text.

A Storm of Swords. The duel between Clegane and Oberyn was the last time I let GRR play Lucy and the Football with me.

I mean being ignored by people you don't like, who don't like you, seems kind of ideal to me.

If you're not getting the energy you want or need from these events, just stop showing up to them.

If you want to spend time with Danny, invite her to events of your own, that you have planned and arranged for the friends you actually get good energy from.

First thing that would happen is someone would make a superhero film.

Here you go:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FastForwardGag

As far as I can tell, the MCU films aren't so much showing market fatigue as creator fatigue.

I would care more if the Oscars actually used consistently meaningful criteria.