moimoi
AV Clubber 
Posts: 5,076 
|
Post by moimoi on Oct 25, 2024 13:45:34 GMT -5
Only Murders in the Building, S4 Episode 9
In which Ron Howard solves the mystery. Ron Howard?
Oliver: "Finally, a celebrity this season!"
Yeah, halfway through this episode I was like, what am I even watching? There is no urgency whatsoever to solving the mystery. It's just a bunch of wacky stuff happening. When the murderer was revealed, I was just like, "okay, that's a resolution, I guess". |
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 25, 2024 22:28:48 GMT -5
Only Murders in the Building, S4 Episode 9
In which Ron Howard solves the mystery. Ron Howard?
Oliver: "Finally, a celebrity this season!"
Yeah, halfway through this episode I was like, what am I even watching? There is no urgency whatsoever to solving the mystery. It's just a bunch of wacky stuff happening. When the murderer was revealed, I was just like, "okay, that's a resolution, I guess". Marshall was the only remaining viable suspect. It has been this way since episode 5, at least. He was the only one who wasn't cleared. The mystery isn't resolved though. We still have a lot of questions, like how did he know it was Sazz in Charles' apartment that night? It was dark! How did he get access to the Westie apartment? Did he have an accomplice? He is the one who suggested it might take two people. The show has been playing around with twins and doubles all season. Does he have a twin who helped him? Was it really two people? Like, did he move Sazz's body, or have someone help him, or did someone else entirely do this? Because we have to explain how someone accessed Charles's apartment in addition to the Westie apartment.
And then midway through the season, the show introduced an entire other plotline about someone targeting the trio since Season 1, and this was clearly not related to the murder of Sazz.
And given that they found the creepy cameras and got the "I'm Watching You" texts, why are they all fine with staying in the Arconia now? They all fled for their lives when they got those texts. But now Oliver is like, "Yeah, let me have my wedding here!" I have heard no rationale from any of the trio as to why they are suddenly fine with going back to their apartments. I wish this had been addressed.
The structure this season has been crazy.
And now we're going to obviously see a character we care about be murdered at that Arconia wedding. Loretta? Howard? Or, for a truly bold idea, one of the trio? And they have to investigate the long term plot in the final season.
It's a LOT to cover in the season finale!
|
|
moimoi
AV Clubber
Posts: 5,076
|
Post by moimoi on Oct 26, 2024 8:18:53 GMT -5
Yeah, halfway through this episode I was like, what am I even watching? There is no urgency whatsoever to solving the mystery. It's just a bunch of wacky stuff happening. When the murderer was revealed, I was just like, "okay, that's a resolution, I guess". We still have a lot of questions, like how did he know it was Sazz in Charles' apartment that night? It was dark! How did he get access to the Westie apartment? Did he have an accomplice? He is the one who suggested it might take two people. The show has been playing around with twins and doubles all season. Does he have a twin who helped him? Was it really two people? Like, did he move Sazz's body, or have someone help him, or did someone else entirely do this? Because we have to explain how someone accessed Charles's apartment in addition to the Westie apartment.
And then midway through the season, the show introduced an entire other plotline about someone targeting the trio since Season 1, and this was clearly not related to the murder of Sazz.
And given that they found the creepy cameras and got the "I'm Watching You" texts, why are they all fine with staying in the Arconia now? They all fled for their lives when they got those texts. But now Oliver is like, "Yeah, let me have my wedding here!" I have heard no rationale from any of the trio as to why they are suddenly fine with going back to their apartments. I wish this had been addressed.
The structure this season has been crazy.
And now we're going to obviously see a character we care about be murdered at that Arconia wedding. Loretta? Howard? Or, for a truly bold idea, one of the trio? And they have to investigate the long term plot in the final season.
It's a LOT to cover in the season finale!
I agree that the twins/doubles thing is going to come back at some point. Right now I'm thinking Marshall has a disfigured twin who was Sazz's protege out for revenge and he's the accomplice. As for someone targeting the trio since Season 1, I suppose I'll have to rewatch, but I feel like some of that evidence was suggested by Marshall, like the handwriting on the notes... I also feel like, in an effort to give Martin Short something to do during a Steve Martin-heavy main plot (and to get more use out of Galifinakis), we've gotten too much of Oliver's shenanigans. Last season, Oliver held together the main plot so his scenes had more focus--now he's just doing schtick like an elevated side character. Perhaps this is building up to the death of Loretta (I mean, they were lucky to get Paul Rudd for two seasons, is Streep really staying on for three?). That's my best guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 26, 2024 14:25:42 GMT -5
I agree that the twins/doubles thing is going to come back at some point. Right now I'm thinking Marshall has a disfigured twin who was Sazz's protege out for revenge and he's the accomplice.
I also have been wondering if Sazz's protege is Marshall's twin. It would seem weird for the show to focus so much on twins and doubles and then not use this in the final reveal. I guess we'll see.
No, the handwriting on the notes was pointed out by Zack Galifianakis. The idea of someone targeting them since Season 1 was suggested by the actors in episode 7.
This is my guess, too. For roughly the same reason. That Oliver's whole story this season was basically obsessing over Loretta. And it is just beyond stupid for them to be having the wedding in the Arconia after they believe that someone is out to get them. She is the most likely target, because, like you, I can't believe Streep would be signed on for three seasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by DangOlJimmyITellYouWhat on Oct 28, 2024 18:58:25 GMT -5
OG Law & Order, Abby just said she was going to order BBQ.
She’s from Texas. She absolutely is not ordering BBQ in Manhattan.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Stuffingtacular She-Hulk on Oct 29, 2024 10:56:54 GMT -5
OG Law & Order, Abby just said she was going to order BBQ. She’s from Texas. She absolutely is not ordering BBQ in Manhattan. Meanwhile, I just watched episode 3 of Poker Face last night, in which Charlie Cale solves a murder at a Texas BBQ stand. As someone who has done her own fair share of smoking various meats, it tickled me to watch her chewing on little bits of wood to see how each tastes different, just as the pitmaster showed her. Also, that BBQ looked so freaking good, my word. |
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster 
Posts: 10,252 
Member is Online
|
Post by LazBro on Oct 29, 2024 11:36:53 GMT -5
OG Law & Order, Abby just said she was going to order BBQ. She’s from Texas. She absolutely is not ordering BBQ in Manhattan. Meanwhile, I just watched episode 3 of Poker Face last night, in which Charlie Cale solves a murder at a Texas BBQ stand. As someone who has done her own fair share of smoking various meats, it tickled me to watch her chewing on little bits of wood to see how each tastes different, just as the pitmaster showed her. Also, that BBQ looked so freaking good, my word. My favorite episode of the series, for obvious reasons, but also because I liked the complexity of the murder, the racist dog, just so much good stuff. And *mild spoilers* I love how she catches the guy with a sort of meta double-meaning of the episode's title. Great episode of TV right there. |
|
|
|
Post by The Stuffingtacular She-Hulk on Oct 29, 2024 11:58:09 GMT -5
Meanwhile, I just watched episode 3 of Poker Face last night, in which Charlie Cale solves a murder at a Texas BBQ stand. As someone who has done her own fair share of smoking various meats, it tickled me to watch her chewing on little bits of wood to see how each tastes different, just as the pitmaster showed her. Also, that BBQ looked so freaking good, my word. My favorite episode of the series, for obvious reasons, but also because I liked the complexity of the murder, the racist dog, just so much good stuff. And *mild spoilers* I love how she catches the guy with a sort of meta double-meaning of the episode's title. Great episode of TV right there. Yes! The dog had me in stitches -- especially because you could tell that the canine actor was really thinking, "I am a good boy and I am doing a great job and I am a good boy!" One thing I really like is Charlie's willingness to learn; once she decides to learn how to do something, she does it wholly and doesn't care if it makes her look strange or silly. I think it's what makes her such a believable private eye. I genuinely believe that Charlie absorbed quite a lot of knowledge in her three or four days working at the BBQ place because they showed her putting in the work! |
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 29, 2024 15:26:01 GMT -5
Watched the finale of Only Murders in the Building Season 4.
I'm still not convinced they really addressed how Marshall knew it was Sazz in Charles's apartment. They want us to believe he just saw her. But it was dark in the original episode. Maybe they're banking on us seeing that Marshall never saw Charles, so he didn't know they were dressed identically. He only saw Sazz?
The story about Sazz in this episode was so sad. I feel like episode 1 was also very sad. It is strange that the tone this season was so zany, when this is a genuinely sad story at the core.
As expected, someone gets murdered at the wedding. At some point. Thankfully off-screen. Also thankfully, not who I was fearing. I was comforted early on in the episode when the writing kept making jokes about this. I felt pretty sure they wouldn't joke about it and then actually do it.
Amy Ryan put in another appearance. My god, she is so incredibly funny as this character. I think she prompted my biggest laugh of the episode. I loved her interaction with Steve Martin in this. Loved Oliver commenting, "It's hard to deny you make a cute couple" and Mabel's "Oh GOD!" reaction.
|
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster
Posts: 10,252
Member is Online
|
Post by LazBro on Oct 30, 2024 8:10:52 GMT -5
OMITB
A messy but enjoyable 4th season. A really breezy hangout show with established, likable characters in the guise of a not-very-good whodunit. The case work was all over the place, and the writers were much more interested in exploring relationships and offering up wacky scenarios over telling some watertight mystery. The Westies, the film production, the celebs, the stunt double society, Charles' sister ... this season was out there. And honestly I'm fine with that. As I've stated before, something about the show's look and especially that original score just gets me. I wanna spend time here. I don't want it to ever end. This is, no joke, one of my favorite shows of all time.
Some terrific work from Jane Lynch throughout. She's really great at this positive, wise, encouraging, and (as Desert Dweller rightly notes) really very sad character. I loved that scene early on, when imaginary Sazz was speaking with Charles about getting shot, and she said something to the effect of, "That's what I do. I take hits for my guy." Lynch is a treasure.
Season rankings:
1 3 4 2
I can really go either way between 3 and 4 here. I think I like the minute-to-minute of season 4 more, but season 3 had a better murder mystery, plus some really classic gags like the "white room" that Charles would fugue into. |
|
|
|
Post by Pedantic Editor Type on Oct 30, 2024 8:24:55 GMT -5
OMITB spoilers:
I was surprised Sazz just let Marshall/Rex go without making some calls or something. I know she was trying to be kind, but feels like she'd be smarter than that - he already tried to screw you over, what makes you think he won't go further?!
That said, Jane Lynch was just great, I did like the bittersweetness of her and Charles.
The plotting has gotten messier on this show, but it's still so much fun to watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Stuffingtacular She-Hulk on Oct 30, 2024 8:38:58 GMT -5
OMITB spoilers: I was surprised Sazz just let Marshall/Rex go without making some calls or something. I know she was trying to be kind, but feels like she'd be smarter than that - he already tried to screw you over, what makes you think he won't go further?! That said, Jane Lynch was just great, I did like the bittersweetness of her and Charles. The plotting has gotten messier on this show, but it's still so much fun to watch. I think it just honestly did not occur to Sazz that he would get violent, because she was the kind of person who would never do such a thing. Or, if it did, that he would react in the moment and she'd be able to defuse the situation. It wouldn't occur to a kind and decent person that Marshall/Rex might elaborately plan a longer-distance act of violence.
I am confused, though. Has someone really been trying to kill the trio since season 1, or was that just their speculation? I genuinely can't tell if I'm just bad at watching TV and missed it or whether they even closed that narrative loop. Definitely very messy, but I've been enjoying it regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pedantic Editor Type on Oct 30, 2024 8:54:48 GMT -5
OMITB spoilers: I was surprised Sazz just let Marshall/Rex go without making some calls or something. I know she was trying to be kind, but feels like she'd be smarter than that - he already tried to screw you over, what makes you think he won't go further?! That said, Jane Lynch was just great, I did like the bittersweetness of her and Charles. The plotting has gotten messier on this show, but it's still so much fun to watch. I think it just honestly did not occur to Sazz that he would get violent, because she was the kind of person who would never do such a thing. Or, if it did, that he would react in the moment and she'd be able to defuse the situation. It wouldn't occur to a kind and decent person that Marshall/Rex might elaborately plan a longer-distance act of violence.
I am confused, though. Has someone really been trying to kill the trio since season 1, or was that just their speculation? I genuinely can't tell if I'm just bad at watching TV and missed it or whether they even closed that narrative loop. Definitely very messy, but I've been enjoying it regardless.
Yeah, that was definitely a plot hole, I don't think they ever followed up on that. |
|
Ben Grimm
TI Forumite
Posts: 7,532
Member is Online
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Oct 30, 2024 9:32:20 GMT -5
I think it just honestly did not occur to Sazz that he would get violent, because she was the kind of person who would never do such a thing. Or, if it did, that he would react in the moment and she'd be able to defuse the situation. It wouldn't occur to a kind and decent person that Marshall/Rex might elaborately plan a longer-distance act of violence.
I am confused, though. Has someone really been trying to kill the trio since season 1, or was that just their speculation? I genuinely can't tell if I'm just bad at watching TV and missed it or whether they even closed that narrative loop. Definitely very messy, but I've been enjoying it regardless.
Yeah, that was definitely a plot hole, I don't think they ever followed up on that. I think it was setup for season 5. There were a bunch of crumbs spread out throughout the season - leading up to the murder at the end - that I think are all there for season 5. |
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 30, 2024 22:52:56 GMT -5
Yeah, that was definitely a plot hole, I don't think they ever followed up on that. I think it was setup for season 5. There were a bunch of crumbs spread out throughout the season - leading up to the murder at the end - that I think are all there for season 5.
Yes, I think that is related to Season 5. If Marshall had planted cameras in everyone's room and texted them "I'M WATCHING YOU" then surely that would have been addressed in his confession scene. We have to assume, I think, that he knew nothing about them or the podcast until he read Sazz's script.
There's a theory floating around that I've never really read/heard in depth that talks about someone trying to kill Charles in Season 3. So, there are definitely theories out there that someone has been after them since season one. Who isn't Jan, I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 30, 2024 23:16:37 GMT -5
OMITB spoilers: I was surprised Sazz just let Marshall/Rex go without making some calls or something. I know she was trying to be kind, but feels like she'd be smarter than that - he already tried to screw you over, what makes you think he won't go further?! Well, in fairness, she did actually try to call Bev Melon! But Bev was too busy at some Hollywood function to take her call.
But, I also thought she was too nice to Marshall/Rex. I wish she would have called up the production studio immediately when she saw the fraudulent script. And then called Marshall/Rex later. I mean, what does she have to gain by waiting to talk to him first? There is nothing he could say that would get her to just let him have that credit. Why wait?
I just found all the details around this to be very loose and illogical. Nothing about the mystery really hangs together for me at all. Like, I cannot believe that Sazz would have put Dudenoff's real name, real apartment number and real door code in the script. She's an industry professional. But that was all there for Marshall/Rex to see, so he got in to the apartment? I also find it pretty nonsensical that he walked the outside ledge around, what, half the building? And no one saw him from any of those apartments or the courtyard itself? Charles' window can be opened from the outside? What kind of window is that? How did Marshall know Sazz would be the only one in that apartment? In *someone else's* apartment? He just climbed in the window and hoped no one was there??
Like, the entire mystery is written backwards, and stuff just happens because the writers need it to be that way, regardless of whether it makes any real sense. The only part of this that is funny enough that it justifies including something this nonsensical is that Marshall was fine with murdering someone at the Arconia when he knows there are people there who solve murders that happen in the Arconia.
I feel like the mysteries in the prior 3 seasons were tighter than this. Though, admittedly, I haven't re-watched S1 or S2 recently.
Still, I thought this season was incredibly funny. So many hilarious scenes and gags. I loved the bonding going on between Charles and Oliver over the last few episodes. So many funny gags with them not understanding tech. Their hilarious and heartwarming fight in the alien motion capture suits. All the stuff with Melissa McCarthy and the fight she had with Streep. Oliver's Finsta account! The actors being so clueless and funny. I loved everything Richard Kind and Kumail Nanjiani did. Paul Rudd's completely insane Irish stuntman acting. And the two appearances by Amy Ryan, who has just mastered the comedic line delivery for the unhinged things her character says. I started cackling in that finale scene when Charles said he was aroused by Jan, and then when Jan was being dragged out I started fully laughing when she told Charles, "We're endgame!"
And damn, I just loved the wedding between Oliver and Loretta. Short and Streep are so dang cute together!
|
|
|
|
Post by Desert Dweller on Oct 30, 2024 23:46:57 GMT -5
I watched the final two episodes of Agatha All Along.
.... Not sure I like these. I may have to rewatch and process everything. I feel like Agatha was sacrificed as a character to promote Billy, and not in a good, satisfying way. I'm not entirely clear on the backstory involved here and what Agatha was doing. I was tired when I was watching and I'm not sure I really understood what happened with Nicholas and how this connects to the current scenes. I feel like I'm missing something. I asked this on Twitter, and got a response which was someone just guessing at the interpretation, so was the show actually too vague about this?
Edited to add: Okay, I've now received three, maybe four, totally different interpretations from people on Twitter. So, the show itself was not at all clear about what is going on here.
I'm also not sure how I feel about the resolution being that Billy really is responsible for everyone's deaths. I know Agatha tries to absolve him. But... like, none of them would have been there if he hadn't created that portal. Lilia had already stopped the witches from attacking Agatha. We're really going with Billy killed Sharon Davis, an innocent lady? Like, who's to say that, even without entering the portal, Billy's terror wouldn't have triggered his own magic that could have saved them all from the Salem Seven? (who were mostly nonentities in terms of villains.)
|
|
|
|
Post by MyNameIsNoneOfYourGoddamnBusin on Oct 31, 2024 14:20:58 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes?
|
|
Ben Grimm
TI Forumite
Posts: 7,532
Member is Online
|
Post by Ben Grimm on Oct 31, 2024 15:56:43 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes? It was fun enough. It got better once Monroe and Rosalee got together and became the best part of the show. The main plot was entertaining-enough silliness, but never really anything special. If you were in the mood for a case-of-the-week supernatural procedural it scratched that itch. |
|
ABz B👹anaz
Grandfathered In 
This country is (now less of) a shitshow.
Posts: 1,971
Member is Online
|
Post by ABz B👹anaz on Oct 31, 2024 17:17:29 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes? I find it neat that the two main characters got married IRL, and when Bitsie Tulloch went to star in Superman & Lois, her husband has also directed some episodes there. |
|
|
|
Post by Prole Hole on Nov 1, 2024 4:41:29 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes? Not really but it's still a fairly entertaining ride. Enjoyable without really ever becoming remarkable but not a complete waste of time. Slightly more grown up version of Supernatural, in some ways. |
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster
Posts: 10,252
Member is Online
|
Post by LazBro on Nov 1, 2024 7:27:10 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes? Grimm is my go-to example of shows I couldn't believe were still airing after we cut the cord, went to full time streaming, and stopped watching most broadcast shows. I think we were in season 1, maybe season 2, so when I later heard in passing the show was entering its sixth season, I was like, "What?!"
See also: Once Upon a Time
|
|
|
|
Post by William T. Goat, Esq. on Nov 2, 2024 11:19:15 GMT -5
I only watch Halloween-ish themed programs in October and Peacock recommend a show from around ten years ago called Grimm. A few episodes in and I have a question for anyone here who watched it: were they really able to sustain this premise for 120-plus episodes? Some subplots were more "dragged out" than "sustained". My strongest impression of Grimm is: There were at least 3 subgroups of characters with their own subplots that kept intersecting and diverging, and whenever a character learned an important piece of info, that character would get on the phone to tell someone, and then THAT character would get on the phone to tell someone, and so on. Theoretically this avoided Ebert's "idiot plot" syndrome. But it also made it very clear that the show was created as product placement for phones. (I'm also sure the writers discovered the online fan community a couple of seasons in, and considered themselves to be in a dialogue with us. One shocking season-ending cliffhanger was followed by a title card saying, "Oh sh*t!") |
|
|
|
Post by rjamielanga on Nov 3, 2024 1:53:18 GMT -5
Saturday Night Live the pre-election episode with John Mulaney and Chappell Roan. I haven't listened to the musical performances yet, but based on all of the clips available on YouTube I have to ask: how is it possible that the show is that much better when Mulaney hosts as compared to the usual run of things?
|
|
repulsionist
TI Forumite
actively disinterested
Posts: 3,674
|
Post by repulsionist on Nov 3, 2024 16:34:05 GMT -5
Taskmaster (S18:E7)
The heady highs of episode 6 dropped a bit to a lower orbit. Amazing that Zaltzman lied consistently. Sidi wrecked Greg and Rosie during the first prize contest banter at beginning of show. Dee did his smirky work well. Mostly enjoyable.
|
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster
Posts: 10,252
Member is Online
|
Post by LazBro on Nov 4, 2024 8:46:46 GMT -5
Saturday Night Live the pre-election episode with John Mulaney and Chappell Roan. I haven't listened to the musical performances yet, but based on all of the clips available on YouTube I have to ask: how is it possible that the show is that much better when Mulaney hosts as compared to the usual run of things?
It's really time to drop his recurring "surprise Broadway" sketch. "Diner Lobster" wasn't funny because it was a musical riff on Les Miserables. Hell, "Diner Lobster" lowkey wasn't funny at all, it was just so weird and surprising that it won you over with its audaciousness. Every new version of this sketch since, including "Port Authority Duane Reed" here, the audience is already in on the joke. It's such a waste of time. |
|
moimoi
AV Clubber
Posts: 5,076
|
Post by moimoi on Nov 4, 2024 10:20:33 GMT -5
Saturday Night Live the pre-election episode with John Mulaney and Chappell Roan. I haven't listened to the musical performances yet, but based on all of the clips available on YouTube I have to ask: how is it possible that the show is that much better when Mulaney hosts as compared to the usual run of things?
It's really time to drop his recurring "surprise Broadway" sketch. "Diner Lobster" wasn't funny because it was a musical riff on Les Miserables. Hell, "Diner Lobster" lowkey wasn't funny at all, it was just so weird and surprising that it won you over with its audaciousness. Every new version of this sketch since, including "Port Authority Duane Reed" here, the audience is already in on the joke. It's such a waste of time. See, but this is why I so enjoyed "Pete here's your bus milk! - "Thanks John!" Much like with What Up With That, everyone knows what's coming, so might as well break the 4th wall and get loose with it. |
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster
Posts: 10,252
Member is Online
|
Post by LazBro on Nov 4, 2024 10:33:08 GMT -5
It's really time to drop his recurring "surprise Broadway" sketch. "Diner Lobster" wasn't funny because it was a musical riff on Les Miserables. Hell, "Diner Lobster" lowkey wasn't funny at all, it was just so weird and surprising that it won you over with its audaciousness. Every new version of this sketch since, including "Port Authority Duane Reed" here, the audience is already in on the joke. It's such a waste of time. See, but this is why I so enjoyed "Pete here's your bus milk! - "Thanks John!" Much like with What Up With That, everyone knows what's coming, so might as well break the 4th wall and get loose with it. While I still think the sketch, as a concept, is tired and a frustrating use of 5-8 minutes that could bet better spent on something new, I do agree that quick exchange was really funny.
I like Mulaney as host, and sketches including the original " What's That Name?" and the original " Sitcom Reboot" (the switcheroo) are all-time bangers, but I want him to get out of the rut of his old sketches. It really stood out this time around that ALL of his live sketches were recurring bits. |
|
|
|
Post by William T. Goat, Esq. on Nov 4, 2024 21:16:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mrs David Tennant on Nov 5, 2024 11:13:38 GMT -5
Um, I was around for the very first video and there's no way it's been 43 years. That would mean I'm old! |
|
