Coaxial

Tonight Brings
The Almost-Last Episode of Aaron Sorkin’s STUDIO 60!!

Published at: June 21, 2007, 7:35 a.m. CST by hercules

I am – Hercules!!
“Studio 60” supporters have bought a $2,255 full-page ad in the Hollywood Reporter to bid the show thanks and adieu on the date of the series’ June 28 finale next week. Having raised more than enough to buy the ad, the same group continues to salute the show by raising money to benefit Tiptina’s, which benefits artists victimized by Katrina. Tonight brings the penultimate installment of the series, titled “K & R Part III. ” NBC describes it thusly:
The long day's journey into night continues as we learn more, in flashback, about how Matt (Matthew Perry) and Danny (Bradley Whitford) came to be fired in the first place.
10 p.m. Thursday. NBC.





$15.99!! ROBOCOP: 20th ANNIVERSARY EDITION audio commentary new minidocs deleted scenes 103-minute ‘extended cut’ I’d buy that for a dollar!!

49% Off Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 21, 2007, 7:34 a.m. CST

    1st?

    by rbrog77

    Are you kidding me. 1st. I'd like to thank the academy....

  • June 21, 2007, 7:35 a.m. CST

    of course not

    by rbrog77

    I'll miss it...the award of first and the show. Love the writing.

  • June 21, 2007, 7:36 a.m. CST

    rbrog77 pwned.

    by Tallguyme

    yup.

  • June 21, 2007, 7:40 a.m. CST

    WHAT?

    by Tallguyme

    this site is bullshit. I was 1st, and what, it was deleted because I said something disparaging about this lame ass'd show?? aintitfuckincensorednews.

  • June 21, 2007, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Grow a f@ckin brain!

    by thinboyslim.

    This show was funny and clever but because it was about a TV show it wasn't deemed 'high brow' so you get dumbfucks watching who don't get it and would rather see reruns of reality gameshows thus it gets axed leaving another chance to actually enjoy high quality writing missed. FYI - if sorkin was a comedy writer he would of written a sketch show, the sketches on 60 are plot points not actual sketches to make you laugh out loud. mohammed, christians, bush, they're there to tell a story, if you wanna laugh at a sketch show download SNL episodes from 10 years ago, don't bitch about a drama series not having quality laughs!

  • June 21, 2007, 8:20 a.m. CST

    reasons the final sopranos was a dream

    by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell

    got it from some kid on imdb-"I am interested in the theory that the entire final episode (not just the final scene) is a dream. I'm sure this theory has already been brought up in several threads, but I find it to be really intriguing and I hope we can discuss it to see if there is any truth to it. Below, I set out the points that support this theory. Most of these points are not my own -- I got them mostly from posters on the hbo forums and one poster here (flapper25). Please add your own points supporting this theory or points that debunk it. Note that many of the following points may be wrong -- may may be really stretching. Evidence that the final episode is a dream (a lot of what follows is based on the idea that this is what Tony wishes were to happen): 1. Previous episode (Blue Comet) ends with Tony going to sleep -- this episode begins with Tony waking up so it seems to be the next day. However, he wakes up in what seems to be a different setting (though the same room): namely, sheets on bed, alarm clock present, different clothes. BUT I think there may have been some mention that some time has passed from the previous episode -- so maybe it's different because it's not supposed to be the next day. 2. Before Tony goes to bed in Blue Comet, we get the flash back of what Bobby said on the boat in Soprano Home Movies (when you die, you don't hear anything). How often does the show do flashbacks like these -- to something from a past episode? I don't know how this supports the dream theory. 3. AJ straightens out and becomes more like the kind of son Tony wants: he gets together with the model (not explicit but given the attempt in the SUV before the explosion, they probably do end up getting together later). So, AJ and the girl are more then friends -- something that Tony seems to have wanted to happen. AJ also gets his act together regarding his career. And, he becomes more like Christopher with respect to getting into the movie business. Tony wanted Christopher to be like a son, which never happened -- now AJ is (pretty randomly) becoming the son Tony wanted. This is reinforced with things like AJ coming down in a bathrobe for breakfast when his parents introduce the idea of working in movies. He wears an undershirt with the bathrobe like Tony does and even says something like "Always with the drama!" to Carmela -- something Tony seems to have said before. In the final scene, AJ is wearing a shirt that is very similar to Tony's in color. 4. Meadow becomes what Tony wants: a success. Although a law student, she is getting a potential job offer with a small firm that gives a starting salary of $170,000. Now, the LARGEST firms offer $160,000 as a starting salary -- how can Meadow be getting $170,000 starting salary from a small firm? It seems to be something that Tony and Carmela have wanted. Additionally, when Tony and Meadow are sake bombing, she says that she is going down the career path because she saw him being dragged away by the police all those times in the past. Seems something that Tony wishes were true - that his criminal acts have brought on something good. 5. Meadow's friend Hunter appears out of the blue after serious problems and is now in medical school -- something Tony and Soprano wanted for Meadow. 6. Patrick Parissi (Meadow's fiancee) is now a high paid lawyer -- not just a law student anymore. He is working on important cases. He seems to be the perfect guy: speaks favorably about marriage and dotes on Meadow (I think he says, "don't undervalue yourself"). 7. The cat staring at Christopher's picture -- very dreamlike, regardless of any symbolism (the orange cat reappears as a tiger on the wall in the restaurant behind Tony). As Melfi recently read, sociopaths love animals -- Tony protects the cat from Paulie. 8. Phil's death -- are those Phil's grandkids? In an earlier episode, when Phil was telling some young children about their Italian heritage (when he laments the butchering of the family name) he says that he never had any children. Where do the grandchildren come from? Sociopaths love babies -- Tony's hit on Phil gets Phil away from the babies. 9. Agent Harris helping Tony find Phil and then cheering about it (although this is apparently based on a true story so not necessarily something that only happens in a dream). Agent Harris acts more like Tony in this episode -- he is clearly married but it seems that the female FBI agents is his girlfriend. While in bed, his facial expression seems to resemble Tony's post-coital look. 10. AJ saying: you're all living a dream (during the breakfast scene where the family discusses his possible movie career). THE FINAL SCENE 11. The final scene's beginning -- song that plays as Tony walks into the restaurant is called All That You Dream. 12. The weird sequence of: a. Tony walking in; b. cut to Tony seeing the layout,; c. cut back to Tony; d. cut to Tony sitting within the layout, identical to shot b. It is as if Tony sees himself. 13. The various people walking into the bar who RESEMBLE Janice, Phil, two black hitmen from season 1. 14. Tony eating onion rings -- earlier in the season (after Tony gets out of the hospital) he specifically notes that he can't eat onions or onion rings. 15. The way Tony, Carmela, and AJ eat the onion rings -- placing them whole in the mouth (Eucharist). MISC: 16. Carmela getting back into her construction work 17. First shot of the episode -- Tony looks like he is in a coffin. 18. The title Made in America -- anagram: I am a nice dream. 19. Tony seems to make piece with Junior. 20. The feud with Phil is resolved very quickly -- even a quick agreement to compensate Janice for Bobby's loss. 21. AJ's therapist -- resembles Melfi in her actions (if not her appearance). 22. Paulie agreeing to run the crew. 23. The family's last dinner spent not eating at Artie's or their usual Italian restaurant but a diner. 24. Guy in members only jacket -- clearly suspicious but no one suspicious should be around given that there is no one left that would put a hit on Tony or more importantly, no one would know where Tony would be eating dinner (last minute decision to eat here, everyone arrives separately). 25. Tony playing the music on the jukebox -- Journey's song immediately comes on, syncs perfectly with Carmela's enterence. So the CUT to black? Tony waking up and the story goes on, just without the audience? Tony dying in his sleep? The entire episode being a dream is consistent with the rest of the show being focused on Tony's psychology. One problem, however, is that we see things happening to characters other than Tony. Has this ever happened in Tony's dream before? Have we followed someone other than Tony in Tony's dream"

  • June 21, 2007, 8:22 a.m. CST

    "artists victimized by Katrina"?

    by newc0253

    victimized? Don't know about you, Herc, but my dictionary defines victimise as "to treat someone in an intentionally unfair way" or "To make a victim of, esp. by deception; to dupe; to cheat". I get that there are victims of Katrina, but I don't think it's right to say that they were victimised by the Hurricane. Not unless weather systems have become much more cunning since i last checked.

  • June 21, 2007, 8:28 a.m. CST

    "It was too smart / People are stupid" = bullshit

    by Creamery Butter

    References to Gilbert and Sullivan and lines like "YOUR BROTHER IS STANDING IN THE MIDDLE OF AFGHANISTAN" don't make this show smart or high quality. The writing was weak. WEAK. The characters all sounded alike. Did you watch the last episode, where the military guy, the doctor, and the nurse were all way too clever, making jokes like they were auditioning to be full-time Sorkin characters? That's not smart writing. That's not high quality writing. That's weak writing. Taking three fucking episodes drag out a story that could have been covered in one? That's weak writing, and it happened fucking twice this season. This show was really watchable and occasionally enjoyable, but to call the writing smart or high quality is wishful thinking at best.

  • June 21, 2007, 8:44 a.m. CST

    put a bullet in it and movie on

    by redfist

    Fucking lame show, made me want to grab the remote every 2 minutes and I loved the west wing

  • June 21, 2007, 9:01 a.m. CST

    Shock!

    by thinboyslim.

    There are people who are funny and clever but having 3 of them gather in one episode of a tv show is 'bad writing'? C'mon, you'd rather see dumb characters having to have the story spelt out to them after every commercial break so the audience can catch-up because they're just as dumb? Look I ain't saying this was anywhere near the quality of West Wing I'm just saying it was never given a chance to be and the fact that the same guy wrote both kind of suggests there was a chance it could of been.

  • June 21, 2007, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Last 3 or 4 eps have been the best in the series

    by BitterMan23

    Shame that they finally found their footing and that NBC didn't give it a chance in the regular season.

  • June 21, 2007, 10:11 a.m. CST

    sorkin was the problem

    by NormanFell

    Sorkin killed the show by making the Perry character (albie/Sorkin) so damn mean to the Paulson character (Hayes/Chenoweth).Perry is a beloved actor...funny, quick and smart...so why not turn himinto an angry bitter pill popper that is pissed that his ex gf prays to god? Sorkin used this show to get revenge on his ex. People dont want that. Television Rule #1--viewers have to want to invite these characters into their homes. Albie/Sorkin broke this rule. Now dont give me the "does that mean America wont accept troubled/mean/evil characters" meme. Look at some recent TV undesirables---Vic Mackey, Al Swearegen, Andy Sipowicz, Tony Soprano. Sure we know they are flawed, but the writers make sure to clue the viewers in on his redeeming qualities. Studio 60 didnt do this. Albie was strident and mean right up to the end.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:12 a.m. CST

    All characters sounding alike = weak writing

    by jimmy_009

    I saw the characters Creamery Butter was talking about. The doctor was a total jerk, and sounded just like Danny and the other guy, really snappy and bitter. The nurse had all sorts of quick retorts when the dude was trying to get in to see the Jordan. The military guy talked just like the both of them. I quit watching after that, but I can tell you this: rule #1 when writing characters is to give them each a unique voice. It can be hammered into the heads of all the people who think this is good writing all day long, but it just doesn't seem to sink in. BAD WRITING = FAILED SHOW! If you liked it it's because your standards are too low. Watch Friday Night Lights and see what good writing is all about. Each character is their OWN PERSON, not a clone of all the other characters. GET A CLUE.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:38 a.m. CST

    i find it hard to believe...

    by sonnyhooper

    ....that everyone saying that the "characters all sound the same" DON'T have a friend or GROUP of friends that know how to turn a phrase. really? you don't have a bunch of people you know personally that can make a witty comment? a clever retort? a cutting bon-mot? really? gee, you know, even some of you people that hate this show sound like reasonably intellegent human beings. (notice i give you the benifit of the doubt here, despite that fact that you loathe this show) so forgive me if i find it hard to believe you don't know more people who have better banter skills than the average wal-mart shopper. <p> sorry but the "characters all sound the same" thing is a tag that got attached to sorkin since SPORTSNIGHT and it's been regurgitated so often since that the words have lost all meaning, and have become a shortcut to actually thinking for oneself. at least imo. but hey, if you really think that way fine. guess i just don't hear it the same way you do. still find it hard to believe that noone knows any people who "sound that clever in real life" but hey, whatever.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:49 a.m. CST

    "television rule #1"

    by sonnyhooper

    guess noone told that rule to the cast of "Seinfeld" because last time i checked jerry, kramer, george and elaine had NO redeeming qualities what so ever. yet people invited them into their homes on a regular basis. not to say that i agree with you that matt albie is "unlikeable", i'm just not sure i buy your argument to begin with. this show didn't connect with viewers for a variety of reasons, but i think the "unlikeability" of matt isn't really as big of one as you might think.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:52 a.m. CST

    sonnyhooper

    by jimmy_009

    No one is saying people turning a witty phrase (if that's what you want to call it) is unrealistic. You're not listening to the arguement. The point is they all turn the SAME witty phrases. My friends can be pretty funny, some of them can turn a witty phrase occasionally. But they SOUND like different people. One of them would say something totally different than another in response to the same situation. All of the S60 characters would respond exactly the same way to a situation (i.e. witty retort, pretty much Sorkin's only character attribute). It's not that the 'wit' is unrealistic, it's that they all have the exact same wit, or in otherwords all the characters are the same. Even the extras, like Doctors and Nurses sound just like everyone else.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:54 a.m. CST

    I think it's more to do with the unlikability of

    by jimmy_009

    Matt Perry, not his character. He's really an annoying guy. Him playing annoying jerk characters doesn't help much.

  • June 21, 2007, 12:11 p.m. CST

    sorry, like i said...

    by sonnyhooper

    to me simon dosen't at all sound like matt or danny or harriet, and the animal trainer from the episode where the snake dissappeared in the studio is a great example of a "extra character" that didn't AT ALL sound like a "typical sorkin character". again, i'm just not hearing it they way you are i guess. so, to be honest, i hear the argument loud and clear i just don't agree with it. personal perspective is like hindsight: it's 20/20.

  • June 21, 2007, 12:16 p.m. CST

    redeeming qualitys vs. likeability

    by sonnyhooper

    ....i agree that the two aren't mutually exclusive. i'm not really trying to argue that they are, i'm just saying i don't buy the premise that characters HAVE to be likeable and/or have redeeming qualitys in the first place for people to watch. not to mention the fact that, IMO, they have shown matt to have some redeeming qualitys. <p> my point was that i just don't buy into the premise of the argument being made in the first place. and again, thats just my point of view.

  • June 21, 2007, 12:30 p.m. CST

    Good Show but...

    by Avert Therapy

    It's just too preachy, too earnest. That kind of issue writing worked on the West Wing because of the context but it just doesn't fit a TV Show setting. I do like the characters and the writing for them, but Sorkin should have laid off the issues and focussed on the show.

  • June 21, 2007, 12:35 p.m. CST

    "I saw the characters Creamery B was talking about."

    by Billyeveryteen

    "I hate this show so much, I watch every ep"<p>Creepy psyco.

  • June 21, 2007, 12:44 p.m. CST

    I saw the first 20 minutes of that episode...

    by jimmy_009

    ...and the first 3 or 4 at the beginning of the series. I wanted to like it, but it was a huge let down. And it's 'psycho', not 'psyco'.

  • June 21, 2007, 1:06 p.m. CST

    Spelling Tips

    by newkie brown

    Hope you're jotting down these spelling tips, Billyeveryteen. This guy's good. He even uses the lesser known "arguement".<p> Greetings Jimmy009, I see you stopped by the Studio 60 talkback to take your weekly dump and start calling people names, you charmer you...

  • June 21, 2007, 1:06 p.m. CST

    As much as I enjoy this show, and don't think all

    by jim

    the characters speak the same way, I thought the doctor last week was a poorly done character. Way too flip, too glib, to be believable.<p>Maybe it was partly the actor's fault. He forgets to mention they did a C-section, but does not act like he is distracted or addle-minded. Any doctor who was that cavalier in giving news to someone's loved-one would get the living crap knocked out of them more often than not. People waiting for news on a loved-one's surgery shouldn't have to work that hard to get information out of the prick whose only purpose for being in the room at that time is to give them information.

  • June 21, 2007, 1:34 p.m. CST

    this is television, people

    by oisin5199

    I went through something very similar when my daughter was born. Even though I was in the room when they performed the surgery, I still had no idea what was going on or even really why the baby had to be delivered - and on Studio 60 the baby was only 2 weeks early (which is pretty normal), whereas mine was almost 4 months. We didn't know if the baby was ok or if my wife was ok - but the doctors had to run through all the possibilities (they have to do that). And let me tell you, they were mostly pretty grim. If Danny had heard some of the things I had to hear, he would have been way more freaked out and choking the doctor. <p> Anyway, my point is that of course things are heightened on a television program to create tension. That doctor wasn't too far off from reality - but they had to add in a few things (like forgetting the delivery) to ramp up the tension and the comedy. <p> I also can't understand why people would complain when incidental characters are given a chance to shine. I didn't think they sounded alike, but I probably wouldn't care if they did. It's a hell of a lot more interesting than boring, stock characters. Some people will complain about anything. <p>having said that, I will go along with all the criticisms about the show within the show being painfully unfunny. I don't really get why, because I know Sorkin can write funny, the show within the show on Sports Night was clever and funny and you can see how it would be a popular show in that world. Just not the case here.

  • June 21, 2007, 2:03 p.m. CST

    Calling people names?

    by jimmy_009

    I was talking about bad writing in the show.

  • June 21, 2007, 2:22 p.m. CST

    A good show

    by thinboyslim.

    is one that creates debate amongst those that watch it and you know what, I think this one has proven a point. One thing tho, please don't bitch about a show you only watch halfway thru, ok if you hate it you hate it so don't watch it but you can't watch half an episode a week and bash it.

  • June 21, 2007, 2:58 p.m. CST

    The last episodes HAVE been great...

    by DanielKurland

    And with Whitford submitting "The Christmas Show" for his acting nomination, hopefully he'll get some recognition. Also, there is only ONE heratfelt moment in the entirety of Seinfeld. It's when the gang returns from LA, and Jerry throws Kramer his keys. It's the only hokey, "group hug" type of moment, and I can live with that. That being said, the cast WERE monsters, George calls Marrisa Tomei up for a date the day his wife dies. However, the cast of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia are much more terrible people. There's no comparison, and love watchin them.

  • June 21, 2007, 3:43 p.m. CST

    Fair enough

    by newkie brown

    Fair enough, you seem to have laid off calling people names in this particular talkback, but Jimmy, most weeks you just love to sling names and make like everyone who loves Studio 60 is some kind of moron. It wouldn't be so bad if your arguments were reasonable and considered, but mostly they're not. A couple of weeks back you even admitted that you just love to stop by to rub people's noses in the fact that the show had been cancelled. I mean give me a break; *this* is the show that makes your blood boil? Really? There's an ocean of pure shit polluting the airwaves and you get worked up about this? Is it because you think the show misfired given it's early promise or were you determined not to like it from the start? Lighten up is what I'm saying. <p> As a dyed in the wool fan of the show, it might surprise you to learn that I actually agree with a couple of the posts above. The doctor in the maternity ward did come across as unbelievably glib considering the weight of the situation that Jordan was in. As I was watching I figured that the guy recognised Danny and fancied himself a bit of a comedian, but when I watched it a second time it came across even worse. Even so, I consider this a rare misjudgement of tone on Sorkin's part.

  • June 21, 2007, 4:43 p.m. CST

    "long day's journey into night"

    by BadMrWonka

    anyone else notice that little phrase in the description? if that's a reference to the Eugene O'Neill play of the same name, you can bet that substance abuse will be a main theme in this episode. the play is a pseudo-autobiographical 3-act play about a dysfunctional family (O'Neill's) and their dealings with alcohol and drug addiction over the course of one day and night.

  • June 21, 2007, 5:55 p.m. CST

    I will watch an intelligent show

    by Napoleon Park

    where every character has the same large vocabulary, recognizes the same literary and pop media references, espouses the same world view and in general "speaks with the same voice", if what they have to say in that voice is amusing, entertaining, dramatic, informative or interesting. <p> I would prefer that to any sit-com, reality show or drama about twenty characters who all have decidedly different 'voices', be it vocal timbre, intonation, nasality, dialect or speech impediments, whether they're expressing radically opposing viewpoints or just pointlessly arguing or bickering or making fart jokes and acting like morons. <p> Even the best television, film or play writing is not entirely natural and "realisitic" - you will always have exposition, recapping, people describing what they're doing or are about to do, whatever. Just like you will almost always actually be able to see the person who is supposedly trying to hide. it's simply how stories are told. <p> I'll take a well written one-person monologue performed by a group of performers speaking with 'the same voice' over a crowd of nincompoops spouting nonsense no matter how individual each one of them is. <p> If you want all your characters to have distinctive, individual 'voices', go watch a show hacked together by a team or writers or a committee, and leave Studio 60 to the folks who want to see and hear writing written by a writer.

  • June 21, 2007, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Napoleon Park is my hero

    by Unnatural

    You sir, said it better than I could have. Bravo!

  • June 21, 2007, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Napoleon Park....

    by DS9Sisko

    you deserve a Mars Bar and a bag of nuts!

  • June 21, 2007, 10:48 p.m. CST

    man, i'm gonna miss this show.

    by sonnyhooper

    the show really shines when it does these long story arcs imo. these last few episodes and the "nevada day" storyline really show the impact this type of storytelling can and should have. <p> really is a shame this isn't comming back next season, because i think these last episodes opened the door for judd hirsh to come back in the second season. and that would have kicked 7 kinds of ass imo.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:35 p.m. CST

    your willingness to become invested in what the writer

    by Jed

    wants you to be invested in colors your take on the show, it would seem. Me and Sorkin are pretty much eye-to-eye geoartpopculturepolitically, and I think his shit's funny as fuck, so I go along with whatever. In defense of the doctor last week; that character was also on two weeks ago and danny was a right prick to him, so I sorta took the jokeyness being a defensive reaction, a bit of gentle ribbing, and also an attempt to calm danny dan, which good doctors do. With that said, Sorkin's characters often sound the same because Sorkin's all about recycling material--not just dialog but characters and subplots frequently ring extremely familiar. Jeremy on Sports Night and Sam on TWW went through the *exact* same family crisis,and it's a legitimate complaint to make but one that only Sorkin Superfans are going to be qualified to make, so we don't really care. There you go haters; from me to you.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:37 p.m. CST

    "calm danny *down"

    by Jed

    Thanks folks, I'll be here all week. Be sure and tip your servers; it's not a hobby.

  • June 21, 2007, 11:41 p.m. CST

    Expensive show

    by wildwest949

    I think the ratings didn't support the high cost of producing the show and likely that was the cost of the acting talent. NBC had to nix Homicide for likely the same reason. If there really going to pay Paris a million for an interview then I'd rather see them spend it on good shows like Studio 60

  • June 22, 2007, 12:31 a.m. CST

    My one complaint...

    by DanielKurland

    I don't like the actor playing the officer that is supposed to be comforting Tom. This would have been the perfect role for them to slip Malina in, and we're at the point where I don't think Malina will be appearing. This aside, great second last episode, and yeah, they're really opening some doors for what could have been a great second season. I wish more stuff was concluded this episode though, so the finale won't be so crowded, but I'm sure it'll still be great.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:43 a.m. CST

    Hey jimmy...

    by Billyeveryteen

    I liked tonight's ep.<p>I bet that you did too.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:10 a.m. CST

    Tonight

    by FeedMeAStrayCat

    I love this show. I know some people dont I I'm not sure why, but to each their own (though the haters who post here sure are angry about something, not sure why they post so much on it, especially when many dont even watch anymore). Ever since it returned from hiatus, every episode has been great. Sorkin makes some great shows and this is just one more (wish we had more Sports Night though). I'm glad someone is saying something about the sad state of affairs the government and the world of tv is in. Even if you dont agree with his politics, its nice someone is saying something. Hopefully more shows will be like it in the future. Now more reality tv can take over, something which Sorkin can definately see irony in.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:41 a.m. CST

    Musical

    by newkie brown

    Exactly, Napoleon. Nicely put. Good writing doesn’t necessarily mean that characters talk naturalistically. Stylised dialogue works beautifully for writers like the Coen brothers in movies. Why is it that Sorkin is raked over the coals for bringing a different style to television? <p>You won’t find a bigger fan than I of shows like The Shield and The Wire, whose writing includes spare, realistic dialog; which is a great asset to both shows. But Sorkin brings a playwright’s ear to the table. His dialog is musical, and he is a virtuoso, it’s really down to whether you like the music he’s playing.

  • June 22, 2007, 1:55 a.m. CST

    Tonight's ep

    by Olsen Twins_Fan

    was maybe the best of the series. The reason? More Steven Weber. If they had focused the show around him, with about 25% of the screen time devoted to the others, this show would've been far more entertaining. Oh, and they would've needed to get rid of that screechingly unfunny "star" of the show in a show. Also, the lawyer woman in a t-shirt with bedhead turned me on.

  • June 22, 2007, 7:15 a.m. CST

    Nobody cares

    by MJAYACE

    That's why the show failed. It may have been well written, it may have been brilliant, but the truth was nobody cared. The topic wasn't unique or enticing enough to draw people in to watch the show. That's why it failed. Contrast that to Prison Break where the topic was very intriguing and unique, thus drew people in orginally (even if overall it was an inferior show).

  • June 22, 2007, 7:34 a.m. CST

    Sounds Like

    by joee60

    In the real world, doctors and soldiers have their own vernacular. That's what's missing. Not accents, or dumbed down comments, but the vocabulary specific people use.

  • June 22, 2007, 9:11 a.m. CST

    people cared enough....

    by sonnyhooper

    .....to give the original episode a huge ratings number. unfortunatly the show didn't keep that number, which was probally unrealistic to expect it could anyway. and i think that was the shows biggest problem, it was just too damn hard to live up to the hype of that original episode and i think that had a lot to do with the character of wes mendel not being around after the fact. like i said, i think these flashback episodes that tell how and why matt and danny got fired in the first place might have been opening the door to judd hirshs return. but alas, now we will never know.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:05 p.m. CST

    And just when the show's at its best

    by JacksParasites

    Seriously, these final ones have been the best episodes of the series. I'm going to miss this show, which is far better than most of the shit on TV these days. And thanks Aaron for not letting Danny cave in and pray to god like Matt did last week. I'd like to see Harriet go the other way next before the series ends. I just hope Jordan doesn't have to die before Harriet realizes there's no god. What a great bleak ending to send us off if the show's not coming back. C'mon, please have Harriet deconvert. That'd be so sweet.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:06 p.m. CST

    And just when the show's at its best

    by JacksParasites

    Seriously, these final ones have been the best episodes of the series. I'm going to miss this show, which is far better than most of the shit on TV these days. And thanks Aaron for not letting Danny cave in and pray to god like Matt did last week. I'd like to see Harriet go the other way next before the series ends. I just hope Jordan doesn't have to die before Harriet realizes there's no god. What a great bleak ending to send us off if the show's not coming back. C'mon, please have Harriet deconvert. That'd be so sweet.

  • June 22, 2007, 12:50 p.m. CST

    DanielKurland, I know what you mean.

    by jim

    Having James Lesure play that character seems like a wasted opportunity. He's not that strong performance-wise; it would have been better suited to a deserving actor rather than one who works for another NBC show.<p>His performance shows why some people think all Sorkin's characters speak with the same voice. It's because the actor speaking the lines gives a poor performance, often mimicking what he has seen the regulars do, rather than give an original reading.

  • June 22, 2007, 2:03 p.m. CST

    have a little faith...

    by onewingedangel

    Its a great shame Studio 60 isn't getting a chance for a second season, these last few eps have been great and the ratings have been steadily (albeit slowly) growing. I'm still hoping for a second season of Studio 60 as a mid season replacement, perhaps if they can get a DVD/Blu Ray boxset out there quick enough there will be a way to measure how much the shows audience cares (and is willing to pay to see the show).

  • June 22, 2007, 2:10 p.m. CST

    Yeah...

    by FilmNerdJamie

    ...I was under the impression we'd see Wes Mendel return. Then again, I also thought STUDIO 60 would do well in the ratings and get a 2nd season. So I was wrong on both fronts...sadly!

  • June 22, 2007, 2:19 p.m. CST

    I also love how Steven Weber's character...

    by DanielKurland

    Has been drunk for like the past 6 episodes.

  • June 22, 2007, 10:32 p.m. CST

    am I the only one?

    by BadMrWonka

    who sees a bit of Toby Ziegler in Steven Weber's portrayal...he's got a heart, but he's a pragmatist...he is forced to make tough decisions all the time...drinks to relieve pressure, but not problematically...ends up touching other characters (and the audience) with selfless acts right when you don't expect it...(I swear that scene with him and Asner in the Christmas episode where he offers to resign...WOW...so moving...)

  • June 23, 2007, 1:51 a.m. CST

    Wonka

    by stabbim

    I hadn't thought Toby specifically...but yeah, the fact that he has turned out to be an essentially good guy in spite of his gruff cynicism and bottom-line focus has been satisfying to see, and is another Sorkin trademark (See also: Sam Donovan on SportsNight.)

  • June 23, 2007, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Sigh....

    by Albean

    Tho the show is mind-curdingly liberal and self-centered i'll miss it...good writing, good characters..and politics i love to hate!

  • June 25, 2007, 9:41 p.m. CST

    west wing rhythm

    by TAF

    finally watched last week's episode this evening. reminded me of the rhythm of west wing. never watched sports night so cannot compare. really gonna miss studio 60. looing forward to this week.

  • June 26, 2007, 1:31 p.m. CST

    The doctor is pissing me off

    by Col. Tigh-Fighter

    I find the story of Tom and his brother far more engrossing.

  • June 26, 2007, 9:24 p.m. CST

    either someone here likes this show

    by Napoleon Park

    or there's really nothing else on TV to talk about these days. <p> I remember times when a Lost of heroes talkback would slip off the front page after a couple of days - a Studio 60 discussion - and a not very active one at that - stays up for a whole week. Oh well, one more time tomorrow, then it's a memory, a trivia question or - hopefully - a DVD set. <p> the way the last few episodes have played out, is anyone else worring that we're not going to get any kind of conclusion at all, not even a cliffhanger, just one more episode of an ongoing serial that leaves all sorts of loose plot threads? I mean, these were mid-season episodes shot before Sorkin knew the show was canceled, right? Too bad. Hope the brother gets out alive. <p> As for Amanda Peet's character... do you suppose having a character bleeding to death was meant as a literary metaphor for all the accusations that this was a 'bleeding heart liberal' show? Or is that too much of a stretch?<p>[DS9Sisko, thanx for the 'you deserve a mars bar and a bag of nuts" comment. I'm diabetic so i avoid more than about one candybar a month, but peanuts are a good source of protein. And that new diet Pepsi Max - zero calories and twice the cafeine - totally kicks ass. Unnatural and Newkie, thanx for your comments as well.] See you tomorrow night after the show. <p> So, with this over, anybody watching anything else on Tv these days? I've been enjoying the Loop, which fox is just about finished burning off, and "Standoff", which I liked when it debuted last Fall, before it became the first show of the year to get pulled.<p> Having a collectors mentality, I'm just too careful about catching every episode of the shows I like that I can't get into watching them again when reruns come around. Still waiting for that Dave Matthews "House", which I missed first time around. <p> If "Lost" is so great 9and count me among those who thinks that it is), why isn;t ABC showing it in reruns? I'd ask the same about NBC and "Heroes' but I'm told it runs constantly on Sci-Fi. I only have basic cable, so it's just broadcast networks and TBS for me. What else are you folks watching?

  • June 28, 2007, 8:13 a.m. CST

    Tonights...

    by Napoleon Park

    (6/28/007) episode<p> "The long night for Danny, Jordan, Tom and Simon ends; Matt and Harriet's new beginning."<p> Keen. Because the final episode of a canceled series is always a great time for 'a new beginning."