Studio 60
Have you guys been watching Studio 60? I’m a big fan of Sports Night and the first three seasons of The West Wing, so I was really looking forward to Aaron Sorkin’s new show. On the surface, it seems to be an improvement over Sports Night it two respects : (1) it’s about the backstage antics of a far more interesting show than a SportsCenter clone and (2) the show is an hour-long, so it’s freed of the expectations of being a sitcom. While I expect Studio 60 to have more laughs than The West Wing, it’s really a show about comedy than an actual comedy itself. With that said, I’m trying to ignore the hype, avoid comparisons with past shows, and let the show stand on its own.
I’ve really enjoyed the first two episodes, but there’s something that isn’t quite clicking with me. I don’t love the show, but I’m really looking forward to loving it, if that makes any sense. I’m confident about the writing and cast that I’m sure the show will completely suck me in soon, but as it stands so far, I see a few potential problems with the series.
The Boss Looking Over Your Shoulder – Are Amanda Peet and Steven Weber’s characters going to be in every episode? It’s looking that way, but how are they going to explain why the heads of the network are constantly meddling with one of their, I’d assume, many programs. I wonder how hard the writers are going to have to work just to write them into the show week after week. “Hello, I’m antagonist” – What’s the purpose of Sarah Paulson’s character? Based on what I’ve seen, it seems that she’s just there to provide dramatic tension. She seems to show up to make Matthew Perry’s character uncomfortable and to give monologues about Christianity. She seems like a one-dimensional character thrown into the mix to play devil’s advocate like The Went Wing‘s Ainsley Hayes. Please give her something better to do. Show, Don’t Tell - What might be the biggest failing with the show if they’re not careful is the tendency to hype characters and situations without delivering. In the first episode we’re introduced to the three stars of the show within the show as “The Big Three”, but we still haven’t seen them do or say anything funny. If we’re to believe that these are comedic superstars, eventually they’re going to have to make us laugh. Just as bad was the second episode’s obsession with the “cold open” for the main characters’ first episode for the show within the show. After brainstorming with their writing staff, which included a great scene of the writers shouting out hackneyed ideas like an episode of the Family Feud with the Bush and Clinton families, they’re finally struck with inspiration and come up with a great idea for the first sketch. The only problem was that the “great” idea sucked. A Gilbert & Sullivan parody is pretty weak, especially when the only good line (about the producer doing “blow”) was given away 15 minutes earlier.
Step Away From The Soapbox, Mr. Sorkin – I love The West Wing, but it’s a really preachy show. While I enjoyed the Network-esque opening of the pilot episode, the first two episodes focus on the Christian moral outrage factories like Focus on the Family is already beginning to wear thin. We get it. I just hope the Christian character on the show wasn’t just thrown in ad hoc to give Sorkin an excuse to call Pat Robertson a “bigot”.
Of course, those are relatively minor complaints from a show that I consider one of the best on TV. It’s really, really good, but it’s just not great yet.
5 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Yeah, I have the same problems, which sucks because I really, really want to like this. I like what Matthew Perry is doing and I always enjoy Bradley Whitford, but there are just too many things that they need to get a handle on.
It’s not effective to have four different characters tells us over and over again what a major “talent” the Sarah Paulson character is if we never frigging see it. Nobody is funny because the writer says they’re funny.
And then there’s the problem that Sorkin is treating every decision on this late-night comedy show as if they’re the foreign policy decisions he was dealing with on West Wing.
I’m really anxious for this brilliant show to stop sucking.
Comment by Joe — October 2, 2006 @ 5:56 pm
I’ve only seen the first episode and I will probably stay with it but there a couple things:
I agree with you on the Christian character. The conservative provided a nice counterpoint on West Wing but Sarah Paulson’s character seems really awkward. Maybe I’m naive but I just don’t think there are a lot of social conservatives working in the sketch comedy biz.
I really like Bradley Whitford as an actor but having him on this new show is kind of strange. The guy kind of has one speed…sometimes when he’s talking it feels like Malibu West Wing.
Comment by jim marquis — October 2, 2006 @ 8:01 pm
I want to like this show as well, but after three episodes I think it’s falling flat.
What was great about the first West Wing episodes was the focus on the lives and personalities of those working in the White House. I don’t care about the show within the show, so much as the personalities and interactions of those behind the show.
Second, I think the dialogue was sharper on Sports Night.
Comment by Jason — October 2, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
i’m giving it one more episode… i was really bored with the 3rd installment of the same shit. it’s so damn sanctimonious and full of elitist intellectual masturbatory writing it’s wearing very, very thin.
Comment by tomN! — October 2, 2006 @ 11:15 pm
Actually, I thought last night’s episode was the best one they’ve done so far. It was nice to Sarah Paulson’s character show a little personality, but she’s still an annoying busybody. If she spends every episode complaining about the writers and cast being insensitive, then this show is finished. I hope that they have at least one episode where her relentless moralizing doesn’t mean she’s the lone voice of reason by fiat.
While I’m complaining about her character, did you guys pick up on the “show, don’t tell” bit from last night’s episode? While demonstrating her joke about the bear hunting for the second time, it once again got no laughs, but the audience was assured that “She’ll make it funny”. Next time, can we see that part too?
The sketeches and stuff seemed okay. Pretty much like an average SNL episode. A couple highlights, a couple duds, and nothing that would be funny for longer than three minutes. Not deserving of the in-show hype, but better than MadTV.
Welcome to the world of Aaron Sorkin. It’s an acquired taste.
Comment by greg — October 3, 2006 @ 1:23 pm