Aaron Sorkin HBO show The Newsroom

[Lcsulla]

Oh great - fonda too? Jeez, as much as olberman and sorkin irritate me at least they don't aid and abed our enemies.

[junior94]

General TV question for those who might know: when the real name of a site like facebook or youtube is used in a show, is that something you need to pay a license fee for (or at least clear), like actual brand name products may be? Because it seems overall, some shows use it and some don't, and I'm wondering what the rhyme and reason is for it. As a viewer I think I'd prefer if they just use the real thing (unless it has some significant impact on the story). Because I just went thru the trailer more slowly, and they're not using "Youtube", it's of course the same exact thing but they made up their own name for it.

[thestand]

They'll usually clear it to be safe. But if they know they're using it in a way that the company won't likely clear, they don't even try. That's why Law & Order: SVU uses "Face Union" and stuff like that, because "stalking a rape victim" isn't something Facebook will clear.

[smokew11]

saw the trailer last night, looks pretty good

[moosicmaniac]

as a huge fan of Sports Night, I'm beyond excited for this

[Arby]

The trailer looked interesting. I like Jeff Daniels.

[junior94]

2nd trailer, with (far as I can tell) 100% different footage

http://www.hbo.com/video/video.html/...room&view=null

[~Crashintome89~]

So pumped for this. I've seen The West Wing and Studio 60, along with Facebook and Moneyball. Sorkin is the man with his own style.

[newscane]

Looking forward to it... will have to find a way to watch since I don't have HBO at home. Did see an online review (maybe in the New Yorker?) that wasn't too favorable... let's hope it's better than that writer thought it was!

[proppenator]

Most of the reviews I've seen have been pretty tough on it. We'll see; I'll definitely be watching the premiere.

[~Crashintome89~]

They were also tough on Studio 60 for not getting the viewers. Honestly, I don't even care about reviews anymore with the amount of crap on TV, music, etc.

[proppenator]

Studio 60's problem was that the "show" was totally unbelievable as a sketch comedy show. First, the skits weren't funny. Second, it's absurd to think that a network would live and die by its late-night sketch comedy show. I'm a little worried The Newsroom could fall into a similar trap.

[junior94]

I think mostly now I'm just thrilled that it's on HBO. Means the episodes (I'm assuming) will generally be at least 50 minutes long and no ads, and yea okay even if it doesn't set the ratings on fire at first, there will still be a very good chance it gets a 2nd season.

[Trippin4136]

I've seen a number of reviews that really shit on this show.

I'll still give it a shot, but the reviews I've seen are pretty forthright in bad-mouthing the show.

And I can kind of see why.

Jeff Daniels' character seems very annoying, and he comes across, IMO, like a cheap Josh Lyman impression. Not like annoying as in, he's supposed to play a wise-cracking, bitter TV personality. Annoying like, fuck he pisses me off just watching him because this character sucks so much.

[Dannyyankou]

Sorkin was my sister's commencement speaker at Syracuse this year. He's quite an entertaining guy.

[junior94]

Originally Posted by Trippin4136

I've seen a number of reviews that really shit on this show.

I'll still give it a shot, but the reviews I've seen are pretty forthright in bad-mouthing the show.

And I can kind of see why.

Jeff Daniels' character seems very annoying, and he comes across, IMO, like a cheap Josh Lyman impression. Not like annoying as in, he's supposed to play a wise-cracking, bitter TV personality. Annoying like, fuck he pisses me off just watching him because this character sucks so much.

hmm, I mean they wouldn't mean a thing to me anyway, but I'm honestly kinda surprised to hear this. I wasn't aware there were many reviews of it out there to begin with (though it makes sense, given how close the premiere is), and also that it's getting as much negative as it apparently is.

[thestand]

Yeah, The New Yorker made it sound like the worst thing ever.

[kto2122]

Washington Post dropped a pretty harsh review on it today. Fresh Air had the lead actor on today--made it sound interesting.

[proppenator]

Of course, we do need to keep in mind, most of these reviews work for news companies. So they're not necessarily going to be thrilled with a show that picks on the media. And they'll also be more attuned to any inaccuracies in the portrayal of a news company than they were to the inaccuracies of Sorkin's portrayal of, say, the white house.

[Trippin4136]

Originally Posted by proppenator

Of course, we do need to keep in mind, most of these reviews work for news companies. So they're not necessarily going to be thrilled with a show that picks on the media. And they'll also be more attuned to any inaccuracies in the portrayal of a news company than they were to the inaccuracies of Sorkin's portrayal of, say, the white house.

Umm, any publication can be viewed as a "news company."

The bottom line is there are more reviews than not that absolutely shred this show to bits, mostly blasting Sorkin for his over-the-top castigating of today's media and culture, and doing so in the extremely unnecessarily verbose way that only Sorkin knows how.

If this show sucks it'll be because Sorkin created a shitty show. Not because some "news companies" in theory gave it crappy reviews because they don't like being the subject of scrutiny through a TV show.

[proppenator]

Originally Posted by Trippin4136

Umm, any publication can be viewed as a "news company."

The bottom line is there are more reviews than not that absolutely shred this show to bits, mostly blasting Sorkin for his over-the-top castigating of today's media and culture, and doing so in the extremely unnecessarily verbose way that only Sorkin knows how.

If this show sucks it'll be because Sorkin created a shitty show. Not because some "news companies" in theory gave it crappy reviews because they don't like being the subject of scrutiny through a TV show.

I think we made the same point here and are in complete agreement, but I'm not sure.

[Beebz]

A lot of critics I respect are calling this a mess. Damn shame.

[coldengrey12]

Disappointed to hear this thing might be a piece of shit.

[DrewD55]

Originally Posted by proppenator

Most of the reviews I've seen have been pretty tough on it. We'll see; I'll definitely be watching the premiere.

Originally Posted by Trippin4136

I've seen a number of reviews that really shit on this show.

I'll still give it a shot, but the reviews I've seen are pretty forthright in bad-mouthing the show.

And I can kind of see why.

Jeff Daniels' character seems very annoying, and he comes across, IMO, like a cheap Josh Lyman impression. Not like annoying as in, he's supposed to play a wise-cracking, bitter TV personality. Annoying like, fuck he pisses me off just watching him because this character sucks so much.

Originally Posted by thestand

Yeah, The New Yorker made it sound like the worst thing ever.

Originally Posted by kto2122

Washington Post dropped a pretty harsh review on it today. Fresh Air had the lead actor on today--made it sound interesting.

Originally Posted by Beebz

A lot of critics I respect are calling this a mess. Damn shame.

AV Club and Alan Sepinwall added their names to the list of pans in the last couple of days. Sorkin's preachiness is apparently at an all-time high, and the show's "villains", so to speak, are one-dimensional conservative archetypes. The result is that it leaves no room for questioning his conclusions because it's not so much of a debate, but an hour-long dressing down of the other side's position, so much so that even Sepinwall, who said he probably agrees with most of Sorkin's political positions, said that it becomes uncomfortable.

I'll still give it a look. Sepinwall made an off-hand comment that there's merit to the notion that sometimes there aren't two sides to every debate, that sometimes a stupid idea has to be pointed out as such, which definitely see the merit of, but he also said that Sorkin has trouble reigning himself in when these tirades come up, and that four episodes in, the show is not much more than an engaging mess.

[dre2142]

Originally Posted by Beebz

A lot of critics I respect are calling this a mess. Damn shame.

Originally Posted by coldengrey12

Disappointed to hear this thing might be a piece of shit.

yeah, im very dissapointed in this.

Ill watch it tonight and hold judgement until then. We'll see how crappy it really is.

[DrewD55]

Still planning on watching this, if for no other reason than to get to see Sam Waterston tearing into Sorkin's dialogue. Jack McCoy is one of my all-time favorite TV characters, and I truly admire the man as an actor, going all the way back to his Oscar-nominated turn in The Killing Fields. If there's one saving grace to this, which from all accounts, pretty much sucks rocks, it will be Waterston being awesome with Sorkin's [preachy] but admittedly awesome dialogue.

[Beebz]

Oh, I'm definitely going to watch this. The notion that there's a lack of subtlety is rather disappointing, though.

[smokew11]

i'll still check it out...critics arent always right

[junior94]

I'm very happy to confirm the pilot for this is no less than 72 minutes long. (though the credits sequence is the one of the longer ones I've seen in awhile)

[Beebz]

Yeah, OK, Im in on this for at least the premiere.