Felicity Huffman Reacts To Kerry Washington's ‘Desperate Housewives' Spinoff
Kerry Washington's pending spinoff of the acclaimed Desperate Housewives television series has support from one of the show's leading cast members.
Felicity Huffman, who starred in the series as Lynette Scavo, earned a Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series, three Screen Actors Guild Awards, and nominations for three Golden Globe Awards for her portrayal.
'Isn't that great? They're gonna do Wisteria Lane with women of color, and I am all for it,' Huffman said Wednesday on Good Morning America. 'I just think it's wonderful, and I'm a huge fan of Kerry's.'
She continued to detail when asked who she thinks could fill Scavo's shoes, 'Oh my god, I have no idea. I think a lot of people could do it better than I did, so I can't wait to see it.'
Earlier this month, Washington confirmed that her production company, Simpson Street, is reimagining the Desperate Housewives mystery as Wisteria Lane through Onyx Collective after Deadline exclusively reported the news. Sources informed the outlet that there are no current plans for characters from the original series to appear on Wisteria Lane.
'I can't say too much — it's very newly announced, it's in development,' detailed the actress at the time, 'The idea is that it's new times, there's new challenges, it's like — what happens on that cul-de-sac now? It's really exciting.'
According to Deadline, Wisteria Lane was written by Natalie Chaidez, and is described as a fun, sexy, darkly comedic soap/mystery in the vein of Desperate Housewives, set among a group of five very different friends — and sometimes frenemies — who all live on a picture-perfect cul-de-sac. The original series was created by Marc Cherry and aired for eight seasons on ABC from October 2004 until May 2012.
More from VIBE.com
Tyler Perry, Shonda Rhimes Celebrate Kerry Washington Receiving Star On Hollywood Walk Of Fame
Kerry Washington Takes Command In New 'The Six Triple Eight' Trailer: Watch
Kerry Washington Invests In Black-Owned Social Media Platform Spill
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Love Island USA' Season 7 Premiere Suffers Delay On Peacock & Viewers Share Their Outrage
Love Island USA viewers didn't get a warm welcome to the Season 7 villa on premiere night. Peacock had been touting the new season's premiere at 9 p.m. ET and 6 p.m. ET, but the episode was not made available then. More from Deadline 'Love Island USA' Season 7 Cast Photos: Peacock Reveals First 10 Islanders 'Love Island UK' Season 12 Cast Photos: Meet The Islanders From The Summer 2025 Season 'Bridget Jones: Mad About The Boy' Emmy Submissions: Renée Zellweger Eyes Historic Double A minute after the episode was supposed to start streaming, Peacock posted a message on social media announcing a slight delay. 'WE GOT A TEXT! Tonight's episode will be slightly delayed. But it is worth the wait. Stay tuned!' read the Peacock post on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. WE GOT A TEXT! 👀 Tonight's episode will be slightly delayed. But it is worth the wait ❤️🔥🏝 Stay tuned! #LoveIslandUSA — Peacock (@peacock) June 4, 2025 Deadline reached out to Peacock for comment and will update when we hear back. Users in Canada reported that the Love Island USA Season 7 premiere episode was available on the CTV streamer, which indicates it was a technical issue on Peacock's side. The memes started flooding in when Love Island USA didn't premiere, with many quoting Season 6's Kaylor and her iconic 'Fawk Aaron' moment. RELATED: FAWK PEACAWK — Matt 🥩 (@yomattycakes) June 4, 2025 well how long is slight peacock?? — han (@_brhrb) June 4, 2025 So in minutes or?? — FETCH ME THEIR SOULS 👹 (@sheinhamoodz) June 4, 2025 Sweetie, what's is the problem? We're 10 minutes past start time — Deja (@dehacat) June 4, 2025Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Tonys, Emmys, Oscars & More Everything We Know About 'Nobody Wants This' Season 2 So Far
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Wuthering Heights' Casting Director Defends Margot Robbie & Jacob Elordi Controversy: "It's Just A Book"
English author Emily Brontë published Wuthering Heights in November 1847, and the intense novel remains a cultural phenomenon over 177 years later. It's been adapted numerous times across film, TV, radio, and even music, but now, the latest re-imagination of Brontë's work has sparked some controversy. Wuthering Heights, a movie directed by Emerald Fennell and inspired by Brontë's iconic novel, is set to debut in early 2026. However, many have taken issue with the leading roles being given to Margot Robbie, best known for her performances in Barbie and The Wolf of Wall Street, and the Priscilla star Jacob Elordi. Brontë's Wuthering Heights takes place in the late 18th century in remote Yorkshire and centers on the relationship between Catherine Earnshaw and Heathcliff, who is an orphan. In the book, Heathcliff is also portrayed as having dark skin, hair, and eyes, which is why readers suspected he was of Roman or "Gypsy" descent. This would help explain the prejudice that Heathcliff faces throughout the story. So, critics have suggested that Jacob Elordi wasn't the right choice to depict Heathcliff, given his ethnicity. Moreover, he and Margot Robbie, who are 27 and 34 years old, respectively, have both come under fire due to their ages, since the main characters are in their early twenties for most of the book. Casting director Kharmel Cochrane responded to the backlash at the Sands film festival in Scotland, claiming there was "no need to be accurate" since the material inspiring Emerald Fennell's newest film adaptation is "just a book," according to Deadline. This statement seemingly struck a nerve with numerous literary lovers, as a recent Reddit thread regarding Kharmel's response sparked a lot of outrage and called into question the respect Brontë's novel was being afforded. "It sounds like she [Kharmel] has lots of respect for the material and isn't just doing it for money," sarcastically commented one Redditor. "What was the point of adapting it if they weren't gonna actually adapt it accurately?" asked another, "They'll probably change entire plot points to make it unrecognizable." "The casting decision is one thing, but that dismissive attitude makes me angry. I won't be watching, considering it's 'just a film,'" added a third. Now, Emerald Fennell's adaptation of Wuthering Heights isn't the first to ignore character traits laid out by Brontë in the original book. In fact, Heathcliff has previously been played by actors such as Ralph Fiennes, Tom Hardy, and Timothy Dalton. Still, the rest of Kharmel's remarks from the Sands film festival have left a sour taste in many people's mouths. "There was one Instagram comment that said the casting director should be shot. But just wait until you see it, and then you can decide whether you want to shoot me or not. But you really don't need to be accurate. It's just a book. That is not based on real life. It's all art," she stated. "There's definitely going to be some English Lit fans that are not going to be happy. Wait until you see the set design, because that is even more shocking. And there may or may not be a dog collar in it." According to , the film will be released on February 13, 2026. How well it's received by audiences in the wake of such casting controversy remains to be seen. Looking for more , , and news? Follow us on so you never miss a thing!
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Blake Lively drops two claims of emotional distress against Justin Baldoni
In the latest twist in the legal saga between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, Lively is dropping two claims against Baldoni of emotional distress. As if the drama couldn't get any messier, the accusations continue to fly. Baldoni's lawyer filed a letter requesting that the judge in the case compel Lively to 'identify her medical and mental health care providers' — signing a HIPAA release to open up access to her therapy notes and pertinent medical info, as People reported. Rather than do so, the letter says, Lively requested to withdraw her claims of emotional distress, but maybe just for now. Baldoni's attorney Kevin Fritz said the actor wanted to keep the right to re-file those emotional distress claims at a later time — but Lively 'can't have it both ways.' Lively's lawyers take another view. Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb accused Baldoni's legal counsel of a 'press stunt,' saying they are simply 'preparing our case for trial by streamlining and focusing it,' as per Deadline's reporting. U.S. District Court Judge Lewis J. Liman had this to say on Tuesday: The two parties must decide 'whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice' before proceeding further — the claims are either to be dismissed forever or possibly pursued again, but there is no in-between. Representatives of Baldoni and Lively did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment on Tuesday. The order comes as the latest event in the lawsuit, with a trial set to begin in March 2026. Lively initially filed a sexual harassment and retaliation complaint in September. She accused Baldoni, along with his team, of orchestrating a smear campaign against her after she reported on-set sexual harassment, as first reported by the New York Times. Most recently, Lively sought to dismiss a defamation countersuit from Baldoni. The motion, filed in March, cites a California law that prohibits 'weaponizing defamation lawsuits' against those who have filed suit or 'spoken out about sexual harassment and retaliation.' Baldoni's attorney Bryan Freedman later called the motion 'one of the most abhorrent examples of abusing our legal system.' But Lively's motion only picked up steam as it drew widespread support from advocacy groups. Equal Rights Advocates, a gender equity and workplace protection-oriented nonprofit based in San Francisco, urged a federal judge to support the motion and uphold the aforementioned law. Jessica Schidlow, legal director at Child USA, a nonprofit that pushes for more legal protection of abuse victims, told The Times in May that if the law were to be struck down, it would 'essentially do away with the protections for all survivors.' 'It would be a devastating setback and completely undermine the purpose of the law, which was to make it easier for victims to come forward and to speak their truth without fear of retaliation,' she added.
