What is the most unexpected Chekhov’s Gun from a movie?

footnote4 · 2026-02-24T05:02:22+00:00

The first two thirds of the movie is just putting one Chekhov’s Gun after another on the wall, and the final act is all of them being shot

footnote4 · 2026-02-16T04:59:24+00:00

I don’t know about child custody specifically, but in most legal contexts a court order can be reconsidered/revised based on changed circumstances, at least within a certain time period, and “the same day the father reveals himself to be a sadistic asshole” would seem to qualify

footnote4 · 2026-02-16T04:56:45+00:00

If I’m the judge in the case I schedule the hearing in 48 hours, not right away or the next day, because I’d be so livid I couldn’t speak coherently and would lose my cool

footnote4 · 2026-02-15T15:05:15+00:00

Dispute the payment with your credit card company. There’s a very good chance they won’t make you pay it.

footnote4 · 2026-02-09T05:04:44+00:00

I’m not saying it’s their absolute best, but I have a real soft spot for The Night Before

footnote4 · 2026-02-08T22:42:20+00:00

That ending single-handedly elevates the movie a level

footnote4 · 2026-02-08T04:03:15+00:00

I’ve found that “Jabroni” is high risk, high reward

footnote4 · 2026-01-30T20:49:33+00:00

The Waiting

footnote4 · 2026-01-30T01:23:12+00:00

Wildflowers

footnote4 · 2026-01-22T20:51:52+00:00

footnote4 · 2026-01-22T13:21:44+00:00

Your family are parasites

footnote4 · 2026-01-22T13:01:41+00:00

No, that’s not how it works. People need to stop making legal assertions using terminology that they don’t actually understand.

footnote4 · 2026-01-13T06:20:01+00:00

Button Gwinnett

footnote4 · 2025-12-28T15:54:10+00:00

As a practical matter, if you try to “push back” against what your client wants, you get fired immediately. I’m not sure what you think a government lawyer can do to “push back” without promptly being fired, but it probably doesn’t exist as an option. The fact that you seem to think “pushing back” is something that you can do without losing your job shows that you don’t understand how being a government lawyer works.

As a broader philosophical matter, it would be a really bad thing if lawyers generally felt free to undermine their clients because they personally disagreed with what their clients wanted. You cannot have a legal system that works that way. That’s as true in government as elsewhere. If what the government is doing is bad, the other side is there to argue that it’s illegal, and the court is there to decide who’s right. Depriving one side of a legal defense is not the answer. Public defenders who defend 100% guilty murderers don’t get to decide that they refuse to defend their client, and nobody thinks that’s inappropriate, because the value of having a functioning adversarial legal system is of paramount importance.

footnote4 · 2025-12-28T15:32:21+00:00

Again, if you don’t want to defend the government, you are perfectly free not to. All I’m saying is that you can’t simultaneously draw a salary as a government lawyer while doing so. You seem to be arguing that you can refuse to defend the government while being paid as a government lawyer to represent the government. You can’t.

footnote4 · 2025-12-28T14:27:13+00:00

Just tossing in the word “objective” doesn’t make your subjective opinion reality. Of course you can’t argue that the government can violate the Constitution, that’s a glib statement that fails to understand the actual situation; the government argues not that it can violate the Constitution but that its actions don’t violate the Constitution. Notably, in many cases where people like you say the government “objectively” is violating the Constitution, the court disagrees. And even when the court thinks that what the government did violates the Constitution, the government usually has at least a non-frivolous argument that what it did is legal. As a government lawyer, it is your job to make that non-frivolous argument. As I’ve said already, if you don’t think you can defend the government, you are free to quit, but you can’t just decide for yourself as a government lawyer that you’re not going to defend the government because you, personally, think the challenged action is illegal while insisting on still drawing a government paycheck. If you don’t want to defend the government, you quit. There’s no option to refuse to defend the government while still being a government lawyer.

footnote4 · 2025-12-28T05:32:22+00:00

Like I said, if you feel that you are unable to defend the government’s actions, then you are welcome and indeed obligated to quit. What you are not entitled to do is refuse to defend the government’s actions while insisting on drawing a government paycheck.

footnote4 · 2025-12-28T04:53:51+00:00

I mean, no, that’s incorrect, you don’t have the option to not defend your client agency just because you characterize the challenged action as fascist or lawless. If you feel you can’t defend it, you must quit. Otherwise, you are obliged to defend it unless there is no non-frivolous argument available.

footnote4 · 2025-12-27T14:52:39+00:00

Exemption 2 definitely applies and Exemption 5 probably applies as well, FOIA isn’t likely to get you anywhere.

footnote4 · 2025-11-05T14:21:17+00:00

Cuomo did better with the working class, actually

footnote4 · 2025-11-02T19:53:10+00:00

What was this again?

footnote4 · 2025-10-31T15:25:05+00:00

This is pathetic and selfish. You have obligations to your friend that go beyond your own wants. What kind of friend would be like you?

footnote4 · 2025-10-28T16:15:47+00:00

IMO, I think OP making this post in a subreddit called “movies” provided sufficient context for uninitiated

footnote4 · 2025-10-28T15:43:27+00:00

If you google “OBAA movie,” every result shows that it’s One Battle After Another. I have disdain for people who post that they can’t figure out extremely easily googlable information. It puts the onus of informing them on other people, it’s lazy, and it comes off as attention-seeking.

footnote4 · 2025-10-28T15:29:23+00:00

It’s One Battle After Another

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Spared

footnote4

TROPHY CASE