Television Discussion Thread

[Rosebud]

AD's a show I never got into. :-/

Originally Posted by Mufasa

They way I got into the show and got a couple friends into it was to watch a couple of the best episodes first and then go back and start from the beginning.

Or just start with season 2.

[comahan]

Or just start at season 2. It doesnt have any sort of overarching plot from season 1 to 2, you can completely ignore season 1 and be fine.

[fenikz]

Originally Posted by comahan

Ugh, you cant say that something isnt consistent with a character when youre 4 episodes in and he's barely had any screen time.

Tess is such a ***** though :)

[comahan]

Originally Posted by fenikz

Tess is such a ***** though :)

Completely true

[Caddy]

Originally Posted by comahan

Ugh, you cant say that something isnt consistent with a character when youre 4 episodes in and he's barely had any screen time.

Sure you can.

[Mufasa]

Originally Posted by comahan

Or just start at season 2. It's a comedy with no real multi-season plot, you can completely ignore season 1 and be fine.

That works too. I just like to watch shows in order from beginning to end whenever possible.

[Xiomera]

Originally Posted by comahan

I guess im the only one who REALLY doesnt care about them covering real stories. It makes no difference to me at all which stories they cover, if theyre real or fake, etc. I just want to see how the characters react to them and how the news story is molded into an episode.

You don't mind that Sorkin beats the viewer across the face to point out the error of the real media's ways by constantly showing us how everything should have been handled? That's pretty damn distracting from the on-screen drama.

It's like the characters aren't used as characters, but rather as a bunch of variables he has changed from the original, real-life version of news coverage to teach us all a valuable lesson. Only problem is, in many of these cases, Sorkin's idealistic alternate news report wouldn't have been possible. Hindsight changes everything and watching a version of events as portrayed by a news broadcast where everything plays out like a final draft of history, rather than the in-progress, uncertain and ever-changing chaos that it actually is, doesn't make for as satisfying of a show as Sorkin seems to think. That's not realistically the way the industry works.

It's true that all of us pretty much agree with the bulk of Sorkin's commentary about the media and Will's desire to "civilize" people. But the way he's chosen to convey that message is just so, so obnoxious, heavy-handed and overt. It's arrogant to sit back and cherry-pick from real-life instances of bad media and then proceed to give viewers a lecture about why it's bad. Subtlety is a hallmark of good drama in most cases. Sorkin has none whatsoever.

[Todd Bertuzzi]

I did like the last two episodes of The Newsroom more than the first two so I'll stick it out for the season. I can definitely see where the criticism stems from though. One thing that bugged me was that they all came in to the office on a Saturday morning just so Dev Patel could give them his presentation on Big Foot? Then while they're there a big story just happens to break. It just seemed a little sloppy but maybe I'm nitpicking.

[comahan]

Nope, dont mind. I just enjoy the show :)

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by descendency

Really?

I thought Newsroom was one of the best shows on TV, but last night's episode was kind of disappointing.

I like it for the most part but yea Ive noticed a few times where she's making some really weird facial expressions. She looks like a freakin' psycho especially in that scene where she has a panic attack, and the one where her and Jim leave the Bigfoot meeting and argue.

Wish I had a screen cap of it actually. Seems like meme material.

[SuperMcGee]

I know exactly what you mean. She's cute but her freak out faces are... freaky. You see it a lot in this role.

[Xiomera]

Can someone who enjoys the show please tell me how they reacted to the end of Episode Four of The Newsroom.

I'm really confused why the audience is expected to view News Night's refusal to prematurely report Gifford's death as triumphant or inspiring. Clearly that's what Sorkin was going for with the big musical build up with the Coldplay song and Don's big, out-of-character line about doctors pronouncing people dead, not newsmen.

Is it supposed to be a feel-good moment with an emotional payoff for viewers? Because that's pretty twisted given that the subject of the news they're reporting remains that a half dozen people, including a girl that I believe was 9 years old, died at the hand of a lunatic. This is a big reason why writing episodes around actual U.S. news from the past is so troublesome.

The whole circumstance just seem tone-deaf to me. It's a really bad choice of real-life news events to use to manufacture a moment where the characters can pat themselves on the back for a job well done. And having that network executive guy shouting at them to pronounce her dead was just ridiculous and over-the-top.

Also, the whole self-satisfaction the characters take in what they'd just done (or rather, did not do) doesn't make sense. They wouldn't in-the-moment know the significance of what had just occurred. Bah, the whole scene is just bad.

[Brodeur]

TEARS STREAM......DOWN YOUR FACEEEEEEEEEEE. When you lose somethin you cannot re-place.

[Xiomera]

Also, why did Episode 3 feature Will going on dates with many, many women, but Episode 4 completely changes gears and says Will doesn't know how to date or even so much as approach a woman?

They completely reversed fields on Will's characterization in back-to-back episodes.

[descendency]

Originally Posted by Xiomera

You don't mind that Sorkin beats the viewer across the face to point out the error of the real media's ways by constantly showing us how everything should have been handled? That's pretty damn distracting from the on-screen drama.

I personally thought that was a subtle way to mock the erection that news people seem to get from the fact that they are "fact givers" to the average public.

I'm not going to name any names, but Will McAvoy reminds me of a major news anchor (or two) in a whole lot of ways.

Am I the only one that sees this?

[Xiomera]

Originally Posted by descendency

I personally thought that was a subtle way to mock the erection that news people seem to get from the fact that they are "fact givers" to the average public.

I'm not going to name any names, but Will McAvoy reminds me of a major news anchor (or two) in a whole lot of ways.

Am I the only one that sees this?

Keith Olberman? Yeah, but Sorkin denies vehemently that he's based on him or any one person. And there is absolutely NOTHING subtle about the way Sorkin has approached mocking and criticizing the media.

[draftguru151]

I'm so happy that I don't suck and can actually enjoy Newsroom cause that was ******* awesome.

[thefalconer]

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Can someone who enjoys the show please tell me how they reacted to the end of Episode Four of The Newsroom.

I'm really confused why the audience is expected to view News Night's refusal to prematurely report Gifford's death as triumphant or inspiring. Clearly that's what Sorkin was going for with the big musical build up with the Coldplay song and Don's big, out-of-character line about doctors pronouncing people dead, not newsmen.

Is it supposed to be a feel-good moment with an emotional payoff for viewers? Because that's pretty twisted given that the subject of the news they're reporting remains that a half dozen people, including a girl that I believe was 9 years old, died at the hand of a lunatic. This is a big reason why writing episodes around actual U.S. news from the past is so troublesome.

The whole circumstance just seem tone-deaf to me. It's a really bad choice of real-life news events to use to manufacture a moment where the characters can pat themselves on the back for a job well done. And having that network executive guy shouting at them to pronounce her dead was just ridiculous and over-the-top.

Also, the whole self-satisfaction the characters take in what they'd just done (or rather, did not do) doesn't make sense. They wouldn't in-the-moment know the significance of what had just occurred. Bah, the whole scene is just bad.

i enjoy the show but agree with your post. sorkin was hammering home the fact that journalism today values breaking stories over reporting quality news. i thought it was pretty insensitive to the actual tragedy too.

there's nothing good on the tele for me right now except BB. the newsroom keeps me entertained. i tried political animals but i couldn't get halfway through it.

[Brodeur]

Originally Posted by thefalconer

i enjoy the show but agree with your post. sorkin was hammering home the fact that journalism today values breaking stories over reporting quality news. i thought it was pretty insensitive to the actual tragedy too.

there's nothing good on the tele for me right now except BB. the newsroom keeps me entertained. i tried political animals but i couldn't get halfway through it.

Someone needs to embrace Louie.

[Xiomera]

Originally Posted by draftguru151

I'm so happy that I don't suck and can actually enjoy Newsroom cause that was ******* awesome.

What specifically was awesome? I still don't really see any people speaking up in favor of the show.

It's perfectly OK that you like it, but everyone who does seems to like it in an "It's entertaining if you don't think about it intellectually" sort of way.

[Prowler]

I watch the Newsroom because its higher quality TV than other shows. I watch it on demand the next day. I'm pretty much caught up on every other decent show out there, so this show fills a gap in my tv schedule. The show reminds me of The Office, but only if it were written by the people who did Frasier. I don't really watch it for humor or indepth analysis. It has a higher ceiling than most shows and it is easy enough to become invested and knowledgeable about each character's motivations.

I would say that its a slick time-killer that provides a different enough of a feeling to distinguish it from the other shows that I could be watching. The ease of HBO on demand/Go also helps a ton.

[Xiomera]

When you say "higher quality," are you talking about the art direction, cinematography, production value and maybe the acting? Because I'll obviously agree with you there. There's nothing to really complain about in that regard. The show looks like a high quality show.

But then again, so did AMC's The Killing, and I think most people were compelled to stick with that show longer than The Newsroom before the whole thing unraveled.

[Brothgar]

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Can someone who enjoys the show please tell me how they reacted to the end of Episode Four of The Newsroom.

I'm really confused why the audience is expected to view News Night's refusal to prematurely report Gifford's death as triumphant or inspiring. Clearly that's what Sorkin was going for with the big musical build up with the Coldplay song and Don's big, out-of-character line about doctors pronouncing people dead, not newsmen.

Is it supposed to be a feel-good moment with an emotional payoff for viewers? Because that's pretty twisted given that the subject of the news they're reporting remains that a half dozen people, including a girl that I believe was 9 years old, died at the hand of a lunatic. This is a big reason why writing episodes around actual U.S. news from the past is so troublesome.

The whole circumstance just seem tone-deaf to me. It's a really bad choice of real-life news events to use to manufacture a moment where the characters can pat themselves on the back for a job well done. And having that network executive guy shouting at them to pronounce her dead was just ridiculous and over-the-top.

Also, the whole self-satisfaction the characters take in what they'd just done (or rather, did not do) doesn't make sense. They wouldn't in-the-moment know the significance of what had just occurred. Bah, the whole scene is just bad.

I understand the complaint but I like to see that scene in the context of the characters. Was the network exec over the top sure, but, I think that is the theme of the whole show. That the main characters are rebelling against what is perceived as a horribly corrupt system. I have no issue though with some of his comments on the 24 hour news cycle and its bias toward sensationalism and a rush to get the information out as fast as they can possibly get it out there.

[vidae]

Do not feed the troll guys.

[Prowler]

Originally Posted by Xiomera

When you say "higher quality," are you talking about the art direction, cinematography, production value and maybe the acting? Because I'll obviously agree with you there. There's nothing to really complain about in that regard. The show looks like a high quality show.

Pretty much, its all production quality. It also fulfills my need for a tv show that is similar to The Office, but not be The Office. I loved that show, but it died for me a long time ago. The Newsroom is like having a new girlfriend and going over the introductory stage again.

Again, accessibility is everything for me with this show. The fact that I don't have to DVR anything, and can just access every episode on demand is huge.