I don't think actually showing the "Crazy Christians" scketch would have been a good idea.
I'm sure we'll see it next week. They didn't make some weird committment to have each episode be about exactly one episode of the show within a show, did they?
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2006
hopefully I will download it tommorow. I'm behind on my TV because I can't remember when shit is on. I tried making a schedule but I think some of the information on it is wrong.
I don't think actually showing the "Crazy Christians" scketch would have been a good idea. The amount of hype they gave it between the pilot and this week's show was just too much, it could never live up to it if we actually SAW it.
Sorkin shows don't show everything. Their focus is on the behind the scenes aspect. So it's reasonable to not expect to see the focus of a lot of the hype in the character's lives. The sketch was the focus of the show (studio 60 -nbs) and so the show (studio 60 - nbc) wasn't going to show it.
I like that sentence.
It's Sorkin. So don't expect to see the things the show (studio 60 - nbs) is about but rather the things the show (studio 60 -nbc) is about.
The second episode i think it was which was their shows first episode when they did the cold opening i was telling my grandmother how good the show was since she liked west wing i said she would like this one and then that song came on and i was like oh my god they just sang about a reach around and i laughed beside my grandmother.
I don't think actually showing the "Crazy Christians" scketch would have been a good idea. The amount of hype they gave it between the pilot and this week's show was just too much, it could never live up to it if we actually SAW it.
Sorkin shows don't show everything. Their focus is on the behind the scenes aspect. So it's reasonable to not expect to see the focus of a lot of the hype in the character's lives. The sketch was the focus of the show (studio 60 -nbs) and so the show (studio 60 - nbc) wasn't going to show it.
I like that sentence.
It's Sorkin. So don't expect to see the things the show (studio 60 - nbs) is about but rather the things the show (studio 60 -nbc) is about.
I like doing that.
Studio 60 (NBC) isn't about Studio 60 (NBS) at all. Just like Sports Night (ABC?) wasn't about Sports Night (CSC). It's about the people that happen to work there.
Studio 60 (NBS) is the setting; the characters are what Sorkin is writing and what he's trying to get you to care about.
I don't think actually showing the "Crazy Christians" scketch would have been a good idea. The amount of hype they gave it between the pilot and this week's show was just too much, it could never live up to it if we actually SAW it.
Sorkin shows don't show everything. Their focus is on the behind the scenes aspect. So it's reasonable to not expect to see the focus of a lot of the hype in the character's lives. The sketch was the focus of the show (studio 60 -nbs) and so the show (studio 60 - nbc) wasn't going to show it.
I like that sentence.
It's Sorkin. So don't expect to see the things the show (studio 60 - nbs) is about but rather the things the show (studio 60 -nbc) is about.
I like doing that.
Studio 60 (NBC) isn't about Studio 60 (NBS) at all. Just like Sports Night (ABC?) wasn't about Sports Night (CSC). It's about the people that happen to work there.
Studio 60 (NBS) is the setting; the characters are what Sorkin is writing and what he's trying to get you to care about.
Right. But the point still stands that Sorkin isn't necessarily going to show the "big number" or whatever in an episode if it doesn't impact the character or the plot.
[spoiler:e424970b5a]With the kid about the United Nation show, will that make two shows this Show will focus on?[/spoiler:e424970b5a]
I hope not.
Also, I've only watched Sorkin shows after I could watch the entire first season on DVD. But, does it seem to anyone else like Stuido 60 is moving slowly? We're 4...I think 4...4 episodes in and the only substantial continuing plot points are:
Relationship between blonde actress and writer
President's ex husband publishing a book
Reporter doing story on the cast
And...it just doesn't seem Sorkin yet. It seems to be good but without a substance at the center holding it all together.
Sports Night had the continuing battle against the network. West Wing had..hell...MS, re-election, zoey/charlie, etc.
Stuido 60 doesn't have that nugget of Sorkin at the center that compells each episode.
Yeah, but how many episodes did it take before West Wing introduced the MS problem? Before that it was just a bunch of little battles taking place, that would MAYBE span 1-2 eps at most. He waited until 3/4 of the way through the season for a story arc that would tie together the last 1/4 of that season, and the first few episodes of the next season.
And I can't believe I actually MISSED it last night! I guess I know what I'm doing for lunch today.
[spoiler:a260d66608]With the kid about the United Nation show, will that make two shows this Show will focus on?[/spoiler:a260d66608]
I hope not.
Also, I've only watched Sorkin shows after I could watch the entire first season on DVD. But, does it seem to anyone else like Stuido 60 is moving slowly? We're 4...I think 4...4 episodes in and the only substantial continuing plot points are:
Relationship between blonde actress and writer
President's ex husband publishing a book
Reporter doing story on the cast
And...it just doesn't seem Sorkin yet. It seems to be good but without a substance at the center holding it all together.
Sports Night had the continuing battle against the network. West Wing had..hell...MS, re-election, zoey/charlie, etc.
Stuido 60 doesn't have that nugget of Sorkin at the center that compells each episode.
Or maybe it's just me.
Well, the Vanity Fair story has lasted 2 episodes already, and she'll be back in 2 weeks. Jordan's husband writing a book could last longer, and I think that we've already got conflict:[spoiler:a260d66608]Jordan vs. the NBS chairman. I particularly liked their blowout this episode over the reality television show. I could see this lasting through the entire show because she's looking to class up the network and he's looking for the quick buck every time.[/spoiler:a260d66608]
There's also the ongoing Matt/Harriet relationshiop, which you mentioned, but I think that's something very Sorkin. Sports Night had Casey and Dana, and it worked very well.
i absolutely LOVE studio 60. it has quickly become one of my favorite shows on television. i missed it last night cause my awesome VCR recorded black. but it is tivo'd at the parent's house.
i work in live television and so i'm especially interested in this show just because the whole 'live' aspect is extremely fascinating to me. not only that, but i LOVE the actors in this show. i don't really like amanda peet, but luckily i don't have to see her too much.
Those of you that missed it: if you happen to have an Intel-based processor you can watch last night's episode at NBC.com with very little commercial interruption. I think I may quit taping it and just watch on my Tuesday lunch break from now on.
Oh man, first episode was stellar, but the show is getting progressively worse with each successive episode.
And the newest bits of the show within the show were worse than SNL.
I dont think it will last a full season.
Oh man, first episode was stellar, but the show is getting progressively worse with each successive episode.
And the newest bits of the show within the show were worse than SNL.
I dont think it will last a full season.
It's no West Wing.
But we have to give them at least half a season...
[Sports Night had the continuing battle against the network. West Wing had..hell...MS, re-election, zoey/charlie, etc.
Yeah, West Wing had all that...over several seasons, you twit. Pretty much the only thing carrying through the first 4 eps of West Wing was "Sam's fucking a call-girl" and even that didn't develop much until later in the season.
Studio 60 hasn't blown several seasons worth of plotlines in its first four episodes. Jesus christ, what a brilliant observation, _J_.
[Sports Night had the continuing battle against the network. West Wing had..hell...MS, re-election, zoey/charlie, etc.
Yeah, West Wing had all that...over several seasons, you twit. Pretty much the only thing carrying through the first 4 eps of West Wing was "Sam's fucking a call-girl" and even that didn't develop much until later in the season.
Studio 60 hasn't blown several seasons worth of plotlines in its first four episodes. Jesus christ, what a brilliant observation, _J_.
There's nothing drawing the entire cast together yet, there's no point of ensemble.
There's nothing drawing the entire cast together yet, there's no point of ensemble.
While I agree to an extent, I think the relationships between the characters, the one-on-one time, works very well. Matt and Danny, Danny and Jordan, Jordan and Jack, Matt and Harriet, they're all great little microcosms that are part of a bigger picture. There's a hierarchy in the show-within-the-show that has to be defined by the separation of people. Jack won't come down and complain to Harriet about a sketch, he's going to take it to Jordan.
I would definitely like to see more conversations involving three or more people. That scene at the table at the awards banquet in the pilot was just yummy.
Fucking godfucking damn shit cock, I would have sex with Sting just because of him writing that song.
Interestingly, I thought his accent came through a lot more than it normally does when he sings. Maybe something about the atmosphere created by a lute that makes him work less to suppress it?
NBC will try to give its struggling drama "Friday Night Lights" an extra boost later this month by airing after the network's most successful new show.
On Monday, Oct. 30, NBC will air an original "Lights" episode at 10 p.m. ET, following "Heroes"; the episode will then repeat in the show's normal 8 p.m. Tuesday spot on Oct. 31. "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip," which usually airs at 10 p.m. Mondays (and was scheduled for a repeat that night), will get a week off.
Elki on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2006
something they actually discussed on the show was holding on to new viewers... I read today that their first week was something like 13.6 million viewers and it's dropped to 7 million now.
The problem is it's not going anywhere. It's brilliantly acted, and entertaining, but nothing really attention-grabbing is happening.
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
MikeMan on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2006
I actually think it can, for me and I assume some other viewers, but obviously not for enough people.
It's not like the shows that are huge right now. Most of what I've heard is worth watching this season (and what I have continued to watch from last season) are dramas that you need to keep watching to follow a story and characters. Generally speaking i think that's a good thing, I prefer a show that requires an investment from me to know who I'm dealing with and what they are dealing with, but for a show like this it hurts because I don't think it's designed to be a show like that, and this year most of all I think it's going to be hurt ratings-wise because of it.
The problem is it's not going anywhere. It's brilliantly acted, and entertaining, but nothing really attention-grabbing is happening.
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
It's not going anywhere yet. It's only been on for, what, four weeks? Give it some time to get the ball rolling.
The problem is it's not going anywhere. It's brilliantly acted, and entertaining, but nothing really attention-grabbing is happening.
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
It's not going anywhere yet. It's only been on for, what, four weeks? Give it some time to get the ball rolling.
And Matt's ex's name is Harriet.
Hi, my name's Kidnapped and I've been highly praised as a new critcal smash for NBC. I'm going to really up the old quality on NBC and they're very supportive. You can catch me at Wednesday at...oh wait, you can't.
The problem is it's not going anywhere. It's brilliantly acted, and entertaining, but nothing really attention-grabbing is happening.
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
It's not going anywhere yet. It's only been on for, what, four weeks? Give it some time to get the ball rolling.
And Matt's ex's name is Harriet.
I'm not condemning them. And thanks for the reminder; I had forgotten.
The whole point is yes, we both agree it isn't going anywhere. This is a problem; if only because it won't get the ratings it needs to even continue any length of time.
I'm fine with waiting. Is the viewership? Probably not.
The problem is it's not going anywhere. It's brilliantly acted, and entertaining, but nothing really attention-grabbing is happening.
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
It's not going anywhere yet. It's only been on for, what, four weeks? Give it some time to get the ball rolling.
And Matt's ex's name is Harriet.
Hi, my name's Kidnapped and I've been highly praised as a new critcal smash for NBC. I'm going to really up the old quality on NBC and they're very supportive. You can catch me at Wednesday at...oh wait, you can't.
I'd think they're willing to give Sorkin a chance. Look at how well The West Wing turned out for them.
Well wikipedia has a good rundown on the ratings. They are holding steady at 9% which is just simply not enough.
West Wing went, what, five years averaging a 6.7 share, lower than Studio 60's current 8.
The networks don't axe everything that isn't in the top 10; they'll keep it around as long as, like the West Wing, they feel it garners the network as a whole significant critical attention and attracts a more affluent viewer than average, as the West Wing did.
Posts
I'm sure we'll see it next week. They didn't make some weird committment to have each episode be about exactly one episode of the show within a show, did they?
i just watched it, and I was thinking "this would never happen but it's fucking great".
[spoiler:a6a409d03c]That quiz show sketch was pedantically awful[/spoiler:a6a409d03c]
[spoiler:887cabdcde]Agreed. I think it was supposed to be a little unfunny to make us sympathetic with Harriet but it was just horrible.
The episode had a much better second half than first.[/spoiler:887cabdcde]
Sorkin shows don't show everything. Their focus is on the behind the scenes aspect. So it's reasonable to not expect to see the focus of a lot of the hype in the character's lives. The sketch was the focus of the show (studio 60 -nbs) and so the show (studio 60 - nbc) wasn't going to show it.
I like that sentence.
It's Sorkin. So don't expect to see the things the show (studio 60 - nbs) is about but rather the things the show (studio 60 -nbc) is about.
I like doing that.
Studio 60 (NBC) isn't about Studio 60 (NBS) at all. Just like Sports Night (ABC?) wasn't about Sports Night (CSC). It's about the people that happen to work there.
Studio 60 (NBS) is the setting; the characters are what Sorkin is writing and what he's trying to get you to care about.
Right. But the point still stands that Sorkin isn't necessarily going to show the "big number" or whatever in an episode if it doesn't impact the character or the plot.
Also, yeah, Sports Night was on ABC.
[spoiler:05586226ef]With the kid about the United Nation show, will that make two shows this Show will focus on?[/spoiler:05586226ef]
I'm here to inspect the chicken nuggets.
Killamajig and Scullykel999 on MTGO
I hope not.
Also, I've only watched Sorkin shows after I could watch the entire first season on DVD. But, does it seem to anyone else like Stuido 60 is moving slowly? We're 4...I think 4...4 episodes in and the only substantial continuing plot points are:
Relationship between blonde actress and writer
President's ex husband publishing a book
Reporter doing story on the cast
And...it just doesn't seem Sorkin yet. It seems to be good but without a substance at the center holding it all together.
Sports Night had the continuing battle against the network. West Wing had..hell...MS, re-election, zoey/charlie, etc.
Stuido 60 doesn't have that nugget of Sorkin at the center that compells each episode.
Or maybe it's just me.
And I can't believe I actually MISSED it last night! I guess I know what I'm doing for lunch today.
Well, the Vanity Fair story has lasted 2 episodes already, and she'll be back in 2 weeks. Jordan's husband writing a book could last longer, and I think that we've already got conflict:[spoiler:a260d66608]Jordan vs. the NBS chairman. I particularly liked their blowout this episode over the reality television show. I could see this lasting through the entire show because she's looking to class up the network and he's looking for the quick buck every time.[/spoiler:a260d66608]
There's also the ongoing Matt/Harriet relationshiop, which you mentioned, but I think that's something very Sorkin. Sports Night had Casey and Dana, and it worked very well.
i work in live television and so i'm especially interested in this show just because the whole 'live' aspect is extremely fascinating to me. not only that, but i LOVE the actors in this show. i don't really like amanda peet, but luckily i don't have to see her too much.
such a good show.
And the newest bits of the show within the show were worse than SNL.
I dont think it will last a full season.
It's no West Wing.
But we have to give them at least half a season...
Well, we don't "have to", but it would be nice.
Studio 60 hasn't blown several seasons worth of plotlines in its first four episodes. Jesus christ, what a brilliant observation, _J_.
There's nothing drawing the entire cast together yet, there's no point of ensemble.
While I agree to an extent, I think the relationships between the characters, the one-on-one time, works very well. Matt and Danny, Danny and Jordan, Jordan and Jack, Matt and Harriet, they're all great little microcosms that are part of a bigger picture. There's a hierarchy in the show-within-the-show that has to be defined by the separation of people. Jack won't come down and complain to Harriet about a sketch, he's going to take it to Jordan.
I would definitely like to see more conversations involving three or more people. That scene at the table at the awards banquet in the pilot was just yummy.
oh, and i love your sig pic.
Fucking godfucking damn shit cock, I would have sex with Sting just because of him writing that song.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/54117
Did I read that in this thread?
When Matt and his ex (I can't even remember her name :?) had that moment at the end of this week's episode, I thought it touching, but I honestly am having a hard time caring about any of the characters. Something needs to happen... it can't just be a comfortable rhythm with allusions to political and religious controversy in every episode.
It's not like the shows that are huge right now. Most of what I've heard is worth watching this season (and what I have continued to watch from last season) are dramas that you need to keep watching to follow a story and characters. Generally speaking i think that's a good thing, I prefer a show that requires an investment from me to know who I'm dealing with and what they are dealing with, but for a show like this it hurts because I don't think it's designed to be a show like that, and this year most of all I think it's going to be hurt ratings-wise because of it.
It's not going anywhere yet. It's only been on for, what, four weeks? Give it some time to get the ball rolling.
And Matt's ex's name is Harriet.
Hi, my name's Kidnapped and I've been highly praised as a new critcal smash for NBC. I'm going to really up the old quality on NBC and they're very supportive. You can catch me at Wednesday at...oh wait, you can't.
I'm not condemning them. And thanks for the reminder; I had forgotten.
The whole point is yes, we both agree it isn't going anywhere. This is a problem; if only because it won't get the ratings it needs to even continue any length of time.
I'm fine with waiting. Is the viewership? Probably not.
I'd think they're willing to give Sorkin a chance. Look at how well The West Wing turned out for them.
The networks don't axe everything that isn't in the top 10; they'll keep it around as long as, like the West Wing, they feel it garners the network as a whole significant critical attention and attracts a more affluent viewer than average, as the West Wing did.