[akCard]

I think this is referring to you.

"Revolution has a Metacritic rating of 64 from 32 mostly positive critic reviews, with Glenn Garvin from the New York Times saying 'Revolution is big, bold and brassy adventure, a cowboys-and-Indians story for end times.'[9]"

That's taken from the Wikipedia page on Eric Kripke, creator of Supernatural and Revolution, which I stumbled across because I was trying to remember Kripke's new show. (Sidenote: it's waay too easy now to forget about a new show when it goes on a months-long break in the middle of its first season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kripke

[akCard]

I think this is referring to you.

"Revolution has a Metacritic rating of 64 from 32 mostly positive critic reviews, with Glenn Garvin from the New York Times saying 'Revolution is big, bold and brassy adventure, a cowboys-and-Indians story for end times.'[9]"

That's taken from the Wikipedia page on Eric Kripke, creator of Supernatural and Revolution, which I stumbled across because I was trying to remember Kripke's new show. (Sidenote: it's waay too easy now to forget about a new show when it goes on a months-long break in the middle of its first season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kripke

[akCard]

I think this is referring to you.

"Revolution has a Metacritic rating of 64 from 32 mostly positive critic reviews, with Glenn Garvin from the New York Times saying 'Revolution is big, bold and brassy adventure, a cowboys-and-Indians story for end times.'[9]"

That's taken from the Wikipedia page on Eric Kripke, creator of Supernatural and Revolution, which I stumbled across because I was trying to remember Kripke's new show. (Sidenote: it's waay too easy now to forget about a new show when it goes on a months-long break in the middle of its first season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kripke

[akCard]

I think this is referring to you.

"Revolution has a Metacritic rating of 64 from 32 mostly positive critic reviews, with Glenn Garvin from the New York Times saying 'Revolution is big, bold and brassy adventure, a cowboys-and-Indians story for end times.'[9]"

That's taken from the Wikipedia page on Eric Kripke, creator of Supernatural and Revolution, which I stumbled across because I was trying to remember Kripke's new show. (Sidenote: it's waay too easy now to forget about a new show when it goes on a months-long break in the middle of its first season.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Kripke

[Kathy]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

[Kathy]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

[Kathy]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

[Kathy]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

[washingtonismoney]

The most important question: is Eric related to Saul?

[washingtonismoney]

The most important question: is Eric related to Saul?

[washingtonismoney]

The most important question: is Eric related to Saul?

[washingtonismoney]

The most important question: is Eric related to Saul?

[FarmBoy]

Per wikipedia: [Saul] is the second cousin once removed of the notable television writer, director, and producer Eric Kripke.

[FarmBoy]

Per wikipedia: [Saul] is the second cousin once removed of the notable television writer, director, and producer Eric Kripke.

[FarmBoy]

Per wikipedia: [Saul] is the second cousin once removed of the notable television writer, director, and producer Eric Kripke.

[FarmBoy]

Per wikipedia: [Saul] is the second cousin once removed of the notable television writer, director, and producer Eric Kripke.

[yvonne]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

Wikipedia is us -- or anyone else for that matter. Feel free to go in and correct it.

[yvonne]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

Wikipedia is us -- or anyone else for that matter. Feel free to go in and correct it.

[yvonne]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

Wikipedia is us -- or anyone else for that matter. Feel free to go in and correct it.

[yvonne]

Are you stringing for The New York Times now? Or do Wikipedia people just not understand the basic premise behind syndication?

Wikipedia is us -- or anyone else for that matter. Feel free to go in and correct it.

[akCard]

Kinda funny that that page shows both the good and bad of Wikipedia in one article: it does a pretty good job of citing its references but then blows it badly by incorrectly noting the paper at which Garvin works.

How hard could it have been for the author (authoress??) to double-check that bit?

[akCard]

Kinda funny that that page shows both the good and bad of Wikipedia in one article: it does a pretty good job of citing its references but then blows it badly by incorrectly noting the paper at which Garvin works.

How hard could it have been for the author (authoress??) to double-check that bit?

[akCard]

Kinda funny that that page shows both the good and bad of Wikipedia in one article: it does a pretty good job of citing its references but then blows it badly by incorrectly noting the paper at which Garvin works.

How hard could it have been for the author (authoress??) to double-check that bit?

[akCard]

Kinda funny that that page shows both the good and bad of Wikipedia in one article: it does a pretty good job of citing its references but then blows it badly by incorrectly noting the paper at which Garvin works.

How hard could it have been for the author (authoress??) to double-check that bit?

[Bruce Wang]

I looove REVOLUTION, but I'm a sucker for anything post-apocalyptic.  I can't wait to see the STANFORD badasses that rule the California Commonwealth.

Garvin, what shows do you recommend that are under the radar (besides Body of Proof)?

[Bruce Wang]

I looove REVOLUTION, but I'm a sucker for anything post-apocalyptic.  I can't wait to see the STANFORD badasses that rule the California Commonwealth.

Garvin, what shows do you recommend that are under the radar (besides Body of Proof)?

[Bruce Wang]

I looove REVOLUTION, but I'm a sucker for anything post-apocalyptic.  I can't wait to see the STANFORD badasses that rule the California Commonwealth.

Garvin, what shows do you recommend that are under the radar (besides Body of Proof)?

[Bruce Wang]

I looove REVOLUTION, but I'm a sucker for anything post-apocalyptic.  I can't wait to see the STANFORD badasses that rule the California Commonwealth.

Garvin, what shows do you recommend that are under the radar (besides Body of Proof)?

[washingtonismoney]

Not garvin, but The Americans on FX (which is available for free online), is very good and in its first season. The plotting can sometimes rely a bit too much on contrivance and metronomic swings, but it has some very good characters and a good premise (to wit: KGB undercover agents in the Beltway during the 80s. They had an arranged marriage to each other -- it's an examination of the marriage. There's also a parallel plot with FBI counterintelligence and his troubled marriage.)

[washingtonismoney]

Not garvin, but The Americans on FX (which is available for free online), is very good and in its first season. The plotting can sometimes rely a bit too much on contrivance and metronomic swings, but it has some very good characters and a good premise (to wit: KGB undercover agents in the Beltway during the 80s. They had an arranged marriage to each other -- it's an examination of the marriage. There's also a parallel plot with FBI counterintelligence and his troubled marriage.)

[washingtonismoney]

Not garvin, but The Americans on FX (which is available for free online), is very good and in its first season. The plotting can sometimes rely a bit too much on contrivance and metronomic swings, but it has some very good characters and a good premise (to wit: KGB undercover agents in the Beltway during the 80s. They had an arranged marriage to each other -- it's an examination of the marriage. There's also a parallel plot with FBI counterintelligence and his troubled marriage.)

[washingtonismoney]

Not garvin, but The Americans on FX (which is available for free online), is very good and in its first season. The plotting can sometimes rely a bit too much on contrivance and metronomic swings, but it has some very good characters and a good premise (to wit: KGB undercover agents in the Beltway during the 80s. They had an arranged marriage to each other -- it's an examination of the marriage. There's also a parallel plot with FBI counterintelligence and his troubled marriage.)

[dabigv13]

Garvin, have you seen Peep Show, a British sitcom on Channel 4? It's been one of my favorite comedies for a while, has the depravity of Always Sunny and Curb, but with a British veneer and a really cool POV style of filming. Curious if you know anything about a possible 9th season.

[dabigv13]

Garvin, have you seen Peep Show, a British sitcom on Channel 4? It's been one of my favorite comedies for a while, has the depravity of Always Sunny and Curb, but with a British veneer and a really cool POV style of filming. Curious if you know anything about a possible 9th season.

[dabigv13]

Garvin, have you seen Peep Show, a British sitcom on Channel 4? It's been one of my favorite comedies for a while, has the depravity of Always Sunny and Curb, but with a British veneer and a really cool POV style of filming. Curious if you know anything about a possible 9th season.

[dabigv13]

Garvin, have you seen Peep Show, a British sitcom on Channel 4? It's been one of my favorite comedies for a while, has the depravity of Always Sunny and Curb, but with a British veneer and a really cool POV style of filming. Curious if you know anything about a possible 9th season.

[Nan3cy]

One more vote for The Americans. I think it's terrific.

[Nan3cy]

One more vote for The Americans. I think it's terrific.

[Nan3cy]

One more vote for The Americans. I think it's terrific.

[Nan3cy]

One more vote for The Americans. I think it's terrific.