BEFORE MIDNIGHT - News/reviews, 2013 Teen Choice Nominations (Film), 2013 Teen Choice Nominations (TV) , Emmy Rookies who should be nominated(supporting and lead), Best Picture Snubs 2000-2013 (Elimination Game), Official MODERN FAMILY (Season 4) Thread, Which actress would you say is Meryl Streep's biggest rival talent-wise?, The 2013 Emmy Awards Discussion: Drama Categories Part 3, Homeland Season 3, Who deserves a nomination but won't get one (Unless voters view this thread and notice them!)
Welcome - Make Your Predictions! Give Us Feedback!, Oscars, Golden Globes and Film Awards, Primetime Emmys, Daytime Emmys, Tony Awards, Grammys and Music Awards, General Discussion: All Non-Award Topics, Games! Games! Let's Play Games!, Report SPAM Here, Polls! Polls! Who Should Give Back Their Oscar? , Daytime Emmys Judging 2012, Daytime Emmys Judging - 2011
Advertisement
| Jun 23rd 2012, 22:26 |
|
|
|
Episode Title: "We Just Decided To" (Pilot) Synopsis: In the series premiere of HBO's new drama series, "The Newsroom," ACN anchor Will McAvoy returns to his job at "News Night" following a very public meltdown and awakening to find that his longtime executive producer and most of his staff have left the show; Will's boss and news division head, Charlie Skinner, hires a new executive producer for the show, who also happens to be Will's former girlfriend; Will and his overhauled staff must grapple with an immediate challenge when breaking news comes in over the wire. Discuss.
|
| Jun 24th 2012, 04:42 |
|
|
|
Well, having read the original script, back in December when the show was called "More As This Story Develops", the trailers have pointed to a significant deviation from it. The script itself was just mindblowing, the last 30 pages I read outloud and the pace and the writing was just... wow... This series which we're seeing on trailers and promos, however, seems to be pretty different. However, we seem to be getting a lot of stuff from after the pilot episode. I'm saying this because in one promo Emily Mortimer says "Welcome to Newsroom 2.0". Now, the title of the first episode is "We Just Decided To". The Title of the second episode is "Newsroom 2.0", which leads me to believe that these trailers have been showing us footage that is not from the pilot episode. |
| Jun 24th 2012, 20:41 |
|
|
|
Aaron Sorkin is one of the best writers of dialogue in the business. This show has one of the best casts I can imagine reading dialogue by Sorkin. So here's what's wrong: - Sorkin, it seems, has a limited number of tropes that he has recombined into a slightly different shape. The fast-talking co-workers with the troubled romantic history and/or present sexual tension -- he did that on both "Sports Night" and "Studio 60." Specifically, the female producer with romantic history with on-air anchor is right out of "Sports Night." A romantic subplot between cutely talented/ambitious secondary characters. I think there's been a variation of that on every one of his shows. - The political speechifying, which made sense on "The West Wing," which was the only show he's done with a setting and stoory big enough to fit this kind of material. It was preposterous on "Studio 60." Works a little better here, but it's no "West Wing." Too often it feels like Sorkin, using his characters as sock puppets, is just preaching to us. - I don't buy the relationship between Jeff Daniels and Emily Mortimer. When we're first told about Mackenzie, she's described as a tough as nails war correspondent, but when we meet her, she flutters around like a fragile bird, giving silly romantic advice to a girl she doesn't know, giving an idealistic, pie-in-the-sky speech that sounds like a child trying to save Tinkerbell. The Mackenzie we see and hear never matches the woman described to us; Mortimer, whom I've always liked, is either miscast or misdirected in this, a little miswritten too. And Will comes off as a pompous bully. They're mismatched, and I need to believe them as equals to buy their dynamic. - The women. Mackenzie and Margaret both seem jittery, flustered, and erratic. Can't they just be competent without also being cutesy? - Ripped from the headlines. I think I'd prefer this show to exist in a completely fictional world that allows Sorkin to use the show as allegory -- like "The West Wing" with its idealized version of the White House. By spending so much of the episode talking about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, Sorkin seems too much to just be talking at us about current events. If he develops his own stories, I think the points he wants to make would come through more strongly.  |
| Jun 24th 2012, 21:04 |
|
|
|
Daniel, you're absolutely right about the ridiculous sexual tension and romantic subplots that are front-and-center with the female characters. Christ, enough already! It's depressing that someone of Sorkin's caliber can't resist those cliches. The walk-and-talks and rapid-fire conversations and grandiose monologues could be any random combination of characters from "Sports Night" or "West Wing" or "Studio 60." Sorkin is Sorkin, I guess. That being said, it's fantastic entertainment to watch talented actors bite into good material. I actually thought Sam Waterston was the MVP here. Feels like Daniels was still trying to find the right tone. It's nice to see him actually make an effort, though. He's been sleepwalking for years. That whole half-hour or whatever depicting the live broadcast was riveting, gotta say. I can see a fair amount of tech Emmy nods and cursory Emmy nominations based on Sorkin's celebrity glow and the HBO factor. But I'm not sure if Emmy voters overall will feel like they've already seen this show. Sorkin, Waterston and #Newsroom are all trending right now on Twitter and have been for the last couple of hours. Of course, so is the latest episode of "Real Housewives of New Jersey." "I knew I shoulda taken that left turn at Albuquerque." |
| Jun 24th 2012, 23:17 |
|
|
|
I gotta say i completely loved this pilot episode. The cast is perfect, the dialogue is sharp, the banter between characters is just so quick and witty, and it has just the right amount of humor. Also was that Jesse Eisenberg on the Phone as Eric Neil? |
| Jun 25th 2012, 06:06 |
|
|
|
Certainly was not a flawless pilot, but there were some fantastic moments throughout the episode. Dialogue was excellent, but that is always to be expected when it comes to the work of Aaron Sorkin. However, don't let the witty rhetoric fool you. A lot of it was some very irrelevant rambling that was probably unnecessary in the scheme of things. On the surface the opening was a great hook, but to tell you the truth I found it be rather sappy and very American - sorry I'm not an American and I find the whole debate of 'the US being the best country in the world' to be somewhat nauseating. The casting is good and there are no characters that are annoying me yet, so that's always a plus. I do feel that the whole 'former colleagues' former romance unexpectedly coming to the fore again' to be a bit repetitive, so I hope this doesn't become too much of a focal point of the series. The office politics of forming a team for the news show was good, but the show really started to kick into gear when they started working on some news stories (in this case, the Louisiana oil spill). Will be interesting to see whether the show will improve in the areas that the critics are picking on, or whether it will plod along with little improvement. All in all, a bit disappointed with the quality of this pilot episode. And just on a side note, why was it soooo long? 72 min running time - was quite a lot to get through. Grade: B |
| Jun 25th 2012, 07:25 |
|
|
That was one of the more infuriating pilots I've sat through in a while. So much potential ,but its maker is too up his won ass to let it succeed. Show us why this country has goen to shit. Don't tell us. We can just watch the actual news for that. Overly quipy, patronizing and at once bitter and idealistic. Pretty much exactly what I expected. For Sorkinheads only. |
|
| Jun 25th 2012, 07:45 |
|
|
|
Certainly wasn't as bad as Hell on Wheels or Smash. I can't stand those shows. Here, we have a great cast reading excellent dialogue. You people have watched too much TV (and take it far too seriously...) and are so soured on the whole format that you wouldn't be satisfied even if he did manage to switch it up. That said, I've been more intrigued by his adaptations as of late. He was once a great original writer (A Few Good Men, The American President, The West Wing), but with his work in Charlie Wilson's War, TSN and Moneyball, he has mastered the art of the adaptation |
| Jun 25th 2012, 07:55 |
|
|
|
I find that debate nauseating as well. I think a lot of us do here in the US, and I think that's what Aaron Sorkin wrote the scene about. Constantly declaring our country the best in the world without evidence to support the claim -- and a lot of clear evidence to refute it -- is what many people these days confuse for patriotism. |
| Jun 25th 2012, 08:11 |
|
|
|
There were a couple of things going on in the pilot that I'd hope for a course correction on, but I doubt those elements will change anytime soon with the season already filmed or nearly finished filming at this point. The good slightly outweighs the bad I think, and I'm anticipating more in the future from this strong cast. Jeff Daniels was pretty electric all through the episode. If this series goes the distance, he already has a tape submission. Daniels should be on a couple of Oscar nominations at this point in his career that he sadly doesn't enjoy. Loved Will's opening rant to "sorority girl" at the college lecture. It's just like Wes Mendell's rant at the start of "Studio 60," or looking at it cynically, it's more of Sorkin being Sorkin (but who else can he be really, especially since this approach has gotten him this far). The ensemble is top notch. I enjoyed pretty much every word that Sam Waterston uttered here. His character should be a riot in the coming episodes. The young cast is a who's who of Tony nominees/winners: Thomas Sadoski, Alison Pill (so amazing on "In Treatment," though this show won't allow her to get anywhere near that level of greatness), and John Gallagher, Jr. Their budding love triangle could become tiresome if not handled well. I'm not sold about Emily Mortimer yet. I like the idea of McKenzie's character, but the execution/writing was weird at times. That spiel of hers on democracy was pretty ridiculous, as was quoting Cervantes and doling out relationship advice to Pill's character whom she's never met before. I don't think some of those scenes would have made the final edit in a normal 50+ minute episode. Her focus should have been solely on Daniels's character at this early stage, developing whatever antagonistic tension they need to develop to sell this relationship and make us see the Will she sees (or saw way back when) before he became the "Jay Leno of news anchors." Right now, that's not coming through too well. This aspect will probably continue the ongoing narrative of Sorkin's weaknesses in writing for women. There's no C.J. Cregg-level female floating around in this office (maybe there's a glimmer of hope for Jane Fonda?), and that's disappointing. I'd also agree that basing this series in a real-time (or real-time past) context is a mistake. One of "The West Wing"'s triumphs during the Sorkin years was being able to pepper the series with fictional plotlines that mirrored real life without going there entirely. Then they could control the scope, timing, details, soapboxing, etc. on their own timetable, whether it was the fallout from an oil tanker explosion, a mad cow scare, an opposition party bill, an assassination attempt, or going to war with a fictional Middle Eastern country. Here, they have to stick to the facts like with the BP oil spill in Louisiana, and it does have a sanctimonious ring to things that this newscast can do reporting in one hour what it would take their real counterparts weeks and months to do effectively. And then to bemoan the competition for not being up to par with them? Hindsight is indeed 20/20, but this kind of suspension of disbelief is excessive. The "News Night" broadcast was thrilling to watch though, so at least the mechanics of a live cable newscast they got right. I'm sticking with the show, b/c there could be greatness in here somewhere, and I'd like to keep up for when/if that happens. Gorgeous main title design too. Watch out for it at next year's Emmys. Grade for "We Just Decided To (Pilot)": B/B-
|
| Jun 25th 2012, 08:19 |
|
Sorkin demands that he be taken incredibly seriously. I'm just abiding him. Also, I don't see what's great about the dialogue. Some of it was clever, but it was hardly ever witty. Most of it was filler. And I thought Smash's pilot was a bit more accomplished than this. |
|
| Jun 25th 2012, 08:31 |
|
|
|
Why the need to bring up Smash? What am I missing between these two shows? I liked it. It was very, very entertaining. I do agree that Sorkin is full of Sorkinness and will never let it go. The opening could've been Studio 60's opening with Judd Hirsh. Then, several moments where almost identical to Sports Night, Studio 60 and West Wing. But the faster people understand that Sorkin will be Sorkin (which has been obvious since forever) they'll enjoy things much quicker, otherwise why do you even bother, where people really expecting anything different?. But it was entertaining and much better than A LOT of shows out there. The cast was also pretty great. This will be a very easy Golden Globe for Jeff Daniels, they'll eat it up and he has three loses I think. Same goes for Emily Mortimer, she might also show up. I don't know how it will fare at the Emmys with Breaking Bad and even Mad Men still popular plus a second season of Homeland. |
| Jun 25th 2012, 08:39 |
|
| Until I saw the previews I thought this might be different. I thought maybe the failure of 'Studio 60' and his work as a film writer woke him up. Either which way, this was an extemely hyped new HBO drama, so I see no problem with people giving their opinions of the pilot even if it fits the Sorkin mold. | |
| Jun 25th 2012, 09:29 |
|
|
|
Because of "The Social Network," "Charlie Wilson's War," and "Moneyball," which had signature Sorkin qualities (fast-paced, wordy dialogue) but proved that he's not necessarily a one-trick pony. Perhaps, as awardskel above suggested, the fact that those were adaptations and not his own original material kept his indulgent streak in check. But based on the "Newsroom" pilot, he seems to have put this one together from spare parts of his previous TV shows. He wants to make a point about the modern news media, and it's a good point to make, but he needs to put character and storytelling first. |
| Jun 25th 2012, 10:35 |
|
|
|
I thought the pilot was really good, but I knew the reaction on these boards would be mixed. The entire cast was really good and I can't wait to see more from each of them. I think with Aaron Sorkin + HBO + massive snob appeal this show is going to do extremely well at the next awards season. |
Facebook Timeline
