love

Author Topic: The Newsroom  (Read 5421 times)

saltine

  • Administrator
  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9800
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #10 on: June 27, 2012, 06:13:51 PM »
Slate did a Completist article on Sorkin, titled "You Can't Handle the Truth about Aaron Sorkin" and there were a couple of spin-off articles by the same writer, as well.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/the_completist/2012/06/the_complete_works_of_aaron_sorkin_from_the_west_wing_to_the_social_network_to_the_newsroom_.html
Texan Down Under

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2012, 12:59:00 AM »
It was OK.  The music was the worst part of the pilot, for me.  There's definitely potential for awful here.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people?"

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2012, 10:34:57 PM »
If the show just has Munn pretend to be a new anchor I think that can work, but when she was off fake camera she was a pretty big drag. Especially since she was up against Mortimer who killed it tonight. As did Pill for that matter. It is troubling, I think, that gender roles are being perpetuated in generic fashion (as was the blunt foreshadowing earlier about how Mac couldn't work the e-mail system) while challenged in a lazy fashion, but as a whole I found the relationship dynamics mixed with the news to be a good deal more compelling this week even if cliches were being trotted out.

The execution of the news segments continue to be a highlight, but I find the interconnectedness of the newsroom itself to be fairly compelling as well. Even if it works, so far, in cliches when it does take some time to work with how each person is reliant on the other to create this idealized whole (and the struggles that go in to even making that work for a single episode of fake television) it works nicely.

There are still some notable problems that need ironing out (and again the musical cues, while more subtle this week, are completely unnecessary and with the Big Three of Pill, Mortimer, and Daniels they become even more obvious as points of disinterest), but I've enjoyed the first two episodes enough to keep coming back even if the show hasn't vaulted (or perhaps shown enough sustained potential on a single episode basis to suggest that it will vault) in to the immediate list of best programs on TV, but I certainly wouldn't call it bad or mediocre by any means.

Also, over this past week, and giving a read of the AV Club's review of tonight's episode, I have been completely floored by how much collective animosity the tastemakers and critics seem to have against Sorkin. Dunham caught shit from viewers and comments in blog posts, but the shots taken directly at Sorkin seem even worse, despite basically being notably less harsh since his physical appearance hasn't been called in to question...yet, coming from supposed authority figures. In some ways I would even call the attacks equal because I can understand why Joe Schmo would make direct personal attacks about Dunham against her because there's anonymity and ignorance that are given and not super surprising from people posting on AV Club comments sections or the [as] boards, but to have critics blatantly attack Sorkin is absolutely stunning to me.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 10:37:48 PM by FLYmeatwad »

mañana

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 20862
  • Check your public library
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #13 on: July 04, 2012, 09:27:25 AM »
Also, over this past week, and giving a read of the AV Club's review of tonight's episode, I have been completely floored by how much collective animosity the tastemakers and critics seem to have against Sorkin.
but to have critics blatantly attack Sorkin is absolutely stunning to me.

Attacking Sorkin? What like in a personal way? Most of the criticisms of The Newsroom I've seen seem pretty reasonable.
There's no deceit in the cauliflower.

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #14 on: July 04, 2012, 09:45:21 AM »
I was off base on this one, at least in part, for this week's AV Club review. I'll have to find the articles that caused transference on to this week's review (which still had too many of the generic 'idealist' 'unrealistic' 'why isn't this Sports Night?' observations for my liking) because I get the impression that since the show's debut it's basically been a bunch of critics trying to one up each other over who can get out the snarkiest one-liner about Sorkin and his style.

I shall do some searching and see if I can find examples of what I'm talking about.

It just seems a lot of other shows that just start out get a little more leeway while it seems like this one has already been written off and any hints at positivity for its future have already been declared DoA.

I guess I need to read about Studio 60, because I don't know anything about it aside from what I have read in articles and comments, but the impression I'm getting is that the first episode or two were the two single greatest episodes of television ever made, better than anything even Sorkin has done, and then they started showing children being killed live on air or something.

I get slapping his name on it means that there are going to be comparisons to his other works, but two episodes in and it already seems excessive.

mañana

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 20862
  • Check your public library
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #15 on: July 04, 2012, 10:24:37 AM »
I'll have to find the articles that caused transference on to this week's review (which still had too many of the generic 'idealist' 'unrealistic'
Idealism and lack of realism are of course not necessarily problems, those things certainly never bothered me on The West Wing (ok, maybe sometimes it did), but the writing and execution have just felt so clumsy to me here that those criticisms ring true for me. It can start to seem generic because everybody’s saying it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not reasonable.   :) 

I get the impression that since the show's debut it's basically been a bunch of critics trying to one up each other over who can get out the snarkiest one-liner about Sorkin and his style.
Yeah, I guess that probably happens to some degree.

It just seems a lot of other shows that just start out get a little more leeway while it seems like this one has already been written off and any hints at positivity for its future have already been declared DoA.
I get slapping his name on it means that there are going to be comparisons to his other works, but two episodes in and it already seems excessive.
Maybe shows should be given more time to settle-in, I don’t know. Though a lot of critics were given screeners for the first 5 or 6 episodes, so the response has been informed by more than the just the first 2.

I guess I need to read about Studio 60, because I don't know anything about it aside from what I have read in articles and comments, but the impression I'm getting is that the first episode or two were the two single greatest episodes of television ever made, better than anything even Sorkin has done, and then they started showing children being killed live on air or something.
Heh, my recollection was that the pilot was fairly well-received but really did not live up to expectations, which to be fair were extremely high. The Judd Hirsch opening rant is considered a high of the series, but I don’t think the pilot has ever been elevated to the annals of great episodes or anything. It was at the close of the 2nd episode (“model of a modern network TV show”) that I realized I hated the show.  :)
There's no deceit in the cauliflower.

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2012, 12:10:34 PM »
Granted it's only been three episodes, but I think last night's was easily the best episode so far. Not sure how much I care about the Will/Mack stuff (though again, both people playing them are great), but the Pill and that other guy stuff has been pretty compelling. Again, I think the show is at its best when it's focusing on the news itself and allows everything to happen organically around News Night and the ramifications for the individuals and the company. Felt moving fairly rapidly through time and having it all broken up by the boardroom parts really worked.

EDIT: Enjoyed the kind of reference to Scott Pilgrim where Pill had a line about punching a face.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 12:27:10 PM by FLYmeatwad »

mousterpiece

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
    • Mousterpiece Cinema
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2012, 01:20:41 PM »
This was an improvement on the second episode, in that I didn't dislike it as much. I did like the boardroom sequence, partly because Sam Waterston is quickly becoming my favorite part of this show (not his character, mind you, but Sam Waterston himself), and partly because Jane Fonda did a fine impersonation of Ned Beatty in Network. But a lot of this show continues to be either frustrating or very dull. I like Alison Pill and John Gallagher, Jr., but I couldn't care less about them getting together. I like Jeff Daniels and Emily Mortimer, but...well, see the end of the last sentence. So...not great for me, but not as bad as last week.
Listen to my podcast, Mousterpiece Cinema!

Find me on Sound on Sight!

Follow me on Twitter!

spoko

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2062
  • Hero of the Great Taco Syndicate
    • Bullet in the Brain
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2012, 09:15:59 AM »
Just caught up with the pilot, but I'll probably watch the next couple episodes today & tomorrow. So far, though, I'm not impressed. The timing is way off--there's no pop to it, like there was with The West Wing and Sports Night. Far worse than that, though, the actual content wasn't great either.

About 50% of that opening speech is nonsense--anyone with even a mildly critical understanding of history knows that the Glory Days he's describing never existed. Not in the newsroom, and not in the world at large. Did he honestly say, for instance, "We never thumped our chests?" America? We haven't stopped thumping our chests long enough to catch a decent breath since about the mid-17th century. The rest of the last half of the speech was equally ridiculous.

I would comment on the typically Sorkinesque misogyny of the whole thing, but I'll wait for that to play out in hopes it will fade.

And finally, what the hell was going on with Emily Mortimer by the elevator at the end? Was that as absurd as it seemed? Watching that, and then thinking back to the opening scene, I'm literally wondering if our protagonist is entirely sane. He very clearly saw someone else in that crowd. When there were flashes of her holding the signs up, I read it as his consciousness tweaking him a bit. If she actually was there, and he was imagining some bland, emotionless woman in her place, what was that? Are we to assume he was actually hallucinating?

All that said, there were one or two good lines. "Speaking truth to stupid" was good. I don't remember the other.

Totoro

  • Guest
Re: The Newsroom
« Reply #19 on: July 14, 2012, 04:59:04 PM »
This show is pretty awesome across the board, but then it loses me with all of its super uppity upper class liberal preaching. Also, bad music.

 

love