Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 14, 03:50
2: Dec 13, 12:54
3: Dec 13, 08:30
4: Dec 13, 05:28
5: Dec 12, 13:06
6: Dec 12, 08:55
7: Dec 11, 23:59
8: Dec 11, 14:43
9: Dec 11, 11:29
10: Dec 11, 07:59
11: Dec 10, 18:15
12: Dec 10, 12:28
13: Dec 10, 09:30
14: Dec 10, 05:59
15: Dec 9, 17:07
16: Dec 9, 13:47
17: Dec 9, 10:33
18: Dec 9, 07:33
19: Dec 8, 17:50
20: Dec 8, 10:32
Posts: 154
In response to
"
Slate bait: "No, Tom Hiddleston Should Not be the Next Bond" -- (link)
"
by
senor dentista
Slate got this article 100% wrong *spoils* flip it all and its a good review
Posted by
Epiphany (aka Epiphany)
May 27 '16, 11:22
I felt the flirtatious side to extract info was " off" = I felt the pivotal scene in the opening act of episode 2 was remarkable and basically sold me from then on.
Show Spoilers
Responses:
So, its a Slate article? -- nm
-
iSpam
May 27, 11:25
3
ahh I see - I never read Slate - they try to be so controvorsial that people will read it? -- nm
-
Epiphany
May 27, 11:26
2
I can't find it at the moment, but they had a brilliant self-annihilation a few months ago. -- nm
-
Beryllium
May 27, 11:46
Imagine Onion articles. Except the writers mean what they write and are really earnest about it. -- nm*
-
ty97
May 27, 11:27
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.