Cas Stark

And another year winds down.

OT/I really miss the old ProFootballTalk including the comments section. Whatever reasons they had for both the design change and the killing of comments, there is nothing there anymore, it's like scrolling google news, information wtihout any spark.

A rare occurance, I rewatched The Wolfman w/del toro and a hopkins, which i HATED originally, it still has pacing issues but I liked it a lot more than on my previous viewing. Last Night in Soho. What's this? Something original? Anya TJ, Diana Rigg and the guy who played prince phillip on the crown. It wasn't really scary, but original and interesting. House of Usher. Ugh. Why is it modern?? Why is it about pharma now? I'm sure I will eventually finish it, but I wanted Vincent Price gothic camp. Beckham doc. Loved it.

I liked it, thought it had too much going on for a single episode. The last three episodes definitely better than anything that went before. Lanfear, Moraine&family, Lan, Rand, Siuan, Logain and a couple of others are all very watchable. Not so much for most of the rest.... I'm just not interested in Matt and Perrin. The two women's stories are more interesting, but they are not that interesting on their own. I can always do without the animal deaths. Always.

I thought this was the best episode of the series so far.

I'm not sure we're going to see any break-out stars emerging from this show, the casting is just not that great for the most part. Everyone is mostly 'fine' but there is a serious lack of charisma.

Unbelievable. 4 snaps and he's out, probably for good. I don't even want to say anything quippy about the Jets.

I watched all 4 episodes, so I guess I was wrong that I won't finish season 2. I still think it's extremely weak, but I'm glad fans of the book series are enjoying it. It certainly doesn't enrage me to the level of ROP Galadriel as an unhinged fuckwit, etc. etc. does. A lot of the casting seems, not very good to me. There are only a handful of actors who are GOT level. If everyone was killing it like Alvaro Morte [hitting just the right notes of scenery chewing], I would more easily overlook the choppy story and other issues.

I don't think I will make it through season 2. This show is fucking terrible, worse than I remembered, it's like Zena the Warrior Princess but with a massive budget. It's only saving graces are Rosamund Pike and good production.

Oh Harry, don't ever change. Even in a documentary about military veterans he manages to include footage of Diana's funeral. Lilibet is a dumb name, not quite as dumb as North or some others, but still in the top tier of dumb.

Raise the Red Lantern. I thought it was a rewatch , but turns out I had never seen it. Loved it, though I'm assuming some large part of the symbolism must have gone over my head as an American because I didn't see anything direct or sufficient enough that should have caused the Chinese gov. to ban it when it came out in 1990. That's all I got.

Okay. I don't see any reason to dislike the late queen other than you just dislike the monarchy for whatever reasons. Same for William, what has ever done that is so terrible? He's starting initiatives on homelessness and the environment, seems pretty good use of whatever 'power' he has. That leaves Charles, who is a jerk and is unsuited to the public life that is his birthright, which is too bad for all concerned, and Andrew. But, it's a little disingenious that you keep saying how the royal family is full of liars and terrible people, but narrow the scope down to the 2 worst, Charles and Andrew.

Yes. But my point is that her age is the not issue with the Andrew case. Its a dumb, transparent way people try to score points. Oooh, pedophile, ooh kiddle fiddler. The issues with Andrew is whether 1) he knew or did not know that she had been trafficked and thus would be unable to consent, 2) did he use force. If people in general object to the age of consent in the UK, which is 16, or the US, which is 16 in about 2/3 of the states, then fine, object.

What's the age of consent in the UK again?

I thought it was clear: the monarchy. It may be in hindsight its going to turn out that Andrew should have let the case go to trial, come what may. I will say that when I was 17 I did not consider myself a child

I could turn that around and ask why the need to defend two privileged, rich uninteresting people who have done nothing but complain for ther last 5 years, and why the need to believe on such scant evidence, that Meghan is disliked for being biracial? There are many, many specific actions that the couple have taken which could reasonably lead them to be disliked compared to as I keep saying, a half dozen articles out of thousands. I don't think the monarchy is horrible, it's archaic and benign. The royal family are figure heads, that's it. Okay they have some? small? amount of soft power, which for the most part they use to spotlight charities. I also don't see much evidence that all the royals are 'horrible people' as you keep saying. Charles and Andrew have a lot of baggage, but otherwise? What have Edward, Sophie, Anne, Zara, Princess Margaret's completely low profile children...done to be tagged as horrible liars?

It's the hypocrisy. If you hate the media, especially the British tabloids so much so that you left the UK to 'remove public interest' in your actions, why are you giving any interviews? In the same vein, they cut off her father for ? making money on a tabloid story about his wedding preparations, while they are fine to make tens of millions talking about their own families and don't seem to see a contradiction. There is also the issue that so much of what she has said is untrue.

Right? My god she had Serena Williams on her dumb podcast right around the time she retired and still, everything came back to Meghan. The headlines were nothing about anything Serena said but all about Meghan revealing again more horrors she endured that a heater in Archie's room smoked!!! And the evil royals expected her to continue on with her events that day!!!!

Of course. Differing opinions, not viable. If you don't agree that a half dozen 'racist' stories out of thousands=british press racist, totally, then you are problematic. It's just not possible that any other answer is valid or can even be considered.

Ah, so basically, the handful of stories I ALREADY mentioned. You can do better.

I would imagine that both Meg and Harry were shocked by the impact that Spare had on their popularity. Rather than catapult them into the stratosphere, it somewhat backfired. It did show of course there is still a huge appetite for royal gossip. But it turns out that Harry's own story of jealousy, pettyness and lack of introspection had a negative effect on his numbers. I'd suggest that caused a retrenchment and is the reason why we have not heard so much from Meg lately.

Doesn't talk much? Yes, she's been quiet for the last 5 or so months. But before that, there was Variety, The Cut, op ed in the New York Times, lobbying US Senators, a 6 hour docu-drama and Oprah. There was the book Finding Freedom, which she collaborated on and then lied to the court about it. There are the innumerable stories that come from "friends"...you know, getting your story out there w/out putting your name on it, just like the Royals do. There are the zoom calls to charities and the award speeches and there was her 12 hour podcast. Doesn't talk that much? Come on.

Hmmm. What's the point here? Are you going to try to deplatform anyone who isn't British on this subject, or just me? Is there some minimum number of times visiting the UK on holiday qualifies one to comment on tabloid stoires that are available to anyone with a computer or a phone? Do the visits have to be recent? How recent? How many visits make it acceptable in your opinion to comment? What a weird litmus test for a global story.

Ha. Oh it totally fits. It's not a matter of 'dozens and dozens' of racist articles about Meghan that don't appear to exist, it's the dozens of posts right here on this forum that made it clear posters believe that racism is the primary reason for dislike of Meghan. Doesn't anyone wonder what kind of person would have acted the way Meghan did in the run up to the wedding behind the scenes? Why would you be antagonizing people right and left the way she did?

Isn't 'gaslighting' from the old Ingrid Bergman movie "Gaslight"? It's not new.