How to get into a free screening of 'Normal' this week in the Seattle area ⁠5%

By Dyer Oxley⁠0%

5/4/2026, 2:44:22 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Appeal to Authority, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 84.6% saturation with 209 hits. Analysis detected 643 faulty-reasoning hits from 247 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 19% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (20,978 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.80% of the article peer group.

Magnolia Pictures has partnered with the USO to provide free screenings of the movie "Normal" starring Bob Odenkirk at movie theaters across the United States, and one Seattle-area theater is participating. 
Past and present military members, as well as first responders, are being treated to a free screening of "Normal" at select theaters across the United States May 5-7. 
In the Seattle area, there is only one theater participating: AMC Alderwood in Lynnwood. 
While the free tickets to watch "Normal" are for past and present service members, and first responders, they also get one guest. 
So, if you know anybody who fits the previously mentioned criteria, and they like you enough, they can bring you to the free movie. 
RELATED: "Normal" is a refreshingly comedic upgrade to modern shoot-em-up flicks 
The USO is behind the free screenings. 
Theaters across the United States are participating, but only two in Washington state are included: AMC Alderwood 16 in Lynnwood and AMC River Park Square in Spokane. 
The USO offering comes shortly after Odenkirk, along with "Normal" writer Derek Kolstad, visited with soldiers at Camp Pendleton in southern California on April 24. 
"Normal" was released into theaters last month. 
It's writer, Kolstad, is the the creator of "John Wick" and "Nobody" (which also starts Odenkirk). 
You can expect the same over-the-top punches and explosions from this shoot-em-up flick. 
Check out our review of "Normal" here. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 3.3%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 2.2%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 16.6%Dyer Oxley: 3.8%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic16.6%This article: 5.3%Dyer Oxley: 1.6%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic5.3%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.1%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%Dyer Oxley: 2.4%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias5.3%This article: 6.1%Dyer Oxley: 5.3%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.7%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.8%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.7%Dyer Oxley: 5.1%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias9.7%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.3%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Dyer Oxley: 8.8%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.8%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.6%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 11.3%Dyer Oxley: 2.6%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias11.3%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 10.9%Dyer Oxley: 3.6%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect10.9%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.8%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.2%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.6%Dyer Oxley: 4.3%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority14.6%This article: 8.9%Dyer Oxley: 1.2%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma8.9%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.4%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.7%Dyer Oxley: 7.5%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization9.7%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.4%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.4%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.5%Dyer Oxley: 5.6%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion4.5%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.0%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 10.1%Dyer Oxley: 2.5%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.1%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 9.7%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof9.7%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.7%Dyer Oxley: 2.1%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal9.7%This article: 5.7%Dyer Oxley: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman5.7%This article: 16.2%Dyer Oxley: 1.6%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)16.2%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.3%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 1.5%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.6%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.9%Dyer Oxley: 6.3%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice10.9%This article: 6.1%Dyer Oxley: 1.5%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination6.1%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.1%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Dyer Oxley: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 84.6%Dyer Oxley: 2.5%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…84.6%

247 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers26%attributed speech184writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageMagnolia Pictures • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageUSO • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageUSO • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

USO

100%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words51% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%42.5%85.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.0 ptsWriter: 83.2%USO: 78.1%78.1%Biased Writer Voice-14.7 ptsWriter: 14.7%USO: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-8.2 ptsWriter: 8.2%USO: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.