Cool News
Herc Says The Season’s Best New Series Hits NBC Tonight!! Aaron Sorkin’s STUDIO 60 ON THE SUNSET STRIP!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
I am – Hercules!!
This show has been much covered on this site. The script and the screener have been reviewed here, and I have hailed it as the best of the season. More importantly, Broadcast and Cable polled 66 critics on the season’s best new series and “Studio 60 Live on the Sunset Strip” received more than four times as many votes as its closest runner-up.
As “West Wing” did, “Studio 60” gives us a president to love – but this time it’s network president Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet), who dazzles with a series of fearlessly dead-perfect decisions even as the company she’s just joined seems to careen toward disaster. She is just one character, but she is my favorite, at least in the opener.
Mind you, the “Studio 60” pilot has its flaws (the teaser, especially, played a lot better on the page than it does as filmed), but it also stands head and shoulders above any other pilot I saw this year or last. As for future episodes, one has to put a lot of faith in any enterprise that emerges from the author of “A Few Good Men,” “The American President,” “Sports Night” and “The West Wing.”
But what matters Herc’s opinion?
USA Today gives it four stars (out of four) and says:
… What matters with Studio 60 is that it stars Matthew Perry, Bradley Whitford and Amanda Peet; it's directed by Thomas Schlamme; and it's written by Aaron Sorkin. And they're all at the top of their games. Teeming with rich characters and terrific actors, brimming with wit, drama and unexpected urgency, Studio 60 brings its workplace to full, immensely entertaining life.… There are times when Studio 60 is a little too self-important and self-referential. (It's impossible not to read Sorkin into Perry's character.) But while it is interested in the issues that are faced and stirred up by TV, it is definitely not a show about show business. This is a beautifully acted drama about the conflicts, pressures and joys that arise when people come together at work.
The New York Times says:
… what most distinguishes “Studio 60” is that it is as romantic about television as “The West Wing” was about politics. Mr. Sorkin has created a world where some things actually are as they seem, and even untrustworthy people have hidden valor. And he has taken two of the most easily caricatured female archetypes, an evangelical Christian entertainer and a sexy network executive, and made them as richly textured and captivating as the two male leads, maybe a little more so. …
The Los Angeles Times says:
… Sorkin, creator of "The West Wing," brings his intoxicating brio to the backstage world of a late-night TV series and conjures the place as the same roiling ground zero of social and moral debate that he projected onto the White House. …
The Washington Post says:
… Less than some of its parts, and a little long on shortcomings, "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" nevertheless arrives with so much credible fanfare and such a hefty cadre of talent that even skeptics can reasonably expect future episodes to improve on tonight's more ho-hum than ho-ho premiere … The cast is formidable and seems to be using the premiere mainly as a warm-up, waiting for the really good scripts to come in. … Though it may not yet have achieved the level of devastating lampoonery, there is something electric in the air just because a network television show is taking both a sardonic and serious look at television as a medium and how it affects the people who work in it and, to a lesser degree, the millions of faithful who man their couches and clickers hoping for something that will stimulate them, one way or another. …
Variety says:
… it's hard not to root for "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," a series that weds Aaron Sorkin's crackling dialogue and willingness to tackle big ideas with a beyond-stellar cast. Sorkin's ear for the media's rules and excesses was a staple of both "The West Wing" and "Sports Night," and his exploration of an aging latenight franchise is so bracingly smart it's sure to hook discriminating viewers. … Even with his eccentricities, Sorkin infuses his stories with aspirational fervor (network execs exhibiting backbone? Go figure), his characters with brains and his rat-a-tat patter with an electricity that puts most primetime drama to shame. And if the show's sense of reality suffers amid those stagy, too-articulate exchanges, it's nevertheless an invigorating contrast when so much TV entails pacing around a chalk outline.
The Hollywood Reporter says:
… the launch of "Studio 60" - an ambitious and hugely entertaining drama - somehow tells us that the new fall season truly has begun. …
We give the last word to AICN’s own “Shelbygirl”:
Yeah, I know. Big deal. EVERYONE has seen the pilot, it's on NetFlix, etc... And if I still lived in Canada, this would be cool, too, because CTV is showing Studio 60 on Sunday nights, a day earlier than down here. But alas, I'm here, and not there, so this will be the only opportunity I have to review this show for AICN.
This will be a little different review. There are any number of places online where you can read about the plot, hell, even read basic pilot reviews. I want to go into a few observations about the show, about the Sorkin style, and what sadly lacks on TV that Sorking brings to the small screen.
I've been a fan of Sorkin since Sports Night. I sent the sad news to you WAY back when it was rumored that perhaps the show would be saved by cable (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/6275). When I was lying flat on my back recovering from a nasty, nasty virus, a few years ago and was able to watch all of Sports Night on DVD back to back to back. The West Wing had been on the air for a few years now, and
certain tendencies had begun to emerge with Sorkin's oeuvre.
Once you got past the painful laugh track in the first few episodes, what emerged was a smart, fast paced comedy filled with primary, secondary and tertiary characters that endeared themselves to you. There were story lines that seemed like they had been abandoned, only to be picked up the next season to great effect. There were many, many similarities that the short-lived comedy and the long-standing drama shared. Studio 60 is no exception.
There were a few things that always stood out for me about a Sorkin Show. The first thing is characters who were excellent at what they did (sports, production, speech writing, politicking) and absolutely horrible at most other things in life (mostly interpersonal
relationships). These people needed each other, mostly because no one else could really understand them, let alone put up with them. Sorkin once said that his characters would have success in their love lives when he did. The deep flaws that all of his characters
possessed, paired off with their super-human ability in their chosen field made each character memorable and lovable.
The second thing that Sorkin excelled at was creating outstanding female characters. One only needs to look at the "evolution" of the characters of CJ and the First Lady on The West Wing to see Sorkin's genius when it came to writing strong, complex women characters and not caricatures. All Sorkin's women are successful, and yet not; strong, and yet not; always absolutely human. Always fully developed and always written with a deep respect, Sorkin created women that we could all relate to.
The third thing Sorkin brings to TV is a fully developed universe behind the scenes. We see the same quirky assistants, the same helpers running around, the same faces, many, many faces, week after week after week. Sorkin creates entire, self-contained worlds that need virtually no suspension of disbelief in order to allow yourself to get swept up in them.
Studio 60 is no exception. I watched the pilot multiple times and rejoiced at the return of a Sorkin-created universe. Not only are the dialogue, characters, plot, etc, a treat, but We get to see some familiar faces who have appeared elsewhere in the Sorkin universe
(try to spot Leo's daughter!). The pilot contained all three of the main ingredients for the Sorkin trademark, which is so refreshing. The pilot makes you laugh, but the drama is present. While there is a dark streak that runs through Sorkin's comedy, it still has a lightness and dare I say hopeful aspect to it that appeals to so many viewers. There is no doubt great drama on TV right now, not much great comedy, but so few that a) combine both and b) manage to do so with such lightness and effortlessness.
But what I found makes Studio 60 so special is the personal nature that this show implies. The two main characters, Matt and Danny (played by Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford respectively) are a writing/directing team who won't work without the other, mirroring the relationship between Sorkin and his go-to director Tommy Schlamme. There are a few other parallels that are revealed in the pilot that I won't spoil here, but is interesting to see a professional and deeply personal relationship recreated in the show.
I wonder how much is personal to the writer himself. I would think quite a bit.
Another interesting parallel is how Matt and Danny are brought back to NBS (the imaginary station) after being unceremoniously "dismissed" (there is some debate as to whether they quit or were fired) in order to save the show and the station. Sound a little like Sokin and Schlamme being unceremoniously "dismissed" from The West Wing and then brought back to NBC in order to save the station? Jack Rudolph, played by Steven Webber, is the network suit who pissed them off the first time, but has to watch them come back into the
fold, knowing that they do represent the saviors. Fact and fiction collide! Because Studio 60, I think, can save the network. It's that good.
I could say a lot about all of the other characters, but I think I will leave it at that. What's bad? The nagging fear that I have when watching the pilot that this is all too good to be true and will flame out before we want it to. Who will pull a Rob Lowe? Will
there be dissension in the writing room? Will the network botch it (it would be hard, but who knows!)? I'm being pessimistic, but I am so positive about the show that I am terribly fearful for it's future. TV has let me down over the course of my life, and this would be too much to bear.
Do what you like with this. It's long, it's rambling, but the show inspired nothing less than that in this humble pseudo-reviewer.
Thanks, herc.
10 p.m. Monday. NBC.
What book about Stanley Kubrick could possibly be worth $200? How about The Stanley Kubrick Archives
??
Alan Moore's Lost Girls!!
This will be a little different review. There are any number of places online where you can read about the plot, hell, even read basic pilot reviews. I want to go into a few observations about the show, about the Sorkin style, and what sadly lacks on TV that Sorking brings to the small screen.
I've been a fan of Sorkin since Sports Night. I sent the sad news to you WAY back when it was rumored that perhaps the show would be saved by cable (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/6275). When I was lying flat on my back recovering from a nasty, nasty virus, a few years ago and was able to watch all of Sports Night on DVD back to back to back. The West Wing had been on the air for a few years now, and
certain tendencies had begun to emerge with Sorkin's oeuvre.
Once you got past the painful laugh track in the first few episodes, what emerged was a smart, fast paced comedy filled with primary, secondary and tertiary characters that endeared themselves to you. There were story lines that seemed like they had been abandoned, only to be picked up the next season to great effect. There were many, many similarities that the short-lived comedy and the long-standing drama shared. Studio 60 is no exception.
There were a few things that always stood out for me about a Sorkin Show. The first thing is characters who were excellent at what they did (sports, production, speech writing, politicking) and absolutely horrible at most other things in life (mostly interpersonal
relationships). These people needed each other, mostly because no one else could really understand them, let alone put up with them. Sorkin once said that his characters would have success in their love lives when he did. The deep flaws that all of his characters
possessed, paired off with their super-human ability in their chosen field made each character memorable and lovable.
The second thing that Sorkin excelled at was creating outstanding female characters. One only needs to look at the "evolution" of the characters of CJ and the First Lady on The West Wing to see Sorkin's genius when it came to writing strong, complex women characters and not caricatures. All Sorkin's women are successful, and yet not; strong, and yet not; always absolutely human. Always fully developed and always written with a deep respect, Sorkin created women that we could all relate to.
The third thing Sorkin brings to TV is a fully developed universe behind the scenes. We see the same quirky assistants, the same helpers running around, the same faces, many, many faces, week after week after week. Sorkin creates entire, self-contained worlds that need virtually no suspension of disbelief in order to allow yourself to get swept up in them.
Studio 60 is no exception. I watched the pilot multiple times and rejoiced at the return of a Sorkin-created universe. Not only are the dialogue, characters, plot, etc, a treat, but We get to see some familiar faces who have appeared elsewhere in the Sorkin universe
(try to spot Leo's daughter!). The pilot contained all three of the main ingredients for the Sorkin trademark, which is so refreshing. The pilot makes you laugh, but the drama is present. While there is a dark streak that runs through Sorkin's comedy, it still has a lightness and dare I say hopeful aspect to it that appeals to so many viewers. There is no doubt great drama on TV right now, not much great comedy, but so few that a) combine both and b) manage to do so with such lightness and effortlessness.
But what I found makes Studio 60 so special is the personal nature that this show implies. The two main characters, Matt and Danny (played by Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford respectively) are a writing/directing team who won't work without the other, mirroring the relationship between Sorkin and his go-to director Tommy Schlamme. There are a few other parallels that are revealed in the pilot that I won't spoil here, but is interesting to see a professional and deeply personal relationship recreated in the show.
I wonder how much is personal to the writer himself. I would think quite a bit.
Another interesting parallel is how Matt and Danny are brought back to NBS (the imaginary station) after being unceremoniously "dismissed" (there is some debate as to whether they quit or were fired) in order to save the show and the station. Sound a little like Sokin and Schlamme being unceremoniously "dismissed" from The West Wing and then brought back to NBC in order to save the station? Jack Rudolph, played by Steven Webber, is the network suit who pissed them off the first time, but has to watch them come back into the
fold, knowing that they do represent the saviors. Fact and fiction collide! Because Studio 60, I think, can save the network. It's that good.
I could say a lot about all of the other characters, but I think I will leave it at that. What's bad? The nagging fear that I have when watching the pilot that this is all too good to be true and will flame out before we want it to. Who will pull a Rob Lowe? Will
there be dissension in the writing room? Will the network botch it (it would be hard, but who knows!)? I'm being pessimistic, but I am so positive about the show that I am terribly fearful for it's future. TV has let me down over the course of my life, and this would be too much to bear.
Do what you like with this. It's long, it's rambling, but the show inspired nothing less than that in this humble pseudo-reviewer.
Thanks, herc.
-
+ Expand All
-
Does anyone know where in Canada Shelbygirl is from?
I'm sure you know, Shelbygirl.
I'm just curious. -
Saw this last week from Netflix, and I really enjoyed it. Can't wait to download it this season. I am putting it on my list alongside House, Prison Break, Fear Factor and the last few episodes of WSOP (I know, the winner has already won but I still enjoy the journey to get to the top.)
-
i'm in the background of the scenes where they're filming the actual show within the show. i'm an audience member. look for me!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
i'm in the background of the scenes where they're filming the actual show within the show also. i'm an audience member. look for me, I'm the good looking one!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
i'm in the background of the scenes where they're filming the actual show within the show also. I'm an audience member. Look for me, I'm the one doing coke off the chair next to me!!!!!!
-
Not 'some' of its parts
Once again, great editing from the Washington Post. -
development." Us here in Canada get the show Sunday at 10, which is quite nice. I had seen the pilot before, and yeah, it's nice, but it's mostly so good because it opens up so many doors and shows how much potential it has. A lot of people may think this pilot is only average, but it'll get you addicted to watch more and more, and that's how Sorkin works. I'm also glad that the end credits aren't made up of select shots from the episode with ridiculously chipper music playing, like "The West Wing" did. What the hell was THAT?
-
I watched the pilot via Netflizzix & liked it. A lot. So glad to see Perry working outside a sitcom but still able to be a touch wacky. Normally I'm an Amanda Peet hater, but I even think she's good in the show. Though the bitch still ain't that sexy.
-
And yeah, it's a tricky subject, because West Wing had some really great dramatics and powerful scenes, but I think I just liked Sports Nights' characters more. They were all so fucking real (not to say that The West Wing characters weren't). Watching stuff like Jeremy being alone while everyone else plays trivia, and he knows all the answers, Casey's reaction to finally "achieving his goal", Dan's treatment of his relationship with Rebecca, Dana's realization of how useless her plan was, Jeremy's speech about Natalie moving to Gavalston....It was all just so great, and you completely cared about them. And as far as Studio 60 goes, it seems it will be closer to Sports Night than West Wing, and I hope they can bring some Sports Night actors back.
Also, Peet IS three months pregnant, and I really hope they don't make that a storyline, as it could truly screw stuff up, but unfortunately it seems like she'll be gone for a chunk of episodes this season. -
i thought he voluntarily left the West Wing because he was tired of the constant deadlines for finished scripts? personally, i'd have been happy to have given him all the time he wanted but it seems a little like re-writing history to suggest he was forced off the show.
-
I thought that too, but 'less than some of its parts' is different from 'less than THE sum of its parts', so it's feasible that they meant the former.
-
It's easily one of the best shows on TV right now. It clicks on all levels, and is by far rivaling 'The Wire' for some of the finest writing period.
-
I was going to cleverly ask if they do a lot of fast walking through hallways while they talk fast, saying very clever and witty things. I dunno, I never hated the WW, but I always thought they sort of pretended it was a great show. Look how dramatic this scene is! We're all so clever! I don't know what it is, but I guess I just never got it. Although, I liked SportsNight. I'll hope it's more like that show. I'll give the pilot a chance, anyway.
-
It sounded really good when it was announced, but the actual previews I've seen haven't been all that spectacular. I'll definitely be giving it a shot though.
And it'sum, math term, the results of addition. -
saw it up here in Canada as well..(actually saw it three times cause of the timeshift thingy my satellite has)....
rocked the world...sorkin/schlamme are the only ones who know how to make good television anymore....we will have to see how this season of LOST does to see if they remain the only kings of the sandcastle.....
whitford and perry have the best chemistry on TV right now....
definitely putting this on my weekly schedule of must watch...
favorite line - 'yeah sorry about that...that's totally my fault' -
She's just sneaky hot. Positively Zooey Deschanel-esque. Surely a man of Sorkin's prodigious talents could forge a back story of a "Ellen and Anne Heche" style relationship between Sabrina Lloyd and Amanda Peet. That will certainly keep the viewers coming back for more.
-
I got this from Netflix and it sucks. It has the solemn approach of "West Wing", only it's about...A FUCKING TV SHOW! It's not funny, it's not that compelling dramatically and I have no idea how they are going to find enough stories to keep this going. Sorkin's dialogue is more self-conscious and self-absorbed than ever, but in this case the characters don't have national security issues to blame their pretentiousness on, they're just show biz assholes. Except REAL show biz assholes are much more entertaining than this. Even after the sloppy blowjob the press is giving this one - you gotta' wonder did they give the critics a free junket to Tahiti?? - I predict it will go down faster than a priest at an altar boy convention. How many people in Idaho give a shit about the demands of running a weekly SNL-type show?? And if they are curious about that, why not watch a COMEDY about it - the Tina Fey show?? Oh, and Matthew Perry is FUCKING TERRIBLE. He's trying so hard to not be Chandler he barely registers any personality at all. Sarah Paulson is a terrific actress, but they saddle with her this ridiculous devout Christian character. (Yeah, the world of satirical comedy is rife with born-again Christians) Everyone else does a fine job, but the show is just an enormous waste of your time.
-
Steals from "Network" to give itself an interesting opening. They acknowledge it, but it's still a cheap gimmick.
-
Yikes. I can't believe AICN would allow terrorists such as the psychos at PETA to advertise on this site. For shame.
-
The only new show on NBC, ABC or CBS I will avoid this season. Can not stomack Sorkin's writing.
-
Huh? People watch television on random subjects all across the nation. What ARE we supposed to show for people in Idaho? We already have that ass backwards Jericho show set in Kansas. Perry is the edge this show needed, and pulls back and reminds us it IS show business. It's the best shot feature on television now. Fuck Idaho up their fictional 'We don't watch Studio 60' asses!
-
Same with the new 'How I met your mother' episode.
But come on, best new show will be 'The Black Donnellys' starting in January.
The pilot was absolutely awesome. Godfather awesome! and Olivia Wilde is hot, so yeah. -
Again, if you haven't seen Sports Night, please, check it out. Oisin's comment on particular scenes just brought a huge smile to my face, it was just great. Because when these characters fought, or lost, or became friends, it was always amazing. And yeah, Sabrina Lloyd and Josh Charles (even the newly unemployed Peter Krause) better make some sort of appearance. I agree with the "Emperor's New Clothes" comment to an extent, I love Sorkin, and even I am getting a little sick of all this good press. I thought the pilot was great, but I have a clear bias, and it's obviously not close to the best stuff he's written, but like I said, with the pilot, it is clear that things are going to get better, and will be at that extremely high echelon soon enough. And for that, I can't wait.
-
come on, how bad could a show with chandler bing in it be. im pumped
-
Matthew Perry's character alone makes this show worth watching..i'll be tuning in this nest week, and it's nice we get it on sundays in canada.
-
to be Chandler." I'm sure Matthew Perry is tired of the character more than anyone. He's just acting, and sure, some Chandler may slip through, but I doubt it's intentional. He's just played the same character for 10 years, so obviously he used to that delivery and he knows it works. But I really don't think he is trying to be Chandler, I'm sure he's trying to distance himself as much as possible.
-
Studio 60 is flat out boring. I'm going to watch CSI: Miami instead.
-
I really like Sorkin's writing and pacing ... the only thing I can't stand is knowing that at any second, the dialogue will devolve into Rosie O'Donnell and Barbara Streisand offering their keen insight into "The Religious Right" and how they are "worse than Islamic Fundamentalists" Casting Amanda Peet was a good move, though - she is pretty much smoking hot.
-
Not to mention sanctimonious. And the characters speak faster than I do, which is saying something.
-
Having someone on the show later acknowledge that its like the scene out of Network does not excuse the fact that they ripped it off.
-
I've said it before and I will say it again. The tone of the show set in the backdrop of a comedy sketch show could become a problem.
-
Victoria Jackson (SNL cast 1986-1992) was a born-again Christian (or maybe not even born again, just devout) and actually appeared on The 700 Club...so while it seems unusual, it's actually happened.
Yeah this show seemed a bit self-important, as if television entertainment is as big of a deal as running the country...but it was still entertaining as hell. -
No born-agains on SNL? What about Victoria Jackson? She actually appeared on The 700 Club too.
-
I stand corrected. But obviously she is an exception, not the rule. And I didn't mean to be durogatory when I referred to audiences in Idaho, I think Yackbacker is right that it's a TV writer writing about TV writers and it's all in danger of flying up its own asshole. I think it does in the pilot, but if not, I think it will as it goes on. It's all too specific and in love with its reflection. I just don't think people will keep coming back for this one, but we'll see.
-
I hope you hold Studio 60 up to the same standards you hold the fictitios show in your show. Show's show show within a show based on a true story about a show about a show about a real show in which a real fake show is a show based on a real show within a show where the show is really a show about a show about a show. By the way, why do we call television programs shows?
-
Lots of critical acclaim, but I predict it'll fizzle out by Feb sweeps. >> P.S. With the number of "A"-list cast members, it also must be an insanely expensive show. If it fails to pull earth-shattering ratings right from the start, NBC won't be ordering a 2nd season.
-
(Sorry for the double post) I'm guessing Sorkin was probably inspired by Jackson; if you've ever read "Live From New York" it details how her religion made some of her relationships on the show difficult. Obviously she's the exception, I don't think the show will try to portray her as the norm.
-
It was very meta for the 1st 20 minutes. I remember during Judd Hirsh's saying out loud to myself. "Wow, it's like Network: The TV Show!" and then sure enough THEY referenced network and then it descended into the usual "let's introduce everyone's backstory" bullshit. Having a positive Christian character is cool but Matthew Perry breaking up with her because she was on the 700 club is a little over the top.
-
It shares critical acclaim like Commander in Chief did, but did every critic praise Commander in Chief? And Commander in Chief didn't have a showrunner with a track record like Sorkin does. You're definitely right about it being expensive, but due to the cast and awards this show is going to win, advertising for it will be expensive as well.
-
The whole The 700 Club thing has to be ripped right out of Sorkin and Chenoweth's relationship, since she went on there to promote her own Christian album a couple of years ago. Wonder what she thought about that, haha.
-
Is this garbage what passes for 'clever' tv these days? Hopefully the American public won't be so stupid and listen to these asshole critics who praise this crap and it will be cancelled shortly. And fuck this shitty cast too.
-
This grabbed me, and the Nework rip-off was fun too.
-
i'm in the background of the scenes where they're filming the actual show within the show also. I'm an audience member. I was the one with really huge cock! ** All jokes aside, this show will never last; it's too intelligent, which is kind of ironic considering how it rails against ignorance in television. Sorkin is awesome, cast is awesome. This show and "Justice" supremely rock.
-
Dunno what you're talking about, herc.
-
Pretty great indeed.
-
...I still like this show. A lot. Critics say Sorkin is out of touch, and that these days network TV is either irredeemably hopeless or getting better all the time, but it doesn't matter. "Studio 60" is pure fiction (well, as much fiction as a story with thinly-veiled stand-ins for Jamie Tarses and Kristin Chenoweth can be) and I'm enjoying the alternate-reality-ness of the whole thing. In reality, network heads are much more venal and stupider, showrunners are even nuttier and more egotistical, and cast members are masters of one-upsmanship and back-stabbing. All this may come into play in this show in the coming weeks, but it will be witty and amusing, which is completely unrealistic. I just hope there's enough interest to sustain it at least through this season, because I know it will absolutely be incomprehensible and therefore hated by most folks in the red states.
-
...but that audio mix was the worst I've heard outside of Public Access in years. It was completely impossible to understand a word of dialog during a ton of scenes (especially the club and behind the scenes scenes). I have an excellent sound system and my friends and I tried everything -- treble, mono, tv-only sound, anything, and some lines which seemed important remained completely incomprehensible. I hope the next episode is better.
-
I just saw a one trick pony gallop by. That or I was on shrooms. Sorkin is to pretentious assholes, what Joss Whedon is to obnoxious assholes.
-
Much in the same way Will Forte and Seth Meyers are, so I guess they had that down. And I usually am not offended by Amanda Peet, but she had a frightening amount of prissy smirks. Other than that, it was cool enough.
-
The story has been around along time. Sorkin did not not resign but he was "resigned" by the network. ie he wa fired. There was two things. And neither had to do with his talent. one thing was the drug taking and his subsequent arrest. the studio forgave him(publicly)when he cleaned up his by letting him continue to write but they never really forgave him(privately) for it, the studio then privately bgan looking for reasons to get rid of him. Then they came along. the actors, who were for a while on sorkins side began to get annoyed when sorkin got lazy and the network had noticed that Sorkin was falling behind. Sorkin was living in, now in a political fantasy world, the network wasnt, they knew who the new president was and what his leanings were. Sorkin Refused to give the network what they wanted. The decline in the writing of the west wing can be traced back to an episode called Issac and Ismail, which sorkin wrote in one day after 9/11. Theis episode was critically drubbed in the press as preachy and ill though out. Sorkins final eps leave a sour taste in the mouth and they are the ones with John goodman who play the temporary pres. The weest wings decline in its story writing was swift and the whole thing ended with a wimper. To this day i dont understand the rational of having Jimmy Santos as president. When it would have made sense to give it to Arnol;d vinnick, at least it would have given the West wing a real world political ending. they should have brought sorkin back.
-
nice enough, but wholly unconvincing. that said, it probably is the best new show of the season.
-
There are new kids in town and there names are ricky gervaise and stephen Merchant. They have created two of the most successfull shows on televsion, the office(winner of six international awards) and then there is Extras and there will be more to come.
-
I saw the trailer where every second shot seemed to be Matthew-Perry-the-hotshot-writing bellowing about failing a drug test, and my heart sank. Look, I'm glad Sorkin's sober, got his life together personally and professionally yadda yadda. But the one thing I'm not interested in watching is Sorkin treating his audience like a therapist who's paying him for the privilege.
-
I get the feeling that we won't know if this one is any good until episode 3 or 4.
-
I didn't bother since I had already seen it on Netflix. Will that help build buzz for the show, or hurt ratings for the first episode? I agree that the tease was week, it's a great idea but I just didn't buy it. Hope he doesn't get bogged down in constantly talking about drug rehab (he ran it into the ground already with Leo McGarrity) and tilting at windmills. We get it already, you've already covered the thins that piss you off a million times on your first two shows. And I'm still VERY concerned about the feaux-SNL sketches, the last thing I want to see is guys on the show laughing their heads off and patting themselves on the back for material that is just as bad as the real SNL. This show has the POTENTIAL to be the best new show this season. I hope it can deliver, and not be a rehash.
-
That's Tina Fey's show - anyone know when it premieres? I think that show is the same idea as Studio 60, and it's on the same network! Why the hell would NBC do that?
-
...played by Sarah Paulson was not inspired by Victoria Jackson, but by Kristin Chenowith who used to be Aaron Sorkin's girlfriend. Obviously Matt is the stand in for Sorkin and Harriet is the stand in for Chenowith. This may be Sorkin's most autobiographical work to date, which should be pretty interesting.
-
If Matt wrote the "Crazy Christians" sketch four years ago, how did it wind up in the line up for that evening's show?
-
Peet is nice to look at. I didn't like the ex, neither the character nor the actress, and the annoying guy from the credit card commercials. I hope he's not a regular. The trophy girl at the awards show had an enormous chin.
-
I am a huge fan of The West Wing. Comopared to The West Wing's pilot, Studio 60 fell flat.
I hope they make the credit card guy a regular character so he can save the show! =D -
I love the pace and the dialogue, though some of the insider jargon missed me (something about a bug and a frog?), but I'm sticking around. Interesting to see Steven Weber as a hard ass. And I definitely agree with the interesting thing about Sorkin's characters being excellent at what they do but terrible at human relations. Like how Matthew Perry's character walks into the negotiation a total clueless wreck but quickly gets it together to impressively make the deal, fights with his ex-girlfriend, then says 'looking forward to working with you.' The bit at the end where they meet the cast reminded me of one of those great Sports Night moments. I'm not burned out be 7 years or so of West Wing (never watched it), so I'm totally willing to get into this. I see lots of potential and I want to see where it goes.
-
I would prefer and hope at some point they actually point out how full of themselves all of these characters are, but since one of them is supposed to be Sorkin, I'm guessing that won't happen. The idea that an SNL show is or should be "important", even if you just reduce it to the world of television, is a bit insulting to me. The pilot reminded me of that movie I never saw where Redford pays Woody to have sex with his wife. The premises weren't original at all, but nobody ever bothered to do it before on TV, so everyone will talk about it as if Sorkin thought it up. Its such an obvious premise that NBC has two different versions of it. I'll probably check back with it again, but I doubt I will finish out the season with it. Emmy voters who never watch this show will vote for it and it will win, and then Sorkin can feel more important about himself.
-
The little network logo down in the right hand corner of your screen is called a bug. When Matt said replacing the bug with a flag, I took it as a criticism of network news divisions falling in line with the current administration and not pressing them on several things that they should be pressed on.
-
It was just a plot device. I imagine Wes got so tired and fed up he couldn't be bothered to write, so he just trawled through old material of Matt to find something to put on the air, and then got pushed to breaking point.
-
I really liked it. I'm in for the run. I think some of you guys are letting the marketing of it cloud your judgement. Just give it a shot. It's good.
-
I loved the West Wing until it took a total nose-dive post Sorkin. One thing he does well is keep the characters developing in a gradual and almost pre-written way, they develop like real people and affect the plots, they don't just radically alter behaviour according to what story needs to happen. His dialogue is ridiculously epic and Shakespearian but it's grounded by people who seem like 'the best and the brightest'. I was a little worried about Studio 60 because, as the reviews point out, you can get away with the fantasy of intellectual heavyweights battling with wit in the White House (sure we know it doesn't happen in real life but it would be nice) but can you see such cleverness in late night tv execs? But, hell, given how good Sorkin is when he's focused, I'll let this build up over the first season. The WW needed two seasons before the development seemed to work anyway.
-
...so i decided to turn it on to watch it, since its about TV. i like it. But i'd rather see it in digital then on TV...no commercials and all convenience.
The pace was cool and I hope it doesnt slow down. And the Wit...Whoa...better than Scrubs! No wait, maybe equivalent! -
Coming from a liberal I have to say this show was typical Aaron Sorkin crap. God his shows suck. He is a fucking preachy, overblown, self-aggrandizing egomaniac. If I have to listen to one more of his characters give some weepy, contrived speech I'll kill myself. Granted I'm the only person on Earth who hated The West Wing so this will no doubt be a runaway hit with the mouth-breathing, pseudo-liberal, elitest Democrats who take his bullshit to heart. Don't be fooled by this turd people!
-
Hey guy. It said "less than some of its parts," not less than "the" some of its parts. In this context "some" is correct.
-
....as opposed to mostly dead. This was pretty darn good. Writing, acting, pacing...all top notch. I need some time to decide if Amanda Peet "works" as the new President of NBS. Plus, it was a little weird seeing her and Matthew Perry together without thinking of 'The Whole Nine Yards' movie. Didn't care much (so far) for the born again ex-girlfriend character. Considering most of the dreck on the tube, this was a distinct pleasure.
-
NYPD Blue? CSI? ER? These are all shows about people who do things that are a little out of the ordinary. It wasn't boring at all. It may not be your type of show, but that was a really strong episode and if it's not your thing, fine, but wow, you're gonna miss out on a good show.
-
In reading Live from New York they mention that every skit, aired, not aired, or flat out rejected at table-read, is kept on file. It made sense that Judd Hirsch's character, when stuck for a skit, would go through the files of past good writers and use their unused stuff. One thing I was confused about: I get that Steven Weber is Peet's boss. But who is he, what is his title? Also, someone above mentioned cost. I heard the episodes cost around $2.5 million each (I'm sure cast salary is much of that). It could be a problem for the show if it doesn't get the ratings the network expects. A cheaper show might be given longer to find its audience than one with such a hefty pricetag. Sad but true.
-
"Once you got past the painful laugh track in the first few episodes," I just started watching the DVD. Does this mean there is no laugh track in the later episodes?
-
No one who posts on this site ever believes there may be two ways to look at anything. Everyone is either "this is awesome" or "this is shit." Can no one here be objective? The shit really kills me. Some of you are calling this show the best thing on TV and others are calling it the demise of television. The characters are full of themselves? You guys are full of yourselves. Sometimes it's difficult to stand the arrogance of unemployed "Star Trek" geeks who live at home with mommy and daddy. I'm just saying...
-
It's boring as all hell. Total crybaby bullshit. Watch Smith or GTFO!
-
Wake up on the wrong side of your futon, did you?
-
SOLID WRITING.
-
From zap2it: At 10 p.m., the season premiere of "CSI: Miami" scored the night's biggest audience with an 11.2/17. "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" averaged a decent 8.6/14 for NBC but lost a significant number of viewers in its second half-hour.Well, no surprise that viewers drifted away after Deal Or No Deal. The next two episodes will be important ratings-wise as hype dies down and it has Heroes as a lead-in. Then we'll really know if enough people are watching for it to stay on the air. But so far it looks ok if not overly strong.
-
It got beat by CSI Miami, and had a smaller audience than Deal or No Deal before it. And the second half hour dropped off quite a bit from the first. Not terrible, but you'd hope to see better from a premiere on the first night of the fall season. I hope it hangs in there, but I'm not holding my breath.
-
I'm not holding my breath either, minderbinder. I knew it would be a hard sell to the flyover states (watching a game show and David Caruso's simplistic fake hard-assery is much easier for them to understand). Especially when the hard-line Christians find out that the thinly-veiled Chenoweth Christian character is played by an out lesbian actress (Sarah Paulson is the girlfriend of Broadway actress Cherry Jones).
-
Originally he was going to win. When John Spencer died they changed the ending. Spencer dead and his team loosing would have been too much of a downer ending for fans of the show, and at that point they were not going to get new viewers anyway.
-
Nobody gives a damn about that shite when they are watching the ol' boob tube. The folks you so callously refer to as the "flyover states" will watch if they are entertained. If they are not, I'm sure their remote control will come in most handy.
-
I mean it's just dreadful. Not only is it over the top in every conceivable way but it damn near crosses the line into neo-fascism. All the suspects are caricatures of evil that are not only guilty until proven innocent, but ones only the most twisted and paranoid xenophobic mind would consider realistic. The shows obviously panders to right-wing Catholic geriatrics and anti-Castro fanatics that make up a significant portion of Miami. The rest of the show is just ridiculous. I flipped it over last night during a commercial and low and behold I'm privy to an absurd, overly sun-sunsaturated knife-fight on a heliopad with shots of the Cristo Redentor statue slipped in every five seconds. It doesn't even have anyhting to do with forensic science anymore. Yes my friends. CSI: Miami may just be the worst show ever made.
-
I don't think this pilot episode was crap by any means, but it just didn't reach out, grab you, and pull you in like the first episode of The West Wing did. The pacing just seemed a little off. There were a lot of silences and "filler shots". Also, it was anti-climactic. The climax was the opening with the Judd Hersch rant. The dialogue was pretty good, but there was too much space in between and the plot seemed out of order. I still think the credit card guy's "I thought you prayed before every show." was the best part.
-
The fact that the uptight Christian is played by a lesbian actress just makes some people want to watch this more. I'm just saying! And surely a show about an ultra-liberal presidential staff would be more divisive than one about tv networks? Or do Red states hate liberal network writers more than liberal politicians? If the ratings collapse, it's just a sign that people don't go for Sorkin's writing. Which I think is crazy but then so are a lot of things.
-
Sorry people... this is just another hype implosion? Where is the emporer's friggen clothes? This was sheeeeit. I mean to start out copying "Network" then to mention "Network" thirty times to try to distract from your plagerism? In the worlds of Roy Neary "You can't fool us by agreeing with us."
-
...what pretentious assholes call America. The best way to proceed with this show is for all 12 of the fans to lay some early groundwork, and insulate this show from failure by employing the tried and true "show's too smart for blue-collar comedy tour crowd in the red states who'd rather see things go boom" defense.
-
shot like warm sepia nostalgia. I work in TV. Its faster, the lighting is flourescent or halogen in production offices, the people are stupider and more egotistical, and I've never seen a network boss as hot as Amanda Peet. I'm sure it will win Sorkin a lot of emmys though because it will make people in the TV academy feel like they are important and worthy in today's society.
-
Unlike the sheer realism of most shows, Studio 60 is wildly out of touch by having mood-lighting in the offices...
-
Most production offices are a fucking eyesore. But then the West Wing made the White House look plush and well-lit and it's pretty bright in there really. It's coming to something when tv isn't authentic.
-
...is the name of the credit card guy.
-
it's percieved realism. I grew up in DC, and now live in LA, Sorkin hits me in stuff I know. The problem I have with him is the problem I have with all television, and the problem he seems to have with television. He complains about the dumbing down of america, and the social impact of the medium, but he puts out these shows that people in flyover states, and coast states alike take as true drama. The West Wing did a debate about 9-11 for crying out loud!!! Was that show an accurate depiction of D.C. and its politics? Not close... Should've watched K st for that, unless you blinked and missed it. No he's going to keep candy coating the world we live in and people will watch and feel self rightous and smug and as though they know something when they really dont. I was just using that lighting thing as an example of his clever TV trickery. "That remote is a crack pipe" Come on, if you work on a TV show then you've never met a quite calm, adorable, polite director like whats his butt from 30-Something. Thats another thing.
-
can't wait to see next week
-
I guess I forgot about that. And she dated Sorkin? There's an odd couple. I wonder what his religious position is? He rants plenty about religious extremists, but I guess he's had plenty of religious characters on his shows, especially West Wing. That show covered a LOT of religion, especially for one penned by a guy who seems pretty hard core liberal.
-
I always figured Sorkin was pretty pointed in his 'allegorical fantasy' approach to writing. I think his 9-11 West Wing 'play' was just like any writer using the tools at his disposal to muse on the toll of the events. I do work in TV and I know plenty of smart people (and a plethora of dumb ones it's true). I can't comment on real white house politics but I thought The West Wing did get a lot of people to ask questions about policy creation and how lives are affected by such a small, insular group that maybe people wouldn't have asked before. As for his candy-coating, well Sorkin's favourite writers are all rather grandiose historical ones. I think he's trying to write something novel-like in tone and structure with all his shows, I never really took any of it as hard-core factual drama-documentary style work. (As for the lighting, blame Schlamme, not Sorkin, that guy likes everything to look like a 30's stage play). As I said before, I'm not convinced Studio 60 can disguise its tone behind the same pretense of 'exploring' as The West Wing did. It matters to people to maybe ask questions about their leaders, not so much their late-night entertainers but I genuinely think rich dialogue (whether every word is insightful wisdom or not)should be applauded. There's a lot of flaws with Sorkins work, I'm a huge fan and even I see that, but given what it's compared to, its smart and brave and I'd like to see it work. If Studio 60 gets dull, repetitive and it's characters devolve into unending steretyped ciphers - fine. I'll call it another CSI piece of shit and stop watching. But frankly, given the option, I'll take Sorkin's witty, candy-coated fantasy polemics over another vapidly-dull cop cut-out. Although my apologies if I missed your point.
-
Lighting is inconsequential, the real reason is when you said "if (it) gets dull, repetetive...etc" I watched that pilot and had the next 5 years of plot lines sketched out in my head. I just don't see them having many original stories to cull from that, which I dont mind in a show if it has other qualities. And pretentious verbose writing and miserable characters aren't going to be enough to hold me... And can I just say, as a liberal, shows like his really give us a bad name.
-
I personally didn't like the pilot for the West Wing but it developed over a period of time. I'm willing to see if (*if*) this develops as well, or is just a badly formed one shot idea. Sorkin wants to be Charles Dickens essentially and there's hardly a complex Charles Dickens story that doesn't start out being overly verbose and annoying, so maybe I just like to give things a chance. It's one of the values of tv drama over films, the chance to develop character. Although, sure, if there's nothing to develop, you're right, it's a waste.
But, ha, I rather like being a pretentious, verbose, miserable liberal (pretension is so vastly underrated these days...sigh), so maybe I'm one of those 12 people who are going to defend this show anyway. -
If she were a hardcore fundie she would never have taken a role in Broadway's WICKED, about the Witches of Oz before Dorothy shows up. Trust me, I've known people who have grown up in and escaped from hardcore fundie households where the 1939 version of THE WIZARD OF OZ was literally considered the work of Satan.
-
It goes away in the second season, although for the first few episodes there is faint giggling every once in a while. It was basically as if they were going toward non-laughtrack but ABC intervened slightly, so they compromised. Really, though, it sounds like the cameraman trying to stifle laughter, and it's really awkward.
-
Can you imagine the ratings if it had been in its original Thursday slot up against Grey's Anatomy and CSI? At least now it has a fighting chance.
-
Watch tony robinson last saturday night. For those who didnt. It was all about the book of revelations. But more specifically it was about these people called Endtimers, who believe that world is going to end and soon. It was interestin that the book of revelations wasnt written by St. John by a refuge who had fled to greece. He could have been from Rome. Nero burned Rome to the ground. He had people marked. so some refugess had the Mark of Nero. this is where all that 666 stuff comes from. There is a lot of historical context to the bible but those fundies use it to preach hate. They are doing it again. Bush is either a liar or very brave man in what he said yesterday with about Muslims and about reaching out to them.
-
Then studio60 truly is fucked.I preferred Tony Robinson as Baldrick than as Tony Robinson. Religion is funny.
-
Miami isn't the biggest one, but the original is often the highest rated show, and the others do very well. It beat S60, but I would expect an established show to have a big opening. Most new shows need some time to build a big audience. The big worry isn't losing to CSI, it's that viewers dropped way off in the second half hour.
-
Chenoweth sure is willing to show off a lot of cleavage now and again.
-
If Perry's character is a stand-in for Sorkin, it makes sense since both Sorkin and Perry have had drug problems. Maybe that'll be a future storyline?
-
Sep 20, 2006 12:01:02 PM CDT
Don't like it = Don't get it = You're not too bright
by ahopefullfanboy
I wonder if everybody posting that they didn’t like the West Wing or this new show knows that they are really admitting to the world that they’re just not bright enough to appreciate either? Kind of like a little kid saying that he hates broccoli is the same thing as advertising his stunted underdeveloped pallet. You’ve all outed yourselves as unintelligent morons dontcha know . . .
-
the laughtrack. It is awkward. In the first episode early on I heard what I sounded like laughter but I couldn't tell; I thought it might just be part of the office background noise. For the rest of the episode, when the laughter became obvious, it sounded apologetic. I noticed when watching episodes 4, 5, 6 yesterday that #5 did not have the laughtrack. I was hoping it was gone for good but it was back for #6. The show works better without it.
-
i never saw Sports Night, but i did enjoy the West Wing very much. some episodes were too cheezy/corny, but one thing about it was it always moved along rapidly, either plot-wise or dialogue-wise or both. Studio 60 just dragged on during certain scenes of the pilot, and yet stayed so superficial that the characters remained caricatures. like the scene when matthew perry and bradley whitford (who i normally love) sat in the car and discussed whitford's return to drugs. there was zero character insight, just like "why'd you do it?" "i just did" "ok, let's move on, you're ok now." Yawn! who cares about these people. and i have no real previous opinion of amanda peet, but her acting was not very good--e.g., every one of her scenes she ended with that same, toothy expression that was supposed to communicate...what? she's a dreamer? she's on something? strange. this show better get better fast. frankly, i thought the only good part of it was matthew perry, regardless of whether he's rehashing chandler bing.
-
Fair enough if people hate the characters/premise/Sorkin's style/Liberal intelligentsia etc etc but claiming that the characters aren't fleshed out and totally motivated in a pilot is getting ahead of the game a little. The great thing about tv drama is how they can 'develop' characters and how they can reveal little bits about them so you see them in a new light over a longer period of time. The Sopranos managed it, Six Feet Under was doing it really well until it jumped the shark and, pointedly, the West Wing was doing it over the first four seasons. I'm giving this at least a few episodes to see where the characters go.
-
I agree with cruel-kingdom. People take one side without looking at the other and then blow it up to be some big thing, pretending their opinion is the one and only, even after giving shit to critics who give their opinion. And just because a show is intelligent and you dont get it doesnt mean it is bad. It also doesnt make you an idiot, so dont twist it like that. Dont watch it if you dont like it, watch it if you do, but dont hide behind a computer as if it makes you sound tougher (which I'm not trying to do, so...). Anyways, thought this show was good. Really great writing and acting. The network thing was awesome, despite what others may believe. I loved the fact it was paying HOMAGE, yes homage not just copying, Network. There is my two cents.
-
In The West Wing, the first thing they did was go through character introductions and the introduction to the white house in general. We get the amusing spat between Toby and the flight attendant about whether or not his cell phone will really crash the plane. We get Leo contesting the spelling of a New York Times crossword puzzle word. We get a whole sense of the frantic pace of a day in the white house. The story builds throughout the episode and culminates in a big inspiring speech by the president. Wow! That's exciting. Now with Studio 60, we get the big speech at the beginning, and it's from a character we'll never even see again. We're thrust into a major plot event without being introduced to the normal goings on. There's no way to top the Judd Hersch speech, and they don't. Because all the characters are scrambling around frantically, we don't get a sense of what they're really like. Also, we don't get a sense of stuff because there were too many sweeping shots of whatever when there could have been dialogue. I would have liked to have seen a pilot that focused on everything leading up to the speech, and maybe ended with it as sort of a cliffhanger. It might have even been a good idea not even to introduce Matt and Danny until the second episode. I don't know. I really want this to be good. I really like The West Wing. I really hope they can pull it off. It's the best pilot I've seen this year. I tried watching the first couple episodes of the emmy-winning 24 season 5 a couple days ago, and it just sucked. I wanted to sleep. This was at least better than that. 24 was my favorite show on television for about the first three episodes of the first season and then it began its slow decline into the retarded. Maybe Studio 60 will do the reverse.
-
The show is not Christian bashing. Some characters may have a problem with fundamentalists, but this is just their starting point in the story. I guarantee that some of these characters attitudes are going to grow and change over the series course. (Providing it lasts longer than 13 weeks)
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts