FiRE010

Firstly, Harvey Dent is underwritten. At his core, he believes that he needs to make Gotham a better place, to cure it of its corruption, but by the end of the movie, he's become a villain.

However, this is an extreme alteration, and I feel the logical basis behind it isn't particularly compelling.

The primary justification for his alteration seems to be Rachel's death, not his ideology being proven wrong. But here's the problem: I don't understand how much Rachel means to Harvey. They make it clear that he loves her, but the movie doesn't flesh out their relationship to where his alteration is believable.

If there was some compelling context to their relationship, say Harvey Dent struggles to find people he can trust and feel comfortable around. And Rachel is the first person he feels secure around. I think his transition would be more believable, but in its current state, it's underwhelming.

This isn't as important, but one thing the movie goes for is presenting that great struggles and sacrifices are being made to catch the Joker. There are two in particular that I want to focus on.

Firstly, why did Commissioner Gordon have to fake his death? I think Commissioner Gordon faking his death was purposeless, and only done so he would be making a sacrifice too. That and so the audience assumes he's dead for a brief moment.

Secondly, Lucius Fox. Bruce builds a machine for Lucius to use, which is incredibly invasive of personal privacy. I want to discuss how the movie presents this machine. I think you could argue that the movie having this machine is propaganda in favor of utilizing these types of devices. And with the machine playing a significant part in helping Batman defeat the Joker, the movie is relatively optimistic about the benefits this type of machine could provide. However, while I think the film's didacticism relating to the subject is rather uninsightful, I think the film is neither blindly in favor nor entirely against machines like this.

While the device plays a big part in catching the Joker, Lucius Fox condemns the use of the device and quits despite it working. Lucius Fox is generally characterized as morally good; earlier in the movie, refusing to engage with a business he believes may be corrupt. And when Lucius confronts Bruce on the company, Bruce listens to him without question and halts their business relations. On top of that, Bruce states that Lucius is the only one capable of using the machine, and he does this because Bruce doesn't trust himself to use it.

Concerning this machine, the movie conveys that while an invasion of privacy has benefits, it has the potential to be immoral. I don't think the film is propaganda in favor of using this type of machine; the machine is introduced to make the audience think about what kind of actions should be taken against people like the Joker, what countermeasures people can justify under the premise that it's needed to combat people like the Joker.

And Batman, who proposes this idea, isn't strictly the hero in this movie. In the dinner scene between Harvey and Bruce, Harvey discusses Batman. And I think this is what the film is trying to get at: often, those revered as heroes aren't. The winner writes history and all that. In trying to justify the actions of Batman, Harvey talks about how the Romans would suspend democracy, putting one man in power. It is then pointed out that the man they put into power was named Caesar, and he never gave up his power. This is where Bruce differs, he fights for the city, defeating the Joker, but he takes immoral measures to accomplish such. Unlike Caesar, Bruce knows that some of his actions are immoral. Rather than becoming Caesar, Bruce paints Harvey as the hero and himself as the villain because he did things he knows were wrong.

At its core, the movie is trying to represent the vague concept that those fighting evil aren't inherently moral and that immoral actions can be justified in fighting evil you.

This is a solid concept to implement.

However, this concept has already been extensively explored in the Batman mythos, and even though I like this concept, the film entire doesn't resonate with me because I have no emotional investment in the unfolding drama. Because similarly to the other characters in this movie, I don't find Bruce particularly compelling. I struggle to get into the head of his character. And while he's put in some interesting dilemmas, I fail to empathize with his struggles and feelings toward Rachel.

And lastly, the Joker, who is the weakest and strongest aspect of the movie. The strongest because Heath Ledger provides the best performance in this movie; that's nothing new. The weakest because I don't care for how his character is handled. The opening scene is fantastic; I think it's one of the best opening scenes of any movie. It provides an extensive characterization of the Joker while engaging on its own. And the rest of the film doesn't come close. His taking down of the mob is decent, and there are some solid aspects, such as him switching the addresses for the buildings Rachel and Harvey are in, but that's about it, and I mainly took issue with the third act. I wouldn't say I liked the boat scene. The stakes are significantly increased, and the Joker's confidence causes him to leave himself vulnerable.

The movie introduces a trolly problem. With the boats, the dilemma is apparent, either the citizens blow up the criminals or vice versa. Alright, solid start.

My problem is that the way it plays out isn't involving. The debate regarding the morality of the situation is brought up; however, it's not elaborated on. And I think the way the whole situation plays out is rather dull.

On the prisoners' boat, one prisoner takes the detonator and throws it out the window. This follows his stating: "Give it to me, and I'll do what you should've did 10 minutes ago." It's just a random prisoner who by being portrayed intimidatingly, you're made to believe will blow up the other boat, but instead throws away the detonator.

And on the citizens' boat, one citizen has the detonator and is about to blow them up but stops at the last second. And all we get is the statement: "Those men on that boat? They made their choices. They chose to murder and steal." But again, it's not elaborated on further.

So, here's the problem. Everyone on these boats is just random people. I don't have an intimate understanding of any of them. Therefore, I can't get into their heads.

This scene could be significantly improved if, for example, there was a character on these boats we have been given an intimate understanding of. In this case, we would be engaged with their desire for self-preservation and have an investment in whether or not they died. Because in its current state, I don't have an emotional investment in any of these people.

You could also flesh out one of the characters on the boat with this scene in mind. Having a fleshed-out character deal with this dilemma would allow me to understand their thought process in choosing whether or not to activate the detonator.

Because in its current state, I think the people on the boats not blowing each other up comes across as insincerely optimistic. And the people on these ships not blowing each other up defeats the Joker. The Joker was so confident they would blow each other up that he left himself vulnerable.

You may respond that the Joker doesn't care about his own life, and I would agree. However, while Joker is nihilistic, he does have a goal, and he's consistently characterized as smart.

One of my favorite moments in The Killing Joke comic is when Joker has genuine self-doubt. In this comic, the core of Joker's character is a desire to validate his trauma. He experienced a day that was so traumatic that it turned him into this disfigured villain. Joker desires to prove that other people are just like him, that other people would become him if subjected to equivalent trauma. In The Killing Joke, the Joker's self-doubt in his beliefs is moving, and considering the situation the Joker is put in with the boat dilemma; this is the moment I would expect the Joker to experience self-doubt. He left himself vulnerable because of his certainty one of the boats would destroy the other, and the boats not destroying each other could instill self-doubt in the Joker's certainty.

But Joker's characterization here is enigmatic. In this movie, the Joker is unsympathetic. He's just an "agent of chaos." So instead, when his plan with the boats fails, Joker states Harvey Dent is his "ace in the hole."

It's a missed potential not to provide a more compelling portrayal of the Joker, but I also have issues with the Joker using Harvey as his "ace in the hole." Harvey's transition was already forced, but now I'm supposed to believe the Joker would leave himself vulnerable and rely on Harvey changing. I find this behavior illogical that he would do this, making the Joker's defeat incredibly anticlimactic. Again, his portrayal here is unsympathetic, but I think the characterization he gets conflicts with his choices here.

The Joker doesn't have a coherent arc in this movie and feels like a plot device that serves as a vague manifestation of evil rather than a compelling character.

Anyway, I think this movie's passable. I relate to neither those who hate it nor those who love it.

I feel it's a bit difficult to talk about this show, especially in this final season, as it has become increasingly convoluted. However, I think this ending is a mess.

Regarding the entire show, I found it consistently dull. Some novel fantastical concepts were introduced, but the majority were uninterestingly implemented. We also need to talk about the teen romance stuff. Media that explores romantic relationships can be incredibly compelling, but here I thought it was undeservedly overbearing, banal, and convoluted. Often characters would shift their feelings for one another on a whim, predominantly with a vague or nonexistent logical basis for doing so. And when there was a solid logical basis, it was one note.

Also, I thought Moon betraying Eclipsa was incredibly forced. She initially was the only one who had faith in Eclipsa, and once Eclipsa took over, Moon went off doing her own thing, ultimately serving a smaller Kingdom. Eclipsa makes a mistake while trying to protect her daughter, which leaves Moon separated from her family. Later, Eclipsa states she didn't know it would happen and apologizes. While separated, Moon was blissfully unaware, but her actions here are supposedly her getting revenge for this. She's amassed an army, using magic on her subjects, and tries to use them to make Eclipsa surrender. We also find out she was actively trying to trip up Eclipsa. Maybe someone can explain why I'm wrong, but I thought it came out of nowhere.

Also, the idea behind destroying magic and having it be a way to end a toxic family line cycle had potential but needed more focus and significant readjustments. The narrative around this exploration is incredibly bloated. And while the dynamics between some of the characters were potentially very compelling, it doesn't get more interesting than Solaria disapproving of Eclipsa because she fell in love with a monster, which is a rather one-note dynamic. Watching Eclipsa struggle with this rejection has been somewhat compelling, but the dynamic isn't. It could've been more interesting if, for example, I understood why Solaria seems more approving of Eclipsa in death, but it's left vague.

Lastly, and most importantly, the implications of destroying magic feel brushed off to the side. I feel the show glosses over the pros and cons of destroying magic and primarily focuses on the relationship between Star and Marco, which I found dull. On the negative, it shows us that some people will die because they're magic, but it's vague about the extent of this. Hekapoo and Glossaryck seem nonchalant towards the fact they'll die; morally complex characters like Rhombulus die unceremoniously, and the spells, shown to be sentient, are dead. On top of that, with a multiverse full of magic, this would likely be systematically catastrophic. The good is supposed to be that destroying magic ends the toxicity in the rule of Mewni and, in the heat of the moment, heals a few monsters. However, I have to point out that removing magic won't necessarily end toxicity in Mewni. I believe the show is somewhat aware of this; it shows Mina still upholding these beliefs. Destroying magic reduces the power of everyone, not just those who are toxic. I view the destruction of magic as a temporary fix to problems on Mewni, but one that has permanent negative implications for an entire multiverse.

I guess I'm supposed to like it regardless because Star and Marco are finally together and are honest about their feelings, but I don't. Marco is what Star seems to care about, and she's the one who decides to destroy magic. This is incredibly selfish and seems inconsistent with her character. She's consistently empathetic and, throughout the series, has worked to solve the injustices on Mewni, but she's the one who destroys the magic. It is a decision with many implications, made on a whim and with weak justification.

Also, while it wasn't a conscience choice of a character, as Star and Marco don't seem in complete control of their powers, I thought combining Mewni and Earth was just plain dumb. It has more significant implications on top of the existing narrative, and I feel I'm just supposed to ignore these implications completely.

I didn't really care for this final twist.

My understanding of the twist is that the Elliot that we've been with: created Fsociety and planned out "Stage 1" and "Stage 2." He lied to the audience, making it out that Mr. Robot was the one doing all these things to feel like a hero. He was the "rage" personality taking radical action and "the mastermind" behind the plans just mentioned.

Lying can be really engaging and compelling in story-telling. Usually, it's a character lying to another character, but the audience is seeing the situation from the point of view of the character lied to. With Mr. Robot, we see things many things from Elliot's perspective. He's not lying to another character, he's lying directly to the audience, and arguably himself. He has a solid motivation for lying, he wants to make himself out as a hero. This is moderately compelling, and it is the final twist is that finally uncovers the lie. Unfortunately, I don't find it engaging; I think the build-up is poorly done.

Elliot was an unreliable narrator from the show's beginning; he speaks to the audience. The way his multi-personality disorder is presented inherently makes him an unreliable narrator, as well as more minor things, such as his perception of E-Corp as Evil Corp. But now, finding out that Elliot was unreliable in a particularly malicious way towards the audience. It brings everything portrayed from Elliot's perspective into deeper question, as now none of what is portrayed from Elliot's perspective is reliable concerning continuity. Earlier on, the way Elliot was an unreliable narrator felt more grounded. We would experience his struggle with him. We were with him as he went through his delusions from his dissociative identity disorder, but now we find out that his gaps were just sequences he didn't want to show the audience or whatever.

It feels like a cop-out. If I try to criticize parts of the show from Elliot's perspective, there's always the interpretation that: "No, that's not what happened. Elliot was tricking you." There is nothing wrong with ambiguity, but in most cases, the setup implies the payoff. With how the ambiguity is utilized with this twist, it doesn't.

From a story perspective; I think it's a bad idea to have ambiguity like this on such a wide scale, especially for a twist. And it makes the show makes any attempts to uncover this lie nearly impossible. This is because I feel the show was inadequate in providing setups that fell outside of its ambiguity. I found the final twist cheaply unpredictable regarding certain specifics. And it made the twist feel like it existed despite the rest of the show. I think this type of twist would've worked better in a movie, where the build-up to it could've been better polished. I've heard Mr. Robot was initially planned to be a movie, and unfortunately being a rather convoluted television show, made it cheaply unpredictable.

I thought it was apparent they would expand on the multi-personal disorder somehow. At one point, Elliot questions if Tyrell Wellick is just another personality of his, and more blatantly, and in hindsight, outside of ambiguity, the ending of 402. The specifics, though, feel entirely out of the left field.

I feel many "setups" for the twist, such as Angela handing Elliot a key and saying: "Elliot, you are the-" and it cutting out in 104, just to be reincorporated in the finale as: "Elliot, you are the mastermind." My problem, if not obvious, is Angela could've just said anything like: "Elliot, you are the coolest person in the world." Stuff like this doesn't signify anything. One of the only things I can think of that definitively does is the hallucination sequence in which the scene mentioned prior takes place. This sequence supposedly represents the world the "real Elliot" is trapped in. However, I think that concluding what we find out this hallucination is supposed to represent is entirely out of left field.

There are things that are correctly recontextualized where they undoubtedly signify something, such as the meetings between Mr. Robot and the other personalities in 409. This clearly signifies that Elliot is a created personality, but doesn't signify how exactly our Elliot is tricking the audience. I feel some parts allude to how Elliot is tricking us, such as the end of 406, where we have Mr. Robot musing: "What if Elliot isn't the hero?" but overall, I felt that aspect of the twist was utterly unpredictable. I think too much information is withheld from the audience to figure out the ending.

I also found situations like these incredibly disjointed. They end up being one of many in the show that is perceived as cryptic when first viewed. This is important to note. Your brain treats information and problems with one of two systems. System 1 is fast thinking; it's a reflexive way of thinking through a situation. When your brain operates in this state, what it experiences is stored in short-term memory. This is done mostly for repetitive tasks. Say you take out the garbage. Unless something particularly unique occurs, you'll never remember it; it takes little thinking. It relies on long-term memory from when you learned to take out the garbage. System 2 is slow thinking when you are presented with new problems to solve, which is more likely to be placed in long-term memory. Unfortunately, many situations in the show are cryptic or vague, and a sizable percentage of them had no significance in the first place or stay undefined. Because of this I inadvertently trained my brain to use System 1 for these sequences, and I engaged with these sequences that set up the final twist in the same way I learned to with the others. To put them into the backlog of my mind, potentially completely forgetting them and hoping they will be explained later. I was never encouraged to engage with them otherwise. I feel the best path to improve this seems simple: Don't make a lot of elements of your story cryptic outside of stuff that sets up your twist, so its importance is properly signified. But, how Mr. Robot is done, fails to engage me.

I stated that I feel like the twist exists despite the show. The stuff mentioned with Elliot is one of these reasons, but ultimately the stuff with Elliot would be fine if the other characters were written around this twist...I don't feel any characters are written for this twist. Many characters feel like they only exist so that people around Elliot have died, such as Trenton, Mobley, Angela, Tyrell, Cisco, etc. These characters feel like they are just needed for a checklist of people dying, and these characters could be applied to a myriad of other tragic stories. They are not explicitly written for the twist. Also, Whiterose initially feels like she's written to reflect Elliot and Mr. Robot's dynamic in the earlier seasons. Yet, in the later seasons, with stuff such as the backstory she receives, all feel to be written so that the fakeout of her machine is initially believable. And Darlene: In the final episode, we find out that Darlene knew the entire time that our Elliot wasn't the "real Elliot." My main issue is that Darlene struggled with many personal problems, none of which I felt were explored, though likely they just couldn't, so a twist such as this could work, but ultimately her issues are vaguely coped with. The twist recontextualizes her character to that she had multiple things she was already struggling with, but knowing our Elliot wasn't the real one was another one of these. The twist simply adds one more layer to her checklist of personal struggles. I don't feel anything we are shown with her character before the twist is specific for the twist.

The entire appeal of mystery stories is being given pieces of information, but only enough to maybe figure out what was happening. Then an aspect of the information you likely overlooked is pointed out to you, or the pieces of information are put together in a way you didn't expect. It's engaging because you're provided a puzzle to solve, and to predict it beforehand you would have to put the pieces together by yourself. However, Mr. Robot is either too convoluted for me to identify all the pieces, or vital pieces are completely withheld, making it impossible to definitively predict. And ultimately, I feel this twist ended up going more for shock value than being compelling, and I have to question if many of those who like it have hindsight bias.

Here's some dialogue

Do you see this writing?

Do you know what it means?

Hospitality.

And you can't Piss on hospitality.

I WON'T ALLOW IT!

• What are you going to do to me, daddy?

Tightening my belt by one loop, so I don't feel hunger pains.

And your sister and mother will have to do likewise.

It's funnier in context and execution, but this is the sort of dialogue you are going to get throughout this movie, and it is legendary. I don't think that I have ever laughed at a movie as much as when watching this. Strangely an absolute must see.

The first 3 minutes between Steven and Connie are great. The rest is meh. It's not horrible, and I don't seem to dislike Mayor Dewey as much as most, but this episode has no real point outside of the first 3 minutes and therefore ends up being really dull.

I just want to say this is the funniest thing I may have ever seen. This game is beyond unfinished. Who in their right mind thought this was acceptable to release.

Entertaining and beautifully animated duel.

All in all, this episode was really enjoyable to watch. Not an amazing story but a solid one. This show isn't serialized, so these are the kind of episodes I hope we get more of. Excited to see if we get more such as this.

Very rarely does a character death tear me up inside for years after I watch it. The death of Fives still tears me up inside. His death does an excellent job at providing a deep sense of injustice. He dies not for reasons of his own fault, but simply because he was loopy. All along he was right, and just no one would take him completely seriously. It cleverly uses the Star Wars lore to execute this plot line, and as I've said I feel the strong emotions it ignites and the uniqueness of it leaves a mighty strong impression.

"Pilot" is incredibly engaging, partially in thanks to the exhilarating starting scene that comes together at the end, but with almost every scene already being engaging this is just the cherry on top.

As well, the episode does an excellent job at meticulously crafting a starting point for Walt's character in preparation the journey he is about to embark on. Throughout the episode it portrays specific concepts, such as what a meth raid looks like, and introduces these ideas to Walt and in extension the audience. Every bit of information introduced in this Pilot does not go unutilized, every little element has a purpose for its introduction.

Honestly, there is nothing bad about this Pilot, other than one or two weaker scenes, it is an incredibly captivating beginning to a masterpiece.

I do not get what makes this show great to certain. I have to admit I find it to be an entertaining show. Many of the fight scenes are very entertaining; they are probably the strongest part of the show, and the best of them are well thought out. Though I do, I feel the fight scenes are almost entirely barren regarding emotional tension.

Also, The set design and the VFX are, for the most part, excellent, and the level of polish and detail makes the universe feel genuine; it feels like Star Wars. To some extent, they were able to recapture the feel of the Star Wars Universe, but I find almost every other element to be underwhelming.

For me, the acting is all over the place in terms of quality. The actor playing "Mando" (Pedro Pascal) is consistently excellent, but the guest actors are inconsistent. Of course, some of them are excellent such as Giancarlo Esposito, playing Moff Gideon. However, scenes with weak side actors speaking with an excellently acted lead are consistently jarring with the apparent contrast between them.

Also, the costume design is a mixed bag as well. The main character design is excellent, but many of the aliens look bad. Ahsoka Tano's design is a consistent distraction, which can be said for many of the others. They use CGI for Luke and Grogu, which seems to be what people mostly complain about. This can also be distracting, but I do not think it is that egregious.

But where the show truly struggles is in its plot and characters. None of its characters are interesting or go through solid arcs, and the overarching plot is not elaborate. You could easily reorder the occurrence of many of the show's episodes, and it would not change a thing. Many shows have multiple moving pieces they have to handle in unison, and there is impressive attention to detail in these shows, but the Mandalorian lacks any resemblance to this.

By the end of Season 2, I felt that none of the characters had any apparent changes. The journey should've changed Mando, but they barely flesh out his character, and he has no arc. He has a solid character motivation. That being to escort Grogu so that he can avoid the war-torn childhood Mando had to endure, but his character receives no depth besides that. Mando is the protagonist, he is the one the audience is supposed to see from the viewpoint of, and you are trying to portray a journey; not having his character be dynamic through having an arc greatly weakens this.

Let me provide an example of a show that provides an incredibly complex character arc, Breaking Bad. Walter's character receives a clear starting point, many middle points, and a drastically different and explicitly shown endpoint. His character consistently changes over time, and we are shown and explained why it changes throughout the show.

My point is, with Mando, we get nothing like this; they do not show him changing over time, or how his character has changed by the end of the show because they didn't flesh out a proper starting point for his character arc yet they attempt to treat him as such. The ending scene of season 2 has many declaring that it brought them to tears, yet I do not empathize with Mando's character because of his lack of development. I admittedly think many were brought to tears by the somber music that played, but for me, I found it incredibly manipulative. This music potentially gets you to tear up whether you were watching the show or not.

Secondly, Grogu is one-note. We know nothing about him. We know he is force sensitive and of the same species as Yoda (I guess), but that is about the end of it. As far as I am aware, the only depth we get for him is one of your own conjecture. Akin to Grogu, every other new character in the Mandalorian is simply a "character," as they have no depth whatsoever. We get a lot of one-off-side characters, but unless they come from the pre-established Star Wars universe, they have no depth. However, they fail when attempting to use pre-established characters.

The old characters they bring back (Ahsoka Tano, Boba Fett, Luke Skywalker, etc.). Have depth and have gone through arcs in other Star Wars media, but never in the show do they utilize this depth. There are no character-specific moments that are interesting. There are subtle fan service moments, such as the Darksaber and Boba getting Mando to let him keep the armor because his father was a Mandalorian. However, still, nothing is displayed that is particularly interesting or requires effort in writing. I feel like they just played it incredibly safe and is duller for it.

As much as I dislike Star Wars Rebels, I cannot deny that I feel they had some well-written fan service in that show. They provided some subtext-heavy moments, such as the duel between Maul and Obi-Wan. This scene from Star Wars Rebels executes a cathartic and solid ending for a long-running character arc in the Star Wars universe. The Mandalorian lacks any resemblance to this, and as a result, the inclusions of these characters feel contrived and pointless.

Conclusion - Unfortunately, I do not find the show to be anything spectacular regarding the story or the characters. I enjoyed it nevertheless because of its entertainment value, and I can understand why many like it because, to some extent, it captures the genuine of the Star Wars Universe. However, I do not think it is worthy of its praise.

Hi, I'm a two-dimensional character who isn't interesting in any way, shape, or form. Anyway, we need to take this spice to a crime syndicate otherwise they're probably going to kill us. I have an idea, for no reason whatsoever, other than the script needs me to, I'm going to dump the spice into space like the two-dimensional lifeless character that I am.

I think Breaking Bad is the best show I've seen, but I nevertheless have mixed feelings about this episode.

I want to start with that I find this episode to be one of the most distinctive episodes of Breaking Bad, and it is very memorable because of this. I respect that they made this episode due to going over budget, and I don't think it's necessarily the worst episode of the show. They could have done so much worse, but there was some love and care put into this episode.

I like that this episode does an excellent job of portraying how dedicated Walter is to his craft in how he is incredibly concerned with a fly. At the same time, his competitors wouldn't care about stuff much more significant, it's accurate to his character, and I can respect the general concept.

The highlight of the episode is the moving conversation between Jesse and Walt. Jesse discusses his aunt and her struggles through cancer, Walt talks about Jane, and Walt describes what he feels was the perfect moment for him to die. This is scene is moving and is a great moment between the two, and I'm glad that it transpired. The main issue I have with this episode is how much of it isn't that conversation; throughout most of the episode, very little happens.

The cinematography is excellent at specific points in the episode, there are some memorable shots, but most of this episode was a bit of a bore.

I know some liked the humor of Walt chasing around the fly comically, but I found it to be a bit of a tonal whiplash. Breaking Bad, as a whole, keeps a consistently serious and grounded tone. Yet, a lot of Walter chasing the fly felt "cartoony," it simply felt out of place, especially considering Walter is usually the show's most serious/intelligent character. He does switch to using more logical means to take care of the fly, but it alone felt off. The humor contained in the banter between Jesse and Walter is good, though.

Again, I respect the concept and the brief scene with moving dialogue, but for me, it wasn't enough to hold up a 45-minute episode. This is partly due to the interaction between Walt and Jesse. But also, while I feel the episode itself provided tonal whiplash, I think it adds tonal potency in building towards the penultimate episodes that follow.

Gonna keep this short, but overall this is a good game. It has a lot of unique/well designed locations, and the gun-play is really great. I encountered some frustrating glitches that cost me, over the course of my play through, about 3 hours of progress, but it's a Bethesda game, so it's expected. The biggest issue with it is the story and RPG mechanics, there just not great. There are many issues with them, and it lacks what the older fallouts provided.

I'm giving it an 7 because honestly I got a lot of enjoyment out of the game, it was a lot of fun, and kept me thoroughly engaged from beginning to end. It had the feeling of exploring an open world game, and I would say that the exploration aspect is really where this game shines. In regards to the exploration it isn't as great as some I've played, but I still found it to be very enjoyable.

Unlike the last one, I ended up enjoying this episode a bit. Neither the A nor B plot was terrible, but they weren't really good either. I definitely enjoyed the slower pacing of this episode to an extent. And luckily a few of the jokes on both plots landed, though, in the latter half of the episode in the Beth, Jerry, and Rick plot, the running joke began to get repetitive. Also, the plot with Morty and Summer trying to get a new kid to be their friend, before he realized they "weren't cool", started out promising, and while a few jokes hit, a lot of them, like the subplot with the car, had their moments but were mostly unenjoyable.

Actually, that's how I would describe the whole episode, it had some good moments, but was mostly unenjoyable. Unfortunately, a low point for Rick and Morty.

Going back to the main plot of Rick and Morty, this episode features Rick going into the mind of Bird Person to resurrect him. It's not anything spectacular when it comes to serialization, but it ended up, for me, being one of the most enjoyable of the season thus far. Also, unlike most of the other episodes this season, the jokes of this episode actually landed for me, there were a few actual well-thought-out jokes. Not to mention this episode is definitely a peak in the visuals department. The pacing was still a bit jarring, but again it's a significant improvement to most other episodes this season.

A unique premise presented in a non-linear film; is structured in a way that comes together clearly, and provides an unpredictable twist that leaves every character involved in a moral grey area.

Everything about this movie ranges from great to excellent. I don't know what more could you ask for.

The plot of the episode is simple. Muscle Man has bald spot so he takes off his shirt and starts flexing to distract Starla. Unfortunately, that's all there is to this episode.

I simply don't get any enjoyment from watching this episode, it's just not funny to me, and ends up being bizarre and irritating.

This episode is just spectacular. Gus Fring's death is excellent, it's a revenge story akin to his own in "Salud". Also, can I just mention how incredibly good the combination of makeup work and VFX look on Gus Fring; the scene where he walks out and straightens his tie is absolute perfection. Throughout the episode it seemed like a game of checkers was afoot, but it turns out the whole time Walter was playing chess. This is potentially one of the most riveting hours of television you could watch.

Seriously this feels like something a child could write. The story isn't anything interesting, the visuals aren't anything interesting. It's just a lazy movie, because you know, even if it was horrible, they would still make bathtubs full of money from it. The only way I could possibly enjoy this is if I just watched it completely zoned out, but still it would just be a waste of my time.

An incredibly cryptic episode. It does a great job at creating interest, which leads it to be heavily engaging, and the mystery ends up being really enjoyable. The ending is left up to your own interpretation, but honestly, this is Adventure Time at its best, just being incredibly creative and wacky.

An incredibly cathartic ending. Every element receives proper setup, from Walt poisoning Lydia with ricin, which has been part of the series since early Season 2. To him getting Elliot and Gretchen to give Walt Jr. The money, an idea he inferably got the inspiration for from Mike.

The scene where Jesse points the gun at Walt only to realize Walt has already been shot is excellent. No words need to be said, and no sad music needs to be played; this scene has a lot of weight to it, and you can feel how Jesse feels without any dialogue.

There's also the moment when Walt admits to Skylar that he went on his whole crusade because he was "good at it." I found this quite impactful. We learned in "Fly" about Walt's perfect moment to die, but I loved watching his character grow, especially in these final two seasons. Going from the stance stated previously to, as I saw it, what he truly desired. This is not only really good at humanizing Walter but also well handled in how it played out narratively, with Gray Matter having been a part of the show from the beginning.

In the end, Walter ends up dying peacefully, and we know that what he initially set out to do, provide for his family, he accomplished with flying colors. Certain elements are ambiguous, but unlike some shows, it makes it crystal clear how things will play out. On a side note, while I found it unnecessary, I enjoyed El Camino.

Breaking Bad's ending covers a lot of ground in a relatively short period, but the episode as a whole often lingers. This is because it was really well thought out, and they could heavily rely on the actors' performances. I feel this allows the conclusion not to feel rushed. Ozymandias is the climax of the series, and Felina and Granite Slate are the resolutions. These two episodes function well in wrapping everything up.

While not necessarily my favorite of the finales I've seen, this is an engaging and cathartic end for the show.

However, I feel some may feel that's a bad thing because they feel that the show is pandering to its audience. This would be because Season 5 is the point where the viewer will likely begin to start rooting against Walter but still root for his family. So Walt dying, the contrived machine gun scene that leads to his death, and Walt's family getting the money could be considered pandering. However, they kill off Hank, and the ending for Jesse is rather bittersweet. So, I think it's overall satisfying and doesn't exceed being mildly pandering.

I'm going back to The Ricklantis Mixup. This episode was just painful to watch. This is one of the few television episodes where I can say: you're better off if you don't watch this. I'm sorry if you like this, but to me I felt this episode was completely tasteless. All I need to say about it is "incest baby". Also, usually with Rick and Morty I can at least enjoy the pacing of the episode, but here I felt the pacing was incredibly unsatisfactory/jarring.

This episode more openly proposes the possibility that the Diamonds shattered Pink (more specifically, Yellow), this is plausible under the fact that Yellow Diamond was so willing to move on from the shattering of Pink in That Will be All. Obviously this Is wrong, but I view it as well-written misdirection. In the end, Yellow only wanted to move on to keep up their "perfect empire", but this could, and most likely does-come across as her only moving on only because she was potentially responsible, in contrast to Blue, who refuses to move on. This is also supported as Yellow is the one who is upset by Zircon's proposition and not Blue.

The honest truth is that I avoided the internet in relation to this show, and so I didn't find the twist to be predictable, and I think the build-up to it was excellent (Which is probably why some people could predict it.) Also, I first watched this show after Change your Mind had aired, so I just was taken for a ride (unlike people who watched on release who had to deal with hiatuses), and felt that episodes, like the Trial, would constantly warp what the possibilities would be, but with all the half-truths combined(which is shown at the beginning of A Single Pale Rose) this is what makes the most sense. This twist warps the entire plot of the show up to this point. Also, the effects of it, are applicable to almost every main character in the show all in very drastic ways, and all of which are explored.

Examples Pearl - Rose's Scabbard now has a deeper and more sentimental meaning to it, that she was the only one that knew Rose's greatest secret, so her keeping the lion left for Steven from her is upsetting to her. A lot of details like Pearl covering her mouth in some instances, and not wanting to shape-shift, now also have more meaning to them. Sworn to the Sword also means more, as she was fully dedicated to Rose, because serving Rose was all she knew as her Pearl, and due to that, the only thing she wanted to do was to do anything to make her happy. This is unlike what we are meant to believe of her being an ownerless Pearl. This also makes Peridot commenting that Pearl is a "fancy one too" make more sense.

Bismuth has a deeper meaning to it, as Bismuth states, she essentially came up to Rose and wanted to shatter her alter ego. Therefore, she bubbled Bismuth away in order to prevent Bismuth from taking it too far, and took the advice into her own hands and faked what was proposed. Also, she wouldn't unbubble Bismuth, as Bismuth learning that she had come to shatter Pink, even though she entrapped her for proposing that, would of you know, upset her. She had to keep the fact she was Pink Diamond a secret because if she told her rebellion that she was the enemy leader, they might turn on her. Also, the reason the rebellion followed Rose in the first place was that she represented a symbol of independence from a gem's original purpose. If she revealed she was a Diamond separating herself from the Authority for seemingly selfish reasons, the rebellion would have never followed her. This is why Amethyst and Garnet would never have been told, but Pearl could know because as I mentioned she was solely dedicated to Rose, but Rose manipulated her into being physically forced not to tell anyone.

I think this is by far the best route they could have taken with this plot twist as it has more of an impact than something like, you know Yellow Diamond shattered Pink. This would have essentially no impact on any of the characters. Yes, it would make sense, and could potentially be shocking, but it would not provide an emotional impact on any of the characters. If Yellow shattered Pink, then yes, Rose was framed, and there was no reason for Steven to be doubting why he exists. But her being Pink means that everything they have thought was wrong and that while she didn't shatter anybody, what she did was arguably worse. This still keeps a moral dilemma on Rose, that would have been shattered(ha) in some of the other directions, they could have taken, as well as the added depth I mentioned above.

I know some people think it was tacked on, I just cannot agree. I feel that the plot and a lot of character arcs come together in unison with the twist, my only conclusion is that some people are being reactionary.

It wasn't planned ______________________________________________________ I've heard people be disappointed by that the twist was just something they stole from a fan theory. They didn't plan to use this twist they just took the fan theory and rolled with it. I disagree, there is just a multitude of small world elements and details that foreshadow and are written to the twist. Along with the above information I'll just give two examples of small details of foreshadowing that I know. Only two for the sake of length.

In "Space Race" Season 1 Episode 28 on Pearl space suit is a symbol of a pink diamond. As she states in the episode the idea of building a rocket hadn't come to her mind before. So, the last time she would of ever utilized the suit was when she was under Pink Diamond.

In "Say, Uncle" (Which I don't like) after Steven is upset by his gem not functioning, Uncle Grandpa takes a look at Steven's gem. He then proceeds to tell him that he should polish it twice a year. All I'm going to say is do a quick google search of "How often should you polish a Diamond". I would encourage you to look it up yourself. Here is a quote from an article talking about Diamond Rings "We highly recommend that you get your ring cleaned and inspected by a professional every 6 months." For the record, there are multiple sources saying the same thing.

This movie was just straight-up painful to watch, with so many stupid scenes. The constant bathos and unearned character moments made me sick. It feels so on the nose the entire running time, and the plot is just completely absurd. This just felt like a bad joke.