Cool News
L-Prime Eats Up The Rest Of The Harriet Dinner!! The First STUDIO 60 Of Sweeps!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
I am – Hercules!!
“L-Prime,” a Canadian, gets to see “Studio 60” on Sunday, even if it’s a Super Bowl Sunday:
What’s it called?
“The Harriet Dinner, Part II”
Who’s responsible?
Story by Mark Goffman and Dana Calvo, teleplay by — who else? — Sorkin.
What does TV Guide say?
“Conclusion. Harriet is feted with a special dinner, but things continue to fall apart with Matt, while above the event, Jordan and Danny spend time locked on the roof.”
What is TV Guide not telling us?
That easily as much time is devoted again to Tom and Kim, Cal dealing with a menagerie under his stage, Simon and Darius continuing their feud, and Jack coming in and trying to salvage the Macao deal when Tom inevitably screws up.
Nya-hah, your show’s getting shelved!
Yeah. Great. Much as I might be a bit of a booster of this show, this would upset me even if I weren’t. If I have to choose between series’ by two Hollywood-types with inflated senses of self-importance, I take Sorkin over Paul Haggis eight billion days a week. The creator of The West Wing, or the creator of Walker, Texas Ranger? Hmm … lemme think about this. Doy.
So, are the romances as prominent as last week?
Matt and Harriet have some decent, mature discussions with real consequences, Danny and Jordan … develop, Tom and Lucy at least don’t go in the toilet, so yeah, I’d say romance is still front and centre.
Cal as delightful as before?
Best part of the episode, if I might say so myself. Much as I like the actual meat of the series (ie: heady discussions of media/entertainment, romantic entanglements), Timothy Busfield driven to distraction by a laidback animal wrangler and stubborn vipers, ferrets and coyotes is endlessly amusing.
About the whole ‘part what of what’ confusion?
This one says ‘conclusion’, but still doesn’t feel finished. More wrap-up than last week (obviously) though. We end on a decent note of uncertainty about how a show can be broadcast the next night.
How do our couples end up? Matt and Harriet?
Iffy. Harriet calls it over, but Matt hasn’t given up.
Tom and Lucy?
Hope.
Simon and Darius?
A couple of smiles and a bit of making up, but not after some more jackassery from Simon. (C’mon, I’m not the only one who sees a bit of ambiguity on Simon’s part, right?)
Jordan and Danny?
There’s a bit of magic. Which may or may not be as telling as it sounds.
What’s good?
“Let’s make fun of the homeless, they deserve it.”; “I was trying to get past the visual of you playing field hockey!” “I was good!” “I’ll bet!”; “You don’t scare me! … You do, that was hubris.”; “It was probably the tequila.” “Thanks, Hawkeye.”; “OK, and I’ll be performing selected scenes from Weekend at Bernie’s!”; there seems to be an AWful lot of booze at the catholic fundraiser; “I think it’s that you can’t walk away, so you’re burning down the house.”; “What the hell just happened?”; “And when I find these animals, I’m gonna cook ‘em and I’m gonna eat ‘em!”; “She’s 20 years old, Tom.” “She’s Courtney Love, Jack!”; Matthew Perry’s excellent terrible introduction, proving definitively to those who still doubted that dude can really act; “We dropped her, it’s ok.”; Timothy Busfield getting progressively more ridiculous dealing with the missing animals; Steven Weber helping Kim with a hangover; “It’s cooler with a dollar bill.” “No it’s not.”; Mark McKinney panicking about mold; “Lunatic girls is an idiom in our language.”; “I speak a few words.” “How many?” “All of them.”; “Your daughter’s not going to quit the viola, but you might consider laying off her ass once in a while, you commie prick. Did you understand all those words?”; “How many hours ago?” “Tuesday.”; “What is it?” “Chanel Sable.”; “Look behind you.”; “Don’t ever make fun of my magic tricks.”; the final montage – Jack and Tom in particular.
Not so good?
To say it was talky in parts would draw no end of mockery, right? It just felt a tad draggy, even for a show made by one of the people who brought lots of talk back to TV. Matt and Harriet in particular did grow and it felt realistic, but the same conversation felt like it happened about four times, with realizations sprinkled artificially and gradually.; Simon somehow ended up winning his thing with Darius, and somehow we’re expected to believe that that was the correct outcome. Sorry, but he was far too big of a jackass for me to buy that he didn’t deserve to have his teeth knocked in. There’s obviously shades of gray, but still, it didn’t sit right – I like Darius too much to see Simon so smug and superior, no matter how much the reality of Hollywood might reflect on this.; the final montage – the music, Simon and Darius, and the fact that this ‘conclusion’ still left us mid-action.
Rating for 1.14 (out of five)
**** (barely, though if Herc is giving new Losts only three and a half, maybe I need to think about adjusting my system – a system that is generally based on how it related to most else on TV, not a self-enclosed one)
As a bonus, NBC has graciously supplied plotlines for “Studio 60’s” February sweeps episodes. They are hidden with invisotext for those who fear spoilers:
FEB. 5
"The Harriet Dinner Part II"
UP ON THE ROOF? GRAMMY WINNER NATALIE COLE GUEST-STARS -- Danny (Bradley Whitford) and Jordan (Amanda Peet) are locked on the roof of the theater while other members of the cast and staff attend a dinner honoring Harriet (Sarah Paulson), whose relationship with Matt (Matthew Perry) begins to unravel. Grammy winner Natalie Cole guest-stars. Steven Weber, D.L. Hughley, Nathan Corddry and Tim Busfield also star.
FEB. 12
"The Friday Night Slaughter"
MATT AND HARRIET SHARE FOND MEMORIES -- Matt (Matthew Perry) remembers how he and Harriet (Sarah Paulson) first met. Bradley Whitford, Amanda Peet, Steven Weber, D.L. Hughley, Nathan Corddry and Timothy Busfield also star.
FEB. 19
"4 a.m. Miracle"
MATT HAS MORE THAN LATE-NIGHT WRITER'S BLOCK -- Matt (Matthew Perry) is stuck on a Wednesday night with writer's block and also has to contend with a young lawyer (guest star Kari Matchett, "Invasion") who's investigating a sexual harassment claim while Harriet (Sarah Paulson) continues shooting her movie. In addition, Jordan (Amanda Peet) and Danny (Bradley Whitford) enter into a contest to see who'd make the better parent. Steven Weber, D.L. Hughley, Nathan Corddry and Tim Busfield also star.
FEB. 26
TBA
10 p.m. Monday. NBC.
Season Sets Under $20!!
Alien Nation: The Complete Series * Angel 2.x-5.x * Arrested Development 1.x-3.x * The Big Valley 1.x * The Bob Newhart Show 1.x-4.x * Buffy the Vampire Slayer 1.x-7.x * Dark Angel 1.x-2.x * Dead Like Me 1.x-2.x * Dharma & Greg 1.x * Errol Morris’ First Person: The Complete Series * Fame 1.x * Green Acres 1.x-3.x * Harsh Realm: The Complete Series * Hill Street 1.x-2.x * Jeremiah 1.x * The Lone Gunmen The Complete Series * The Magnificent Seven 1.x * Malcolm in the Middle 1.x * The Mary Tyler Moore Show 1.x-4.x * M*A*S*H 2.x-11.x * Millennium 1.x-3.x * NYPD Blue 1.x-4.x * Over There 1.x * The Pretender 1.x-4.x * Rat Patrol 1.x * Reba 1.x-4.x * Remington Steele 1.-5.x * Roswell 1.x-3.x * She Spies 1.x * That ‘70s Show 2.x * Tru Calling 2.x * The White Shadow 1.x-2.x * The X-Files 1.x * The X-Files 4.x * The Young Riders 1.x
-
+ Expand All
-
I want it to... I like parts of it...
Let everybody hump everyone, and move on with it. -
That's just so damned clever!
-
I wasted my time even watching this show. Just like Bumpasses Dawg, I've liked this show in parts and at times, but I've been waiting for it to really take off. Now they've announced it's getting pulled with no return date scheduled... doesn't exactly sound like a vote of confidence from above... But seriously, I have to wonder... with so much *bad* T.V. aired on a weekly basis, would it kill NBC to try and bring along a show that, while it's not *great*, isn't all that terribly bad. That's probably too much to ask. The network needs to make room on the schedule for the next one-cheeked reality show. Howie's Deal or No Deal for Dogs...
-
I want my $20 from one of you Stud-60 lovers. Smugness can only last so long.
-
is gay and likes darius
-
unless they do (it's a question of how much padding they use to play rugby). Anyway, I thought all the shows got pulled on march and april.. they only have 8 eps left, if they're running 4 eps in "febrary sweeps", they need something for may.
-
Yeah, I liked it more than "The Christmas Show". Others may feel differently obviously, but I loved everything about it, and everything rang vary true relationship-wise. Perry PERFECTLY plays someone who is in love with someone who has feelings for someone else. Harriet's comment of "acts of cruelty, disguised as cuteness" has so many shades of Dan Rydell's "acts of insanity, disguised as cuteness". The ending montage is wonderful, especially with how it seems to place Matt in this hopeless position,and the stuffwith Jordan and Danny is wonderful, and left me with a huge fucking grin on my face in the end. Add that to how this episode may have some of the funniest dialogue in it as well. My only complaint is the Simon/Darious stuff probably could have been wrapped up in two episodes, rather than three, but oh well.
-
The fact that when he keeps calling Darius offensive "Black" nicknames, and Darius calls him on it, he says he'll keep doing it quote "As long as it's funny." -- Never once in his calling Darius stupid names did I find it remotely funny, and not even in a "Sorkin-tried-to-but-it-didn't-work way", like most of the sketches from early in the season. It felt like even the show knew that he was being a jerk, and largely in the wrong, so for him to come out on top is just a cynical nod to the politics of starting at the bottom in Hollywood. Something I'd be fine with if we were then given Darius' point of view showing a jerkoff boss being a dick. But we're not, we're given Darius towing Simon's line and smiling about it. And that's just wrong.
-
NOOOOOOOOO, I love it too much. Damn!
-
I find it offensive that you think Kunta Kinte is a "stupid...offensive" name. I think that was Simon's whole point. The character of Kunta Kinte lived an proud, honorable life, and somehow over time that has been distorted into an 'offensive' name. I think that was Simon's point, that Darius doesn't think for himself, and allows 'white america' to define him.
-
I notice that the episode after this looks like it will feature flashbacks. The best episodes of The West Wing were Christmas episodes or flashback-based. The S60 Christmas episode was wonderful, so could the flashback episode be similarly great?I haven't seen this concluding episode yet, but I agree with Daniel's above comment about "we're given Darius towing Simon's line and smiling about it". The thing which annoyed me most when Sorkin wrote The West Wing was when two characters had a disagreement. One was shown to be right and the other wrong. That's fine - the drama would be pretty weak if the writer didn't take sides. But, most often, the person who was "proven" wrong would end up seeing how wrong they were and accepting it happily. That just seems patronising to me. Especially in the episode with a woman who wears a Star Trek badge. After Josh tells her how wrong she is for being an "obsessed" fan we even get a shot of her nodding and smiling in agreement (blame the director for that - hopefully Sorkin didn't go so far as to actually put that reaction in the script).
-
Feb 05, 2007 11:26:18 AM CST
Technically it was Matt not Simon who discovered Darius
by crichtonastronut
Simon took Matt to the comedy club to see someone else, that neither of them liked. Simon didn't pay much attention to Darius, but Matt saw potential and said he "just needed dicipline".
What i find agrivating about Simon's position is that he doesn't want Darius to have his own voice or opinion, Simon wants a Darius that can be be defined by Simon.
He apparently thinks he's the God King of Black America and is solely resoponsible for defining what all black Americans should be.
All must bow to Simon. -
shit sandwich.
-
Ok, I phrased the 'stupid offensive' names thing poorly, and I won't pretend to be as up on the history or siginificance of the specific names he is actually using (and of course Kunta Kinte isn't an offensive name, but the context and tone is certainly meant as a putdown). I think the fundamental problem is that Simon both believes so heavily that he holds Darius' future solely in his own hands and that it is in his rights to ruin it if he sees fit, and that Darius (according to Simon) MUST define himself as a 'black' writer. Not just a writer. Regardless of whether or not he is, he shouldn't be forced (by someone in the same situation) to define himself in any way besides his own. Simon also had a point in showing Darius the haters, but I think Simon is projecting too much onto Darius, and that the show itself followed the wrong path in ending up with him (mostly) in the right. Ok, a hypothetical: what if the new writer situation was reversed? What if Jeannie discovered Lucy at a comedy club, and then browbeat her into only writing sketches with her and about women? Would we be having the same discussion? Should that storyline end with a near feel-good moment about Lucy submitting to writing a pet project of Jeannie's about shopping or tampons? The only thing Simon was right about in this situation was that Darius needed the 'writing rules' attitude that neither he or Lucy have shown quite yet. I realize this is fiction with a exec who writes every word of the show, but if they're going for realism in the Simon/Darius thing, then he should have jumped on the opportunity to work with a star only on those grounds, not racial ones. And supertoyslast, I think that was my comment in addendum to my actual review you mentioned.
-
....a smart, well written show replaced by yet ANOTHER show about mobsters. oh, but it's IRISH mobsters this time, whoopie fucking ding dong. i'll never understand why the american public is so obsessed with fucking mobsters. maybe it's "romantic" to them because they know nothing about these kinds of people? believe me folks i know people like this in real life. they don't deserve tv shows and movies made about them. they deserve slow, agonizing death.
-
I find the charcter less likeable now. Maybe he was supposed to come across as a mentor trying to teach the newbie a lesson. But he ended up just looking like a prick. Darius does have balls - he passed the sketch to Lucy even though he knew Simon wanted him to do it. And time and again he stood up to Simon, only to have Simon pull Rank on him by telling him to "watch his tone" and making Darius call him "Sir". The politics of starting at the bottom was presented in a much better way with Tom's explanation to Lucy about why he didn't think she would be at the dinner. I was critical of his lie last week, seeing it as a lame device used solely to erect a wall in their relationship; I saw it as a bad sitcom situation. But they handled it well this week. It got resolved rather than using it as one of many ways to keep them apart (the old "will they or won't they" tug of war). I found this episode to be slower than the previous two, but still one of the quickest hours of television.
-
A depressed Matt turns to prescription painkillers and becomes addicted. Should be a stretch for Perry to play.
-
I was too quick on the keyboard, elprime. It was your comment I was responding too, but I'm so used to replying to DanielKurland in S60 talkbacks that I put Daniel. Stupid me for being unable to notice usernames. Good review and I look forward to reading your thoughts on next week's flashback-filled episode.
-
and think it's great, the shelving of 30 Rock is even stupider. I mean jesus christ, EVERYONE agrees that show just keeps getting funnier and funnier as it finds its groove. stupid move NBC, stupid. you're banking on Andy
Richter? I love the guy, but come on. anyone remember Michael Richards' detective show? for every "Monk" there's 5 of those heaps of hot garbage. studio 60 and 30 rock are better than 95% of what's on TV, let them be. -
The Studio 60 vs. 30 Rock shelving: much as I get a kick out of seeing my reviews go up for this thing each week, gun-to-my-head, pick one or die between the two for a second season, most days its 30 Rock by a hair. I mean, it's totally Sophie's Choice, but my usual Thursday involves taping the NBC comedy block while catching OC, Grey's and Supernatural, usually so I can have 30 Rock to view repeatedly. And immediately after Supernatural is finished, I rewind the tape half an hour, watch the 30 Rock and am laughed out for the rest of the night. 'The Baby Show' and last week's birthday party with Paul Reubens, Will Forte and Isabella Rosselini have vaulted that show past any other sitcom currently airing, and neck-and-neck with Arrested Development for nearly my favs of all time. Though of course having both 60 and 30 back next year would make this boy the most happy.
-
30 Rock is a solid comedy with a lot of long term potential. I wish they were not pulling it from the schedule. Tina Fey and company are entertaining, and belong with NBC's Thursday night line-up. As far as Studio 60 goes, I don't watch it. I'm just not that interested in an hour-long dramedy about the behind-the-scenes at an SNL-type show. WEST WING was good, but backstage at a comedy show just does not have the same gravitas as the White House, and seems silly to try. Anyway, I watch 30 Rock, and hope NBC is smart enough to keep and protect the show long enough to find its audience.
-
I've heard A LOT of people say that Studio 60 just hasn't quite lived up to its potential, and that's exactly how I feel about it as well. It was supposed to be the best new show on TV this year, and it's been good at best. The show's quality too often seems to get negatively affected by its own agenda (and the comedy in the "show within the show" pales in comparison to that of 30 Rock). On the other hand, I was a huge fan of 30 Rock by the 3rd episode. I recommended the hell out of it to about a dozen friends of mine and it's now their favorite comedy on TV. Yep, for all of them! I know the show is a bit too bizarre or wacky at times for some people, but I agree that it's the funniest, smartest comedy on TV since Arrested Development. I wish NBC had enough brain matter to realize that putting it up against Grey's Anatomy and CSI is setting the show up for failure. Please let NBC renew the show, move it to another night, and start marketing the show a little better (speaking of Arrested Development, that's another show that its network could not figure out how to properly market)!
-
It's okay. Not nearly as good as The Office, and nowhere near as good as Arrested Development. However, last week's Paul Reubens episode was totally channelling Martin Short's stint in "Ready, Aim, Marry Me". I don't know why everyone is panicking though over cancellation, it's just moving for a bit, it more than likely will be back. Also, I'm tired of hearing the complaints on Studio 60 about how the comedy in the show is hardly funny; there hasn't been a sketch really seen in a long time, and the last one involving Santa WAS actually funny, and although the show may have not met inital expectations, I think at this point it is incredibly strong, meeting expectations (Peet is so good in this episode, I can't even imagine people hating her to begin with, and talking about ditching her), and is arguably the best show of the year in my opinion (Lost, The Office, Dexter, BSG, How I Met Your Mother, Heroes, 24, and Veronica Mars, particularly lately, have all been satisfying too, but Studio 60 gives me some sort of surge).
-
All the warm smugness and oh-so-perfect snappy dialogue + the limousine liberal mentality give my stomach a warm surge of bile. Bummed about 30 Rock as that show had promise. Overjoyed, however, the success of Heroes, Office, Scrubs and others warms the cockles of my heart and it should for most of you too. The writing was on the wall for Studio 60 from day one. As someone who works in the television industry, I say this from the bottom of my heart; Sorkin is an idiot.
-
When a show gets bumped during a sweeps month, THEN there's trouble. Even Survivor gets bumped in March sometimes (for basketball.)
-
The Office has spent a bit too much time on romantic subplots, which 30 Rock has been straight-ahead funny.
-
Michael asking Pam if she can be used in his "How to remove a bra" segment for his child was wonderful. My only complaint has been that putting Andy in the spotlight, and giving him so much attention has made his character worse. He's better in small doses, like Creed.
-
frustrated screenwriter forced to work menial jobs in the industry becuse no one recognizes his greatness. who's to blame? Sorkin, of course.but hey, I graduated film school and I'm moving to LA in 2 months to do just such a menial job, so who am I to talk? hate on biggles! I look forward to your next post in a STUDIO 60 TALKBACK, abdout how you hate the show. it's like you have a Rush Limbaugh magnetic poetry set. liberal, smug, limousine, elitist, arrogant, feminazi, etc. etc...you need the set of erotic magnetic poetry, that would at least make your posts something new, and not the same boring post you've laid down on here every week, sir. you don't like the show,you don't like Sorkin, you don't like liberals with opinions (especially if they have their own TV show)...we get it already! go to the Lost talkback.
-
Albeit, a little more eloquently. Also Biggles, I don't understand how from the "bottom of your heart" you can determine that Sorkin is an idiot. Your heart has nothing to do with whether someone is an idiot. Maybe if you had said, "From the bottom of my heart, I hate everything Sorkin stands for..." Hatred is related to the heart, intelligence isn't.
-
Oh Christ, I think I've actually muttered that ill-advised comment myself...yeesh.
-
It's because their fight is so REAL and authentic.
-
They can act out some really bad bombing for Matt....WOW! Give matt perry an emmy nomination for this episode!
-
This show is the gay.
-
I know! He definitely deserves an Emmy for this episode, just see how things continue. Whitford also totally deserves one for "The Christmas Show". After this episode they CAN'T cancel this show.
-
I made it through four or five episodes...the first couple were actually really good. Then I just couldn't deal with the smug attitude of the show and how no one smiles on it and how there is so much political shit in it.
-
It really was. Uncomfortably so. Brilliant, really.
-
Funny. I'm on board with the idea that Darius should've punched Simon.
-
was when she mentions how she's thought of having sex with Luke, and Matt just doesn't hear anything else after that point. That is EXACTLY what would happen in the situation. One of the most real fights I've seen since Jeremy/Natalie stuff in Sports Night. Tom and Lucy have some similar stuff towards the end.
-
DId you notice how he put the show theme into the melody of the action music when Danny is chasing Jordan? It's subtle touches like that that gave John Williams so many oscars!
-
And the end of the Danny/Jordan thing was pretty well-played after all.
-
Everyone so happy, except Matt, just looking down on everyone. Honestly, one of the best parts of the show is the subtle touches of how he is slowly breaking down and losing it. And yeah, the whole "I'm CRAZY about you" was great, and her reasoning for being hesitant to get together with Danny also made a lot of sense. I hope next week's episode with the flashbacks is well done, because "In The Shadow of Two Gunmen" may be one of the best West Wing episodes.
-
On both Perry and Whitford's parts, as I said, but I stand by the four stars instead of five thing, regardless of how the relationships ended up, it still took a three-parter to get there when one (maybe two, tops) were all it should have taken to get there -- I just can't put this near the level of the Christmas Show, nor can I abide Simon's idiocy. Now that our Yank bretheren have seen it, I'd love to hear what they thought of the Darius/Simon thing.
-
I agree with your two/three part comment, but I'm judging the episode based on it's own, and not putting that in as a factor. Yes, this episode probably tied back to the most from the entire series, and maybe that's why I enjoyed it so much (and it's probably why season finales are much better episodes usually as well), but I can't help that from taking place. This episode may not be better than "The Christmas Show", since it's been a while since I've seen it, but it's definitely it's equal in my eyes, and it left me feeling incredibly satisfied. And Tiredpm, your comment about it needing a second season definitely makes sense, and I'd really like to think it can be done somehow, even if they just get a few probationary episodes with a reduced budget and see what happens (although I don't know if Sorkin would even agree to that). NBC must be aware that the quality IS increasing though, and the ratings aren't dropping, and hopefully that will mean something. I suppose a lot will be revealed by how they deal with those dangling four episodes, and hopefully it won't be a "Watch them ONLY on NBC.com!" kind of thing
-
This show is really driving me nuts. Just when I think that it's not showing any progression, the writing steps up a notch and the characters become characters I want to see. Last weeks episode struck me as poor plotting and writing, with characters being set up to fail and fall. This week, they act like adults and stupid arguments are revealed as just that (Lucy and Tom) and old wounds are exploited with repercussions. More and more I'm becoming convinced that this show NEEDS a 2nd season. It probably doesn't deserve it (expensive show that hasn't lived up to it's pedigree) but I think the characters and the crew NEED the time to let all the plots that have been percolating boil over.
-
Lose that blonde douche.
-
...the Simon/Darius scenes bother me. The fact that Sorkin is a WASP and the writer bothers me. The only thing that tempers it for me is that the two actors are willing to say the lines -- you have to assume there's an element of truth to what they are saying. Still, here's what really bothers me: the Militant Fruit of the Loom sketch looked crap. They couldn't just have Darius stand up to Simon and say that he thought it was a crap idea? Because if you have to explain a comedy sketch (the militant fruit is a reflection of black people who are more obsessed with the injustices they see than actually making a difference? Yeah, I didn't get that and as the audience never saw the full sketch I don't know who would have gotten it) it's just not that funny, folks.
-
And how it's become "cool" to hate this show ,and relish in someone who is "used to success" finally "failing". It's juvenile, and it's mean, and it's a waste of time. In 14 hours this show has made me care and be invested in the characters and want to see what happens with them, which isn't easy to do in television these days.
-
....it's a shame. because it will be a clear victory for mediocraty over excellence, the lowest common denominator over higher standards.
since when is being smart considered smug? and why? even if your hang up is politics, i'd love to know how that had ANYTHING to do with this episode? this episode had nothing to do with politics, instead it was all about people and how they relate to each other. and it was brilliant. haters are always gonna hate, and thats fine, but for god sakes why would you hate someting just for DARING to be smart? if nothing else at least this show is TRYING.....would you really have TV become nothing but "reality" and game shows?
*shakes head* -
I agree with what you say wholeheartedly, but I have a question for you: Who are you? You misspelled 'mediocrity' but got every other word right and wrote a literate and impassioned argument...Aaron? Is that you? :-)
-
....i think the problem comes from the fact that the "militant fruit of the loom" sketch is lame and everyone knows it, so for simon to get bent out of shape over it make him seem like a dick. but that might be the whole point. simon actually needs darius to be honest with him, and if he is "trying not to be the black guy" he won't be there to tell simon: "no brother, that idea sucks out loud."
i don't know. the idea seems correct to me it's just that the sketch they used to frame it needed work. either way you gotta give the white boy props for even trying to do the subject at hand. -
....i'm just a guy who likes smart, thoughtful TV, who dosen't pay close attention to typos and spelling mistakes THAT much, because i have false hope that the MESSAGE is more important than anyting else. :)
and if i were aaron don't you think i would have better things to do right now than be on a talkback? you know, like, blowing lines off a hookers ass and reading aloud from book written by karl marks? ;) -
...glad you took my comments in the spirit intended, the last thing I wanted to do was start a flame war with the people that actually like this show! As for Sorkin having better things to do, yeah, probably. But he really hates internet critics and gives no thought to the opinion of those who would post online and after one of his characters gave a big speech about, effectively, protesting too much and becoming obsessed with the very thing he purports to hate... Well, let's just say it wouldn't surprise me. Plus, he already nodded to Talkbackers in a previous episode.
-
but Cal's line about eating the animals was SO funny...perry and pauley were really good in this episode, I finally got why sorkin wanted perry and only him in the part. he has to be bumbling and super intelligent at the same time, sweet and calculating, funny but not overly so. pitch perfect so far. can't wait to see what happens with the animals! SAVE THIS SHOW! I swear to god, it will find its audience, and 1st season DVD sales will be much higher if there is a second season. people who jumped on board late will buy the DVD if they want to be caught up before next season. if there isn't one, they won't buy it. come on NBC!!
-
"all of them" and "it's fun" might be the funniest exchange of the show so far...god damn this episode is good...
-
I concur with the best moments which have been mentioned above. The delivery of Cal's threat to eat the animals was spot-on perfect. And the "I'm crazy about you" note harked back to the most romantic moments of Sports Night. I still like The Christmas Show the best, but I'd put this on a par with the pilot. This picked up the quality after the slightly below-par previous two episodes. I just hope that the show has now hit its stride and won't falter.
-
Action figures. Action figures that just stand there for an hour and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk when you pull their string. It's weird - there will be a plot point that will ALMOST get to the funny or really interesting part, and then it will just die, right there in front of me. The animals under the stage thing could've been hilarious six or seven times, but no-ho! We can't have that, can we? Someone else has a nine-minute monologue to deliver. Jesus. For a hilarious and intelligent show like 30 Rock to get lumped in with this bloated mess and then get SHELVED because of it is a goddamn shame. Thanks a lot, Sorkin, you narcissistic prick.
-
I was chastized, yesterday, for claiming Sorkin an idiot. I was also accused of being a (gulp) screenwriter. Sorry dudes, I've been in television marketing, sales and research for years. I've claimed Sorkin an idiot for different reasons than you may think. I think he's talented, but you can actually track the decline of his shows ratings along with his desire to "preach" his liberal views in each show. When he backs off his soap-box, guess what? The ratings go back up. I can tell you when watching his shows (yes, sometimes I have to) when I see the "Christians-are-too-simple" and "conservatives-are-too-rigid" snappy dialogue, I can visualize 1/3 of the viewers tuning out on one point and another 1/3 tuning out on another. I can then visualize the ratings underdelivery (yes it IS a business) that will be forced to be made good by the television networks and their affiliates. I can then calculate the cost of production v. the revenue brought in by said show and guarantee a cancellation. I can tell you from a pure marketing standpoint and from having to SELL his shit, the guy is his own worst enemy. And yes, he's got a right to express his views (no matter how wrong), and yes, viewers have a right to tune him out, but isn't he "brilliant" enought to be a little more subtle with his views AND retain the viewers and revenue. Sorry, I'm rambling, just wanted to explain were I was coming from when referring to Sorkin as an IDIOT.
-
I, too, found your response eloquent, yet totally off base. There's no hate here. Just a desire for a talented writer to learn from his mistakes.
-
NASCAR will be back, I promise.
-
When I said Matt was looking down on everyone, I meant he was LITERALLY looking down, not that he felt he was better than everyone else.
-
I find your views on NASCAR fans fascinating and would like to learn more!
-
....it really shouldn't be the writters problem that the audience can't put aside their personal views or feelings to enjoy good quality tv. regardless of if you are a loony liberal or a nutty neo-con (or like me and most of america stick in the middle between those ping-ponging jack-off) quality programming should be embraced by anyone claiming to be an intellectual, whatever side of the divide they sit on be dammed.
otherwise we will have NOTHING to look forward to besides a whole lot more shows like "the simple life" and "deal on no deal". i can't imagine ANYONE claiming to have a brain in their head wanting THAT.
having said all of that, i do agree with you that when the show gets away from the "red state vs. blue state" stuff it IS much better. but, again i think it really is up to to the audience to set aside their personal P.O.V and embrace quality instead of getting hung up on a writters politics and letting it affect the enjoyment of a well written show. the danger in exposing yourself to only opinions that you agree with is that you end up never having to think for yourself about anything.
and that is not a statment directed at you, but more so the general viewing public at large. -
Finally, someone trying to make a cogent point! Here's thing about my views on injecting political beliefs into the writing on these shows. When it's one-sided (or perceived to be) and the audience picks up on it, it's over. Period. Especially with a show of this quality (I don't deny it!) and overhead. That's not to say that alternate views can't be presented, of course it would be silly to argue that point. What most TBers seem to fixate on, however, is that if the viewers are turning off because the show is demeaning to "the red states", it's not because they aren't intelligent enough (you snobs), it's because they find it to be intelligently offensive. And at that point (this is IMPORTANT) it DOES become the writer’s problem, if he/she wants the show to stay on the air. BUT DON'T BELIEVE ME! Watch the ratings for the show. The more preachy (yes, liberal) the show gets, the worse it will do in the ratings. Conversely, when Sorkin focuses more on the story, the ratings begin to creep up. Coincidence? I can rattle off a whole history of shows, going back to the 70's, that have experienced the same issues.
-
....and to a degree i agree with you. the show really "snap, crackles and pops" when it is more SPORTSNIGHT than WEST WING. sure the politics CAN be there, but it shouldn't be front and center (sorkin allready did THAT show).
i do however, beg to diffre with you on the point that it becomes the writters problem if the audience finds the show "intelligently offensive". again i think anyone who wants to be intellectually honest with themselves, no matter what there political views, owe it to themselves to be exposed to diffrent points of view and wouldn't let a diffrence of political opinion stop them from enjoying someting that stimulates them mentally, that challanges them. i firmly believe that anyone who shuts someone or someting out just because they disagree with it, dosen't really want to be an free thinking person and instead wants to be spoon fed shit by like minded people instead. and there in lies the diffrence.
in short it's only becomes the writters problem if he wants to PANDER to the audience. and sorkin dosen't strike me as someone who is intrested in pandering. and good on him for not doing so. -
First, this has got to be the most intelligent discussion I have ever read on this site, and I don't mean that in an Eddie Haskel kind of a way. the Reason Sonnyhopper is wrong is that when Sorkin interjects his "opinions" into the characters on his show, he uses the most blatent stereotype or most obvious whipping boy to make his "point." Case in point, the current plot about how the FCC is trying to "censor" the news because fuck was said on the nightly news is so ridiculously out there that the plot and "wacky hijinks" that follow feel even more ridiculous and stupid. Would the FCC ever do this in real life? Absolutely not. Want to argue this point? I'm sure you do, but you'd be wrong. The FCC can't censor the news and they certainly wouldn't fine a network for the reasons depicted in this show. Furthermore, Sorkin makes the argument so onesided and indefensible as to render it completely....boring. Yep. Sonnyhopper, you talk about being spoonfed crap is something you don't want but you're more than happy to just blindly accept this ridiculous plot... kinda undercuts your argument.
I never saw sportsnight, i'm sure it was a fucking brillant show, but it seems like sorkin sets up these ridiculous plot points and then spends the next 45 minutes monologing to try to convince you that they're not riduculous. Thats just how it feels to me. I like the characters, but would love a little bit less soap box and a little more soap opera... -
Kunta Kinte because Simon thinks it is an insult, or because he believed that Darius would take is as a racial slur? Because I don't get how that would be insulting? Now, if he had called him Toby, Kunta's slave name, I could see how Darius would take offense to that. But then, would the audience recognize the reference? Is it a case of ignorant writers or ignorant characters?
-
In case you didn't know sonnyhopper, this whole bleeping argument is about personal taste.
My argument was basically that the FCC was so ridculous that it took me out of my suspension of disbelief for the rest of the plot points afterward. If you liked it cool, but 90% of shows are not what you described... Because of the "genre" of this show, that it is a drama/comedy based on the backstage hijinks of a late night sketch comedy show, then yeah, I guess I would have expected realism, or should I say TV realism, otherwise, why should I take anything this show has to offer seriously, and If I'm not supposed to take anything from the show seriously, then why have the soap box to begin with? Is sorkin making fun of himself with this show? Topics to ponder.... -
....the whole FCC fine/newscast with a private saying "fuck" on the air is just a set up for the whole macow deal, it IS indeed just a plot device to set -up a storyline. i don't recall every saying it wasn't ridiculous. of course if you want to reject any show that sets up ridiculous plot points then spends the rest of the episode resolving said plot point, you would have to reject about 90% of ALL television shows. ever seen an episode of seinfeld?
but regardless of the conventions of televison shows, i guess that gets to the heart of the matter. personally i'm not watching STUDIO 60 expecting to get "realistic" potralalys of the FCC and what they do, i don't expect the show to be "fair and balanced" in how it goes about making it's points, or potraying the media/entertainment business in a "realistic" fashion. i'm actually watching the show for the dialouge, the "monologing" as you put it. i'm watching for the pay off, not the set up. i like the prose of a well written and acted script. thats all.
if those aspects of the show ruin it for you, then hey, no big deal, everyone has their own opinion, and brings their own hang ups to the party. just don't make the mistake of thinking that the things that matter to you are the same things that matter ot me. -
oh i get the dichotomy inherent to this type of "problem". as i said i agree with biggles that the show IS indeed better when it leaves the politics in the background. the only point i was trying to make was that with sorkin, it kinda should be understood what you are gonna get with him. he is, after all, a "big name" writter and his shows are what they are, and knowing that makes me believe he will choose "art" over "business" most of the time.
while i can agree with people who get frustrated with him because of the "soap-box" thing, (because i share the same frustration to a point), it does make me scratch my head sometimes because if you know the mans work at all, you know he dose this sort of thing.
*shrugs* -
imo, the whole "kunta" thing was simons way of making his point. it was a "reverse-psycology" type of insult. he was reminding darius that his "real name" was kunta, because in simons mind, darius was happy to be "toby".
-
...if this "whole bleeping argument is about personal taste" then how are you gonna come on here and say: "the reason sonny hooper is wrong"
*blinks*
so i'm "wrong" because you don't agree with my opinion? O.K. right, got it.
i still stand by my opinion that any intellectual worth his salt souldn't give two shits about sorkins politic views, regardless of his own views, and miss out on brilliantly written and acted moments that capture the bittersweet essence of humanity and life as well as matt breaking down at the podium did. at least, they shouldn't IMO. -
Sorry, guys. Just got back in the office. Great philosophy course going on here. Just want to correct one thing that was brought up: The FCC can most definitely fine a news organization (more likely the parent company) for the use of the f-word in a broadcast. You would not believe the litany of crap that the FCC can fine you for in today’s world. It would be up to the parent company to discipline the employee who let the f-bomb fly. The corporation would be fined even more if the violation was pre-recorded or rehearsed with the corporation’s knowledge. One last thing: Rapid-fire dialogue with a liberal slant does not an intelligent show make. I hear more liberals asking me to expose myself to their television, movies, and newspapers in order to "broaden my horizons" yet they've never read a conservative publication or listened to conservative talk radio. (and, no, New York Times, NBC, and ABC news do not count as fair and balanced) Read some Ann Coulter along with your Al Franken and then lets have the "intelligence" discussion. Sorkins constant play to the left mentality is hardly cutting edge, intelligent or daring in Hollywood. Hell, any east coast or west coast television critic will rave about it! (West Wing, anyone?) It would be intelligent if it was convincing, but it usually ends up being demeaning.
-
Is that Sorkin's soap boxing is so dumb, for lack of a better word. He takes on hot button topics such as "McCarthyism" oohhhh, "crazy-christians" omg! Pregnant working women, omfg! That sorkin is so cutting edge.... I'll still watch the show, because I believe that there's a good show to be found beneath all the crap... That's it for my two cents....
-
I hear that word bantered around quite a bit. Has anyone ever looked into the history of Joseph McCarthy, what he was investigating, and what was born out to be true once Glasnost was enacted? Pretty shocking stuff.
-
...is that Sorkin seems completely unable to show just show his audience something without beating them over the head with it. It's like he's in a constant state of screaming the words "This! This right here! This is funny! That? That over there? That's serious!" to everyone in the vicinity over and over and over again. I have no problem with writers inserting pieces of themselves into their writing, but good lord - the title pages of his scripts must consist of nothing but an autographed 8"x10" glossy of him. Subtle, he ain't.
-
This one's getting a little better, but can it get enough people interested before it dies?
-
...is to get moved to Thursday nights at 10:00. That way NBC would be giving a decent new show a chance to breathe and grow; and they would be (finally) putting that P.O.S. ER out of it's (and our) misery. ...seriously, if there's a show on their schedule that needs to go that's the one.
-
...i think the "intellegent" part of the show happens in the "human" moments. the give and take between the characters and how those relationships bounce off one another. THATS the part i'm talking about. the politicl stuff, i agree, can be a bit gratting. all i'm saying is lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
and just for the record, no sorry i really can't get through anything written by ann coulter. but i do read cal thomas as much as possible. is he still considered conservative enough for me to make the cut? i do my best to listen to both sides, i just can't bring myself to listen to the shreiking extremists (franken AND coulter)i'll give you the benifit of the doubt, if you do the same for me. savy? :) -
There. I said it. Just kidding. I used Ann & Al (sounds like the makings of a great sitcom!) as extreme examples. Unfortunately, as I've stated before, even if you've got a beautiful, yummy cherry pie of a show and add just a little smudge of political feces, the end result will be trashing of the pie. That's what I've been observing. I could be wrong! Most of the east-west coast types don't recognise it until it's too late. From their perspective (they and everyone around them lean to the left), everything is normal. Suddenly, thier critically acclaimed show gets the axe and everyone cries "too-smart-for-the-room". I have, however, seen shows that were too-smart-for-the-room cancelled. Arrested Development, Freeks & Geeks, Undeclared to name a few. I haven't seen many shows with a conservative lean. Have you?
-
.....hurm......um...eh..."father knows best"? "ozzie and harriet"? anything where the married couple had twin beds?
seriously though, prehaps the argument could be made that "7th heaven" has a conservative leaning, but i personally don't watch the show so thats nothing more that a guess really. outside of that, than i guess i would have to say no, i don't know of any shows like that. but it makes me wish there WAS such a show that was as smart as STUDIO 60 because i would probally watch it.the political leaning wouldn't bother me as long as the show was "too-smart-for-the-room."
maybe it's just me, but i refuse to let my own personal beliefs become blinders. you may be suprised to hear me say, i don't agree with every political point sorkin makes on the show. for example i think matt is a bit of ajerk in that he seem to have no problem paying lip service to a cause harriet believes in if he thinks it will score him points, and he seem to be one of thoses people who rails against anyting the rightwingers believe in just because they believe in it. but that really dosen't make me dislike matt or the show. it's just part of the character, and regardless of if i agree with him or not, in the end, i just like the fact that there is a show on tv that dosen't sound like it was dumbed down so the "paris hilton generation" can understand it.
but again, thats probally just me. :) -
....that "ann and al" sitcom sounds like a winner. you should pitch that sometime.
-
...to get laid is the only trait that I admire about Matt. 7th Heaven was a funny little show that positioned itself as a more conservative show, but really had a lot of liberal thinking behind it (funny you mentioned 7th Heaven, I had to sell that show for years). 24, I guess, has been considered to take more conservative ideals (ie national security at all costs), but I think the liberal mindset will win out on that show as well. (I may be blowed up, but I gots my civil rights! Praise Allah!) I'll run the Ann & Al Show by some folks at network and see who salutes. Peace-out.
-
I like S60, but let's not delude ourselves into saying condescending things like Sorkin's writing is "too-smart-for-the-room." Sorkin has an ear for snappy dialogue and rapid back-and-forth pedeconferences, which makes his writing very witty and good but not necissarily intelligent. Sorkin's MO in political debates on this show (I can't speak for TWW, but it was NOT true for the most part with SN) is to put up the most extreme, laughable opposition to the point he is trying to make and then beat that straw man into submission, without ever intellectually exploring the more reasoned arguments of the opposing side (no matter how wrong he deems that side to be.) It would be fool’s errand to expect Sorkin to abandon his political positions while writing an episode, but it is his duty as a good writer to be intellectually honest about the opposition’s reasoning. He also has a tendency (common in entertainment) to reduce women to stereotypes in need of rescue or salvation, or to shrews intent on pulling any disagreement down to jr. high level pettiness ("There's a new prom queen and this one isn't pregnant.") I may be the sole voice on the matter, but I detest the new direction as I tuned in for the show as originally sold, the inner workings and back-stage dealing of an SNL type show. The drama and comedy are there to be mined without resorting to offensive rom-com cliches (i.e. the Danny/Jordan - stalk someone until they love you storyline.) I was more than willing to overlook the ham handed political awkwardness for the entertaining moments in the writer's room (Mark McKinney's presence steals any scene where he appears) and the machinations of handling an artistic (and supposedly funny) show within the confines of a media conglomerate. But the more that these romantic entanglements take center stage, the more S60 becomes like every other love life obsessed show. It both loses what made it different AND has to overcome the browbeating intellectual dishonesty for which Sorkin is widely reviled.
-
...if I were going to precede the word intelligent with a qualifier, it would help if said qualifier was not misspelled. (should read necessarily, sorry 'bout that.) Stupid griff.
-
Sorry, I can't lump Al Franken and Ann Coulter together, as much fun as it would be to watch them, like a mongoose and a viper in a bag...but Ann Coulter is a shrieking jackass. I've tried to read some of her posts on her web site.
At least Franken lists sources for all of his quotes.
Funniest line of "30 Rock" so far, when Alec Baldwin says he had a late night, he stopped by "Ann Coulter's sixtieth birthday party". -
Thank you, so much, for illustrating my point about how people from a certain political lean (left) have a hard time noticing how leftist they are. Sorry YOU can't lump Al & Ann together, they're both extremists and I find them both equally amusing for their extreme views. (BTW they both list sources for their quotes. Only one would get busted by the news media if they didn't. Guess which one?)
-
The best thing Sorkin ever did on West Wing was have a character say the words that should be said every time someone is attacked as a "Liberal". To loosely paraphrase, a liberal is someone that actually cares (at least a little) about someone other than themself and their own kind. And it is CRIMINAL that Democrats have let it be used as some kind of scarlet letter against them.
Sorry Biggles (and never in my life did I ever think I would be typing THOSE two words) there is a difference between Franken and Coulter. Yes, to a certain extent they are both extremists. But I have read "Lying Liars" and if you cut away the hyperbole, he effectively deconstructs what the Right does and how they do it.
I find nothing of that sort when I read Coulter or listen to Rush (as I actually tried to do when driving long distance a few days ago).
And you don't know me, and you don't trust me, but I'm asking you to trust me that I am at least intelligent enough to notice the difference between them, no matter what my political bent.
"heh, heh. He said 'bent'." -
Apology? Biggles, I guess you aren't as smart as I was willing to grant you.
But, if you can't recognize sarcasm, even in it's simplest form, then we might have a clue why you really have trouble with Sorkin's scripts.
Or you're just an ass. Hmmm....on the Right, and an ass. What a surprise. -
...thanks! Apology accepted.
-
I anticipated what Biggles would say before he even said it...But, I guess it's not that hard of an accomplishment, when you really think about it.
-
Could you be referring to this exchange?
SAM
Why are you so bent on carrying these idiot leaflets?
BRUNO
'Cause I am tired of working for candidates who make me think I should be embarrassed to
believe what I believe, Sam. I'm tired of getting them elected. We all need some therapy,
because somebody came along and said "liberal" means soft on crime, soft on drugs, soft on
Communism, soft on defense, and we're gonna tax you back to the Stone Age because people
shouldn't have to go to work if they don't want to. And instead of saying "Well, excuse me,
you right-wing, reactionary, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-eductaion, anti-choice, pro-gun,
'Leave it to Beaver' trip back to the fifties," we cowered in the corner and said "Please,
don't hurt me." No more. I really don't care who's right, who's wrong. We're both right.
We're both wrong. Let's have two parties, huh? What do you say?
One of my favs from TWW.
-
Wow, people on the right are asses? Keep going, buddy. You're making all of my arguments in this TB more crystal clear than I ever could have. Bravo! Go share a Snickers Bar with Sorkin or Frankin, whoever.
-
Stabbim, yes that was the one, although I think there is a second one that is a variation on that. It makes you wonder why no Democrat (that I am aware of) cribbed from that speech.
And yes, the Right are asses. I'm tired of being even-handed. There is a great Doonesbury cartoon where the 'liberal' is told where liberals go wrong by a 'conservative'. Namely, that conseravtives never give ground, they NEVER admit that the other side has a valid point, or that they are occasionally wrong about something. The Liberal then says "I never realized that. Wow, you're right." And the Conservative says, "See, I never would have said that." -
...was what my acceptance of your apology was there mr. lib.
-
can anyone helop me out...is matthew perrys character a liberal? and the blonde woman is a conservative christian right? is that right because I just can't tell for sure...i mean how could i the way the MAKE IT THE MAIN FUCKING POINT OF EVERY FUCKING EPISODE. Really really bummed out about 30 rock...it gets better and better every week..."pete! its time to free our bodies and our minds" tracey morgan is fucking funny -
this show deserves to finds an audience as every week it gets funnier and funnier. -
...of this episode.
In fact, they barely referenced it other than a couple of expository lines during the fight.
-
Wow, when were you even-handed? You'll find that the reason you keep quoting liberal entertainment is because liberalism, doesn't work in real life. So keep quoting Doonesbury (which I love), Studio 60, and TWW. My original point remains solid, the liberal producers of these shows are so caught up in their liberal fantasy worlds (were liberals have the best comebacks to everything the stupid right has to say) that they turn off the part of the viewing audience that pays over 1/2 thier income to a bloated government, gives a tenth of their income to their church, gives to charities, doesn't kill babies in the womb (or partially in the womb, and stays married.
-
A serious question. I didn't see all of the last episode, so I might actually have missed it. But was there anything about politics between Perry and Conserv-A-Blonde in that episode? Everything I saw was about their past history and nothing about their political differences.
-
The other obstacle that S60 needs to overcome (in addition to the romantic comedy-ization and the intellectual dishonesty in the political grandstanding) is that Sorkin needs to find the drama and comedy that would naturally exist in the S60 universe (art vs. commerce, cast personalities, the dog-eat-dog competitiveness in the writer’s room, even the right vs. left political dogfight that exists between the boardroom and the breakroom) as the basis for his story arcs. Sorkin is a talented enough writer that he could do this. He has touched on great material in this vein before on the show, but always as a throw away portion of an otherwise forgettable episode (for example, the battle to defray production costs through the use of ads could have been a GREAT story line in this area, instead of a 2 minute filler used to again show us what a genius Danny is.) It would necessitate dropping the should-be-offensive-to-women misogyny of the Danny/Jordan plot line and would force Sorkin to have at least a modicum of respect for his audience (instead of beating every dead horse in the room), but would allow him to keep some of his political grandstanding (the libs can be right all the time in his world, but the right's position must be accurately portrayed.) It would differentiate the show and still give him his soapbox without alienating the half of potential viewers that disagree with his political worldview. Contrary to popular opinion, conservatives (of which I am usually a part) are not opposed to entertainment that disagrees with their worldview. Hell, we don’t even care that Sorkin thinks that we’re all idiots. Just portray us as idiots with opinions that we actually hold instead of as straw men that hold opinions that the biggest mouth breather of them all (Bush?) wouldn’t look at as an extremely asinine view. But instead, S60 has become a bad combination of “Say Anything”, “Air America”, and Aaron Sorkin's Diary of Fractured Feelings about his breakup with Kristen Chenowith.
-
Couple of points:
Technically, the set-as-ads idea was Cal's, not Danny's.
I disagree with the characterization of the Danny/Jordan relationship as "stalk someone until they love you," Danny's semi-creepiness in the last episode notwithstanding. She was already in love with him, she didn't just trust his motives for pursuing her. One of those "heart vs head" things. Their time together on the roof straightened that out. (Trite? Yeah, but still.)
I do agree, though, about the generic rom-comming and Sorkin's newly found habit of ridiculously overstacking the deck in order to make a point, a la the FCC issue (something that he rarely stooped to in the past.) I think S60 has promise and I do hope for a second season, but I agree that so far it has not connected at the level of its Sorkin-penned predecessors. -
agreed ..."Say Anything"/"Air America"... hee hee good stuff! Also, working in the industry I have to say, the political crap almost never comes up, it IS usually about overhead, egos, budgets, sponsors and so on. More than enough material to mine. If I want political grandstanding, I'll tune into talk radio or network news.
-
Agreed on the Cal's idea thing. I just think that struggle could have been used as the basis for a much larger story arc. I do have to disagree on the Danny/Jordan thing. He wasn't semi-creepy in the last episode; he was full on in-need-of-a-restraining-order stalking with some "Silly woman doesn't know what she wants" egocentrism thrown in as the cherry on top. The undercurrents of this misogyny dates all the way back to Danny's visit to the OB/GYN where he somehow has the nerve to tell Jordan what she will and will not do in the course of the pregnancy. Not to mention that if Sorkin is so much smarter-than-the-room he wouldn't have gone with the cliche of the stuck-on-the-roof bit (the only thing more trite would have been if Danny had taken Jordan to the boiler room.) I apologize to fans of the show that may think that I exist solely to throw this show under the bus (since we’re talking about clichés) but I really was/want to be a viewer of a show with this much as-yet-unrealized potential. It has all of the ingredients to be a GREAT show. Solid concept with built-in tensions, great (at one time, anyway) writer, excellent performers, and solid production values, but thus far the whole has been less than the sum of its parts.
-
blech. christians have the same divorce rate as the general public. some studies even have atheists at a lower rate.you know, the Washington state supreme court (I'm from Seattle) recently ruled to uphold the ban on same-sex marriages in this state. and you know why? because the government should take an active role in promoting procreation, that's what it said...but I don't believe many conservatives really believe that, it's pathetically stupid. so my dad couldn't have married my stepmom since she had had a hysterectomy. sorry, no procreation, no marriage! it's not logic, it's just a thinly veiled way of hiding the public's disgust of homosexuality. call it what it is! so just recently a group here in washington is trying to get an argument before the supreme court that requires all married heterosexuals to have a kid within 3 years of being married. I mean, if that's the logic, why not? (it obviously won't pass, it's just a tool to show the illogical nature of the original ruling) jit's the same as "creation science", which isn't science, isn't rational or logical. if you believe the bible is the infallible, literal word of god, fine. then you have to say the hell with science, because scientific fact CONTRADICTS the literal word of the bible, when it comes to the age of the earth, ang the genesis of human life. so disbelieve science, that's your right. but when you invent phony science and try to trick people with lies and false logic, and straw man arguments, you are pissing on MY church.this all has very little to do with biggles, sorkin, or Studio 60, I'm just on a rant. whenever I hear conservatives make up facts like the "stay married" comment above, it bothers me.and biggles, (if you're even still reading this) don't come back and say, "I didn't say a majority of, blah blah blah", ya know what you implied. good, pious people aren't watching the show, bad athiest that kill babies are. come on man, that rhetoric is beneath you. (and who pays 50% in taxes? steve jobs?)
-
Actually, I'm very surprised no one attacked the last episode for the whole snake/ferret/coyote thing, which is right out of a Warner Bros. cartoon. It produced some funny Busfield moments, but I kept thinking how cliche'd it was.
-
Every damn S60 Talkback devolves into a nauseating dissertation from this or that idiot on "Why people are turned off by Sorkin". For fuck's sake, at least it always starts out as discussing what actually works or doesn't IN THE SHOW ITSELF, and not whether or not character A or B is Sorkin's attack on this group or that. God, it's annoying. No wonder most decent creators end up fleeing television like the plague. Anybody with half a goddamned voice gets dissected to death. Combine that with a media has the unmitigated audacity to actually give credence to a couple of dingbats who seem to think Prince is the first guy to use his guitar like a giant phallus, and really...I just wanna go live on the moon. This country has lost it's fucking mind.
-
To respond to your question about Heroes suffering the kind of staleness that has afflicted ER...
Any show that is around for 13 or 14 years runs the risk of turning into the type of dog ER has become. At this point it would *seem* that Heroes is just at the surface of its' mythology. If the writers are capable it should get atleast another four solid seasons before it starts to feel like it's repeating itself or just going nowhere at all. Anyone who really loves Heroes can only hope for the best... at one point ER was the most beloved show on T.V. Now it's the lamest horse on the track and really needs to be put down.
-
I am referring to the show in general........it was just a wee joke at the lack of subtlety in this show. meant simply in jest as week after week they lay on "he's a liberal she's a conservative and they're in love" wacky star crossed lover shit. thats all.
-
It's all a matter of ratings numbers and money for the networks... so that is a possibility I guess. It *is* a drag to see these shows get stretched out well beyond their elasticity.
-
without turning into a big pile of poo they are nuts.
-
..but Sorkin should beat off to it in private instead of reliving it through the show. The whole romance always seems contrived and flat and just doesn't work.
-
if you think that's contrived, you've obviously never had an opinionated girlfriend...or, actually...a girlfriend in general
-
Sorkin is back on track. The Simon/Newbie story was trying to show how vets show the rookies haw things are done in Hollywood. I noticed most of the white people had a problem with the words used. Has it occured to you that the whole story arc may be based on an actual incident on any one of numerous shows (In Living Color, Mad TV, Chappell, Damon Wayans various projects over the years.) How are we to know? Now as to writing style, would some of you get over it. Sorkin is what he is. Highly scripted and stylized dialogue has a long history in entertainment. Howard Hawkes' "His Girl Friday", the 1950's "Dragnet", SHAKESPEAR!! If that's not your thing, then you are into totally improvised, Dogma '97 rules entertainment. To each his own.----later----m
-
Dude, I'm not going address your entire rant. Go back to my previous post REGARDING WHY THE SHOW WILL BE CANCELLED. BTW: I'm sorry you can't have your Snickers moment in a legal wedded union. Move to Vermont. There's a reason why it's a THEORY of Evolution, dickwad. And 70% of all statistics are made up. Tax Freedom Day is April 26th, so get yer freak flag on, baby! Peace out.
-
saying that Darius wasn't Kunte Kinte so he's not black enough for Simon.
And if Simon had words of wisdom fo the new writer, his method of delivering that was cheap, petty and pathetic.
A professional, a grown for that matter would never need to treat another professional, or anothere person that way.
All that keep your eyes down, keep your voice low, doesn't demonstrate wisdom or insight. It ony that Simon has lack of confidence in the size of his own penis.
He can only tolerates the presence of another man in the room if he's keeping him down.
He treats everone there like its his house and the Daddy, he likes Tom best cause will take that crap without complaint. And even Matt Even though Matt's his boss.
It's a sad a pathetic man who needs to keep others doewn to keep his confidence up, and I really don't see that trait as being worthy of anybody's respect.
And the sad part is thatI had expected better of him.
He has better sides and as much as I'd like to see someone remind him that he should expect more of himself. -
I really wish that people would learn what "theory" means in the scientific sense. In everyday use the meaning of the word "theory" is too often confused with the meaning of "hypothesis". It doesn't matter that the two are interchangeable in general conversation, but when talking about scientific theories such as relativity or evolution there is a significant distinction to be made. I urge you to look it up.
-
Hey, if Wikipedia says it, it must be true!
-
Sorry, no.
-
No apologies necessary.
-
sigh...and with that, I have to say good-bye to you.
last. -
we almost...ALMOST.. had a nice little discussion going on here. a nice little debate, without malice, without nonsense, without subterfuge. but alsa, the political system being what it is in this country today, it broke down to sniping........yet again.
*sigh*
well, regardless, next time i'm still going to strive for someting better. next week on the Studio 60 talkback, i'm still going to try and make the neo-cons see that just because some people believe that a woman has a right to choose to do with her bady what she wants, it's not a big deal. and to try and make the liberals see that just beace i want ALL animals killed and eaten, dosen't make me a bad guy.
until then i leave you all with the observation that the only "liberal" that makes sense is john stewart. and the only "conservative" that makes sense is steven colbert.....and until the rest of you nincompooops figure that out....good night and god bless.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 209 total posts 207 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 97 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 144 total posts 77 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 68 total posts 68 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 64 total posts 60 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 480 total posts 55 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 53 total posts 50 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!! -- 118 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 182 total posts 27 posts