Hey, why not talk about it here? It looks like it'll be fun. The last one sure was.

Episode 1: Waiting for Dutch.

All I can say is, it's a shame to see a judge break the law like that. Just look at what happened.

Just a few actors I recognized so far . . .

Kirsten Dunst as Peggy Blomquist
Jean Smart as Floyd Gerhardt (weird name for a woman, don’t you think?)
Ted Danson as Hank Larsson
Cristin Milioti as Betsy Solverson
Jeffrey Donovan as Dodd Gerhardt
Brad Garrett as Joe Bulo
Nick Offerman as Karl Weathers
Ann Cusack as the Judge
Michael Hogan as Otto Gerhardt

I’m sure they’ll be more later. Good cast. Let the good times roll.

Great first episode, looks like it will be an epic series.

Weird to see Bokeem Woodbine with an afro.

Well . . . I was fairly disappointed to see somebody

Yes.

There's a fairly recent story of that happening in New York.... so, yeah, I think its possible for it to happen in a fairly rural area where there's decidedly fewer people and less traffic.

Whoops, it was Texas. 2001.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_o ... Glen_Biggs

Yeah, he's joking - particularly by spoiler tagging something that needn't be tagged thus.

But I've taken a tremendous amount of crap for saying less about an episode of a show even after more time had passed than this. Trouble is, with DVR tech, it's so easy and quite common to record your favorite shows for later viewing, and it's not unreasonable at all to go at least a week before you get caught up on a particular show.

If you go longer than week, however, then, IMO, you've no one to blame but yourself if you open up and read a thread on the show you like but aren't caught up on yet. You're just asking for it then.

So I'm fine spoiler tagging anything less than a week old, and I think, honestly, more people probably should do as much.

But sure, even this one week standard is completely arbitrary. Opinions will vary.

One week is generally considered polite.

Although if you're dipping into a thread dedicated to a specific show or movie, then I consider it to be at your own risk and you should expect relatively minor stuff to be spoiled.

If something is a big reveal or a really awesome scene, then I go for spoiler tags... even after the one week period. Usually I just try to keep things a bit vague as half the time I'm on my phone and spoiler tags are a pain on my phone.

Of course, the funny thing about spoilers is they often get people to start watching a show, because those really cool scenes will often be the reason why someone starts watching a show in the first place. The big spoiler for Game of Thrones Season One went a long way toward getting me into the show (and books), as I realized it was a show where major things can and will happen. While it would have been nice to go in not knowing that, it's part of what convinced me GoT was worth my time.

I think the spoiler thing is pretty easy - if you have a thread devoted to a programme or movie or whatever and you open it up, then you see a spoiler? Well fuck you - what did you think would happen, you daft git?

However, if you are looking in a thread devoted to the bashing of a man who once had a promising career drawing Marvel and DC comics and made his name through revamping them, and some twat decides to announce the latest event in a TV series that you have been following but trying to avoid spoilers on because you haven't had time to get to the latest episode? It seems to me that you then have a pretty good case for deeming that person a twat. If it's in a thread devoted to that topic, then the twat is the guy who opened it and was surprised to find spoilers.

If someone isn't caught up on a show, they should stay out of that respective thread until they are. It's not that hard. Otherwise we wind up with one of those threads where every post is nothing but a spoiler.

In Fargo's case, I'm happy to maintain the spoiler involving one of the key murders for just a little while longer. It was such a wonderful surprise for me when I watched it that I'm not keen to put it out there quite yet for anyone who is still figuring out that Fargo is back.

But as soon as that particular aspect of the plot takes center stage, I'll happily talk about it.

Threads dedicated to one particular show really should be sufficient warning to anybody not caught up and who doesn't want to see spoilers to stay out. But comments on other shows definitely should still use spoilers, and for especially big reveals or endings to a season or series. Even today, because new people are growing up into the audience all the time, it's not like they've have plenty of time to see it already, so it's not completely unreasonable to spoiler tag something like the fact that Darth Vader is really

For me, they just had a free HBO/MAX, etc. weekend on DISH, and 5 seasons of Game Of Thrones appeared all at once. I thought I was lucky to find season 1 on DVD for $10 last year, but here I could download ON DEMAND seasons 2, 3, 4, and 5 - for FREE! Wow. And this thread isn't about GOT, so I appreciated that Steven Clubb didn't put any GOT spoilers in the Fargo thread. Thanks.

Now I just gotta watch 40 episodes of GOT before they disappear after the 30 day "rental" period.

BINGE WATCHING!

Apropos of nothing (I forgot about the post above) I just noticed there's a character this season called.... Roost Bolton...

Fargo 2 hasn't had the best ratings. Too bad, it's been a good season.

No Bilbo Baggins to bring in the Tolkien and Sir A.C. Doyle fans.

While passable as a decent show, this season seems to be missing the oddly eccentric characters that made the movie and the 1st season unique among all of the other crime series out there. I'll stick with it for the story, but its not really what I want from a series called Fargo.

Yeah - just some "Fargo" accents aren't enough.

We're very satisfied with this season.

After the letdown that was True Detective Season Two, we're delighted that this show has held up well.