The Newsroom > The Newsroom Review: Man on a Mission > Comments Page 2
Why do you keep reviewing shows you dont like? Sure Sorkin has the benefit of hindsight. It's called (recent) historical fiction. Are you suggesting Hilary Mantel shouldn't have written "Wolf HAll" because she (and us) knows how it's all going to end. What about "McHales Navy" or "Gone With The Wind"? "Apollo13". Or any number of books/movies/tvseries set during WW2. Are you starting to get it? And as far as Will's misguided but heart felt "mission to civilize" goes - are you completely unable to detect irony at all? What about your pretentious mission to civilise Sorkin by pointing out how misogynistic a writer he is?
I really love this show. It is different enough from everything else on tv and it gives me a warm, inner glow about the characters if I suspend disbelief. It's a bit of escapism that we live in a better world than we deserve to. What other show does that remind me of? The West Wing
I just re-read it, and i'm serious it is awful. Why have someone review a show they clearly have no desire to even watch let alone write about? Wasn't as bad when the old south park writer lost his flare for SP but this is exponentially worse. Please, new reviewer for this show.
I'm actually appalled at this review. I generally come here to read up and get a broader look into the universe from a different persepective than my own. Instead i get treated to someone who clearly dislikes the show rambling on about why they have a vendetta against it.
Misogyny is not a constant theme in this show and the fact that you infer that speaks volumes about your character. I implore the site to assign someone else to this show for reviewing. Reading this was awful.
This show, as with most in production today, is schlock. Pulp fiction nonsense. Fun to watch. However, most distressing to me (along with the trite office politics, stereotypical execs and managers, sexist roles) is the way Sorkin tries to educate his audience by showing real news stories from his off-the-dial leftist views. Sunday nite ended with the poignant remembrance of Giffords shooting. The lies of the media? Limbaugh, Beck, Palin? Who lied about the politics of the shooter? If I remember, he was first reported to be a right-wing, gun-toting, Limbaugh/Beck/Palin robot when in fact he was a non religious, drug addicted, independent with a screw loose. Where did Sorkin include this in this episode? Biased crap. He is trying to influence this election season by constantly blasting the right without the expressing the truth from the right. And for that, I will stop watching and tell others to do the same.
At the end of Sunday's show my wife turned to me and said that it just keeps getting better. I agree.
Hey Matt - here's an idea. Since you do not like it, stop watching the show.
personal lives. They were also memorable and completely entertaining. And the guys that Sorkin writes haven't exactly gotten a free pass...Josh Lyman and Sam Seaborn were kinda hopeless in their personal lives also. Kinda like Jim from The Newsroom. If all of these characters were perfect there would be no reason to watch...who wants to see perfect people who are the best at what they do? The story comes from the personality quirks. Why can't you just accept this show for what it is? You said yourself that even Aaron Sorkin says that this show is an idealized version of how to do a news broadcast. So why do you keep expect it to be something that it is not? Why can't you just enjoy it for what it is?
As a woman, I was not and am not insulted by the portrayal of women on this show. I am a gainfully employed woman with a master's degree who is very good at my job and also watches Real Housewives, sometimes has trouble creating a simple spreadsheet (not something I use for my job on a daily basis) and gets irrationally jealous of women who date my ex. Women are complex and sometimes silly. And yes, there are some of us out there who sleep with men just because they're rich and famous (um...ever heard of sports groupies?). I can't stand these women and they give all of us a bad name, but I'm not going to deny that they exist either. And I think that Aaron Sorkin writes women better than many of the writer's out there. Abby Bartlett, Donna Moss, Ainsley Hayes, Dana Whitaker, and Natalie Hurley were some of the best written characters on television. And then there is my all time favorite...CJ Cregg. These women were were the best at what they did and kind of goofy in their person
Unfortunately, though I am a huge fan of Aaron Sorkin's writing style, I regret that he is using his talent in a grossly obvious attempt to breathe life into the dying medium of Cable News. I assume that's why the show was written, as sort of a swan song of the industry, a nostalgia piece. Sorkin's liberal monday morning quarterbacking ideas of what the media should have done to avoid becoming discredited and obsolete. Unfortunately the second episode's chest thumping "We are the Media Elite!" Sounds a little like the desperate cry of a mortally wounded Nazi than something remotely palatable or attractive to viewers. "Americans are stupid". I guess it's up to Sorkin and HBO to educate them with a Cable Drama about news. After that you can watch Vampires and werewolves and fairies frolic around in the Swamp. Pretentious, insulting to real journalists and tries way too hard. The show's McAvoy smacks a little too sweetly of the recently dethroned Keith Olberman. I'm surprised they didn't
Misogynistic? You've got to be kidding. Every single thing on the show has happened in my life more often than I care to remember. Are you aware of what women today are watching in hordes? It's shocking. Sorkin is sparing no sides -- men and women, left and right -- everyone is under the gun, and it's incredible riot of swashbuckling writing.
Newsroom is definitely low tier stuff, especially for HBO. I guess if it was devoid of profanity, it could mingle with a lot of the junk on network, but that isn't singing any praises.
Anyway, this episode finally put me over the edge (or was it the premiere of Breaking Bad?) - no reason to continue watching. Nothing feels real, it isn't as ”snappy” as Sorkin desciples tout, it is irritating (a bit blunt... Goes back to the lack of reality), and the hindsight approach, while perfectly reasonable on paper, is so lazy and pretentious in execution.
Also, I don't give a damn what Sorkin has done in the past, what he is doing or saying here, the show is just so subpar. Pretty amusing, and pathetic that so many discussions (positive or otherwise) practically mention Sorkin more than the actual characters. Just goes to show that the emigma behind the show is the only reason why it got a jump out of the gates in terms of ratings, and probably why it won't have a very
As far the Gabby Gifford story: the characters had tears? *I* had tears.
This is real. This is life. And no amount of pompous politically correct grandstanding penned by a Pollyanna critic will make it otherwise.
Brandon: absolutely right! This is an amazing and brilliant show. I have to think that the writer of this review doesn't get that real life is often like this. The reactions were real, not contrived. The situations weren't a misogynist fantasy. People - men and women both - often act a little crazy sometimes. It happens. I have friggen' seen it.
Like the time we had a major blackout on the east coast. People had to react to an unusual situation, and their behaviours changed accordingly. Some people did some noble things. Some become weird and wild. I know of one guy who went home to his guns, determined to set up camp and defend his stuff.
Others performed acts of bravery.
And people - all the time - find weird moments of joy in the midst of trouble.
None of the scenes in this episode struck me as unreal or unlikely. People aren't as neatly defined perhaps as Richenthal would like them to be. Women sleep with celebrities *because* of their celebrity.
I couldn't disagree with you more! This episode was incredible and the best one yet. And I personally love that this nation's events are utilized and not some pointless fiction. I love and have always loved Aaron Sorkin's work.
And as a woman I was not at all offended by the stereotypes used. They were there to use because those women exist. Doesn't mean Aaron Sorkin was insulting all women. I found those women stupid and that's what made the storylines funny. Lighten up buddy! Sit back and enjoy the show....it's entertainment!!!!
This is one of the best shows on TV, period.
You guys at TV Fanatic definitely need a non bias person reviewing this show because this is one of the most refreshing shows on TV right now.
Really proud of the comments section for not being manipulating into disliking this show by the reviewers. Kudos. This show show is educational and entertaining. Exactly what Americans need.
This review has so many stupid points I'm baffled.
I mean consistently every week you've been trashing the show regardless of the great popular support it's been receiving and even regardless of most of what readers here think and comment. I'm not saying the reviewer should change his mind, probably a less biased and more competent reviewer would make the cut.
Now that I got that off my chest I just wanted to point out two things that particularly bothered:
- I fail to see how this show is in anyway classifiable as mysoginistic. It's one of those post-feminist bullshit claims that keep on being used whenever a woman comes out as a bitch in a show. Well guess what... some women actually are bitches! And some women actually are stupid. Etc. etc. Could you please tell me how male characters such as Don or Leona's son were painted up to now? Why does it always have to be mysoginistic when you either don't get it or don't like it?
- Out of EVERYTHING in the review (i'm not sure i
Amen to the annoying depiction of women, especially the portrayals of Maggie and Mac. Really, would anyone as immature, jealous, highly-strung and inept as Maggie have a job in a high-stress work environment? And "Big Foot"???? Please. A little more drama, a lot less soap opera please.
The amusing bit is that while the show's fictional Newsroom might champion a liberal-ish spin, the show revels in a nostalgic traditionalism that defines some of the most head-smacking elements of conservative ideology.
If you can't see the sexism and over-the-top paternalism in this show, you aren't watching with much awareness.
For those that didn't like the Gifford shooting story and the celebration of proper coverage in the story, name an event that is traffic. The Sorkin world is not just good entertainment but it is a world we can stride for. The West Wing was about an ideal government and plays tribute to the patriotic presidencies like FDR, JFK, Carter, Clinton and Obama. And it was compared the non patriotic such as many republicans. Not all republicans, but liberty was what this country was founded on so you can't be anti liberal and patriotic at the same time. The Sorkin world is about what they said the first episode of striving to do better.
The reviewer must have watched a different show. I did not see any stereotypical behavior offensive to women. What I watched was intelligent writing, brilliant acting and character development that has been missing from TV for about 10 years now. Put aside your liberal agenda for a moment and stop being a feable attempt at an ombudsman for television news in general. I worked in it, I live it vicariously through my spouse who runs a news room. The elements of truth are there, the characters do live through these people. If you focus on gross stereotypes portrayed by one group, you're missing the point. All the characters have some sort of truth to these stereotypes in their nuances, or else they would not be characterized such as 'stereotypes.' Yosemite? The drama is a bit overdone as most news rooms are banal with little sense of screaming fits or idle threats and drink throwing, although that did prove fodder for entertainment. I suggest the reviewer get his liberal head out of the s
I see this guys point. I mean it is probably very rare a tragic major event hits the newsroom and is presented live. Sorkin should have picked a major event where there wasn't any tragedy. I mean for them to celebrate having integrity when they should be mourning because it's so rare that tragedy comes across a news desk. Oh wait, this is the real world where anchors report on death and tradegy all the time and if they waited for a non tragic time to celebrate doing there jobs well they would never get a chance to. As for the "mysoginistic" aspects of the show, that wasn't aimed at woman in general, it is aimed at popular culture today where bringing a person down is entertainment. He is talking about illiterate TV shows like Bravo's Evil Housewives various series. I know both males and females that like that crap. It is about our entertainment today bring out and celebrating the worst part of ourselves. Not about woman being bad. Those that didn't like him talking about Giff
Geez! Give Sorkin a break. Say what you will, I don't see a better show on tv presently. Episode 4 was amazing. Most of it, at least. Iff I had to fault it, I'd say it lacked the intensity in dialogue that I've come to expect from the show given the content of it's first three episodes.
All you pointing out the flaws in the female characters, why not mention the conspicuous flaws in his male characters as well? Will is a womanizer who hasn't gotten over his break up with Mac. He has little or no social skills (at least, when approaching women). He sleeps with "easy" women whom are mostly attracted to his 'celebrity' status. He altered his contract in perhaps the dumbest way possible to be able to fire his EP whenever he wants.
Jim's got issues as well; for one, he can't even express his feelings to the girl he likes (despite multiple chances he's had). He took a cheap lay instead. He can't even resolve his seniority with his friendship for his subordinates.
I could go on.
A big part of this episode that I really took issue with was the final scene. I understand that they need to use real-life events to make this show work, but it just put me off that this situation was used. I hate to use the "too soon" card, but this is a real person we are talking about. Even to play with the idea of reports being put out of her being dead seems in poor taste. And to use that as a ploy to prove how much integrity the crew had seems a bit much to me. Perhaps even pretentious. Even a character based off of her would have been a bit better.
I am also not sure how realistic it is. Would multiple programs base the life or death of someone off of one report?
Completely agree with the reviewer. Silly women characters who get mad that they were "lied to", and that the guy they have a crush on has the nerve to date their roommate, dumb plot lines about Will's dating life and leona's sabotage, and YES the coldplay montage all very dramatically set to Gabrielle Giffords shooting, which was just pure heartstring manipulation. I'm trying to hang in there...but.
You are posting as a guest. To post as a user, please Login or Register.
Remember My Info