A Thread Where Aaron Sorkin's Brand New Joint 'Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip' May Be Anticipated And Discussed

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

channel 4 bought it for the UK, hurrah.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Monday, 17 July 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

Great. What's it about?

― Stone Monkey (Stone Monkey), Monday, 17 July 2006 14:49 (nineteen years ago)

people who talk quickly.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Monday, 17 July 2006 14:50 (nineteen years ago)

and say 'the, you know, thing' a lot.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Monday, 17 July 2006 14:51 (nineteen years ago)

CAN
NOT
WAIT.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 July 2006 14:56 (nineteen years ago)

WHAT.
HE.
SAID.

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 17 July 2006 15:04 (nineteen years ago)

Great. What's it about?

by allusion, Saturday Night Live. i don't think i have ever been more excited about a television programme and may have to learn how to TORRENT if More4 or whoeever aren't broadcasting in absolute sync with the American broadcasts.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Monday, 17 July 2006 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

The Tina Fey version of this show looks more interesting. It has Alec Baldwin! Matthew Perry clearly comes second in the lead tubbo sweepstakes.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Monday, 17 July 2006 15:40 (nineteen years ago)

i dunno man, the tina fey version is a laughtracked sitcom right?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 17 July 2006 15:43 (nineteen years ago)

I think so, but the parts of Studio 60 I have seen so far have been painfully bad.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Monday, 17 July 2006 15:49 (nineteen years ago)

But it has the greatest cast of any telly programme in history! Elliott! And the bald dude! And Josh! And some blonde woman who, knowing Sorkin, is just going to disappear after three episodes as if she never existed.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 17 July 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

did I see right that both Judd Hirsch and Christine Lahti are in this?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 17 July 2006 18:43 (nineteen years ago)

I am all excited, oh yes. How could I not be? There's a good trailer kicking about on teh interweb which I can't be bothered looking for but which is linked to off the West Wing thread if that link still works.

― ailsa (ailsa), Monday, 17 July 2006 20:46 (nineteen years ago)

It's just going to make me miss Sports Night more, isn't it?

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Monday, 17 July 2006 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

Ron Mexico OTM. Everything Sorkin's done is a shadow of Sports Night.

― c('°c) (Leee), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:31 (nineteen years ago)

- You're wearing my shirt, Gordon.

(beat)

- I was wondering why it felt so tight...

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Monday, 17 July 2006 21:44 (nineteen years ago)

Ron Mexico OTM. Everything Sorkin's done is a shadow of Sports Night.

bollocks. like it and everything, but nah.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Tuesday, 18 July 2006 09:50 (nineteen years ago)

Now look what you've all done, you've hurt Sorkin's feelings!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 19 July 2006 19:23 (nineteen years ago)

how i love 'omg blogger takes stand' articles.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 20 July 2006 10:40 (nineteen years ago)

The pilot is available through Netflix starting this week.

― milo z (mlp), Monday, 31 July 2006 00:47 (nineteen years ago)

i hope this is good, and I hope that Sorkin isn't removed from it a month in and replaced by a barrage of useless writers

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 31 July 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

and I hope tina fey's show and this one both portray lorne michaels as a freak, but since they're ALL on NBC, probably not

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 31 July 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

i really liked the pilot

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Thursday, 10 August 2006 05:52 (nineteen years ago)

me too :)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 06:21 (nineteen years ago)

it is pretty much exactly west wing behind-the-scenes at snl.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 06:21 (nineteen years ago)

which is obv the best thing ever.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 06:22 (nineteen years ago)

perry/whitford '08

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 06:22 (nineteen years ago)

you know i've always kinda rooted for matthew perry. through all the troubles.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 06:24 (nineteen years ago)

SO EXCITED

― Bashment Jakes (Enrique), Thursday, 10 August 2006 07:15 (nineteen years ago)

SEP 17. (here)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 10 August 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)

BRING
IT
ON

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 10 August 2006 19:32 (nineteen years ago)

Seems overwritten and flashy compared to the West Wing (and moreso vs. Sports Night). Could settle down to be great, if not it still looks good.

Did Miss Isringhausen get a really bad nose job or was it my imagination?

― milo z (mlp), Monday, 21 August 2006 14:57 (nineteen years ago)

the pilot wasn't bad, but i HATED the monologue at the beginning.

― you want pastrami? (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 21 August 2006 19:11 (nineteen years ago)

It serves its purpose.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Monday, 21 August 2006 19:25 (nineteen years ago)

is this on tv yet or are y'all seeing it via some other medium?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 21 August 2006 19:28 (nineteen years ago)

jody otm. also amanda peet can't hold a candle to alison janney. though, admittedly, she didn't have a lot to work with.

― Vacillatrix (x Jeremy), Monday, 21 August 2006 19:35 (nineteen years ago)

Netflix has the pilot on DVD, gabbneb.

― milo z (mlp), Monday, 21 August 2006 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

"An Aaron Sorkin joint"

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Monday, 21 August 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

"Forty Eightballs in a Mule"

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Monday, 21 August 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

four weeks pass...

really really enjoyed this - thought matthew perry was especially good. the monologue at the beginning was a bit 'ok ok' but they totally redeemed it.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 02:48 (nineteen years ago)

noone else watched this?

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 06:08 (nineteen years ago)

Matthew Perry was great, but Amanda Peet was terrible (as she pretty much always is, I think).

Where's Josh Malina?

― The Yellow Kid (The Yellow Kid), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 06:30 (nineteen years ago)

The "new joint" bit put people off.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 10:33 (nineteen years ago)

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 10:33 (nineteen years ago)

WHEN IS THIS COMING TO BRITAIN?

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 10:45 (nineteen years ago)

next year i read... no details tho.

mind you they trailed the fucker already!

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 10:48 (nineteen years ago)

I switched it off after the monologue; summoning up the ghosts of Network strikes me as a pretty lame shortcut to TV seriousness. You better be right, Blount.

(My God, SNL's going to have to parody this show, aren't they? Like a circle-jerk within a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel...)

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 10:50 (nineteen years ago)

definite potential here, I'm in. my thoughts:

1. Matt Perry perfect for this stuff, same with Brad Whitford MADISON EAST GRAD, GO PURGOLDERS
2. Amanda Peet kinda has buck teeth, which I never noticed before, but her character here is too hott/good to be true but I don't care
3. "THE BIG THREE" somewhat unbelievable at this point; Hughley sure but Sarah Paulson as a boffo born-again babe wouldn't work either with Perry's character or on TV, Corddry seems kinda no-hat-no-cattle so far
4. GREAT. EFFING. SETS. (and costumes)
5. If I never hear the name Paddy Chayefsky again I'll be just fine.
6. Steven Weber = hilarious as Big Jerky Guy
7. The actual skits they show better be the funniest things ever shown on TV
8. Loved how they mention NBC as the other network
9. OOOOH DONNA MURPHY
10. My wife fell asleep

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 11:31 (nineteen years ago)

What y'all lovers said. I'm fine w/ Sorkin working out his wuv of Paddy (and it reminded me that I needed to finish seeing Network, so thanks!), and YES to Donna Murphy (and the girl that was one of the reporters in the West Wing gaggle playing one of the BradMatt award show pals, even if only for one ep). I wonder who they'll get to play the Shitty Wondertwin Skit Dudes?

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 11:56 (nineteen years ago)

Also, can I be a shithead and just say that I am so happy they actually got Three 6 Mafia on the show?

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 11:59 (nineteen years ago)

I switched it off after the monologue; summoning up the ghosts of Network strikes me as a pretty lame shortcut to TV seriousness

it got better after that, but i still find the whole thing pretty arch and annoying (good jokes, though).

― any cop (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:01 (nineteen years ago)

Hopefully it's just pilot syndrome (too much data, flash and filigree)...but I didn't really watch much of "The West Wing" after season 1 so yeah I have a limited tolerance for this. I think this show will end up more "M*A*S*H" than "T*W*W" anyway.

And Daver OTM about Three 6 Mafia, they were rocking it — even Judd Hirsch seemed to enjoy them!

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:08 (nineteen years ago)

season 1 of 'the west wing' is pretty much the second-worst, and the first few eps especially.

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:11 (nineteen years ago)

1. what is a purgolder?

2. you never noticed the teeth before?

5. i hear ya on that one.

6. he has really gotten good over the years!

(i am definitely in the sorkin=beyond overrated camp. west wing embarassed me too much to watch on a regular basis. "thinking man's" t.v. for people who hate t.v. can do that to me. or maybe it was just the romanticised lefty porn aspect of it. having said that, i would watch this in a heartbeat but i gotta work that night. i am crossing my fingers for fey/baldwin majik.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:14 (nineteen years ago)

(i am a tommy schlamme fan though. if only for miss firecracker and his work on it's garry shandling's show and larry sanders and sledge hammer.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:22 (nineteen years ago)

not sure whether I think Sorkin is overrated or just has a RILLLLLY annoying MO. I mean, the breathless data dump dialogue kind of worked for an episode or three of "West Wing," but Sorkin-ization in "Studio 60" isn't nearly as logical a fit. And yet, it wasn't as annoying as it was on "West Wing."

Matthew Perry was great. Amanda Peet was miscast. Way too hot. I mean, I know her character was allegedly written with Jamie Tarses (ah, the irony of that for Matt Perry!), but Tarses isn't nearly that hot.

― don weiner (don weiner), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:26 (nineteen years ago)

dorothy parker didn't really look much like jennifer jason leigh either. this is called "dramatic hottie license".

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:35 (nineteen years ago)

i dint see it, but here's a professional opinion.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:36 (nineteen years ago)

A more serious issue is that meanness and stupidity are the worst things Sorkin’s characters can think to accuse one another of.

right, sorkin's characters should rise to the level of calling everyone ugly, fat, "gay," a whore, etc.

― any cop (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:48 (nineteen years ago)

sorkin's kinda a hack, i'm just wondering whether his hack moves are stuff he does knowledgably as hack moves or whether he thinks it is the hallmark of his true genius: like, the episode of the west wing where at the end everyone stands up and says "i serve for the glory of the empire!" or whatever, surely if he has any sense of camp whatsoever he can't have written that straight-faced ...

anyway, i have now remembered i should watch this, because i like him despite the tendency to do, you know, that kind of thing ...

xpost: there's something very doubtful about this sentence, surely: "For all his sniping at Christian bigots, a hobbyhorse going back to the pilot of “The West Wing,” his theology doesn’t seem to encompass any shading of evil."

― tom west (thomp), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 13:03 (nineteen years ago)

calling it a 'hobbyhorse' is the sign of a douche.

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 13:07 (nineteen years ago)

for a pilot it was promising.. i can't think of a single pilot that excelled beyond setting up the characters and background. remember the groantastic Seinfeld pilot?

i'm not crazy about the writer/director duo as mirror for sorkin to hold himself up to.

― mr. brojangles (sanskrit), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:04 (nineteen years ago)

it was great!

amanda peet was charming. people complaining that she's too pretty--it's a tv show. people are pretty on tv.

i thought the chayefsky thing was a pretty good joke! and i think behind-the-scenes at snl is a PERFECT fit for sorkin's style. also i think that people should stop using the word 'hack' because it makes you look like an idiot.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:23 (nineteen years ago)

Peet's great - playing someone who can have a calm conversation at a reasonable volume and still run things. Total enabler, in a mogul way. I buy it.

Not sure if I'll get caught up in 50 hours of this, but I was caught up in one hour.

If that scene in the control room was actually 53 seconds, it's pretty remarkable how much Sorkin packed into it. And having it end with the opening credits was surprising and pretty great, playing off the tension of "What? No opening credits?".

― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:23 (nineteen years ago)

What time is this on? I want to be watching it.

― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:26 (nineteen years ago)

(Is it on iTunes?)

― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:26 (nineteen years ago)

It's on Monday nights at 9.

Way up above - "Forty Eightballs in a Mule" cracked me up.

― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:30 (nineteen years ago)

I just noticed that the premiere episode is streamable on the NBC site. I can't do Mondays.

― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

i will talk to my people at NBC and see what i can do for you john

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 14:58 (nineteen years ago)

Nah, it's cool. I haven't planned my evenings around prime-time TV since maybe The Simpsons in college, so even if I was free on Mondays, I'd probably forget about it, anyway.

― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 15:03 (nineteen years ago)

I thought it was good.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 15:07 (nineteen years ago)

i can't think of a single pilot that excelled beyond setting up the characters and background.

Have you seen Sports Night?

True story: On Sunday, I'd read a This Is An Article Where We Anticipate Aaron Sorkin's Brand New Joint Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip and it included THEE monologue. I forced myself to stop reading it because my Sorkin boner was going nuts -- I was on the verge of tears, because it reminded me of the hopelessly earnest humanism that I love Sorkin for. And I was like, "OMG, I can't wait, squeee!"

But then I find out that Judd Hirsch delivers it. Bwoop. And that the show kept cross-cutting between the monologue and douchey S&P guy douching it up with goatee-less Timothy Busfield. BWOOoooop.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 15:43 (nineteen years ago)

Lee, are you bonkers?

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 15:55 (nineteen years ago)

Kind of?

Obviously that wasn't the one thing that made this episode meh-but-okay for me -- it shattered a lot of fantasies, though. I don't like most of the cast, that helps too. Oh, Peter Krause, where are you now?

Felicity Huffman's cameo was awesome, whether she did anything awesome or not.

For the record, Sorkin pilots ranked:

Sports Night >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Studio 60 > West Wing

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

For the record: LEEE IS ROCKIST ABOUT TV as well as being unfair to Judd Hirsch, who has done nothing but good work ever. Also — unlike apparently every other white person in America and a bunch of other people as well — I think "Sports Night" was kind of overrated. HATE ME NOW

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:11 (nineteen years ago)

um, dear john was "good work"?

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

matt, why won't you tell me what a purgolder is?

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

JUDD HIRSCH IS FUCKING AWESOME! I'LL KILL YOU!!!

DEAR JOHN 4 EVA!

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, yeah: Purgolder = the nickname of Madison East High School's sports teams, from the school colors of PURple and GOLD. Madison West's nickname is the Regents, because they are on Regent Street. Both are kinda pathetic.

Oh and "Dear John" wasn't great, but that was Jere Burns' fault. THE MAN WAS ALEX IN TAXI FOR CHRISTS SAKE WHAT THE HELL PEOPLE.

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

Taxi is the one with Jimmy Fallon and Latifah, right?

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

judd is actually kind of annoying on that n=u+bers show too.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

and i'm not rappaport is just an annoying play.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:25 (nineteen years ago)

It should have been "I'm Not Michael Rappaport." I would have gone to see that.

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 16:27 (nineteen years ago)

hahaha this fox promo came on and they had a mock mt. rushmore up w/ the four fox forefathers of comedy or whatever up - homer simpson, family guy dude, american dad dude, and michael rappaport and at first i just assumed rappaport was up there for no reason, they realized 'shit we need a fourth. how bout michael rappaport? yeah fuckit, throw him up there.' then i realized he actually has a show on fox and it went from amusing to horrifying like that.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

not to mention... american dad dude?!?

i guess it's a mt rushmore of stuff they have on now

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:02 (nineteen years ago)

I loved it, my flatmates hated it, but I'm a sucker for Sorkin, so fuck 'em. What was wrong with Amanda Peet, exactly? Great timing, pretty teeth -- what's the problem there?

I do wonder how much mileage it can get out of the set-up, though. West Wing episodes pretty much write themselves -- what can't you write about? -- but I'm interested to see how they'll stop this from getting repetitive.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:03 (nineteen years ago)

i thought 'sports night' was overrated too, i thought the writing and acting was 'good' (for sorkin/for network tv), but that's the one sorkin show where the implausibility and the 'this show is set in a reality that in no way resembles yr own' derailed me.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

o yeah but i knew american dad was on fox, w/ rappaport i just assumed someone went 'o god, you know who's really funny? michael rappaport. can't have a mt rushmore of comedy without michael rappaport!'

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

Amanda Peet's Coffee had two faces for the premiere.

1. That somewhat vacant gaze with a grin.
2. The other one.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:22 (nineteen years ago)

The christian cast member was totally unbelieveable and annoying but otherwise this pilot totally had me.

― grady (grady), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 17:44 (nineteen years ago)

i dont think i like it, but i cant abide narrsicssitc self referents w/o irony or camp. earnestness annoys me. i like television. i didnt believe the jesus shit. he really consisders himself americas prophet, but ive never figured out to what. also the coke thing, whats with he cocke thing. and it went from v well acted (busfield's worrying producer) to smoe of the worst acting ive seen on tv (amanda peet) and aside from hughley it seemed really kind of white, horribly white in fact. and the 50 lbs of dialouge in a 5 lb sack failed to work.

and network was 30 years ago, i dont believe in the collapsing of the american culture--the assumption that nothing is good on television ignores not only the more traditonal well constructed/written shows on tv (rescue me, lost, house, the wire, deadwood, daily show, the office, my name is earl, etc) but the rise of trash that teaches us lessons (wife swap about gender and domesticity, the satire of family guy, the high drama and brilliant editing of things like the amazing race and project runaway, even danny bonoduce falling apart so convincingly and epically) and baroque post-modern, excesses (nip/tuck). TV is damn good these days, how long do the chattering classes have to wring their hands and say ITS ALL SO BAD, EVERYTHING IS SO BAD, when we can point out work that is well written, well edited, well acted, well constructed, well shot, well written, well devolped)

― anthony easton (anthony), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 18:20 (nineteen years ago)

Sports Night could have been snappier, that would have helped a lot, and the main characters were all too likable, but it was still pretty great. I'm a sucker for Sorkin's daddy syndrome - all the tearful 'we're gonna do this for you BENSON'/'we're gonna do this for you Captain Willard.'

The romanticized lefty porn angle of The West Wing was the best thing about it - it's so weird for a network political drama to embody idealism and hope rather than pettiness. I think of it like Entourage. People complain (or complained) about how easy it was on the gang and Hollywood, that it needed to be darker and more critical of the cast and subculture - but if you did that, the show would be like everything else on TV.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

i am definitely in the sorkin=beyond overrated camp. west wing embarassed me too much to watch on a regular basis. "thinking man's" t.v. for people who hate t.v. can do that to me.

qft

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 18:55 (nineteen years ago)

this show was good. they're replaying it on wed night on bravo for those that missed it.

― chaki (chaki), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:09 (nineteen years ago)

"Thinking man's" whatever in re: Sorkin is way off-base. Sorkin's a stylist first and foremost, no matter what he himself or anyone sez. Also, sometimes he is funny (qualified).

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:16 (nineteen years ago)

yeah let's plz stop tilting at 'ppl who like sorkin are tv hatin snobs' strawman plz. it's a decent non-procedural/non-cliffhanger driven network drama: this is NO SMALL THING. but i don't think anyone's saying it's a big thing either.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:19 (nineteen years ago)

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:20 (nineteen years ago)

(haha, i have no idea if that line was in his play. but that is what i think about when i think about sorkin. and i SAID i woulda watched the new show if i had been home. i understand the value of non-L&OCSIETC programming.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)

also since the episode last night repeatedly declared itself against the 'tv is bad' groan (with the caveat 'some tv is bad') so really beating this show up with that argument is like beating up the west wing with over negatively portraying democrats.

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:23 (nineteen years ago)

i don't care if it is a strawman. i kinda hate hearing people talk about the west wing. kinda like how i hate when my dad goes on and on about how good nypd blue was or who imus had on. (ugh and double ugh)

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:24 (nineteen years ago)

AND IF YOU LOVE AARON SORKIN SO MUCH, JAMES, WHY DON'T YOU MARRY HIM!!??

(i think i might actually be getting mondays off from now on so i will end up watching this. i like the cast for the most part. i can do without bradley dillweed though. him and his hairdo.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

i still think of him trying to fuck over billy madison and i get angry

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:31 (nineteen years ago)

Who doesn't? Bastard.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:35 (nineteen years ago)

AND IF YOU LOVE AARON SORKIN SO MUCH, JAMES, WHY DON'T YOU MARRY HIM!!??
The federal gummint won't let that happen, duh.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

A blogger's lament (with an addendum) I read--http://www.pdhyman.com/blog/2006/09/if_they_can_now_get_rob_lowe_a_1.php#comments

"Much has been made of Matthew Perry's return to the small screen, and of the chemistry between Perry and Bradley Whitford (who played Josh Lyman on The West Wing). They have potential, but they are miles away from the My-Ivy-League-School-Was-Better-Than-Your banter that Sam Seaborn (Rob Lowe) and Josh Lyman mastered, usually while walking down a hallway.

Part of this, admittedly, lies in my inability to get past the goofy, two-dimensional Chandler imprint that will forever shadow Perry. But mostly it has to do with the fact that he's trying to be a neurotic Jewish writer type (which is to say, a stand-in for Sorkin), but he just can't pull it off. If the show has one tragic flaw it is this: There is not a bespectacled Hebrew anyplace to be found. Come on. It's a tv show about a tv show. A comedic show. Set in Hollywood.

No Jews on the the fictional SNL-like show: That might be conceivable, for a given season. No Jews at the management level (apart from Ed Asner, who plays the Sumner Redstone-like head of the conglomerate that owns the network)? Unrealistic (we Jews control the media and the banks, of course, not to mention all the best brunch spots) but I'll accept it, for the sake of argument. But no Jews in the writer's room? Even Hee Haw had a couple of Jews on staff....just in case.

All of this is exceptionally odd for a show that seems, from the get go, intent on taking dead aim at the Religious Right, the morality police and traditional American values. Perry and Whitford are supposed to represent the left-leaning, overstimulated and thoughtful end of the spectrum (that is, the Jews or, at least, Sorkin, the Jew), but they just don't do the job that Josh Lyman and Toby Ziegler (Richard Schiff) did on Sorkin's previous show about his fantasy of being in the White House.

Hire some more Jews, Aaron. In this case, realism calls upon you to embrace the cliche."
ADDENDUM:

Several readers have pointed out that the Judd Hirsch characte, among other (including, possibly, the Steven Weber character) are Jewish. Indeed, the Hirsch character is, though he's not a major presence (nor is he listed on the IMDB page for the show). My point was really that among the core group of main creative characters, there are too few Jews...or, rather, not enough Jewy characters, a la Toby and Josh.

Also: this is, more than anything, a jokey blog posting, not science."

― curmudgeon (DC Steve), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 12:32 (nineteen years ago)

Em, haven't we only met one of the writers so far? And why does he have to be the Sorkin one? Couldn't he be the Conan O'Brien one?

I like Bradley Whtiford's glasses in it. They make him look wise. Shame he can't not walk like Josh, though.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

having seen it, i like it. tho i'd read the script so eh.

i like how schlamme is avoiding totally obvious walk-and-talk setups, because that'd be a bit much, now. and the titles and the occasional slow fade that wasn't even in front of an advert break made it feel far less hectic than the other two shows.

i find myself wanting it to be an arc thing and not a monster-of-the-week thing. and it's like the sports night and west wing pilots in that it doesn't really indicate quite where it's gonna go like that. (n.b. i never saw west wing after season two, where i guess they did a bit more of the arc thing and a bit less of the monster-of-the-week thing.)

― tom west (thomp), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 18:36 (nineteen years ago)

Hah, I always thought/wished Bradley Whitford was Jewish. (Or was he just playing a Jew?) Either way, I'm dead wrong.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 19:48 (nineteen years ago)

I never watched the West Wing. Sports Night was the best thing on network TV ever and I still can't bring myself to watch the last episode because then it would be over.

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 20:59 (nineteen years ago)

Chuck, you thought someone named BRADLEY WHITFORD was JEWISH?

― antexit (antexit), Wednesday, 20 September 2006 22:55 (nineteen years ago)

i liked it! bradley hangdog was okay too. suitably downbeat. i'll be watching. the x-ian thing i could do without, but whatever. it just seems forced. i like matthew perry. as long as he makes sure to keep the mugging down to a minimum. which he did for the most part on this episode.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 21 September 2006 03:03 (nineteen years ago)

i liked it too. not perfect, but definitely shows promise.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 21 September 2006 03:05 (nineteen years ago)

needs more christine lahti

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 21 September 2006 03:06 (nineteen years ago)

aw. I love Sports Night so much that I resent every Sorkin project that isn't it just a little for not being it. I thought the whole point of Sorkin was that he creates worlds divorced from our own?

I liked the pilot (Matt Perry is so good! It's weird!) I don't know, I find it hard to critique Sorkin (except for his creeping sexism) 'cause stuff like the self-righteous speeches are so part of his thing that it seems like missing the point to have a problem with them. Also, because I am a total nerd, I kept track of lines repeated from other shows (like "I hate his breathing guts," which Natalie said on Sports Night.) There were a lot.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Thursday, 21 September 2006 04:28 (nineteen years ago)

Really? I've never really been able to understand what's so great about Sports Night. It must just be me, I suppose. Funny that he's recycling lines from it, as if assuming no-one saw it.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 21 September 2006 15:43 (nineteen years ago)

i have been trying to enjoy sports night, but its tough. the writing is good, but it just seems so *wet, so pompous.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 21 September 2006 15:50 (nineteen years ago)

Funny that he's recycling lines from it, as if assuming no-one saw it.

I don't really see it as sneaking anything by, or even lazy. It's just how people talk in Sorkinia.

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Thursday, 21 September 2006 16:28 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think he's conscious of recycling lines; it just gives me a dorky thrill to notice them.

no way is Sports Night as pompous as West Wing! but I kind of dig the pomposity.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Thursday, 21 September 2006 18:54 (nineteen years ago)

It's weird, I can't think of a current television auteur that likes television more. Sorkin's shows have never been similar to the HBO serials, where reviewers and sometimes even DVD commentators will remark how a given show is Better than and therefore in some way doesn't quallify as television. Sorkin just makes painstakingly crafted, painfully earnest, probably classic television, without any attempt to conform to some arbitrary sense of realism.

― William Ryan Stuart Hamilton (Stagger Lee), Thursday, 21 September 2006 21:59 (nineteen years ago)

no way is Sports Night as pompous as West Wing! but I kind of dig the pomposity.

maybe pompous is the wrong word - just the sense that each principal character in the show is, morally, a good egg, the painfully simple corporate battles that get played... like the last episode i watched (haven't been able to go back to the set yet) was the one with janel moloney as the overlooked wardrobe lady, and the ending was just so, i don't know, lame and naive, in a way West Wing never quite was - the characters there had darknesses and fallibiities that weren't resolved within 22 minutes (perhaps its brevity is the reason for this seeming simplicity).

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 21 September 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

the pompousness on west wing seemed entirely more deserved - 'defending abortion rights' or 'ordering a bombing run on a fictional country' seem much more reasonable to get self-righteous about than 'refusing an interview with michael jordan if he insists on plugging his new cologne'.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 21 September 2006 22:20 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, that's fair. but I guess I like the spirit behind the pomposity even on Sports Night, that everyone takes their jobs really seriously.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Friday, 22 September 2006 04:21 (nineteen years ago)

so the cold open turned out to be a gilbert and sullivan number? oof..

tina fey have shouldn't have much trouble dispatching sorkin if this sort of thing continues. and could they rub out the christian woman?

― mr. brojangles (sanskrit), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 02:07 (nineteen years ago)

like the last episode i watched (haven't been able to go back to the set yet) was the one with janel moloney as the overlooked wardrobe lady, and the ending was just so, i don't know, lame and naive, in a way West Wing never quite was - the characters there had darknesses and fallibiities that weren't resolved within 22 minutes...

You're still in season one, so don't count on that absence of darknesses and fallibilities, and all talk of shirts is setting you up for the best line ever.

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 02:24 (nineteen years ago)

it gets better? i was hoping so...

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 10:25 (nineteen years ago)

i liked the 2nd episode better--and gilbert/sullivan was sort of a way of making it clean

― anthony easton (anthony), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 10:29 (nineteen years ago)

did anyone else catch mr. show alum john ennis as the "wacky" hippie-ish staff writer with the beard and rasta hat? seems like it's gotta sting to go from being an *actual* sketch show writer to being a clumsy caricature of one on a new aaron sorkin show. poor guy.

― Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe (Plastic Gas Booby Trap), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 12:32 (nineteen years ago)

This show is an order of magnitude better than "The West Wing".

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 12:40 (nineteen years ago)

(Of course, I'm the one person on the board who ~~completely saw through the complete and utter sham that was~~ didn't like "The West Wing" so take that as you will.)

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 12:42 (nineteen years ago)

Dan, please stop stroking yourself in public; it's making us jealous.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 12:51 (nineteen years ago)

I love Sorkin (and musical numbers) but that Sorkin musical number was ick.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 14:23 (nineteen years ago)

Not as bad as "The Jackal," though. The cold open wasn't even unfunny the way SNL is unfunny.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but: Sorkin should stop trying to be funny. He was never the most uproarious writer -- his gags were pretty basic on Astonishing West Wing and Uncanny Sports Night, but since neither of those shows were comedies per se, the bits were surprising and thus amusing. But now that he's writing, you know, a show about a comedy show, he has to write funnies, but they're not.

Aaron Sorkin, you used to be cool!

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 15:35 (nineteen years ago)

Ugh, I'm not making sense, even circularly.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 15:38 (nineteen years ago)

I don't care if the actual comedy show is funny as long as the behind-the-scenes character interactions are funny (which I thought they were, esp. the press conference).

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 16:11 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't like the way this episode was structured (commercial to commercial episodes leading up to the musical), but I assume that's a one-time thing.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not particularly sanguine about the prospects of this thing, but I like it on balance.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 16:15 (nineteen years ago)

he really really really needs to take a cue from entourage and not show much of the actual product

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

i'm still liking it. but the second episode wasn't as good as the first.

blount OTM. it's going to very difficult to write a good drama and then on top of that expect to have actually funny skits...although i've seen much worse than that on SNL or Mad TV.

the christian woman thing is seeming very tacked on to me, like she even had a line in the musical number about how she's the christian, seemed very wierd and artificial.

i much more prefer the internal show politics stuff...the conflict w/dl hughley, the writers meeting, etc....i think the politics stuff seems a little forced compared to that.

matthew perry is great on this show. really impressive.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 26 September 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

They've got to stop showing the skits. Maybe stop referring to Miss Isringhausen's religion every other sentence, if possible.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 03:41 (nineteen years ago)

I kinda like that the skits are kinda sucky, actually. It's a good suck. Or my kinda suck, anyway.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 03:56 (nineteen years ago)

The skits are eh, whatever -- though the sketch montage was gross -- but the episode was much tighter than the first two. Still, Blond Christian actress doesn't look like she's getting into the role, like she has to be doubly dignified and self-deprecating at the same time, resulting in wooden actoring.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

They keep talking about how funny Harriet is, but they never actually show her being funny. She's terrible.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:26 (nineteen years ago)

the bear/GRRRRR line was cute and endearing. If she had been drunk or something.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:29 (nineteen years ago)

Token Latina needs eyebrows BADLy.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:39 (nineteen years ago)

her holly hunter wasn't that great.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

...I'm less and less impressed with this. Smug and overly self-referential after only three episodes! I'm not sure how, but it's like it's light on its feet and totally ponderous at the same time.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:43 (nineteen years ago)

Chuck otm. I did check this show out because I was curious, but it is way too undeservedly smug.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:46 (nineteen years ago)

sorkin's sappiness still bugs me. that ending was soooooo sappy! jeezus, it was like a high school graduation montage. and peet-face is looking more and more like the most unlikely fictional network president ever. way too teenagey to be the head of anything.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

xpost in the other room
Smug perhaps but so far I'm liking it better than just about anything else on TV (Lost hasn't started yet).

― Maria :D (Maria D.), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 16:59 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, but isn't TV about fantasy? The teenagy president allows us girls to fantasize that we're the president of a network.

― Maria :D (Maria D.), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

i always get the whiff of kidz playing dress-up with sorkin. like he doesn't really know how people actually talk. so his artificialness seems doubly artificial. even the arch stylized artificialness of mamet seems more believable. the artificial stylized human talk of gilmore girlz totally pwnz sorkin.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:06 (nineteen years ago)

but i will still watch cuz there is nothing else on after my fave lame cbs sitcoms.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

I guess no one noticed that Lucy Davis is now on the show...

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:21 (nineteen years ago)

maybe this show should only be half an hour long.

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:22 (nineteen years ago)

MADNESS

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:28 (nineteen years ago)

I'm just not seeing where this show can go. So far we've got four main themes:

1. Art vs. commerce
2. Personal demons
3. Loyalty or lack of

Are we going to get this every week? If so, the show will get tiresome quickly. It's already getting tiresome after only three episodes.

― Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:36 (nineteen years ago)

i always get the whiff of kidz playing dress-up with sorkin. like he doesn't really know how people actually talk. so his artificialness seems doubly artificial.

I'm not really sure what you mean here. I don't really have a problem with the dialogue, which is fine, but the set-up just seems a bit limited (and too comfortable) (and irrelevant).

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 17:54 (nineteen years ago)

I DEMAND THAT THIS SHOW BE MORE REALISTIC LIKE A DOCUMENTARY

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:03 (nineteen years ago)

Best episode yet. Also ponderous, irrelevant, and with no indication yet that the new network prexy has any of the qualities that a board looks for in a network prexy.

More and more, I find myself anticipating the Baldwin/Fey take.

― rogermexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:13 (nineteen years ago)

MADNESS

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:14 (nineteen years ago)

I have zero hope for the Baldwin/Fey version, but it still might end up being better than this.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:15 (nineteen years ago)

i guess i'm liking it overall, but agree w/lots of the criticisms here.

i don't have cable though, so i'm watching this and heroes no matter what.

also, doogie houser's new show is pretty cool.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

I'm wondering too if this show has anywhere to go. I really want it to. I love how Bradley Whitford is embracing his inner curmudgeonly geezer, and I really like how he and Matthew Perry play together, but it's all a little disjointed or something? I get the weird feeling that at some point after the middle of this series, something miraculous is going to happen and they're going to leave. Or else Sorkin is going to get himself fired and they're going to leave too. They're too separate from the rest of the cast.
Maybe it's just because it's too much about the show, which was fine in the West Wing, because the show was running the country, whereas this time it's just a telly programme and who cares?
Also, I wish Amanda Peet would choose between hair up and headband. The two together make her look like she was disturbed in the middle of a facial or something.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:43 (nineteen years ago)

i'm sure this is still better than actual SNL though, and probably much funnier

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 19:02 (nineteen years ago)

I would bet (though I'm not willing to watch and find out) that MADtv is even funnier than SNL these days. The Dane Cook episode was worse than the ones with Robert Downey and Anthony Michael Hall.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 19:03 (nineteen years ago)

accentmonkey you're right - the problem is that it's about a television show. what hangs in the balance? what's at stake? for most people, nothing. a skit show is no longer edgy, a television network is losing viewership - oh no we're all doomed. sure it sucks but making it out to be something dramatic just rings false.

for whom is this stuff actually dramatic? everyone in hollywood. it rings true for them, and I imagine they love this show and I think that's why it's been promoted as much as it has.

i think the writing is top notch, matthew perry's great to watch here, and the show has a cool style. but it's a little too self-conscious, a little too self-absorbed...and i think that will prevent a lot of people from being engrossed with this show.

― Wookie Rookie (Wookie Rookie), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 19:27 (nineteen years ago)

The fundamental drama is in the (proxy) work family, full of professionals, trying to keep itself together, whether through buy rates or the American electorate.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 21:36 (nineteen years ago)

madtv is still on?

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 22:33 (nineteen years ago)

that thing will never go away. i thought last night's episode was pretty awful in general - he really really really really really needs to take a cue from entourage and not show much of the actual product. i'm actually maybe anticipating the tina fey one more now (not too shocking if i'd stop to think about it earlier - mean girls>>>>>>>>>>>>all the king's men).

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 02:43 (nineteen years ago)

I just read, I think in the Onion? that Mark Mckinney of Kids in the Hall (and SNL) was helping him with the actual skits, FWIW.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:03 (nineteen years ago)

the worst KITH sketch is a million times better than Science Schmience.

― milo z (mlp), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:03 (nineteen years ago)

Entourage not only avoids showing the product, but when it does it's a clear parody - everything looks cheap and cheesy. That way the audience (if they're smarter than the average TWOP recapper) doesn't invest in those scenes in relation to rest of the show.

As bad as Sunset 60's skits are, maybe they're going for the same kind of in-joke, but they haven't made it clear enough. And if the skits are supposed to be genuinely funny, the show is doomed.

― milo z (mlp), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:06 (nineteen years ago)

yeah my understanding of the 'actual comedy writers assist mr. sorkin' is that he asks them questions about 'the process' but the words, those beautiful words, are all his. there are so many touches that seem so off, it doesn't bother me as much as it did with sports night, but neverminding the awful awful sketches (seriously mad tv was better than that shit) other touches - rob reiner as host of ratings blockbuster episode? really? - just rang so weirdly false. if it weren't for matt perry i'd've bailed by now.

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:10 (nineteen years ago)

i remember someone from the show saying in an article that when they show skits they can just show the funny parts and don't have to do the hard work of coming up with an ending for them. they can just cut away.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:12 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i love that on entourage all we ever saw of aquaman was vinnie chase running down a pier. and of course the always good for a roffle 'i AM queens boulevard'.

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:13 (nineteen years ago)

too many lines were just dropping like lead. "if a democrat actually said or did something, i'd write about it." ouch! zing! oof...huff...puff...

there were even weird silences in last nite's episode where NOTHING was happening. that's weird to see on a big drama.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:15 (nineteen years ago)

i'm still gonna watch it though. even if it makes me cringe sometimes.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:19 (nineteen years ago)

scott what's yr take on 'how i fucked yr mother'? cuz of all the network tv shows i saw last night (that, 'heroes', studio 60) it was probably by far the best (but not all that etc).

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 03:48 (nineteen years ago)

um, i've watched every episode of it. but i am a crazed sitcom fan. i love doogie. i like the whole cast. scott bakula was really weird on juia louis's show last nite. or looked weird, anyway. i am a 2& a half men fan too. the show i hadn't seen until last nite was the one with john ritter's son in it. it wasn't that great, but it was the first episode i think.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:42 (nineteen years ago)

that show is great. except for the brunette who is too pretty and too stiff (I mean pretty is fine and all but she doesn't really fit in with john cusack v.20 and willow)

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:44 (nineteen years ago)

i agree. and she isn't all that funny. willow & freaks & geeks guy are great together. barney is great. cusack guy has definitely grown on me. i don't think i'd ever seen him in anything before.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:46 (nineteen years ago)

scott bakula needs to disappear from the julia louis dreyfuss show fast, because he's creepy and weird and that haircut is only making it worse, and i can't believe she'd be attracted to him at all. also, isn't he a known wife beater?

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:49 (nineteen years ago)

basically, a sitcom has to be Yes,Dear for me not to watch it. Or According To Jim. Or scary Wayans dad show. other than that, i have no shame.

i think that's it for Bakula. yeah, he was weird. Julia was pretty funny though.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:51 (nineteen years ago)

actually I now can't find any evidence of him beating his wife so I'll just libelously slander it around the interweb myself

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:52 (nineteen years ago)

my wife watches yes dear. It is mysteriously on in syndication almost every half hour of the day. and yet every time I've seen it it's been one of three episodes. all of them are pretty much funnier than studio 60. Not to say they're better or anything.

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 04:53 (nineteen years ago)

i've seen maybe four episodes of yes dear via syndication. it's pretty bad but i've seen worse. there's a really really weird running plot wherein the kinda hot mom and her husband who's that dweeb from that boston common or whatever show from the 90s have these erotic rituals and roleplaying kinkiness they do to spice up their marriage. there was one episode where she dressed up as little orphan annie and he dressed up as whatever the name of little orphan annie's dog is and fucked her presumably doggie style.

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 05:05 (nineteen years ago)

I watched a couple of episodes of How I Met Your Mother and I don't get it at all. And I, like Scott, will watch almost anything for a while.

Anyway:

Entourage not only avoids showing the product, but when it does it's a clear parody - everything looks cheap and cheesy

Except for that Chinese energy drink ad! Which looked fantastic! Although still not as good as the Japanese lipstick for men that Joey wore in possibly the most amusing thing they ever did on Friends.

The fundamental drama is in the (proxy) work family, full of professionals, trying to keep itself together, whether through buy rates or the American electorate.

Well then their fundamental problem is that I don't care about any of these people yet, and so I don't care if they lose their jobs or not. But maybe that's just me. It's like Extras. I'm not finding it easy to empathise with their situation, and I'm not really getting any reason why I should pull for anyone other than Matthew Perry and Bradly Whitford, both of whose characters look like they could coast happily for a year and a half and ride out the problems they're having.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 05:55 (nineteen years ago)

i watch yes dear, but mostly its slashy

― anthony easton (anthony), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 06:18 (nineteen years ago)

"Scott Bakula, will you stop beating your wife?"

― The Yellow Kid (The Yellow Kid), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 07:42 (nineteen years ago)

I think the Steven Weber character has somewhere to go (i.e., learn to have a heart, or become increasingly evil, something like that), but otherwise the characters (even the ones with the coke/painkiller addictions) are just too self-satisfied. There's no real conflict when Sorkin's bad guys (conservative red state America, corporations, etc., I presume ) are offscreen the whole time.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 13:37 (nineteen years ago)

is it mean of me to think that it would just be more fun if it were meaner and more paranoid and panic-stricken? i don't even know why i would want to see that. it's just the hokey/gooshy stuff bugs me for some reason. all the cast-members should hate each other. then it really would have to be on hbo, i guess. i just don't recognize this adult world where people are constantly getting pep talks before they do something.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:11 (nineteen years ago)

how i met yr mother is good.

it's got real chemistry w/the cast, just like friends did. and someone who is genuinely funny (doogie, just like matt perry was). it'll be a success fo sure.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:26 (nineteen years ago)

I read somewhere that Bakula means "penis bone" in some foreign language or other.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:27 (nineteen years ago)

you did not read that anywhere. you made it up!

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:29 (nineteen years ago)

i always wondered how how i met yr mother was doing last year ratings-wise. it was on after king of queens or something so it probably did okay. they brought it back anyway.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:30 (nineteen years ago)

i really do love 2 & a half men! i love that cast too. especially after i found out that rose was the girl in heavenly creatures with kate winslet.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:31 (nineteen years ago)

i made a joke on ILE once about how on t.v. if they need a big woman they either go with conchata ferrell or camryn manheim steamroller and then on 2 & a half men they had camryn mannheim steamroller play conchata's sister!!!!

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 14:35 (nineteen years ago)

camryn mannheim steamroller

haha, is this one of JBR's rejected names?

― nickn (nickn), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 15:39 (nineteen years ago)

rose was the girl in heavenly creatures with kate winslet.

holy crap!!

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 15:41 (nineteen years ago)

How I Met Your Mother is dreck, but I can see it being the best sitcom on TV.

accentmonkey, I'm uncritically into Sorkin, so I'm automatically rooting for his protagonists. I think with the whole "OMG AARON THE SORKIN is coming back to TV! He's like reputable and inherently awesomes" hype, people just assume that everything that comes out of his pen is manna from heaven, and I'm one of them.

― c('°c) (Leee), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 15:57 (nineteen years ago)

Sigh. I wish I felt as you feel. (I actually do, I am not being sarky. I love my telly so much.) But with House turning into The X Files, The West Wing gone, Gilmore Girls mired in mean-spirited and fairly pointless plot turns, and Studio 60 not living up to its hype (for me), I'm pinning it all Lost.

In context, obv.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 16:29 (nineteen years ago)

House is turning into the X-Files?

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

BEST IDEA EVER< MUST WATCH NOW<

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

House is turning into the X-Files?

Well, not really. Just that the little intro bits where the disease manifests itself are becoming more creepier and more supernatural looking.

I never liked the X Files.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

i liked the funny x-files. actually, i liked the first couple seasons of x-files. it reminded me of my beloved friday the 13th tv show. starring canadian pop sensation robey and some guy who looked like mulder. x-files ripped it off big time. i think robey is canadian.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

OMG THE OTHER GIRL FROM HEAVENLY CREATURES IS ON TWO and ONE HALF MEN?????!!!!!! how did i not know this??? i've got a crush on her.

― j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 18:08 (nineteen years ago)

OTM

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 5 October 2006 01:15 (nineteen years ago)

The Other HC Girl was also in Shattered Glass.

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 5 October 2006 02:40 (nineteen years ago)

I've only seen bits and pieces, so could someone fill in the blanks?

Peety=network prez
Perry=head writer?
"Josh"=producer??
Judd Hirsh=??? (I didn't even see him.)

And the romantic angles . . .

Perry went out with the blonde Christian but now likes Amanda P.?
"Josh" is now going out with the blonde Christian but is also a cokehead?

And what was the premise of the pilot? They brought back Perry? And "Josh" too?

― Mary (Mary), Thursday, 5 October 2006 04:09 (nineteen years ago)

Judd Hirsch was only in the first episode. Perry went out with the blonde Christian, but hasn't shown any indication that he likes Amanda P., in fact he probably still likes the blonde Christian. "Josh" is not going out with anyone.

In the pilot, Judd Hirsch, the former boss of the show, had an on-air meltdown, so they brought back Perry and "Josh" to run the show. They worked there years ago, but had been fired. Perry and "Josh" were going to make a movie together (Perry writing, "Josh" directing), but "Josh" fell off the cocaine wagon so he can't get insured to make a movie for like 18 months or something. So they decided to run this show instead.

― The Yellow Kid (The Yellow Kid), Thursday, 5 October 2006 05:02 (nineteen years ago)

I saw part of this show the other night, and it occurred to me that I have never met a grown man named "Danny".

― Stephen X (Stephen X), Thursday, 5 October 2006 13:33 (nineteen years ago)

I'm tellin' ya...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVsKwXJH6xM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N-vbLAUoSs

Alec Baldwin, that's why.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Sunday, 8 October 2006 15:25 (nineteen years ago)

there is already "chatter" that studio 60 might get yanked.

― scott seward (scott seward), Sunday, 8 October 2006 15:55 (nineteen years ago)

which would be the ultimate in meta, i suppose.

― scott seward (scott seward), Sunday, 8 October 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

Really, Scott? I'm disappointed to hear that. For all its faults, I do still really like the show.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 9 October 2006 05:41 (nineteen years ago)

Episode 3 was a real improvement (ie actually funny, no skits).

Ratings-wise, what could they have expected? Dialogue-heavy dramedy vs. CSI: Tallahassee or whatever it's up against.

― milo z (mlp), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 04:12 (nineteen years ago)

camryn mannheim steamroller

haha, is this one of JBR's rejected names?

i may have used this once... i honestly can't remember.

― a portal to squee heaven (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 04:20 (nineteen years ago)

The first half of the third episode was pretty dreadful. It picked up a little, but I'm pretty close to giving up on this.

― Super Cub (Debito), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 05:07 (nineteen years ago)

Wait, was that not episode 4? I am confused. Anyway, I thought it was very good. Much better, because they stopped shiteing on about the Importance of Television and just had stuff to do with the show and people's lives. And a couple of funny jokes. But not the ones in the show.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 06:06 (nineteen years ago)

The Perry and blonde tension plot line is just dead in the water. Are we supposed to care? Their relationship produces little humor and zero drama.

And Amanda Peet is also beginning to grate.

― Super Cub (Debito), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 06:30 (nineteen years ago)

srsly

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 07:06 (nineteen years ago)

here's the thing that i can't figure out. i should love a show like this, i've read a couple books about the behind the scenes doings at SNL and love those "we're putting on a show" type movies..

but something about it seems very false, i think it's Sorkin's use of Perry as surrogate for Sorkin as genius/uberwriter. I mean, one man writing an entire weekly show and ignoring a writing staff of twenty? that's just laughable.

― ▒█▄█ ▄▄▄ ▒█▄█ , Wednesday, 11 October 2006 13:34 (nineteen years ago)

what's even more laughable is that genius writer dude would think that moldy stand-up routine was funny.

also: bombshell babies? hoo boy...

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 14:31 (nineteen years ago)

why do talented women on Sorkin shows always have to be trading on their looks? like, we get it, Sorkin. you're straight as an arrow. I hated the last episode.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:09 (nineteen years ago)

the brad whitford, "nice rack" comment to christine lahti--come on! on west wing sorkin devoted an entire episode to this whole phenomenon and even created a straw man prudish shrill feminist character who got all bent out of shape about it. it used to make me mad, but now I just wish he would find a new theme.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:11 (nineteen years ago)

i just think he doesn't get out of the house much.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

i missed the last 2 episodes, but i'm not sure i can think of any talented women on Sorkin shows who are always trading on their looks

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

is what you're referring to his training his romantic idealization lens on the opposite sex? because where doesn't he use it?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:18 (nineteen years ago)

no, it's the proliferation of women/men commenting on women's looks/bodies in a professional context. in this week's studio 60, amanda peet tells christine lahti, who plays a journalist writing a piece about the show, to unbutton her top button before meeting with brad whitford. he then tells her she has a "nice rack" and that he's not 12, so her attempt at softening his reception of her won't work. and then you get a shot of matt perry staring at her tits, because, whatever, it obviously works on him. stuff like that happened on the west wing, too, and I believe the episode I referred to before, where there was a white house aide who got offended by it, was actually written as a response to some criticism the show had received. so I think it's a bit of a hobbyhorse for Sorkin at this point.

whatever. it's not like I'm terribly offended, but I think it's crazy to act like that kind of behavior is professional or no big deal.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 15:58 (nineteen years ago)

and maybe "trading on their looks" was the wrong way to put it. what I meant by "trading on their looks" is more that Sorkin, in order to create a world where such comments are no big deal, has his female characters either fine with such talk or participating in it. so, in that episode of west wing, emily procter gets a whole speech where she responds to the woman who's offended by saying basically, "I dig men commenting favorably on my body." which is fine in non-work contexts, but, again, come on!

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

I guess what bugs me about the way sorkin constructs those moments is that anyone who's uncomfortable/critical of sexually-inflected talk in the workplace is made out as a ridiculous prude. when it's clearly just sensible to be careful about sexually-inflected talk in the workplace.

apart from that stuff, there's something off about studio 60.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

when it's clearly just sensible to be careful about sexually-inflected talk in the workplace

Get one Friends writers' room lawsuit.

And note that the juvenilia starts at the top, with Peet's network prexy, and is both par for the course and tame by h'wood trench standards. Forget it, 'shoe. It's Chinatown.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

why do talented women on Sorkin shows always have to be trading on their looks?

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/16/aaron.sorkin/sportsnight.jpg

what's even more laughable is that genius writer dude would think that moldy stand-up routine was funny.

also: bombshell babies? hoo boy...

OTM x2

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 16:40 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I still can't understand why ANYONE in any universe thinks that anything on that show is funny. I would never watch it.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 17:29 (nineteen years ago)

I would never watch it.

But then HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S NOT FUNNY? Aha! Anyway, it's a 44-minuter, so it's supposed to be funny BUT ALSO SERIOUS, like Moonlighting.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 18:45 (nineteen years ago)

I seriously cannot believe that the last episode featured a Meet the Press skit with Juliette Lewis' character from Cape Fear. Seriously?

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

Aaron I still love you and your charming anachronistic corny-ass ways. WHO'S WITH ME?

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 11 October 2006 19:44 (nineteen years ago)

AWESOME

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 12 October 2006 13:06 (nineteen years ago)

For all the talk here of how bad the skits are on the show they're producing, it is sad to note that the skits on SNL are worse. I couldn't even get 20 minutes into the last SNL (which I had higher hopes for because Jamie Pressley actually has some talent). Honest, it was the cringiest thing I've seen lately, really horrible, no moments of humor whatsoever, and noticibly very desperate.

― matt the queeg (veal), Thursday, 12 October 2006 15:04 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not Tina's biggest fan as I think she's errattic, but I'm thinking of the Fey/Meyers writing partnership...it's obvious where the really funny bits were coming from.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 12 October 2006 15:17 (nineteen years ago)

I went from wanting to like this show to outright hating it. It's getting worse, not better. Matthew Perry rubs his hand through his hair in every scene he's in, and his character is more cartoony by the week...dude has no chemistry with that ex-girlfriend of his. The Sorkinisms (way too rapid talking, talking over each other, walking tracking shots, info dumps, "clever" pop culture references) are grating and the casting continues to disappoint. Actually, I've grown to accept Amanda Peet as a visual aide.

Not one character is likeable or even amusing. Buh-bye Studio 60.

And FWIW, that 30 Rock show was kind of awkward.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 12 October 2006 15:35 (nineteen years ago)

okay 'studio 60' stays on the dvr schedule for one more week

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Thursday, 12 October 2006 15:37 (nineteen years ago)

they need to have a skit with someone there TO INSPECT THE CHICKEN NUGGETS

― ▒█▄█ ▄▄▄ ▒█▄█ , Thursday, 12 October 2006 17:23 (nineteen years ago)

And note that the juvenilia starts at the top, with Peet's network prexy, and is both par for the course and tame by h'wood trench standards. Forget it, 'shoe. It's Chinatown.

yeah, fair enough. after I'd posted about a million times I realized its the west wing episode that really rankles. for all I know in hollywood people comment on each other's tits all the time.

― horseshoe (horseshoe), Thursday, 12 October 2006 21:43 (nineteen years ago)

I meant the show within the show. Obviously I watch Studio 60, I've been talking about it for the last three weeks. The show within the show is shite, I would never watch it. That's what I meant.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 12 October 2006 21:44 (nineteen years ago)

For what it's worth, I also thought that the unbutton your shirt/nice rack/bulgeing eyeballs sequence was offputting.

― Mary (Mary), Thursday, 12 October 2006 22:08 (nineteen years ago)

there was a lot wrong with that episode, but i don't think that was the worst part

i like the lahti character but not really any of the other ones

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Thursday, 12 October 2006 22:12 (nineteen years ago)

I saw part of this show the other night, and it occurred to me that I have never met a grown man named "Danny".

haha, this is at least the 3rd time Sorkin's named a central character Danny, too (after A Few Good Men and Sports Night).

this week's episode had some problems but it was also the first one that really emphasized the actual making the of the show in a way that I think could be a good working model for most of the episodes to follow. and speaking as someone who's never liked Amanda Peet in anything, she's really won me over in this.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 13 October 2006 04:01 (nineteen years ago)

Timothy Busfield (who directed last week's episode, BTW) also played a "Danny" in The West Wing.

As for the issue w/ the skits - they've actually SHOWN only 2 that I can recall (the Pinafore intro for Matt & Danny's first show, & SCIENCE SCHMIENCE), which (to be kind) were more droll than funny. Everything else has been snippets (like the 2nd week montage, or the news blurbs & Cape Fear Meets The Press), which isn't really enough to judge the stuff fairly. Maybe PIMP MY TRIKE was a barrel of fun; doesn't really matter. And that's probably the way it should be - the skits should be secondary to the actual show.

Every episode's had its bumps, but there are enough moments to keep me happy despite any moments of turbulence. Tho I think (in hindsight) the bumpiness here resembles the awkward first steps of The West Wing, and it seemed to do OK.

― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 13 October 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

How slowly can a ship go down?

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 04:21 (nineteen years ago)

Whatever!

Tho between this & Man of the Year, I've had my fill of fictional characters laughing @ shit that I'm not finding all that funny.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 04:29 (nineteen years ago)

oh man you actually saw 'man of the year'? ;(

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 04:37 (nineteen years ago)

Whatever!

Sting!

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 04:39 (nineteen years ago)

i hope this doesn't get cancelled, because i am loving it. it is hokey as hell, utterly unrealistic, but also great TV. it gives good sorkin (ie ymmv)

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 10:03 (nineteen years ago)

Man, no sketch comedy show has ever had Sting on as a musical guest.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 15:53 (nineteen years ago)

Shouldn't it be a sign that Sorkin has to continually tell us that Miss Isringhausen is the funniest, most talented comic ever? And that she and whatshisface are star-crossed lovers?

If you can't show us, quit trying.

― milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 16:03 (nineteen years ago)

Hughley is pwning tho.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 16:28 (nineteen years ago)

Lauren Graham must have been busy the week that show filmed.

Amanda Peet talking so solemnly about how that one reality tv show would contribute to the decline of American culture was a bit over the top.

― Mary (Mary), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 19:21 (nineteen years ago)

Amanda Peet talking so solemnly about how that one reality tv show would contribute to the decline of American culture was a bit over the top

Srsly. She was right on about Brits tho :-)

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 17 October 2006 20:41 (nineteen years ago)

I really enjoyed this week's episode. A nice, slow burn. I also enjoy the guy who does the Nicolas Cage impression. It's 100% SNL and actually kind of amusing. Again, still think Lahti is a great addition.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Thursday, 19 October 2006 04:37 (nineteen years ago)

It's turning into enjoyable telly this, but it's not Great great stuff, is it? Part of it is the complete lack of any sort of tension: the show has great ratings, because they have the funniest writer in the world; the network is not evil, because they're going all clever-clever and so on.

It'd probably be too meta, but if he had a sudden huge apparently inexplicable ratings drop and the network starting shoving Jordan around, it'd be much more interesting and potentially top stuff. Just now it's just like one of those middle-season West Wing episode where nothing much happens, life just bumbles along.

― stet (stet), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:14 (nineteen years ago)

so, like, does he not get that the PBS stuff is gonna be a ratings-killer, or is it a damn-the-ratings-full-speed-ahead essay? (i like it fine myself)

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 01:44 (nineteen years ago)

wait, i think i know the answer to that

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 01:53 (nineteen years ago)

This week's episode was so-so. Nice to see some character development but it's not as believable as I'd like. I give Sorkin credit for not ending with Nate Cordry's parents in the parking lot. Perry's indifference kind of cut through the old man's stories which was probably not planned, but seemed to take the edge off the sappiness.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 02:46 (nineteen years ago)

Now all we need is George Cloony to be the guest host and tell us that there are parallels to McCarthyism RIGHT NOW. The son of Edward Murrow will wander into the set.

But still I heart this show and Amanda Peet. I hope we see L. Gilmore again.

― Maria :D (Maria D.), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 02:57 (nineteen years ago)

Glad actually about them addressing the black stuff. I know most people here hate Mad TV, but they are so much better about black characters than SNL is. SNL is uncomfortable with black people. The black characters on SNL are black characters. They never get over it and just have the black guy be a person. Or maybe they do now. I sort of stopped watching SNL a few years ago.

― Maria :D (Maria D.), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 02:59 (nineteen years ago)

But it was weird, too. "No you're not getting on a bus to go home, you're coming to work for us..." It was still so self-consciously stereotypical.

― Maria :D (Maria D.), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 03:02 (nineteen years ago)

Would it have cheapened the moment to have the second comic actually be funny? It's a weird statement to make that they're willing to take this guy on even though he's not really all that funny.

I get it that it's important for them to diversify their writing staff but isn't the writing staff just Perry? The last few episodes have suggested that he does it all by himself and the one time the writing staff had any input, they got themselves into a problem with the material.

Hughley should've recognized that it didn't matter if they had black writers or not if Perry's doing the whole show.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 03:39 (nineteen years ago)

At least they got the patented Sorkin Vagrant Of Mystery out of the way without any knives getting pulled.

Would it have cheapened the moment to have the second comic actually be funny?

Dunno. I guess it goes with the writer vs. performer thing from the beginning of the ep. He's a lousy performer, ergo, a writer in the rough.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 04:59 (nineteen years ago)

I thought he was funnier than most of the sketches I've seen on the show!

― J (Jay), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 12:02 (nineteen years ago)

i'm surprised no one picked up on the intentional 30 Rock dis buried in the first black comic using "badonkadonk" (Tracy Morgan's trademark line for a minute).

― manute lol (sanskrit), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 13:55 (nineteen years ago)

It's strange how Sorkin shows work best with schmaltz. I really enjoyed tonight's melodrama - Cordrry's the black sheep, and black comedians drive like THIS and there was like, this blacklist.

Is there any chance in the world that a son would give the verbatim tour guide speech to his parents? That Danny Concannon would download and read back the guy's war record (rather than just "You're a war hero right? AWESOME!")?

― milo z (mlp), Friday, 27 October 2006 05:10 (nineteen years ago)

I can’t get over how bad Studio 60 is. Makes me happy I never had to suffer through The West Wing. I wish 30 Rock, however, would last. But one or both will be gone in a week or two. Network television isn’t big enough for two shows with numerals in the title.

― EComplex (EComplex), Friday, 27 October 2006 13:21 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,226092,00.html

:((((((

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Monday, 30 October 2006 18:01 (nineteen years ago)

I went to a SAG screening this weekend and afterwards there was a Q&A with most of the cast (Perry, Paulson, Corddry, Weber, Peet & Busfield.) A lot of jokes were made about the low ratings and it was kind of uncomfortable.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Monday, 30 October 2006 18:05 (nineteen years ago)

SO LAME

(tho not surprising)

(damn it)

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 30 October 2006 18:09 (nineteen years ago)

Tho I'm hard pressed to think of any show that's going to survive against any CSI.

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 30 October 2006 18:12 (nineteen years ago)

I will never understand why people care so much about CSI.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 30 October 2006 21:18 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think I'm going to miss this if it gets cancelled, which I would never imagine myself thinking two months ago.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Monday, 30 October 2006 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

(Also, what I really want is Sorkin's long-mooted adaptation of "Charlie Wilson's War" -- awesome book.)

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Monday, 30 October 2006 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

where does sorkin go now? if studio 60 is cancelled, what does that do to his rep, his power in hollywood?

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Monday, 30 October 2006 22:53 (nineteen years ago)

I guess I won't ask him to develop a project for my studio.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 30 October 2006 22:55 (nineteen years ago)

both heroes and friday night lights are waaaaaay better than studio 60 and they are both still on the air. the people have spoken! as long as they keep 30 rock on i'll be happy.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 03:30 (nineteen years ago)

Scott, I love you as much as I can love a disembodied internet persona, but your repeated maypole Wicker-Man-dance posts about this show's dire straits and supposed ass-suckery is making me wanna accidentally hit you with pavement.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 04:35 (nineteen years ago)

"where does sorkin go now?"

here's a clue
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/05/02/sorkin.drugs.02/

― timmy tannin (pompous), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 04:42 (nineteen years ago)

you seen this dave?

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 04:47 (nineteen years ago)

I like(d) the show.

― Rebel.yell.For.Internet.cakes (nordicskilla), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 04:49 (nineteen years ago)

oh poo on you! i tried to like it! i watched it faithfully! it's just that all my sorkin fears came true! we will always have the bombshell babies.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 04:53 (nineteen years ago)

and i am not a hater for hating's sake. just cuz i hated the west wing doesn't mean i didn't root for this show. i am all about entertaining t.v. and i don't care where it comes from. the dude who made the abysmal yes, dear sitcom made my name is earl and i like earl fine. and the dude who made the waste-of-godessness-that-is-jill-hennessey jordan's crossing made heroes and heroes is entertaining. but i'm not afraid to call a dud a dud.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 05:00 (nineteen years ago)

I agree with you, Scott. The sooner this show goes down, the sooner Matthew Perry can be in a good show. Maybe with Lauren Graham, who knows?

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 07:26 (nineteen years ago)

Re: Sorkin baseball - ugh.

TS: Bombshell Babies vs. Pussycat Dolls. Seriously. Because, to be honest, both names suck.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

This is where I say I'm feeling Scott (& I apologize for wanting him to lick asphalt) & all the other poo-pooers, tho I still have hope (despite / because of all the Sorkinisms and corny ass awkward stylized nonsense, and how corny ass The West Wing was when it kicked off) in a Nabisco stylee, but I gotta pretend I'm working.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

cos i still really love this show:

http://www.tv.com/story/6990.html?q=studio%2060%20on%20the%20sunset%20strip&tag=search_results;additional_links;0

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 2 November 2006 13:00 (nineteen years ago)

I'm getting an eau-du-vote-of-confidence (cf. baseball) from that endorsement, but if fucking Jericho can get renewed, this sucker can, too.

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 2 November 2006 13:29 (nineteen years ago)

does jericho cost $3million an episode?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 November 2006 15:33 (nineteen years ago)

this show is GODAWFUL, i really was rooting for it but it's just so horrible in so many ways... wrong wrong wrong. i wanna see it put out of its misery so 30 rock can flourish

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 November 2006 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

I am ashamed by how bad it is.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Thursday, 2 November 2006 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

WTF is up w/ linking this w/ 30 Rock? They have nothing in common besides the setting, and I'm pretty sure that Studio 60 shitting the bed won't have fuck all to do w/ 30 Rock's prospects!

(also Studio 60 isn't that bad so :p)

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 2 November 2006 16:29 (nineteen years ago)

it'll have everything to do. THEY"RE ON THE SAME NETWORK.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 November 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

My god, I'm One Of Those Types Of People, aren't I?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 2 November 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

this is kind of a small point but the one thing that drives me CRAZY about this show is how it exists in the same universe as SNL--they make references to it etc. even though studio 60 is so transparently supposed to be pretty much EXACTLY the same as snl. MAKES. NO. SENSE.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 November 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

Count me in the 'terrible' camp. It's truly terrible. (and I was a fan of the West Wing)

― Super Cub (Debito), Thursday, 2 November 2006 17:25 (nineteen years ago)

It's not quite West Wing series 5 bad, mind.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Thursday, 2 November 2006 20:19 (nineteen years ago)

-- scott seward (skotro...), October 31st, 2006. (scott seward)

whoa scott you are the first person (besides me) ive heard say they liked heroes!

― PETE SMITH!!!! (plsmith), Thursday, 2 November 2006 20:36 (nineteen years ago)

heroes is awesome! i mean, it's campy but i dunno i'm totally hooked.

the japanese time bending dude is the cutest ever.

everytime i think "oh man this is too dumb" they do some twist and keep me addicted.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 2 November 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

HEROES THE TV SHOW

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Thursday, 2 November 2006 23:31 (nineteen years ago)

Be easy on on Pete, he was on tour and couldn't find Providence.

― The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 November 2006 23:35 (nineteen years ago)

they did Heroes on NBC before, back in the eighties. It was called Misfits of Science

― manute lol (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 November 2006 23:44 (nineteen years ago)

live in the now

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 2 November 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

they did Heroes on NBC before, back in the eighties. It was called Misfits of Science

Naw dude, I'm pretty sure you're thinking of Manimal.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Friday, 3 November 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

I thought it was Automan...?

― The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Friday, 3 November 2006 00:13 (nineteen years ago)

OK, so even though I am an unofficial Aaron Sorkin Street Teaming Piece of Shit, this week's episode (1st of a 2-parter OMG) was by far the best of the series. Possible reasons for this:

- lots more Steven Weber
- John Goodman as good ol' boy judge tweakin' them thar liberals
- actual grappling w/ the good ol' Xtian stuff
- Bradley's dye job (nice!)
- Parumph, Nevada
- this dude wrote the story

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 04:15 (nineteen years ago)

+ John Goodman - note: they need to get more of the all-time great SNL guests. Like Alec Baldwin...
+ say, is the president of the network going sans support? (not really a plus, just funny)
- the surreal version of LA in which people read Page 6. Page 6! Of the Post!

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 06:37 (nineteen years ago)

Whyohwhy have all my t0rrenting pals given up putting up 30 Rock? I am sad.

I know that has nothing to do with here.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 08:12 (nineteen years ago)

Most Chinese speak Cantonese in Macao -- but the two Japs on the show were not only speaking Mandarin, they spoke it with distinct Beijing accents. Apropos of nothing.

lots more Steven Weber

YES.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:46 (nineteen years ago)

(xp) check torrentspy. that's where i get it from.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 18:19 (nineteen years ago)

I noticed the same thing, kirby. At first, I thought it was a Taiwanese accent, but then I heard the hard pronunciations the daughter made, and I was like "NOT FROM MACAO, dude!"

Whatever - I've lost any Mandarin I used to have.

― B.L.A.M. (Big Loud Mountain Ape), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 18:23 (nineteen years ago)

tvrss.net for your t0rr3nt1ng needs.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 18:38 (nineteen years ago)

damn, they got a full order of episodes, so don't expect it to get cancelled until next year
http://community.tvguide.com/thread.jspa?threadID=700011511

― manute lol (sanskrit), Friday, 10 November 2006 20:11 (nineteen years ago)

When the John Goodman scenes concluded tonight, I could practically hear Aaron Sorkin patting himself on the back. Matthew Perry is pretty good in this, though.

― Dionne Warrick Dunn football psychic hotline (Matt Chesnut), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 04:23 (nineteen years ago)

Liberace!!!

Rilly good episode that was undone by the endings.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 18:04 (nineteen years ago)

nate cordry as jesus, handcuffed, fufills at least three of my sexual fantasies.

also, the noblisse oblige shit was a little much, but he played it well

― pinkmoose (jacklove), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

Is it just me, or is this show becoming even less subtle with each episode?

― Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

that gay marriage stick hitting me over the head for an hour gave me a headache. and the iraq stick poking me in the eye gave me an eyeache. john goodman made my stomach hurt. "funny" chinese sub-plot gave me shingles.

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 19:06 (nineteen years ago)

Aaron Sorkin should be covered in bees.

― Beth S. (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 19:08 (nineteen years ago)

this show is just so awful, so obvious, so pandering, so condescending, and this double-episode was the worst it has been yet. i might be done.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 19:17 (nineteen years ago)

but who's it pandering TO?

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 20:06 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah the whole "nevada day" twofer was the nadir so far, although hopefully they'll rebound from it and not set any more episodes outside of the studio anytime soon (now that they're getting a full season I feel less forgiving of the show's flaws because I don't want to get stuck being vaguely irritated but not enough to stop watching for a whole year or more). There were some good moments but the whole thing was so ridiculously contrived, even John Goodman couldn't make it work. Sometimes you get the feeling that Sorkin just had a lot of political plotlines left over from the West Wing and just has to get them out of his system in this show, context be damned. The politics in Sports Night were similiarly forced but incorporated a little more gracefully. Although it's interesting that as ridiculous as the whole Harriet thing seems at times, it's also one of the characters/plotlines most based on real life (Sorkin apparently having dated some bible-thumping actress, and the fact that Victoria Jackson from SNL is a big Xtian 700 Club type).

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:04 (nineteen years ago)

Sorkin apparently having dated some bible-thumping actress

bablow

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:10 (nineteen years ago)

Parumph

it's Pahrump

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:11 (nineteen years ago)

i'm getting so fucking sick of that xian chick.

"black people lived openly as black people for 400 years...gays have only lived openly for 30 years - be patient!"

wtf was that supposed to mean?????

― M@tt He1geson: Sassy and I Don't Care Who Knows It (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:36 (nineteen years ago)

It means I HATE TEH GAYZ.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:41 (nineteen years ago)

I'm still holding out hope, tho the "awkwardness" I found charming the first few episodes is starting to really chafe. Also, please mention that you said THIS but you also said THIS and that means THIS therefore KILL THE GAYS THAT DON'T BUY MY ALBUM another 389 times so I can totally forget that last night featured the first actual spark jumping between destined lovebirds Chandler & Crazy Christian.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 21:47 (nineteen years ago)

"black people lived openly as black people for 400 years...gays have only lived openly for 30 years - be patient!"

I too was completely baffled by this quote. Huh?

― Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 14 November 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

it is pandering to an imagined audience of Liberals Who Want To Think That Conservatives Just Don't Understand Them -- i.e. the media!!

and yeah that black people was absolutely INSANE. i have no idea wtf that was supposed to mean, but i was still offended by it.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 02:34 (nineteen years ago)

i WANT to like this show. i mean, west wing was my reason for living for the longest time, but if there's one thing we do not need encouraged in sorkin it is narcissism, which is basically what this show is turning into. also, did anyone notice that in the nevada episode bradley whitford dropped all pretenses that he wasn't just playing josh again?

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 02:35 (nineteen years ago)

...OK.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 04:10 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe I'm just not a great watcher of TV but I do think this show is amazing. I like the characters, I'm interested in the relationships, I wanna hear the things they're talking about and the topics they're raising. It was always going to be an immitation of the West Wing and just a demonstration of Sorkin blowing smoke up his own arse, but I don't mind that. It still beats the shit out of the last two series of WW.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Saturday, 18 November 2006 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, you're just not a great watcher of t.v.

― scott seward (scott seward), Saturday, 18 November 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

Cheeses of Nazareth? That's a throwaway joke from primary school, not something the head writer on a major comedy programme ever considers even for a second putting on the air. I don't mind the show itself, but the show within the show is so awful it's ruining the outside show.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Saturday, 18 November 2006 15:51 (nineteen years ago)

fuck it. i enjoy it. it doesn't raise issues and stimulate like West Wing, and i'm not gonna ever quote from it to help make a point in a debate, but it's enjoyable TV and not stupid like so much else on our screens. and america, most of that IS your fault.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Saturday, 18 November 2006 22:28 (nineteen years ago)

Why would anyone ever quote from The West Wing to make a debate point?

― Hoosteen (Hoosteen), Saturday, 18 November 2006 22:37 (nineteen years ago)

Not quote generally (although I have done) but use examples to make a point I'm making more accessible. more in presentations at uni actually.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Saturday, 18 November 2006 23:31 (nineteen years ago)

america, most of that IS your fault

Hi, and thanks for giving us "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" and Mark Burnett.

― hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Saturday, 18 November 2006 23:37 (nineteen years ago)

sorry about that. who's to blame for Deal or No Deal?

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Saturday, 18 November 2006 23:53 (nineteen years ago)

The dutch. And Big Brother as well.

Fuck me, what was with the whole Dylan not wanting to go on telly as himself because he's fat thing? And, if it is a lifelong horror stemming from a deep-seated insecurity about his body, I can't imagine that one single comment is going to turn it around. I at least assumed he was going to turn out to be gay and didn't want to be called a traitor for sitting beside the Queen of Christians at the news desk.

And I really, really hated the bit with Lucy Davis. Nobody would bring the head writer on a show such a terrible sketch, would they? And then cry all over them?

Oh, but I do love Bradley Whitford, and Matthew Perry, and Steven Weber, and Timothy Busfield, and I really like Sarah Paulson and Nate Corddry and I really like Amanda Peet, I just wish this stupid programme would give them something to do.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Sunday, 19 November 2006 10:03 (nineteen years ago)

two months pass...

Question to ilx's Don Juans - What is the one and only secret to the heart (and the bed) of a girl?

Latest ep. surely answers all our questions.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 20:17 (nineteen years ago)

I lost interest after the John Goodman one. Which is a shame because (1) I really liked it up until that point and (2) John Goodman generally redeems just about anything. But it was just too reminiscent of that Josh, Donna and Toby fuck about somewhere in the middle of America to hilarious effect ep of the West Wing with an added "oh look, it's John Goodman being John Goodman, whoop-de-doo" element. And it annoyed me. Sorkin-by-numbers is generally never less than good IMO, but this was Sorkin-on-autopilot.

And also I started watching Heroes which I too also love, and which highlighted how much I don't love Studio 60. And I want to love it like I love the West Wing. I just can't. Not yet. The West Wing took until series 2 to make me love it rather than really like it though, and there were some crappy episodes before that, so I'm being a little bit unfair.

― ailsa (ailsa), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 20:39 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i mean...chandler and danny west wing have some good repartee and charisma together, but that's about it for me at this point.

― M@tt He1g3s0n: oh u mad cuz im stylin on u (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 21:39 (nineteen years ago)

ok, that was horrible. think i'm finally done with caring much about ths show. i'll probably download them all once the season is over but i would be fine with forgetting that it ever existed.

― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Wednesday, 24 January 2007 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

i really really dont want this to be a romantic comedy

― pinkmoose (jacklove), Wednesday, 24 January 2007 03:52 (nineteen years ago)

This show is pretty bad, and deserves to fail, and will.

That is all.

― Charlie Brown (kenan), Wednesday, 24 January 2007 04:08 (nineteen years ago)

maria and i were cracking up over that last episode. it was like dynasty! LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER PRETTY GIRL AT THE PARTY BEING ASKED TO DANCE. AND SHE'S NOT PREGNANT! or something like that. that was an awesome line. reminded me of jan hooks.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 24 January 2007 05:42 (nineteen years ago)

Christ, Scott, it's worse than that. I think it might be the Colbys.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 24 January 2007 08:10 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

This programme is rubbish, and that two-parter broke one of my two major rules for telly programmes. Never have characters get stuck on the roof, and never have them go to a log cabin for the weekend. The result is always rubbish.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 10:08 (nineteen years ago)

i wonder if it'll even get to the end of the season.

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 10:14 (nineteen years ago)

I think they should have left Monday's as the last one. It kind of rounded a bunch of things out nicely, where "nicely" is "at all".

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 11:30 (nineteen years ago)

i still like it and have faith in where it can go, but they're clearly making him write in some standard tropes and the last one was pushing it all over the place

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 12:07 (nineteen years ago)

it doesn't seem to have as much room for growth as 'the west wing'.

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 12:08 (nineteen years ago)

I find it interesting to try to work out what's going wrong. I like some of the dialogue, but the plot lines are terrible, and lazy. Either that whole 'stuck on the roof' section was some sort of terribly ironic and arch comment on other tv programmes, or it was terrible lazy plotting. Also, I don't understand why Tom lied to Lucy, or why Cal lied about the mold. The whole thing was like one of those awful farce-based episodes of Frazier.

And yet I still like all the people involved.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 13:43 (nineteen years ago)

i still like it too. it is flawed, badly. but it is fun, and i like the premise, and i love how sorkin it is.

does anybody think this show is being held to an unfairly high standard in any way? i'm not sure it is, or whether its pre-debut publicity didn't beg for that, but i don't think its faults and flaws are all that bad, especially not compared with the standard of most TV.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 13:52 (nineteen years ago)

I agree that it is being held to a higher standard than much of US telly output, but I think the folks involved would also like to think they are of a higher standard than most of those making telly, and are probably being paid and possibly being given creative freedoms accordingly.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 13:55 (nineteen years ago)

it's not being held to a higher standard, everyone on the show is 100% narcissistic and humorless, it's gross.

(except for amanda peet's character who is just totally wtf.)

― jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 14:06 (nineteen years ago)

The pre-debut press was totally fellatious (sic?), or anti-fellatious, and the show's foibles / failings (of which there were a few) (hundred) made the pro-Sorkin crowd retrench & mea culpa (w/ caveats), while the anti-Sorkin crowd went HAW HAW HAW.

Honestly, tho, I don't see much difference between the first 10+ weeks of this and the start of The West Wing, right down to the awkward "this happened to me, Aaron Sorkin" plots, the awkward dialogue moments, & the cloying self-importance. However (& it's been said before), the self-importance works better in a political setting than in a Hollywood setting. WW seemed to hit its stride when it started flashing back to when the Barlett team was assembled, and it seems that S60 is starting to do that right now. (There are a LOT of cyphers on the show, tho - can't recall if WW was this nebulous, character-wise, when it kicked off.)

Tho I had no problem w/ the "wacky" roof hijinks, or the "wacky" mold lies, or the "wacky" hot viola action. It was a nice (& necessary) counterpoint to Harriet & Matt beating the ever-loving shit out of each other, and I'll take arch sitcommy setups over that belabored "Crazy Christian" / "Science Schmience" browbeating any day.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 21:35 (nineteen years ago)

pretty otm. the problem tho is their hearts don't seem to be into arch sitcomminess.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 21:41 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, the first series of the West Wing was kind of rotten. I mean, it was great, but when you look back on it, it was actually horrible. In comparison to later West Wing, as opposed to in comparison to other random telly, which it was still streets ahead of.

(I am very pro-Sorkin, and I keep telling myself this about series one West Wing to keep myself going through this series of Studio 60)

― ailsa (ailsa), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 21:47 (nineteen years ago)

For me, the major difference is that I found it interesting when people from the West Wing explained to each other (and therefore me) what they were doing in their offices all day, because I was interested in that. And when they were witty on the side, it was an added bonus. These guys are supposed to be funny and they are not. And I am not interested in what they do and don't really need it explained to me, so I'm not as hooked as I was on the West Wing.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 21:51 (nineteen years ago)

There is absolutely no feeling of suspended disbelief with this show. I'm always hyper-conscious of the actors acting and delivering the dialogue. Everything feels forced and joyless. It's just dead and flat and feels totally contrived. I hate the set. I hate the actors (though I've liked them in other projects). I hate the dialogue. I hate the story lines.

And yet I still watch...

― Super Cub (Debito), Wednesday, 7 February 2007 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

That there's what you call a "personal problem."

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 8 February 2007 01:59 (nineteen years ago)

Or Brecht's Verfremdungseffekt

― Haikunym (Haikunym), Thursday, 8 February 2007 02:05 (nineteen years ago)

Ailsa, the first season of the West Wing is still great. This show isn't good, but I watch it for the same reason you do. When will I extinguish what is left of the optimism and hope of my youth?

― The Ultimate Conclusion (lokar), Thursday, 8 February 2007 02:05 (nineteen years ago)

Firmly agree, i think, with most if not all recent comments. I can appreciate that it's flawed but i do really like the characters which is why i care about their ridiculous relationships issues.

i think the criticism that "the sketches aren't funny" is not really good enough as an argument against the show, because surely if aaron sorkin et al were great SNL writers they'd be doing that as well/instead? it doesn't need to be funnier than real sketch shows just in the same ball park.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Thursday, 8 February 2007 02:49 (nineteen years ago)

BTW what do people thingk of "Dirt"? I don't think it's deserving of it's own thread but am not sure it's been mentioned much yet. i'm still on the fence but am persisting.

― uptoeleven (uptoeleven), Thursday, 8 February 2007 02:50 (nineteen years ago)

Loving it much more the last few weeks (tho I haven't seen the last episode). Melrose Place alums sucking cock and coldcocking! Hot lesbionic drug dealers named after silent movie stars! Matt Drudge lookalike chops off his own finger & births cats w/ a dead Shannyn Sossamon! Wayne Brady chopping off dicks! And AND Rick Fox gets kneecapped (YES)! What more do you want?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 8 February 2007 04:54 (nineteen years ago)

I hope its cancellation isn't the end of nonsupernatural noncrime drama on U.S. TV.

― Eazy (Eazy), Thursday, 8 February 2007 05:10 (nineteen years ago)

Firmly agree, i think, with most if not all recent comments. I can appreciate that it's flawed but i do really like the characters which is why i care about their ridiculous relationships issues.

i think this is how i feel too. i like the milieu of Studio 60 too, tho i'm guessing its not too realistic.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 8 February 2007 10:28 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

just found out and i sad

― secondhandnews, Thursday, 22 February 2007 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

laaaaaaaaaame

― David R., Thursday, 22 February 2007 19:46 (nineteen years ago)

so glad this failed

― gershy, Thursday, 22 February 2007 20:30 (nineteen years ago)

The Tina Fey version of this show looks more interesting. It has Alec Baldwin! Matthew Perry clearly comes second in the lead tubbo sweepstakes.

Sorry to be so Colbert, but I called it! Scoff at my prognostications no longer.

― Nicole, Thursday, 22 February 2007 20:58 (nineteen years ago)

so now there's just a single show worth watching on the nets

― gabbneb, Thursday, 22 February 2007 21:01 (nineteen years ago)

Americans really are stupid. I'm sorry, I lived there for a while and really am very fond of you but this is ALL YOUR FAULT.

― Uptoeleven, Friday, 23 February 2007 01:25 (nineteen years ago)

So, umm.... "Dirt" anyone?

― Uptoeleven, Friday, 23 February 2007 01:27 (nineteen years ago)

To be fair:

1) "on haitus" isn't officially "in the shitter" (tho it's all but)
2) the show ain't perfect
3) CSI: Miami is unstoppable (YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH), so I doubt The Irish Lonegans is going to fare any better

― David R., Friday, 23 February 2007 01:34 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

just read this whole thread, been catching up with the whole of S60 in the last few weeks.

it starts pretty goddamn badly but it's good times later on. they fucked up by making it specifically about 'studio 60' because if it's going to continue it'll have to involve other projects, like 'nations', and in however long it is, chandler and josh will have to go make their movie. and that's fine: toby and ross can take over or whatever.

sure the sketches are bad (except for nic cage) but they hardly ever show them now.

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 12:21 (nineteen years ago)

What i was wondering is has it been stopped being shown in canada? all my torrents were from their anyway...

― secondhandnews, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 12:51 (nineteen years ago)

this show is so cancelled

― akm, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 17:42 (nineteen years ago)

well, balck donnellys seems to have even worse ratings! i guess it depends on the may whatchamacallems. i think they should stick with it.

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 09:59 (nineteen years ago)

i haven't watched the last couple of episodes yet - is it ever going to get shown over here?

― stevie, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 10:29 (nineteen years ago)

channel 4 are still being really cagey, but it seems so, yes, in the summer.

presumably they had to pay a lot of money out for it and they'll want a return, however meagre, and ffs it's better than 'ugly betty' or 'desperate housewives' (for which they pay a fucking mill per ep!!!). the question is will it be on more4 or channel 4? they trailed it on more4 during the west wing but it can't have been cheap. that said the us broadcaster knocked warners down on price some time in the autumn so maybe c4 could have renegotiated?

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 10:32 (nineteen years ago)

I've never seen Desperate Housewives but this show is worse than Ugly Betty

― A B C, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 11:55 (nineteen years ago)

a lot of the sorkinny stuff is very 'grumpy old men', scared of the internet and whatnot, which is why the opening episodes ate it.

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 12:13 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

coming back on 24 may. seeing '30 rock' has sort of put me off this now.

― That one guy that quit, Saturday, 28 April 2007 09:38 (nineteen years ago)

(haha I still like this show more than "The West Wing" even though I stopped watching after the third episode, much like I did with "The West Wing")

― HI DERE, Saturday, 28 April 2007 13:25 (nineteen years ago)

srsly the west wing got a LOT better after season one. i don't like season one and i love the show in general. which is why part of me wants s60 to come back for another go-round, but it almost certainly won't.

― That one guy that quit, Saturday, 28 April 2007 14:39 (nineteen years ago)

so are they just showed the recorded but not aired shows then i take it?

― secondhandnews, Saturday, 28 April 2007 19:10 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, the remaining five or whatever. it hasn't definitely been cancelled.

― That one guy that quit, Saturday, 28 April 2007 19:18 (nineteen years ago)

Defamer says they were shooting this week. Guess it's no worse than showing Black Donnellys to the network.

― Eazy, Saturday, 28 April 2007 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

Can't wait for it. just after i finsh my last exams too. woohah.

the first series of the west wing wasn't bad - just a bit cheesy in places - but it did get better in 2/3/4.

― Uptoeleven, Sunday, 29 April 2007 09:02 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

pour one out

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 06:43 (nineteen years ago)

is it definitely dead?

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 09:18 (nineteen years ago)

they will air the remaining episodes, but it is not returning next season.

― Gukbe, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 12:41 (nineteen years ago)

heavy sigh.

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 12:44 (nineteen years ago)

it wasn't great, sometimes it wasn't even good, but it had its moments, and the premise was promising.

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 12:45 (nineteen years ago)

lolololololololol pwned

― HI DERE, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 13:09 (nineteen years ago)

still no sign on e4, either...

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 13:30 (nineteen years ago)

ILX: A Thread Where Aaron Sorkin's Brand New Joint 'Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip' May Be Buried And Never Spoken Of Again

― Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 13:32 (nineteen years ago)

it could have improved on the second series, perhaps. but i doubt it.

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 13:44 (nineteen years ago)

memorial coke service to be held at Sorkin's pad tonight.

― gershy, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 14:20 (nineteen years ago)

will there be shrooms?

― stevie, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 14:36 (nineteen years ago)

they should have gone the extra meta mile and brought in tracey jordan to boost ratings.

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:30 (nineteen years ago)

Except it'd have to be Wayne Brady.

― David R., Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:32 (nineteen years ago)

but Wayne Brady guested in an episode of 30 Rock, too! (and an episode of How I Met Your Mother!)

― Alex in Baltimore, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:34 (nineteen years ago)

Blair Underwood?

― David R., Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:38 (nineteen years ago)

recurring role on The New Adventures of Old Christine. fear my sitcom guest star skillz.

― Alex in Baltimore, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:39 (nineteen years ago)

DAVID ALAN GRIER

― David R., Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:40 (nineteen years ago)

& Thank God You're Here is no excuse!

― David R., Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:41 (nineteen years ago)

I thought the question was whether they're available or if they're busy with another TV project? but then I didn't see TGYH on NBC's up-front sked, so maybe that's a done deal already anyway.

― Alex in Baltimore, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:50 (nineteen years ago)

Was Wayne Brady famous before he had to choke a bitch?

― milo z, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

NBC shd take every struggling show & just tie it into HEROES somehow.

xpost - COME ON MILO! They don't hand out Daytime Emmys to just anyone!

― David R., Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

yeah Wayne was pretty famous (mainly for being the breakout star of the US version of Whose Line Is It Anyway), the whole point of the Chappelle sketch was playing against his squeaky clean image.

― Alex in Baltimore, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 19:59 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

ok i'm probably the only person in the world watching this now.

this one one-nigh story is now into its fourth ep, and there's no guarantee it'll even get wound up there. wonder if that was planned before it got cancelled. peet essentially written out, along with kincannon, sardonic writer, toofer, etc.

by combining birth and hostage-taking it's like the end of west wing series four only nowhere near as good.

― That one guy that quit, Tuesday, 26 June 2007 22:17 (eighteen years ago)

Didn't watch it, but tonight was the series finale.

― Eazy, Friday, 29 June 2007 04:26 (eighteen years ago)

ITS DEAD, JIM.

― chaki, Friday, 29 June 2007 05:12 (eighteen years ago)

I saw 'em all I think. The finale was a little too easy but I still teared up a bit re: the hostage thing.

― bnw, Friday, 29 June 2007 05:14 (eighteen years ago)

God help me, I don't care that they were clumsily written half the time, I don't care that most of them were little more than surrogates for Sorkin's personal problems, and I don't care that most thinking people to whom I've talked and/or of whom I've read the thoughts believed they were unforgivably schlocky, I loved the hell out of those characters, and am glad that they, at the very least, died a death that was kind to those who liked them.

Say what you will about ol' Aaron, but despite all his many, many, many faults as an artist, he sure does know how to make an audience feel like he has a modicum of respect for them, which is a lot more than I can say for 99% of television.

Now who else is looking forward to the show about the members of the board of a small liberal arts university or whatever other doomed venture he undertakes next?

(P.S. turns out drink makes sentences very long.)

― en i see kay, Friday, 29 June 2007 10:22 (eighteen years ago)

sorkin's next project is an opera based on a flaming lips record or something equally mental.

― That one guy that quit, Friday, 29 June 2007 10:30 (eighteen years ago)

i think i liked the actors more than the characters.

i enjoyed having steven weber make on my screen again.

― Gukbe, Friday, 29 June 2007 15:58 (eighteen years ago)

one month passes...

christ, the british press are loving it. the early eps are probably the worst -- what they seem to like is sorkin's snootiness and weakness for easy targets. d-bags.

― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 09:25 (eighteen years ago)

haven't read the reviews, but watching it on proper teevee and not my laptop, i am BUMMED they cancelled this. it could've gotten better! and it wasn't THAT bad to begin with...

― stevie, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 10:09 (eighteen years ago)

dvd set in october

― stevie, Tuesday, 7 August 2007 15:19 (eighteen years ago)

one year passes...

Hulu has the whole season. I really like the pilot ep a lot, in part just because of the unity of action -- those long real-time sequences where every second counts.

― Eazy, Saturday, 10 January 2009 07:25 (seventeen years ago)

two years pass...

Wah?

― Handjobs for a sport (C. Grisso/McCain), Friday, 20 May 2011 05:53 (fifteen years ago)

Eeew.

― Simon H. Shit (Simon H.), Friday, 20 May 2011 06:10 (fifteen years ago)

three months pass...

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/hbo_picks_up_aaron_sorkins_news_room_drama_formerly_titled_more_as_the_stor/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWa0dZMHYeE

― a hurrrr hurrrr (history mayne), Friday, 9 September 2011 12:52 (fourteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.