Does Michael Riedel like anything? — Page 2

"Quaint Finding...ahem...NAMO. But if you have nothing to add to the conversation, other than an asinine comment, please refrain."

Ahem? That was my addition to the discussion. Here, let me spell it out for you. If Michael Reidel is your only source for "fun and witty discourse" (I have to put it in quotes because I would never think to characterize what he does as funny or witty, then you need to get out more. I will refrain from adding "dipsh*t" to keep this civil.

---

If you watch Theater Talk he's actually a really nice guy, and pretty smart. He really liked RUINED.

To each his own. I think he's interesting and he makes theater a talked about subject rather than it just being boring and stale. I mean there's gossip columns for everything else, so who cares?

Huh? I read his column.

The only time i have ever had a problem with him was when he was really hurting Taboo, he went too far and his 'reporting' was misguided at best.

Apart from that though he does make me laugh, i think his column is funny and and informative and a lot if the times he turns out to be right

---

I think he needs to get laid first and then get brainwashed.

---

"He does? I really have no idea where you or Play AHEM Esq are coming from. Idaho, perhaps?"

I do believe I hit a nerve! How Riedel-ian of me! As for your question, born and bred Californian and eight years a New Yorker...but I do know some lovely (and, incidentally, very interesting!)people from Idaho.

Whether or not Riedel is your cup of tea or not, he is one of the very few journalists...(1 a : a person engaged in journalism; especially : a writer or editor for a news medium)....who has a passion for the theater. I would wish his columns not be so gossip-filled and at times, malicious, but I would wish even more that other legitimate journalists followed his lead and made theater their passion. Riedel and perhaps John Lahr (who I much prefer) are really the only two mainstream writers these days who focus on the industry. Riedel's column on a 'solution' for the critics who were ousted from the Tony voting was perhaps unrealistic and over the top, but there were some good ideas in there. He's not always just bitchy. Just take him for what he is, realize the paper he writes for, don't take him so seriously, and he's actually fun to read most time.

I won't argue reach - but this site does get over 2 million hits a month.

And the message boards aren't password only - so many people read these threads who aren't members.

When you google search various things - threads do appear..

Again - not implying BWW has more of an audience. But to say the posters here aren't as easily read as the NY Post - not sure how safe a statement that is.

That being said - sunshine and gummy bears never sell papers. It's always been that way.

---

Craig is right. If you think anything you say can't be easily seen and read by not only the performers you post about but their friends and family, you're crazy. Nothing is sacred on here. None of them will admit it, but more broadway folks that I can count always have their finger on the pulse of what's going on around here.

---

The female panelist on Theatre Talk is Susan Haskins. Riedel clearly pilots the Theatre Talk ship. She's just along for the ride. She rarely speaks. Not sure if she's intimidate by him, or just doesn't have much to say.

1) I would definitely buy newspapers again if they came with sunshine and gummy bears.

2) As they say in Spring Awakening AHEM Play, blah blah blah blah blah blah blahblah. blah blah blah blah blah blah blahblah. If you get my meaning.

---