Question: People have spent quite a bit of time criticizing Studio 60 and its writer Aaron Sorkin for being too smart or for making them feel stupid. The thing is, Amy Sherman-Palladino writes just as many obscure references into her scripts that are never explained. Why is it OK for her to do so without criticism, but not Sorkin? Viewers have been so quick to criticize him, either because The West Wing was such a success or because of his personal battles. Yet we don't hear the same amount of flak thrown at Gilmore Girls and other shows that are just as smart. I would rather look up something that I don't know rather than suffer through one more reality show, procedural or any program that caters to the lowest common denominator. I like my "trashy" shows, but I get a lot more out of people like Joss Whedon, Rob Thomas, the Palladinos and Aaron Sorkin than I ever will out of some of the shows that manage to become hits. If people only want television that they already know everything ...
read more
I thoroughly enjoyed tonight's confession-themed episode, as did my roommate Jason, who referred to the Lynette-Susan-Gaby-getting-drunk-on-the-porch scene as one of the all-time funniest and well-written scenes, and I agree. Just that scene alone had highlights galore, like Lynette confessing her innermost feelings about Tom: "I want him to have what he wants — if it's what I want. I'm a bitch with a capital C." Earlier, Gaby's line had us rewinding to watch it again: "I'm just gonna say it. Tequila makes me happy!" Then, after the neighbor couple walked by: "Yeah, we're drinking on the porch — you got a problem with that?" followed by: "Can I tell you guys something? I can only tell you guys." Susan: "Oh my god — here she goes again — what grade is he in?" And before that, Susan to Lynette: "Where were we?" Lynette: "You were trying to figure out how to kill Edie without doing time." Susan: "I wish Paul Young was still around. He’d know what to do." But th...
read more
I always know Im going to like an episode of any TV show when they include flashbacks to the childhood of one of the characters especially when we get to learn something new about that character That was the case tonight when we discovered that Sean himself had a facial deformity as a youth and had plastic surgery to correct it No wonder hes been freaking out about Conors situation and about his eventual corrective surgery As Julia told Sean That kid is why youre a plastic surgeon Glad they ended up going forward with the surgery and so far Conor seems to be OK Didnt the promos for tonight with Sean saying to Julia I have something to tell you make you think he was going to come clean about his affair with the tragically departed Monica But now Julia has something to hide from Sean her little kiss with Marlowe Interesting line that Marlowe muttered as he walked out Thats why I have to leave You could tell he was into Julia but I didnt think she re
read more
Question: I don't understand why Studio 60's ratings aren't better, considering how celebrity-obsessed our society is these days. Entire magazines are dedicated to describing in great detail what stars are wearing, dating, eating, etc. I really love TV, and I enjoy knowing about the behind-the-scenes workings of my favorite shows. It seems like there are a lot of people who feel the same way. So why can't a show about a show find an audience?
Answer: Gossip is popular, true, but Studio 60 takes the world of entertainment all a bit more seriously. Maybe too much so, as it addresses aspects of the culture wars and the corporate entertainment world with a growing sense of self-importance and at times (especially this week) with a self-righteousness that muddies what could be a very enjoyable workplace-relationship show. Aaron Sorkin never writes ordinary TV, which is great. And there's much about Studio 60 that still dazzles me. But Tyler's comments below may help shed more light on
...
read more
ABC's Brothers & Sisters has joined the charmed, and so far rather tiny, circle of new fall series rewarded with what is known as "the back nine," as in a full-series renewal taking the original order of 13 episodes to 22 (sometimes expanded further for true breakthrough shows). At the moment, only three other shows have this honor: ABC's delightful Ugly Betty and two speculative fantasies that defied the odds to capture an early following: NBC's intriguing Heroes and, to the surprise of many skeptics (including this one), CBS's dark-hued Jericho.Over the next few weeks, we'll find out which other newbies will get the full-season order and which will bite the dust in 13, if they even get that far. Here's my educated guess, by network.CBS The network with the most solid and consistent schedule was the first to cancel a show (Smith), and has only two other new series to decide upon.While Shark on Thursdays has been a bit of a disappointment, relative to its CSI lead-in by being up...
read more
Question: Even with all the hype, do you think Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip will survive? I ask because while Matthew Perry is pitch-perfect, proving my instincts right (he was the most talented and underutilized Friends cast member), and while the dialogue is a little bit of heaven, after the second episode, am I the only one seeing some serious cracks in the foundation? I'm having a very hard time believing any of these characters. D.L. Hughley is the only person who even remotely seems like he would be on a Saturday Night Live-style show. Everyone else lacks the spark of genius I would expect of comedians on a show on par with SNL. Amanda Peet as the president of the network, coming in with the résumé she supposedly has? Not buying it. Bradley Whitford, who was on fire in The West Wing, barely shows a spark in this show (maybe he needed a longer break before going back to series television). And would anyone really expect to see the second episode's supposed "cold open" on SNL or ...
read more
Yes, this year's Emmy nominations make about as much sense as Desperate Housewives' Betty Applegate mystery. Chris Meloni instead of Hugh Laurie? Allison Janney instead of Edie Falco? Stockard Channing instead of Lauren Graham? Alfre Woodard instead of... anyone? But a funny thing happened after I worked through my anger, frustration and general sense of hopelessness: I took another look at the list and discovered, much to my surprise, that members of the blue-ribbon panel weren't completely stoned when they made their selections. Lost amid all the head-scratchers are some truly worthy nominees. In other words, this year's race is salvageable — provided, of course, that the right people win. Who are these "right people" I speak of? They're listed below, followed by my predictions for who will take home the gold on Aug. 27. Feel free to crib the info for your office pool. Not to boast, but history has proven that I'm usually spot-on about this stuff.OUTSTANDING DRAMA SERIES Grey...
read more
Question: It seems like most of the outrage over the Emmys has focused on the absences of some important actors in the major categories, but I stumbled across a nomination hardly ever spoken of. What's your take on Ellen Burstyn's nomination for supporting actress in a TV film, for her work in Mrs. Harris. Apparently, she only has two lines, appears in the film only once, and is listed in the credits as "Ex-Lover No. 3." Now, as mad as the snubs of Hugh Laurie, James Gandolfini, Lauren Graham, Jason Lee, etc, make me, I can still see some dignity in these awards. But how can an Emmy be worth anything if showing up for 20 seconds gets you a nomination just because your name is familiar to voters? Seriously, will she even show up? Her entire performance could be shown as a clip at the show!
Answer: Even by the Emmys' low standards of credibility, this is laughable, preposterous and embarrassing. There's no question the reason she got a nomination for this heightened cameo is because
...
read more
Question: Are you at all surprised that John Spencer didn't receive a posthumous Emmy nomination for his work on The West Wing? I thought his death would earn him a nod at least in an honorary sense. But given the condition of the current system, I cannot say that I am completely surprised.
Answer: It is surprising, but really, with this year's nominations, where do you start and where do you end? Truthfully, and with all sincere respect to the terrific and much-lamented John Spencer, this was not Leo's greatest season on the show, and I think the nomination in that category for Alan Alda was more appropriate. A sentimental nomination for an actor taken from us too soon is without doubt the sort of thing you'd expect from a conservative group like the Emmy voters, so it is kind of jarring. But overall, this is one of the more interesting, eclectic categories this year, and just having Gregory Itzin (24's President Logan) in the running is very satisfying. (He's my pick over Alda,
read more
Question: I know you are really busy at the press tour (thanks for all the detailed Dispatches), but I was just wondering if you might want to comment on the TV Week Critics Poll. Do you agree or disagree with any specific shows in the top 25? Actually, I was really wondering if you might want to comment on the fact that CBS did not have a single show in the top 25. What does that say about the American public, and CBS for that matter, that America's No. 1 network (a title they often shove down our throats) does not have a single "top tier" show? Oh, and how great is Psych? I know it killed in the ratings, so is renewal just around the corner? My guess is yes.
Answer: I'm very fond of Psych, and I look forward to returning home in a week so I can catch up on the episodes beyond the pilot. Its renewal is a lock, I'm sure. As for the TV Week poll: I'm not in the least surprised that CBS isn't represented on that list. When we make a list like this (I'm just speaking for myself), we tend
...
read more
