Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
or else youre a mental
What do I win?
And is there a TV show with 7.5 in the title?
It would keep the perfect pattern going.
it was like they made a good pilot episode just to get a crowd to shovel shit at.
but I'm not sure that's sufficient treatment for mental illness.
The trouble with Studio 60 was that all those rehashed West Wing plots worked much better the first time.
these criticisms are the ones i keep reading but dont understand at all and never see explained beyond the initial statement.
i'm coming straight back off watching the west wing and i'm yet to see any "re-hashed" plots. The only one i can think of that occurs later is the kindapping, which i think they can get away with cos theyre done in entirely different contexts.
Also, bar the incredible speech at the beginning of the pilot, it's probably one of the worst episodes i've seen so far. The one with Eli Wallach in particular is a million times better and one of the best single pieces of tv i've ever seen.
it's a tragedy how popular 30 rock is, when this got cancelled :(
I seem to remember the one where whatshisface gets arrested in the deep south was very similar to a West Wing episode.
Mostly it's just Sorkin reusing the same plot devices* and quoting his own lines that led to the perception Studio 60 was just a budget West Wing. At points entire exchanges between characters are eeirily similar to ones in the West Wing. In some ways Studio 60 was just badly timed: he reused a lot of stuff from Sports Night in WW too but people forgave that because a) no one really watched Sports Night at the time anyway and b) the West Wing was magnificent from day 1. Studio 60 got a lot better towards the end but it took a while to hit it's stride and, since it was in the shadow of the West Wing, it couldn't afford to do that whilst bringing WW to people's minds every second line. And so got cancelled.
Also: 30 Rock is a straight up comedy whereas Studio 60 aimed to be much more weighty. Setting aside they're really not similar enough to be throwing > signs about the place IMO.
*Particularly shoehorning in national security plotlines and bomb scares and whatnot whenever the overarching plot ran out of steam. This worked in the West Wing because it was set in the freaking White House. In a TV studio it just felt forced and weird.
and dont remember anything in the west wing being similar. it was a great episode in its one right anyway, JOHN GOODMAN, etc.
It's obviously the same style and the same devices are used, but I think the hugely different characters and setting are enough to make it feel fresh and different - i'm watching this directly after finishing the west wing, and to be honest it only feels like a continuation in presentation alone. i.e. the way characters will walk and talk at fast speeds but the substance and dialogue is a million miles away. It'd be like comparing studio 60 to gilmore girls.
I really don't think it's that similar to the west wing at all, even the cast that are reused are so different to their previous characters it's pretty easy to forget who they were (which isn't easy for a 7season+ show)
Like I say, i'm only about 8 episodes back into studio 60 (i first watched it all the way through a couple of years back), but i don't remember feeling the security/political stuff felt forced at all the first time around.
I haven't actually seen Sports Night, it's next on the list.
I knew someone would bring up the fact that they're different genres of tv which is a totally valid point, but when the weighty drama is actually a lot funnier that the out-and-out sitcom, you know one's better than the other. And 30 rock's (baffling) popularity is largely responsible for studio 60 being cancelled.
i'm glad you've replied with an argument beyond "LOL NO" anyway.
I seem to remember being baffled by the similarity at the time but I can't remember the West Wing episode I'm thinking of for the life of me. Damn my memory.
Whilst I think the similarites between the two shows were overstated in the critical mauling Studio 60 got when it first aired it is pretty evident. It may just be presentation alone (though I'd argue it was very much in substance too in the big issue driven discussions. Not so much in the more personal moments) but that presentation was so distinctive it's imposible to ignore. Sorkin has a very singular style which is his biggest strength and his biggest weakness. Comparing his shows makes sense because they're put together in much the same way, for instance the main characters in S60 were for the most part the same kind of tortured liberals that made up the Bartlett administration with a few token conservatives dotted around for them to spar with. You can't say that about the Gilmore Girls.
I do have a soft spot for Studio 60 but only because I'm a big shreiking Sorkin fanboy and I felt the last few episodes redeemed it. But it just felt lightweight compared what came before and not quite as funny as it thought it was. 30 Rock is most certainly funnier IMO, but then they're both shows I tend to smile at more than laugh at.
And sadly it was the ratings and the lack of critical prestige that the network expected from a Sorkin vehicle that killed S60, not 30 Rock.
and now this?
they should take away your tv.
"LOL YOU THINK THIS" petty elitism.
if studio 60 was on HBO you'd be sucking its balls.
This seems massively ironic considering how lame your arguments against the Wire always were (sample: "I've never met anyone like Brother Mouzone, therefore he is shit").
But let's review. Studio 60 sucked because:
- Precious few of any of the characters had anything approaching charisma. The largest part of any of their personalities were as shallow conduits for whatever issue the writer wanted to push an agenda for. Other than that, viewers would be hard pressed to find any reason to care what was happening to them. Jordan's baby: Give a fuck. The liberal and Christian's on-off again relationship: Give a fuck. That comedian's brother getting kidnapped in Iraq: Yawn. Give a fuck. More people care about whether Liz Lemon will ever find a confectionery product that isn't toxic than whether Chandler gets over his lame drug addiction that really isn't an addiction, and that's why 30 Rock has lasted four seasons and Studio 60 was lucky to get a full run of one.
- The show the Studio 60 people are supposed to be producing is about as funny as cholera. Consequently, I could give a toss when there is a problem in producing it - which is really the plot of every episode.
- Despite being a wacky comedy, 30 Rock is actually a far more perceptive distillation of current network TV practises than Studio 60 ever was, and somehow audiences picked up on that. Perhaps this is due to the fact that Tina Fey actually was a showrunner on SNL. What did Aaron Sorkin ever do? Cut and Paste unused scripts from The West Wing?
- Jack Donaghy, Liz Lemon, Tracy Jordan and Kenneth: Legends. I cannot even remember most of the characters' names on Studio 60. Fast Talking Man, Fast Talking Man 2, Black Guy, Whiny Woman, Amanda Peet.
- Pretty much everything we know about any of the characters on Studio 60, we are informed about by other characters. I don't think I ever saw that blonde woman be as hilarious as the rest of the cast apparently thought she was. On 30 Rock, they prefer to show, not tell.
- I say this twice because it's doubly true: Every character and plot is a shallow conduit for Sorkin's message of the week. But the trouble is, no-one gives a wank.
- We could spend the rest of the day either listing all the one-liners from 30 Rock that were pure gold... or listing all the reasons why that Pirates of Penzance sketch that "saved the day" on the Studio 60 show was an insult to our intelligence.
I'd disagree with you entirely on the charisma front. Matthew Perry, Brad Whitford, Amanda Peet & whoever plays Jack Rudolph especially give excellent performances as 3D, consistent yet developing characters.
You peddle out that conduit line a lot but fail to back it up with relevant examples - at what point is any character compromised or made any less believable to push any kind of moral message or plotline? Fair enough the show is possibly a little too preachy and swings too often at MORAL HEAVYWEIGHTS in one season, but this doesn;t ever come at the expense of any of the characters integrity.
I largely agree with your criticisms of the actual material on the studio 60 actually, it's probably the biggest flaw of the show. There were a couple of decent sketches though, and i'd say they're all largely representative of what you'd see on SNL or whatever - infact i'd say they're pretty good parodies of lame, obvious popular culture bits that SNL so often wheels out, so that would counter your later argument of studio's 60s lack of being perceptive.
You know the populist argument is a bullshit one so why use it, when it means nothing? More people liked 30 rock than studio 60. More people like Supernatural and The Vampire Diaries than Firefly. Law And Order and CSI get higher viewing figures than the wire. More people "give a shit" about horatio caine than bunk moreland. These examples have literally no value to discussing worth or quality, and rightly so.
"Pretty much everything we know about any of the characters on Studio 60" so you're forgetting the long dialogue scenes from the very first episode where pretty much every character discusses their own emotions & values? Sure, a lot gets said about other characters but to say none of them are developed independently as characters isn't giving it nearly enough credit.
Yeah you dont remember amanda peet's character at all despite calling her by her character's name above. And you've seen 4 seasons of the (currently airing) 30 rock, yet one season, shown years ago, of studio 60. massive mystery that you'll remember characters names from the former and not the latter. "i cant remember their names" weak.
Pretty baffling that a show you perservered with for an entire series was apparently so abysmal, too.
tracy jordan is the only person in mainstream tv worse than brother mouzone. abysmal. tina fey isnt half as charming, intelligent or funny as she thinks she is, and alec baldwin not funny.
IGNORE THE TROLL
- I peddled the conduit line "a lot"? I peddled it precisely twice. And the second time acknowledged that I was repeating myself for effect. Moreover, the first time I 'peddled' it, I listed a couple examples: The Iraq plot and Chandler and the Christian's constant bickering that just so happened to precisely mirror any lame Liberal/Conservative argument you could find on any political message board. I dunno, maybe you can't read.
- This nonsense about characters' "integrity" being compromised is featured nowhere in my post. In fact, the idea of any Sudio 60 characters having integrity conflicts with the only argument I DID make: Namely that there aren't any real characters, just abstracts for the writers to push messages and agendas through. Why are you arguing against something I never said?
- I dunno, maybe you can't read (2): My argument was that a reason Studio 60 was cancelled because all the characters were boring and no-one cared what happened to them, whereas 30 Rock has survived precisely because the characters are so well drawn. You've pulled this populist nonsense out of your arse - just like you always do.
- I don't remember saying I don't remember Amanda Peet's character. Surely the fact that I used her character's name and described a plot she was involved in tells you I did remember her character. And that was only because Amanda Peet is hot. I don't remember caring about anything that happened to her. Neither did America, apparently.
- "you're forgetting the long dialogue scenes from the very first episode where pretty much every character discusses their own emotions & values" - actually I guess I am. But you're forgetting (or couldn't figure out) that my point was that an ability that is told to the audience but rarely shown is poor storytelling. A long monologue in which a character discusses his feelings and character is EXACTLY what I'm criticising. And though I can't really remember the scene you're referencing, I'm going to assume it made me roll my eyes and put a mark in the 'con' column.
- Actually I didn't persevere with the entire series. I gave up a few episodes from the end. Given that I never said I watched the entire run, I'm going to assume you got this from the same place you've gotten all your responses to my points: From your butthole. Heh heh... butthole...
NB: It's pretty easy to dismiss everything you say about things you don't like because you never substantiate any of your assertions. The fact that you're trying to level the same claim as me is just a piss poor (and transparent) effort to pre-empt criticism you know is coming. Suffice to say: No-one will ever take you seriously when you say Alec Baldwin isn't funny. Or when you claim Lost is anything more than hokum.
and I love Supernatural AND Studio 60. I totally preferred Studio 60 to 30 Rock, was massively upset when they cancelled Party Down and am a huge TV nerd. I don't deny that Supernatural is a popular show, but it's actually a pretty good and well written show too. If it was really that popular, it probably wouldn't have been moved into the Friday night death slot.
I understand you were being genre specific, but lets face it, it's hardly Two and a Half Men is it?
I'm pretty defensive about Supernatural it would seem.
Started off okay, but quickly turned (probably right about the time that he learned the show wasn’t going to be picked up for another season is my guess) into a platform for Sorkin to air his brand of smug yet anguished liberal patriotism. Seriously the last five episodes consisted of little more than diatribes about how Hollywood liberals are pro-America and support the war in Afghanistan and the war on terror generally, but are just a little bit unhappy about the way Iraq has turned out.
Honestly, I generally can't stand character-based drama, so you appreciate what’s at stake here, but the only thing that made the second half of the season watchable were the few minutes of lively dialogue and the suspense over the romantic destinies of the leading characters that had to be included in each ep. to prevent it from being outright op-ed.
It's not just the elite tv-watchers who like The Wire and 30 Rock anyway is it? Just as the common consensus between most people that Studio 60 wasn't up to much and Lost was 100% retarded and gay.
For me, he's up there with EB Farnum as one of the best TV minor characters
if that makes sense...
good to watch late at night.
colossalhorse and Stealthy just handed your arse, freshly flame grilled and covered in BBQ sauce.
FWIW I found Studio 60's defining failure was it's massive streak of smugness about the whole genre it was about. It wasn't remotely engaging because shows like Studio 60 are fucking dreadful and it was a dreadful example of it. Oh "Wah! Wah!" Sorkin, TV isn't intellectual enough for you? Big fucking deal.
ON OPPOSITE DAY
You don't tell me anything anymore!"
"Isn't there a slanket somewhere you could be filling with your farts?"
"I can't change. I'm like a chameleon – always a lizard."
"You're going down, Jack!"
...I don't do that."