Review (Season 2): "******"

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > Review (Season 2): "******"

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Nichael posted:

I hope Forrest's assistant, Lucille, isn't gone from the show while she sues him. That would be a sole disappointment in a crazy good season. She brings a great "sick of this poo poo" energy to the proceedings, and her utter hatred for Forrest is hilarious.

"Getting sued for negligence. One and a half stars."

# ¿ Sep 4, 2015 08:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 14:52

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Illinois Smith posted:

I was expecting Suzanne would somehow end up with the handsome Shortstopman but the show manipulating Forrest into getting them to move in together was great.

The best part is that it's completely his fault. He could have catfished someone else than his ex-wife, he could have gone to some charity or whatever for the Make-A-Wish thing. It's like he believes that, because the show made him divorce her, if he just makes enough of the reviews about his family they'll eventually end up back together.

He could have just told her he was catfishing her after she asked to facechat instead of doing the absurd shortstopman thing.

# ¿ Sep 4, 2015 20:40

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

FireWorksWell posted:

He could have told her the divorce was entirely because of the review.

No he couldn't have. It wouldn't have been an authentic review of a life experience if it was tainted by false pretense. He has to maintain kayfabe.

He probably could have told her after giving divorce its rating, but the damage was already done by then.

# ¿ Sep 4, 2015 22:41

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

This version still handles all this better than the original Australian Review. Myles Barlow's actions in the real world were completely detached from his ability to do reviews. He can, and does, end up on the run for a crime and does his review without the slightest worry that the show will tip the police off.

Also, the camera in that version is kind of magical, no one ever acknowledges it and some situations are recorded that would have raised at least some eyebrows.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2015 19:03

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

He's gonna blow the vetos on utterly silly, pointless things (like trying to eat something he thinks might be kinda gross) and end up out of vetos and given a review of Murder or something.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2015 20:57

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

This is a distinctive difference between this Review and the Australian original.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2015 03:03

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

If Forrest had any common sense at all, he wouldn't have this job.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2015 03:08

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

That's cheating!

# ¿ Sep 18, 2015 03:14

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Grant is Satan.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2015 03:19

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 14:52

JT Jag: Aug 30, 2009; #1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

robot roll call posted:

I knew he was going to murder someone once he did the second veto, but it was still hilarious when the second request came up. What a dark show.

Honestly it would have been fully within his rights to say that, once he vetoed the review of murder, it counted as a veto of the concept of "Reviewing Murder", not that one specific review. It's not even outside his own moral code really.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2015 08:00

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > TV IV > Review (Season 2): "******"