Also, he does have the pouch around his neck that he's pawing. It's just that, since they don't do internal monologues, his reason for doing so isn't obvious.
For it to be plagiarism, it would have to be unauthorized and uncredited. Since Ricky Gervais is credited, and an Executive producer, it readily acknoledges it's source material.
It may be copied, derivative, similar or a knockoff, but it is not plagiarized.
The thing is, Robert California is the explanation.
How did the impotence meeting happen? They pretty much bring it up during the meeting ... Toby has been beaten down so much at this point that he doesn't even care anymore. It's a bit of a case of the show sort of going constantly having to push itself further, but considering the characters have (mostly) all been there the whole time, it's been a slow and steady change instead of a massive shift.
As for siding with Nellie, it was Angela that sided with Nellie. The person that didn't exactly have the best relationship with Andy, and is pretty much a bitch to most people. (Also, Nellie had been handing out raises to everyone in an earlier episode).
Most of the rest of the office workers were going the non-confrontation route. They just wanted to stand aside and let thing work themselves out. This has been a trait that a lot of them have shown in the past. Specifically, ever since the introduction of Robert California's wife, it's been revealed that his ability to make people do something without asking is a side effect of him being extremely conflict averse, and not wanting to actually tell people what to do.
The people involved are weirdos. Robert California is some kind of crazy person that just sort of took over a company through sheer personality, but no one really bothered to figure out it was a crazy person doing it. At this point, with the CEO being a crazy person, and the office being filled with a bunch of people that are used to Micheal Scott randomly holding meetings that have inappropriate subject matter (and put up with it because it's an excuse to not work), it's not that far out of the realm of possibility.
The show has steadilly become more and more whacky and farcical, but within the world it inhabits, it follows it's own logic.
Although it did fit into the recurring theme of Annie crushing on Abed when he's "in character".
And, it's probably not that he dislikes Britta but instead:
A) He doesn't want to 'lose' Troy to her
B) He is reflecting the groups agreement that Britta is the 'worst'
C) His way of portraying each member of the group 'in simulation', is by reducing them to one or two dimensional "TV characters", and Britta is sort of the designated Butt Monkey of the group at this point
At least a "What's Up With the Hunt For the Worst Movie of All Time?" would let us know what is happening.
Also, Eat, Pray, Love is still shitty is syndication.
"...in the context of environmental policy, the term climate change has become synonymous with anthropogenic global warming. Within scientific journals, global warming refers to surface temperature increases while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas levels will affect."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change
So yeah, climate change emcompasses and includes global warning, but it includes more than 'just' global warming, and thus is a better view of the negative effects of polution, etc. Also, it works better from a branding perspective, because it's harder for idiots to say "there is lots of snow so no global warming".
Apparently, they are looking into past (i.e. like prehistoric) seismic activity, and there is a connection between melting glaciers and volcanic activity. As the glaciers melt, a ton of weight comes off the Earth's crust, and that, in turn, causes some seismic activity.
So, it's unlikely to be the cause of that Tsunami, but as glaciers melt, there will likely be an increase in earthquakes, and other seismic activity.
"We’re all for clean energy, but right now the tech cannot compete with fossil fuels in the market."
See, it would be easier to compete with fossil fuels if those fossil fuels didn't get subsidized. Part of the reason there is a gap in profitability is that the infrastructure is already in place for fossil fuels, but not for green energy. It actually makes sense to subsidize start ups. It creates jobs too, and once the infrastructure is in place, it becomes cheaper over time. Research, and build up of infrastructure are the more costly parts. If the government wants to give money to 'job creators', helping them create new businesses is more effective than just letting the oil industry keep more of the money they are making already.
As for gas prices ... it isn't directly tied to the price of oil, and the cost of oil is based much more on the speculation market than on the ammount being pumped out of the ground. Increasing the supply of oil doesn't bring down prices. So while there would be jobs created by the oil priceline, it isn't going to change the price of gas.
Ultimately, the problem is that any real attempt a fixing stuff through the government involves going through the government. So they can never get rid of oil subsidies (since it's "technically" a tax increase. They can't really help the green sector, since fossil fuels with always end up with more money in subsidies. So, ultimately, the status quo has the government making sure they are more profitable than companies that are already at a disadvantage because of natural barriers to entry.
The argument that it's just not possible now is never really going to change. Existing businesses have a natural advantage against any start up, and government policy rewards the establishment while raising the barriers for new companies to be created.
It will be interesting to see what happens in later seasons. The way the book dealt with having so many people is to eventually split up the characters so that two books happen simultaneously (for the most part). The books also get bigger up until that point, so it's possible that stuff may end up being cut over time.
I think I may have noticed the first 'omition', as there was no mention of Stannis' daughter (and seemed to imply there was none). Admitedly, I don't think it would be much of a loss if she's cut, but it does seem they are making some trims to keep things from getting too bloated.
Also, compared to the books, I think the fact that the actors, and locations, are so solid, it's easier to jump into these new places and get an instant feel. In the books, it often takes a few chapters to get a good feel for the new character and/or locale, but with a visual medium, you can cut to the chase (not to mention a ton of detail that would normally be written in flowery prose can be shown in a single panning shot).
The look also says that Bronn has pretty much summed up his entire character in that one line. While he just got rid of someone that was bought and paid for, he just replaced him with a guy who is arguably worse. Janos was loyal for what he was already given, while Bronn expects to keep getting paid.
The thing is:
They saw what 30 Rock did opposite Big Bang Theory.
They saw what Community did when Big Bang Theory didn't have new episodes a few weeks.
They know what the ratings are for all their other shows.
Either accept that the 8PM slot is going to get lower ratings, or move Community to a different timeslot. Hell, it may be better to keep it in the 8PM slot and just ignore the ratings. Anything you put in that slot is going to do poorly, so might as well keep around a critical darling and one that, probably, does well on Hulu and DVD and similar alternative outlets.
I would thank Geraldo's assholishness for my first (and probably only) Monster's Ball, but I'll wait until he makes an actual apology instead of the "I'm sorry you got offended by my incredibly reasonable statement" bs non-apology that has become the norm these days.
They could sue anyone involved, but it would be up to the court to decide how much blame each person is responsible for. In the case of Spike Lee, his 'part' would have to do with how much his retweet increased the awareness of the address.
If Gabe were to recieve an annonymous 'tip' about Goopy, and he posted it as 'fact', he couldn't just blame the originator, whether it be someone e-mailing him, or him finding someones website that only gets about 1% of the audience Videogum does, etc ... Gabe would be more liable. Being sued for slander/libel has to do with damage to your reputation, so the person with the bigger soapbox/larger audience would be more likely to get sued. [This is a bad example, Videogum is a humor blog, not 'hard' journalism, and to hurt Goopy's reputation, someone reading Videogum would have to not already know she is the worst]
TL:DR - The source is irrelevant, it's how many people you've spread the info to. [And, whether you add weight. Someone might not care about seeing the address, but Spike Lee telling them the address might convince them it's real, or that it's something they should go and do something about]
I agree on the forced "rut" storyline on 30 Rock. I mean, any storyline involving Cerie is automatically something that hasn't really been done for the past couple seasons.
I apologize to anyone offended by what one prominent Videogum lurker called my ‘very practical and potentially life-saving campaign urging parents of twitter users not to let their children go around to addresses they get off twitter.
By putting responsibility on what Spike Lee tweeted instead of how people react to them I have obscured the main point that Spike Lee asked for someone to be harassed and then apologized for it being the wrong person getting harassed. I give a heartfelt apology to anyone I may have offended in my crusade to warn families of the danger to their young twitterers following the stupid advice of people they follow; like Spike Lee.
I remain absolutely convinced of what I said about asking for trouble. There’s trouble enough for twitter boys and young tweeters not to provoke mad responses from paranoid jerk offs.
Wouldn't it have been a bit dangerous to send a bunch of people to Zimmerman's actual address? The guy shot someone with skittles and iced tea for being threatening. People actually showing up to his house, en masse, with the intent of harrassing him, would be a hell of a lot more threatening.
"Hey everyone, let's form a zombie mob and descend upon the house of the guy known for shooting people he thinks are threatening him. That can't possibly go wrong."
The Rue thing was understandable because they had already built up Katniss' relationship with her little sister. So the brief time with Rue made it clear that she was being treated as a surrogate little sister. Maybe it's just me, but I liked that the movie seemed to be content with being subtle, actually showing stuff instead of just telling you. It's not going to have the same time as a book does. Hell, they cut stuff out of Game of Thrones, and they had an entire season of 1 hour episodes for a single book. So stuff will get cut. But, they were able to, at least for one person who read nothing of the books, get across most of those things in a short period of time through quiet moments and meaningful looks, etc.
From someone who hasn't read the series either, just saw the movie once.
A - It's a reality TV satire. The relationship thing mirrors the kind of contrived relationships that happen in reality TV. Putting people in an unnatural situation, and 'encouraging' them to act a certain way to please the audience, especially mixing in teenage hormones, and one actually has feelings for the other, etc ... something is bound to happen.
B - The monologuing is something that basically all villains do, it's not really limited to this film. That and, again, it's reality TV. So even the "villains" need to play things up for the camera in their quest for sponsors/ratings.
C - It's not so dystopian for the multicolored hair people. The "rich" have over the top fashion in the vein of Brazil. The "rich/1%" have embraced excess and artificiality, while the real people are out there doing the mining and the farming in relative poverty.
D - The "concept" of the anti-rebellion is that, it's a punishment for the old rebellion. The ability of the state to take 2 kids from each district is an implicit reminder they could just go in and kill ALL of them if they really wanted to. And, if they did have a full blown civil war, many more kids would die. It's meant to act, in part, as an outlet. Just like people get their violent urges fufilled by watching movies, or sports, but also reminding people "if you go to war, it's going to be like this but worse". Since it's been going on for 74 years at the time of the movie, it's obvious that at this point, the society is doing it more out of tradition and because they've built an infrastructure around it instead of it being something that is actual useful.
It's sort of a future Rome concept, with a decadent capital fed by poor/slave terratories, and violent 'entertainment' meant to pacify the masses and avoid rebellion.
Don't cross the stree, stand your ground (which means "follow them with a gun ignoring police advice".) We just have to start shooting anyone on sight, before they shoot you.
“When you see a Black or Latino youngster, particularly on the street, you walk to the other side of the street.”
So, in the more general case, when it's a Black or Latino youngster not on the street, say on your TV, or behind the cash register at the Burger King, you still leave the building you are currently in and walk on the other side of the street?
I don't see why anyone would care about the Turtles anyway, they aren't the main characters. Over three quarters of the movie will be about the nerdy guy that finds them, his horny parents, his impossibly hot girlfriend, his stereotypical black friend, and his horny dogs. No one goes to see a movie to see the characters refered to in the title.
They could be "Bubs". It is possible zombies can be trained (like in Day of the Dead). At least as much as wild animals could be. If a circus performer can get a Lion to not just eat them when you stick your head in their mouth, it's possible someone could get a zombie trained as well. Especially after ... um ... disarming them.
Lori dying next season isn't a spoiler. It's something to look forward to. Of course, Shane outlived his comic equivalent, so it's only a spoiler for the comic, and a potential spoiler for the series (which is only slightly more accurate than random speculation or hope).
I would think the more likely answer was that they all died because of the heat in the car (since the fear of zombies outside meant they weren't going to crack a window, and they had long run out of gas to run the AC), so their brains fried (or dehydration did something to the brain to prevent zombyism, etc).
Also, if zombie bites don't cause zombies then it might be something that, within a sealed vehicle, couldn't get in. Even if a car isn't airtight, it may not get enough outside air in to carry the airborne zombie virus to infect the dead.
Comments