701

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 12, 2020, 11:16:11 PM »

Yeah, I doubt there's anything obviously illegal in Trump's tax returns. It's just in his nature to lash out defensively, hatch cover-up schemes, and in general behave very suspiciously whenever he's under pressure. That doesn't prove he's a criminal.

702

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 10, 2020, 03:59:07 AM »

Lawyers have every right to pursue cases that suit their political leanings or avoid ones that don't. It's not remarkable that a lot of lawyers weren't willing to take this case, nor that the one who did supported Trump.

703

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 08, 2020, 01:23:17 AM »

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/07/politics/michael-flynn-prosecution/index.html

Flynn literally pled guilty twice. His conviction and sentencing was all but guaranteed, and for the prosecution to essentially concede a case they were about to win makes no sense. Meaning this obviously wasn't a decision made out of good-faith legal considerations. If Trump wants to pardon his cronies, he should just pardon them. Doing it like this is so petty - it's not enough that Flynn not be punished; it also has to look like the Justice Department actually agreed that Flynn shouldn't be prosecuted and withdrew of their own accord.

704

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 06, 2020, 07:57:11 PM »

I have to say, if the Republicans can make this about sexual assault, and they can pull off a win given Trump's own past, it would be hilarious.

It looks like that could be possible too. Idk, maybe Democrats are more concerned with morality and ethics than Republicans. It seems ironic, given Republicans' Bible-happy, "family friendly" ways, but I really can't think of another reason why this might hurt Biden when Trump escaped the same thing multiplied unscathed.

It may not be due to ideology so much as it is just a reflection of the way the two parties are run, but there's no doubt that Democrats are quicker to discipline their members over ethical transgressions and give in to public pressure. If they were Democrats, Duncan Hunter and Greg Gianforte would have been made to resign immediately, Kavanaugh's nomination would have been promptly withdrawn in the face of sexual assault allegations, and Roy Moore either would have been made to drop out of the Senate race or wholly condemned by the party. And if he were a Republican, Al Franken would never have been made to resign. So I do think it's entirely possible that an allegation like this could genuinely sink Biden while Trump skates by unscathed. And yes, that would be morbidly hilarious, and perhaps even appropriate for the time we're living in.

705

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 04, 2020, 10:52:55 PM »

We don't need to make any such case. It's the accuser that needs to make the case against the accused. Innocent until proven guilty, y'know?

...you're the one who brought it up as an apparent counterargument. Seems kind of weird to raise a counterargument and then decline to follow through with it, but you can do what you want. It's not my counterargument; I don't particularly care.

The US legal system, and seemingly public opinion, given that you're currently criticising it for doing just that. It looks like people don't like throwing legal accusations around in a "fortunately not at all legal haha I'm just accusing a man of rape" way.

Jesus, listen to yourself. You're pretty much saying "I know there is no legal way of getting Trump in trouble without evidence, but maybe we should publicly lynch him and try to destroy his life anyway?" We're so, so lucky that your position holds so little credibility in society. It'd be a proper dystopia.

I don't know how many more times I can stress to you that Trump is not on trial and judgments like these carry no legal weight. Politicians are judged for what they say and do, or what people believe they've said and done, all the time. People make judgments about these things, they talk about their judgments, and they vote accordingly. That's how it works. It's politics. There is no court of political scandals where the due process rights of politicians to maintain their current level of political strength are protected. People simply make decisions. If people think that a politician was made to look dumb in a debate, their political status may suffer. If people think that a politician cheated on his wife, his political status may suffer. And if people think that a politician has probably committed sexual assault in the past, his political status may certainly suffer. Trump will not go to jail for probably having sexually assaulted an undisclosed person at some point in the past any more than he would go to jail for looking dumb in a debate or cheating on his wife. The only thing he has to lose is the upcoming election.

Am I being cynical? Maybe, but I don't think so. I think it's the more likely scenario that those women came forward as a stunt to help Hillary get elected than that they all at that moment decided to come forward because they were stunned that Trump would dare deny that he sexually assaulted women on TV during a tight presidential race. The former may seem cynical, but the latter just sounds naive.

I'd say it was more anger at his denial than shock.

706

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 04, 2020, 04:20:44 AM »

Trump found dozens of women who were willing to accuse Bill Clinton of rape and brought them over to some of the debates with Hillary.

It was three women (along with a fourth who was apparently mad at Hillary for representing her rapist in court), and all of them had publicly accused Clinton back in the nineties.

There's a reason we don't rely on personal incredulity when it comes to such serious accusations.

Who says we don't? I think if the alternative is incredible enough - such as a large number of women all falsely accusing Trump, and only Trump, as if he's the only controversial businessman/politician in the world, of sexual misconduct - then personal incredulity is a perfectly valid reason to make a judgment about, yes, even serious accusations. I wouldn't support that in any kind of legal context, because we don't put people on trial for having poor character or probably having committed a non-specific crime in the past. Fortunately, we aren't talking about that.

You may find it unlikely that so many women would be bought/convinced to put forward a false accusation, but I find it unlikely that so many women kept quiet until the very moment Trump was about to become a hell of a lot more popular and powerful. That they would all simultaneously, unprompted, choose the very worst moment for them to speak up... that defies all logic. They deliberately waited for the time they were least likely to succeed, to get justice, because... reasons?

This doesn't make the case for the women being dishonest or otherwise unreliable. The premise of it being so illogical to make these accusations of Trump at that particular point of time is unchanged regardless of whether or not the women were telling the truth. Either way, Trump was about to become far more powerful and popular. Either way, their accusations were extremely unlikely to succeed in bringing him down.

Nevertheless, the reasons for why they came forward when they did (presumably you're referring to October 2016, when the bulk of them were reported on) are pretty straightforward. Trump was at his highest profile, his behavior towards women had recently come under scrutiny with a NYT piece on the subject and the Access Hollywood tape, and Trump had flatly denied ever sexually assaulting women on national television. A number of his accusers have cited that as the moment they decided to speak up:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html

https://people.com/politics/donald-trump-attacked-people-writer/

https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/national-govt--politics/palm-beach-post-exclusive-local-woman-says-trump-groped-her/aLcLWjmxbmudQMc7TXuxiK/

That's really not suspicious. It's entirely understandable.

707

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 03, 2020, 04:01:16 PM »

No credible evidence has been presented to date. Same as with Biden, mind you.

The sheer number of accusers is what makes it credible to me. The idea that this many women - real women with real names who came forward publicly - are lying or otherwise mistaken just isn't plausible. It's not enough to just suppose that Trump's status as a wealthy socialite or a controversial politician naturally lends itself to lots of false accusers coming out of the woodwork either to cash in or bring him down for ideological reasons, because that simply doesn't happen for other wealthy socialites or controversial politicians. Why would Trump be so special? I wouldn't use this kind of reasoning to support convicting Trump if he were on trial or anything, but it's more than enough to form a personal judgment about his character.

Ignoring Trump? You might want to do that thing you do where you waste an afternoon looking at old stuff on the Internet. Trump's alleged misconduct was far from ignored.

Wow.  Is that seriously your take on how the media has treated Trump over the last four years? 

Those scandals were reported on, past tense. And then the media simply stopped reporting on them after a few days or weeks, in most cases because there was another new scandal to cover. But the old scandals still exist, and they can and should be returned to if the media is going to hammer Trump's opponent for the exact same thing.

I understand tone can be difficult to convey over the internet, but the way you couch your response makes it sound like you think it's incompatible with what you were responding to. If that's the case can you please explain how?

I was going to say that I have a very hard time imagining the hypothetical voter who wasn't deterred from voting for Trump due to the allegations against him, but would be deterred from voting for Biden due to the allegation against him. But now that I think about it, Biden could easily lose plenty of votes to third-party candidates or write-ins. Democrats don't have nearly the level of party unity that Republicans enjoy.

708

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 02, 2020, 09:29:38 PM »

It should matter for both

It should, but it doesn't. Trump is almost certainly a sexual predator, yet he was elected president, and the media seem to have largely made their peace with this instead of grilling him at every opportunity about the numerous allegations against him. It's extraordinarily unfair for them to run with this story and insist that Biden needs to answer for it while ignoring Trump.

I wish I could agree with you. Unfortunately the Left weaponized unproven sexual allegations politically in 2016 so it's a bit hypocritical to try to walk it back now.

I'm not walking anything back. I'm complaining about how, once again, Trump is being held to a completely different standard to other politicians. Hillary stumbles once and is helped back up - she must be secretly dying. Trump is obviously pressuring his doctors to lie about his obesity and disastrous physical shape (and even his height, because he's that petty) - nobody cares. Hillary uses an unsecured email account - she's tied up in Congressional investigations for years and forced to testify on numerous occasions. Trump and his inner circle do that exact same thing multiple times, and breach general security protocol in many different ways, both subtle and major, over the years - nobody cares. Biden seemingly forgets, or at least stumbles over, the beginning of the Declaration of Independence - he's a senile, doddering old fool who's too confused for the job. Trump regularly spews incoherent gibberish at public appearances, slurring over words with his eyes bulging out his head like he's on crack - nobody cares. A sexual assault allegation comes up against Biden, resulting in an unclear he-said she-said situation - this totally spells the end of Biden's candidacy, fucking Hillary should take the nomination now, might as well just reinaugurate Trump today. Trump is accused by over twenty women of sexual misconduct - nobody cares. It's ridiculous, and it will continue until the media put their foot down and stop letting Trump wriggle out of scandal after scandal.

Clearly it's to the American people to decide if the allegations against Biden matter, just as it was with Trump.

If they didn't matter for a candidate with over twenty accusations, then why would they matter for a candidate with only one?

709

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 02, 2020, 06:32:06 PM »

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/495580-a-hillary-clinton-barack-obama-ticket-to-replace-joe-biden

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/495371-as-biden-struggles-hillary-waits-for-the-call

It's still her turn!

In the meantime, the Tara Reade allegations are blowing up in the media. It shouldn't be getting the time of the day given the enormous number of credible accusations Trump has racked up. When the media start grilling Trump about all those women whenever they can, then maybe it'll be time to start talking about the one allegation concerning Biden.

It should absolutely get the time of day. What a stupid partisan position to have. They BOTH should be called to task for potential rape allegations. Everybody who has credible evidence against them should. No one said, “we shouldn’t bother with Kavanagh because Trump’s a more deserving target.”

I think a lot of right wing criticism of media is not very strong but they are dead on with this. Other than Fox, most media outlets have been doing everything they can to avoid the Tara Reade story and it’s such a shitty double standard. Fuck that. Biden is an almost senile alleged rapist. He’s a fucking terrible candidate for president. Probably worse than HRC.

A simple Google search for "Tara Reade" shows that far from ignoring this story, the mainstream media is reporting on it extensively, and most articles are sharply critical of Biden. He was literally asked about it in an interview with MSNBC, of all stations. And if allegations like this don't matter for Trump - and they clearly don't - then they shouldn't matter for Biden either.

710

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: May 02, 2020, 04:37:54 PM »

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/495580-a-hillary-clinton-barack-obama-ticket-to-replace-joe-biden

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/495371-as-biden-struggles-hillary-waits-for-the-call

It's still her turn!

In the meantime, the Tara Reade allegations are blowing up in the media. It shouldn't be getting the time of the day, given the enormous number of credible accusations Trump has racked up. When the media start grilling Trump about all those women whenever they can, then maybe it'll be time to start talking about the one allegation concerning Biden.

711

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)

« on: April 29, 2020, 07:17:46 PM »

Saddam, how do you feel about Cuphead's tutorial level?

I'll let you know as soon as I figure out how to get past the tall pillar.

Final Fantasy XV

I've never liked the Final Fantasy series. Their turn-based combat is dull and mindless, their stories are ludicrously dense and complicated seemingly for the sake of it, their characters are obnoxious, their protagonists are more often than not bland cardboard cut-outs while also being sullen, self-pitying emos, and most importantly of all, their general style and aesthetic always rubs me the wrong way. They're full of the worst kind of camp and melodrama, and feel heavily inspired by really bad, really cheesy anime. But FF XV looked to be very different from the rest of the series, and I had heard from numerous reviews, as well as from trusted weeb junker, that this game was almost a reinvention of the format, with a far more simple story and a refreshing emphasis on non-linear, open-world gameplay. So I thought I'd finally try one of these games for myself.

How is it? Well, pretty good, for the most part. You play as the gay prince from the land of homos driving around with his boy band in the royal pimpmobile, the Regalia. Actually, I really do love the Regalia. It's an awesome car, being endlessly customizable, somewhere between a Rolls Royce and a Cadillac in design, and exactly the kind of car I would expect a king from this kind of setting to drive. You can also upgrade it into a kind of monster truck for off-roading, and later on into the Batmobile, which can also fly. Granted, the mechanics and controls for flying are completely fucked up, but they get points for trying. And again, that upgrade pretty much turns it into the Batmobile, and that's awesome. There's no way the resemblance was unintentional.

I mentioned the setting earlier, which is great. It's very modern for the most part, with everyone having cars and cell phones, and telephone wires and gas stations dotting the landscape. The real-life basis looks to be the southwestern United States, with a desert-like terrain, characters with silly southern accents, and twangy country tunes playing whenever you're within civilization. At the same time, though, it's still clearly fantasy, and the demons that appear at night give the proceedings a splash of color, making for an interesting contrast. Also on the creative side of things, while the main character is exactly the kind of bland emo I strongly dislike and seems to be ubiquitous in the series, I do like his three companions, and the foursome mostly have a great dynamic and a genuine bond you can sense. They feel a lot more like real people than the typical party you'd see in this kind of RPG. And the villain is pretty charismatic and memorable too.

What else is there to say...the open world is kind of repetitive and has a lot of empty space, but I still liked it. There are a ton of sidequests, but almost all of them are fetch quests or simple assignments to kill a monster, which kind of sucks. I love the mechanics of the combat, especially the warp move, and in particular just how dynamic it all is - you're constantly moving, constantly rushing back and forth across the battlefield making passes at your target. Unfortunately, with too many enemies on the field, everything becomes a jumbled clusterfuck of flailing limbs and blurry pixels. It's not helped by the game's bizarre system of "random" enemy spawns, as depending on where you are, enemies can sometimes respawn not even thirty seconds after you've killed them. The endless Imperial dropoffs are the worst. There should definitely have been a cooldown of at least a few minutes in between Imperial waves, and this really should have come up during testing. The camera can be an even worse problem. God help you if you get into a fight under a canopy or anywhere near a large tree, because the camera will inevitably zoom in on those branches until you have memorized every fucking twig on them before it'll let you actually see how the battle is going.

But that's not the worst thing about this game. That dishonor goes to the last third of it. It's like a whole different game. The car is gone. The open world is gone. The camaraderie between the main characters is gone. The fairly restrained story (by FF standards, at least) about the crown prince collecting ancestral weapons and fighting off an invading empire is gone too, replaced with a new apocalyptic plot that feels entirely tangential to the old one. Characters that were introduced and teased meaningful roles in the upcoming story are never brought up again or awkwardly handwaved away. I guess they didn't have room for them, because this last third of the game has about an entire game's worth of story details crammed into it. The villain has a whole new role only vaguely related to his role in the first part of the game, the stakes introduced are very different to what's going on in the first part of the game...it's so strange. And the penultimate chapter absolutely blows chimp. Stripped of your usual weapons, stripped of your party, stripped of your warp move, you're traipsing through this confusing, ugly labyrinth, hitting switches, fighting enemies, backtracking endlessly, etc. It goes on and on and on for at least two hours. It's the worst.

And yes, I know that a number of the unexplained plot details and vanished characters are resolved in the game's DLC. Fuck that. That's not how DLC is supposed to work. You tell a full, complete story with the main game, and then DLC provides supplemental details. Not critical parts of the main plot that the game is incomplete without; extra stuff. A bonus. It reminds me eerily of JJ Abrams.

712

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 29, 2020, 04:56:45 PM »

And for most of his business career, Trump was largely seen as a trashy tabloid figure, far more famous for his outrageous behavior and wild social life than for any perceived business acumen. It wasn't until The Apprentice that Trump's public perception was essentially "retconned" and people began thinking of him as a widely respected titan of business. This article is a great read for anyone wanting to learn more.

713

Arts & Entertainment / Re: White to play and win

« on: April 29, 2020, 04:25:00 PM »

There is no winning move for white. None of their pieces can reach the king.

714

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 29, 2020, 01:37:37 AM »

If only we had a thread discussing Vitamin C's effect on coronavirus so this one wouldn't need to be derailed. Oh, wait, we do:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=16046.0

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/494749-as-the-comeback-kid-trump-will-win-over-persuadable-voters

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but the sheer amount of spin this conservative columnist has to use to show that Trump has an edge in the coming election only gives me more hope that he will lose.

I like how the author began the article by dressing it up like it was going to be a neutral, analytical piece, and then halfway through drops the facade and turns it into a torrent of fulsome praise for Trump:

President Trump’s performance hasn’t been perfect. But few voters beyond the Trump-haters, whose minds were made up long ago, are looking for perfection.

Most swing voters, the truly undecided or yet-persuadable voters are much more empathetic to the nation’s leader and the impossible job he’s been handed. They marvel at his energy and resilience. While the Oval Office has taken an obvious physical toll on previous occupants, it’s difficult to see it in Trump’s face.

These are not the words of a sober, reasoned analysis; they are fanboy gushing. And he's out of his mind if he really thinks that the presidency hasn't taken its toll on Trump. Admittedly, a man like him didn't have very far to fall, so to speak, but he's visibly aged, put on quite a bit of weight, and is more and more frequently either saying increasingly deranged things or spazzing out while saying or doing very simple things. Here's him just yesterday:

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1254871932954083333

If Biden had done that, you just know conservative media would have dove on that immediately and even more mainstream publications would be writing "thinkpieces" with titles like "Are we sure Biden is mentally prepared to be President?" But this scene wasn't widely reported, because the media is by now numb to the fact that Trump is an idiot and a shambling physical wreck.

715

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 27, 2020, 11:23:21 PM »

But that's completely beside the point. Even if he were right that blue states were being poorly governed and red states weren't asking for help, that in no way makes the case that blue states shouldn't receive help. It's a time of crisis, people are dying, and states should be getting the help they need. It's not the time to be playing patronage games and "rewarding" or "punishing" states for mismanaging their resources or not being aligned politically with the president.

716

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 27, 2020, 08:53:59 PM »

Holy shit, can we stop making this thread about totallackey and his incoherent political ideology? We're supposed to be discussing Trump.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1254782650679615492

On the notion of basically admitting that he's deliberately withholding federal aid from Democrat-run states.

717

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 27, 2020, 02:23:40 AM »

Maybe the President of the United States shouldn't be "rambling" or casually musing about whatever crap pops into their head to begin with. It's okay to have standards for the person with the job that makes them the most powerful person in the world. Trump should be changing his behavior to fit the demands of his office, not expecting the rest of us to change our standards to fit his own lazy convenience.

Maybe we should vote for this guy:

...

No Joe Biden. That's not okay.

It's not okay, but he's still a far better candidate than a dim-witted, self-absorbed huckster whose sole motivation is his own direct personal benefit.

718

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 25, 2020, 06:28:18 PM »

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/us/politics/trump-election-briefings.html

It's almost like supporting a dangerously incompetent megalomaniac might end up having negative consequences, whodathunkit.

Sure the Republicans might lose control of both the executive and legislative branches of government over supporting the President who ultimately suggested injecting bleach into the lungs as a potential cure for coronavirus, but they got their judges, right? That's what it was all about right?

So totally worth it. lololol

We've been here before. The Access Hollywood tape, Trump publicly siding with Putin, "very fine people," kids taken away from their parents, etc. Republicans won't do more to break with or stand up to Trump beyond occasionally offering a few disappointed words as long as he's still overwhelmingly popular among the base, and said base will never, never stop loving Trump. The virus could kill half the country and they'd praise him as the God-Emperor. He could be caught on camera molesting a kid and they'd sneer, "You triggered, bro?" Nothing is going to change.

719

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: April 23, 2020, 01:13:26 AM »

I can't imagine Trump has ever given a large (to him) sum of money to any charity, ever.  With the way he brags, he would have told people if he gave a billion to feeding the poor or planting trees, or anything at all.

My favorite story about Trump and charity is the time he crashed a ribbon-cutting for a children's charity and took an actual donor's reserved seat so that people would assume he too was a donor. The article also goes into detail about how Trump's charitable activities seem to largely be a smokescreen.

720

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched

« on: April 20, 2020, 11:23:21 PM »

The Witcher (2019)

Fans of the stories/games, if not necessarily strict purists, should like this a lot. The characters are all portrayed faithfully - Yennefer is regal and commanding, Jaskier (Dandelion) is both annoying and amusing, and Henry Cavill as Geralt is actually pretty great. The role is hardly a complex one, but Cavill makes him likable and sympathetic, and I think it's hilarious that he managed to imbue a character who's meant to be an aloof badass with far more charisma than he ever did for his sullen, scowling Superman. There's a solid budget behind this, if not quite to the extent of something like GoT, and it aims for a kind of B-movie feel. Behind all the nudity and violence, everything feels charmingly goofy.

The show's biggest drawback is its bizarre decision to follow three different characters at three entirely different points in time over the course of the show without so much as a text card explaining what's going on. The showrunner has an explanation for this, some nonsense about not wanting to hold viewers' hands or whatever. That doesn't justify being deliberately obscure and confusing, and I'm convinced that this show would have had a far more positive reception if it had been clearer about this. So, I'm going to do you all a favor and explain it right now. In chronological order, the timeline goes as follows: Yennefer's storyline (some decades in the past), Geralt's storyline (twelve years or so in the past), and Ciri's storyline (the "present," so to speak). Ciri's storyline is also the weakest of the three. It has a lot of padding and a lot of moments where it seems to just be treading water, like it's waiting for the other two storylines to catch up.

On a more personal note, I want to say I'm very happy that the Witcher fanbase (with the exception of a few book purists, like I said - they seem like such dull people) has largely accepted the show and even rallied around it to do the usual dumb fanboy things like get mad at critics who panned it. In the months leading up to this show's release, rumblings on Twitter and reddit seemed to be leading up to a reactionary backlash, largely inspired by a) The showrunner being a woman, and b) Plans for a diverse cast. Those two facts would be enough to keep the Internet furious for years, but strangely enough, the backlash never ended up materializing. I guess the usual suspects found the show to be entertaining and "non-political" enough for it to be spared their wrath, which is remarkable when you consider that these are the same people who got mad at a picture of a bunch of women drinking milkshakes. Oh, well. We should just take the good news when it comes, I guess.

The Mandalorian (2019)

I don't think this show is quite the masterpiece its screamingly enthusiastic fanbase has acclaimed it as, but there's definitely a lot to like about it. It's cool, it's stylish, it has a lot of great action, the production value is incredible, it's good to see different kinds of stories in the SW universe, and I'm in complete agreement with pretty much everyone that Baby Yoda steals the show with how adorable he is. That being said, however, I'd really like to see the show raise its sights for the next season and tell a proper story worthy of television, with a more fleshed-out main character. There are times when The Mandalorian feels more like a video game than a movie. An awesome video game, don't get me wrong, but still one where we watch a badass space marine, who conveniently never shows his face and seldom speaks except to drive the plot forward, seek out and complete a "sidequest" through exploration and kicking everyone's ass, then move straight on to the next one without giving any indication that he's learned anything or grown as a character. I think the show has by now exhausted the appeal of simply watching a badass do badass things in the SW universe, and it needs to move on from that. If the Mandalorian won't be showing his face outside of maybe an odd glimpse here and there, then he has to at least start talking a lot more, and showing off a three-dimensional personality. Make Pedro Pascal work for that paycheck.

This might sound a little petty, but I hope they keep the connections to the animated shows and whatnot to a minimum. One of the producers behind this is also the guy they have in charge of animation, and it was presumably his idea to have the final shot of the season be the reveal of some device or other that appeared in those shows. I just saw Giancarlo cutting his way out of a crashed ship with a weird-looking widget, and didn't understand why this was playing out as a major dramatic moment, or why it was the closing shot. I don't begrudge anyone for liking what they like, and it's totally cool to toss some fanservice to the lore-minded fans every once in a while, but I don't think it's a good idea to be basing key dramatic moments on references to shows that the majority of the audience won't have seen.