I stumbled upon this page while trying to figure out which comic book character to be for Halloween this year. I saw this female Punisher and now I’m kind of thinking this just might be it.

I saw Eat, Pray, Love. I liked it, didn’t love it. I would probably like Scott Pilgrim from what I’ve read and from what my partner told me. And I’m not a gamer, and I’m decidedly not hip. Neither my partner nor I have seen The Expendables, but I wouldn’t rule out seeing it on DVD. We both like when shit blows up real good.

You’re welcome.

By the way, have you seen Eat, Pray, Love? Or The Expendables? Just wondering.

Ed – Well in the largest sense of the word, no story is truely original. Nolan was mining concepts he first explored in Memento and while the movie bears absolutely no resemblance to A Nightmare on Elm Street, a closer cousin might be considered Dreamscape if you’re wanting to pinpoint the similarities with dreaming. If anything, Inception owes a lot to the Wachawski’s for paving a gravel road with The Matrix and making movies like this possible. Still, I’ve never seen The Matrix or anything else command this type of attention from the audience and demand them to keep track of multiple layers of reality all occuring in the same timespace. This is where Inception shines and why it is such an incredible film.

I’ve found this revolving critique of the film: that it’s little more than a brainy Michael Bay movie, to be an absurd one. This is not Transformers on smart pills. (if such a thing even could exist) Bay movies are about the action and everything centers around that. Everything else, even plot, takes a back seat to that one overriding concept: give a balls-to-wall action experience. In Inception, the action is not a set piece, it’s not what the film is about and even moreso, the movie itself isn’t even really interested in the action. Instead, the action becomes a constant driving background force. Nolan turned what is usually front and center pieces into a simple narrative device whose purpose is to become the pulse of increasing tension in the film.

Ed – Totally. I came across it with no byline or credit, so I didn’t know who did it.

Being only an occasional Glee watcher, I didn’t catch the line about Thailand. That’s actually pretty sophisticated. My guess is most viewers wouldn’t even have understood that, not even Glee viewers. I did catch the bit about “she-male.” It wasn’t really a reference to trans-ness per se. It was simply a reference to androgyny, which of course Sue hates.

I agree with you that people sometimes get too sensitive, and these are cases in point. Frankly, I don’t expect TV writers to know anything about trans issues, nor do I expect Jane Lynch to either. They write her as hateful, and as you say, it’s satire. I’m already a little tired of that particular satire because I think good satire is subtle whereas Sue Sylvester is way over the top and thus more parody than satire. But I don’t have a problem with what the character spouts. Sometimes it’s funny, sometimes I think it falls flat, but it doesn’t offend me. There is far worse stuff out there to be offended by.

1. The Bourne Supremacy is listed as number 5. Shouldn’t it be number 1?

2. Death Proof doesn’t even get an honorable mention!?

Ashley – No Deathproof doesn’t get an honorable mention. Everything interesting about that car chase revolved around the girl on the hood.