tom shales - Gawker

posts about #tomshales more →
Do We Need Another Eastwick?
'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
Repent! Repent! 'The Sopranos' Is About To Die For You
Media Bubble: Other Words That Rhyme With 'Toos Are Abuse And Caboose

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

bluebears
09/23/09

In reply to Do We Need Another Eastwick?
When I read the Witches of Eastwick I did not think, hey Updike's really breaking free from his usual misogyny. I am quite surprised that was his intention there. Good...try?
Reply

bluebears was starred bluebears was unstarred

morninggloria
09/23/09

In reply to Do We Need Another Eastwick?
Yesterday, a commercial for this show advertised it as "Sex and the City in Salem!" which to me is sort of like saying "It's like Hocus Pocus, but shitty!"
Reply

morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred

Spirit Fingers
09/23/09

In reply to Do We Need Another Eastwick?
I didn't hate this movie, but it wasn't overly memorable either. I understand that it has the potential for that technicolor quirkiness that's become popular a la Pushing Daisies and such, but again I'd love it if television was either a bit more original OR if they resurrected really good shows that were canceled unexpectedly, not because they were bad shows, but because they just couldn't get a good foothold. Case and Point...Kindred: The Embraced. I adored that show, and it has everything popular right now. Vampires...check. Good story...check. Was a Fox cult fave right around the time of 90210 popularity and Melrose Place...check, check. It was possibly a little before its time when it aired in 1996. Who cared about dusty vampires and their family clans then, right? But we do now. So it's kinda already primed for a Fox show reboot. Sad thing about Mark Frankel who played Julian Luna, though. But if done right it could be Brill, and if there's one thing Fox doesn't have right now it's a vampire show, especially a good one with layers.
Reply

Edited by Spirit Fingers at 09/23/09 10:54 AM Spirit Fingers was starred Spirit Fingers was unstarred

ShanghaiLil
09/23/09

In reply to Do We Need Another Eastwick?
You've obviously forgotten the stage musical version that played in London a few years ago!
Reply

ShanghaiLil was starred ShanghaiLil was unstarred

Swordfish
07/27/09

In reply to 'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
The New Washington Post is a bit like the New Newsweek: put your popular and powerful and excellent writers--David Ansen, Tom Shales--out to pasture so you can lose your old reliable readers as well as not attract the young ones.
Panic is the new Pink.
Reply

Swordfish was starred Swordfish was unstarred

fileunder
07/27/09

In reply to 'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
Tom Shales' takedowns of Kathie Lee Gifford's holiday specials are fucking amazing.

But I've had what passes for a crush on Hank Stuever for years now, so consider me happy.
Reply

Edited by fileunder at 07/27/09 2:09 PM fileunder was starred fileunder was unstarred

notubob
07/27/09

In reply to 'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
Aren't all Fox viewers "sick, dizzy and confused"
Reply

goetz promoted this comment notubob was starred notubob was unstarred

Deric
07/27/09

In reply to 'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
Not that's he's effective, but I believe Doctor Octopus is the only doc specializing in Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity.
Reply

Deric was starred Deric was unstarred

BookishLookish
07/27/09

@Deric: Don't forget the Vulture, who has enhanced strength thanks to the radiation from his electromagnetic harness.
Reply

BookishLookish was starred BookishLookish was unstarred

BxgrlJeri
07/27/09

In reply to 'You Could Be Allergic to Wi-Fi!'
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Reply

BxgrlJeri was starred BxgrlJeri was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion