Has Entertainment Weekly Ruined Entertainment?

I have read every single EW magazine since its inception. As a novice movie buff I saw this ad on TV, looked over at my spouse (former) and asked if I could get a subscription. With a nod of the head, the magazine ever since has ruined me forever in both good ways and bad.

I reveled then and revel still in the attention to detail and the sheer exposition on all things neither academic nor important. Yet, it is like a drug, a weekly fix that I just can't seem to quit. I will be the first to check into rehab when they open the Pauline Kael Clinic.

In a way though, the problem of EW is a deeper one. Has it desensitized us all to simply enjoying any movie, TV show, DVD or book? It's bad enough that we see every plot detail and funny line in movie trailers and commercials, but in this entertainment age we can't seem to decide for ourselves what we like and what we don't. I find myself running to my P.O. Box first, to see if I am going to really enjoy "3:10 to Yuma."

My psychologist friend Craig says EW and I have a co-dependant relationship. We are enablers of each other. I enable Time-Warner to accrue more and more money. EW enables my manic longing for useless trivia and excessive story-arc verbiage.

We've been through it all together too. I have seen the magazine reach highs and lows only comparable to the comedy swings of "Saturday Night Live."

They've still never recovered from losing Jim Mullen's "Hit List" (with the emphasis on Jim Mullen). "The Shaw  Report" has to be the most useless blip of writing since the semicolon. It's shortness is only matched by its insipidness. It's way more than just five minutes ago. The magazine continues to swagger every closer to tabloid mentality. But that's for sure a Time-Warner decision, not an in-house one.

The most interesting improvement in the magazine is all right, but for all the wrong reasons. When EW contracted Stephen King for "The Pop of King," what they got was an incredibly hip column title with an incredibly un-hip writer. But it works and it works good. The back page has long been an Achilles Heel for the mag, but King brings an oh, so wonderful human dimension to the idea of commenting on pop-culture. Nothing like his books, his writing is from the hip, simple and brief!!! Just like his books his writing true to his audience. But I am now becoming a critic myself. The horrors!!!

Asking if Entertainment Weekly has ruined entertainment might just be like asking, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" 'Cause it might just be, entertainment ruined Entertainment Weekly.