The Newsroom > The Newsroom Review: To Rise Again > Comments Page 2
How do you have a conversation with an angry drunk? You don't...
Like its premise this show is old news. LemonLyman's agree.
The thing about this show - the thing that makes it so frustrating for some yet so entertaining to others - is that it's got real characters. Real people have biases. It's in our nature. We may say that we're independent thinkers and that we don't like to be pigeon-holed and we really may mean it (I know *I* do, at least), but at the end of the day, we really do have a bias. Whether it's political or social or economic or spiritual or what-have-you.
Sorkin has created a beautiful mosaic of people, all of whom have a bias of one sort or another. These characters are not one or two dimensional. They have faults and phobias and they make mistakes. Yet they're true to their own beliefs, however misguided or wrong some of us may feel about them. It's the reason I love the hell out of it and can't wait for the next season to begin.
I'm glad the season is over. I never thought I would say that but enough with the Shakespearean love rectangle. Too few meaty news stories, too much pathetic junior high puppy love.
I am also tired of MacKenzie's screechy whining. I can't remember the last time she played the part of a leader in the newsroom. Come to think of it, did she ever?
The ultimate insult to the intelligence of the viewer occurred after an extended conversation about Sex and the City. Maggie runs out in the street, gets splashed by traffic going by as the theme from Sex and the City is played and then they explain to us what has happened. Like we were too dumb to draw the obvious comparison so Maggie has to give us a 5 minute lecture on what being Single in the City is really all about.
Some one suggested new writers. We all know that they will get the pen out of Sorkin's hand when they can pull it from his cold dead fist.
Cjstake, I totally agree that it would be wrong to call tea party members terrorists, but showing how many similarities in agendas besides the actual terrorism the two actually have was weird to see.
I am a sorkin fan. The West Wing is my personal favourite show (above The Sopranos, The Wire, Mad Men and Breaking Bad) so I am going to be biased towards the man who wrote "Two Cathedrals" and "Let Bartlet Be Bartlet" and "100 000 Airplanes" but i do love The Newsroom. I read articles every Monday and see the complaints "too liberal; uses a republican", "women started strong and are now clumsy and jokes", "a boring love triangle". They are all plot points, even the thing about writing for females. Anyone remember CJ Cregg and Abby Bartlet; strong proffesional women in The West Wing but at times they were clumsy and forgetful. Sorkin is doing the same with Mackenzie and Sloan. Its character building. Sorkin has started to flesh out his characters and its a good thing. Sure it can be said he had lost his touch since Sports Night and The West Wing but its clear from the second half of the season he started to get his groove back and i reckon season 2 will be spectacular. I even hear he i
Great, great show......except......enough with the Maggie - Don - Jim triangle. That is really tiresome, ridiculous (I love you but he loves me so I'll stay with him). Come on already, I have to turn away in embarrassment.
Great, great show......except......enough with the Maggie - Don - Jim -triangle. That is really tiresome, ridiculous (I love you but he loves me so I'll stay with him). Come one already, I have to turn away in embarrassment.
When it comes to using a female voice, Sorkin is simply not at the level of D.H. Lawrence, or Ian McEwen, or that bird-watching contemporary novelist. Forget about how words tumble out of the female characters. That's the price we pay when watching shows written or co-written by Sorkin.
And one more thing...
Don't ya just 'hate' it when the wrong people are together? But, it the right people WERE together, then it would not be interesting.
This is one of those shows for me. I don't know why, but it's a show that can't do anything wrong.
I love the cast, brilliant cast, the writing and the whole look and feel.
I'm an unabashed fan.
I hate season finales because of just that fact. It's a finale. That means next week there won't be a new episode or the week after that and in television, we can never be guaranteed that the show will be back.
Thank you Mr. Sorkin, your talent knows no bounds, as a writer/creator. You created three dimensional characters that have, quite frankly, become part of my reality in a small sense.
Hats off to Jeff Daniels and the rest of the cast for very endearing and sometimes brilliant performances.
The bottom line for me is that not matter what all the critics say, what's been written or what I've even written.
I like this show!
Even though there are a few things that definitely need work, I think this is a very good show that got better during the last few episodes. Sloan has become my favorite character. She is attractive and very funny, sometimes not being able to figure out if she is being serious or sarcastic. I think Mackenzie has come a long way. The idea of her being this superstar producer that was in the battle grounds for years was a little hard to grasp at first. However, now they have made sure to make her more of an authority figure and someone who actually steps up for what she believes in. I could do with less of the whole Jim/Lisa/Maggie/Don thing but I don't mind their characters. They definitely, definitely need to focus on a little liberal bashing or it's going to get hard for a lot of people to take seriously next season. Overall, I love where this show is going and love what the actors have been able to do with their characters.
@hawaiian34 VERY well said!
Indeed there's plenty of craziness from both sides of the aisle, but, Sorkin just portrayed what A LOT of people actually think about republicans but they don't say it. Yes, I'm democrat as well. I won't be voting for Romney and his(and the republican party) war on women, his cuts to medicare, his cuts to education, or for him to cater to the rich. Sorry, didn't mean to get off topic.
I love this show.
I, too, am pretty bored with Don/Maggie/Jim/Lisa and now Sloan is added into the mix.
I absolutely loved how they got over on Leona and Reese but I don't think it's over. I don't think we've seen the last of that vixen at the tabloid either.
Felt bad for Charlie when he found out about his informants suicide. I'm wondering if this will somehow play into next season.
I'm thankful that the show is done for Season 1. For whatever reason, I have felt compelled to watch even when the episodes get weaker and weaker. The use of real events as a basis for the show at first seemed like a good idea but now it's just lazy and manipulative. Using Bin Laden's death to make the audience feel patriotic was cool at first but when I re-watched I felt cheated. Will as a right wing basher when he's a republican himself just does not seem real.
Now if anyone on earth is going to tell me that addle-minded, rude and modestly attractive Maggie is a better alternative then having a shot at dating Sloan, they are as nuts as I think Sorkin is. The guy is clueless when it come to writing about either women or relationships in general.
I probably won't be back for Season 2 unless major changes are made. New writers would be a good start.
(it would be nice to warn posters that there is a posting limit)
(here is the rest of my post)
If you are going to use this stupid vacation debate, journalists would add layers to it, not just used the liberal slant to it. But of course the character of Will Is not a journalist anymore than he's a republican.
Calling the tea party terrorists is not journalism. That's discourse at its worse. He's calling Americans who he disagree with but who are winning the debate in the republican party foul murderers?
That was the foulest part of this entire show. You may think the tea party is extreme even rediculous but comparing them to people who terrorize with planned massacres is too much.
This show does not show what journalism should be. And last night finale took the discourse too far. He doesn't even show what liberalism should be.
It's dressing up name calling and insults by saying we have a few thin facts to back someone's hatre. How is it ever right to categorize
The idea that Will Macavoy is a republican but he ignores the country's debt problem and spending problem to constantly rant about republicans is crazy. Even the most moderate of republicans have a problem with this country's spending and to answer that by comparing Obama's spending to Bush's spending is rediculous since both sides agree that Bush spent way too much as well.
Not only that the fact that this anchor who loves to boast that he's a republican like he's Joe Scarborough without the street cred is silly, it shows when he does things like makes the tired argument about Obama's vacations by comparing them once again to Bush and Regan. Yet leave out Bush often went to his Texas ranch to work. And Regan was not a war time president.
First how the heck is the vacation debate news but Casey Anthony is not? Secondly If you are going to use this stupid vacation debate, threpublicans list would add layers to it not just used the liberal slant to it. But of course Will Is
I respectfully disagree. I see your argument about Will's lack of lib-bashing, but he's not attacking the Republican party, that would imply that his arguments have no basis. If you love something or you stand for something you want to help your cause improve, evolve into a better version of itself. If you look at Will's arguments more carefully, you'll see that he clarifies what the Republican Party actually stands for, what the term actually means and simply applies constructive criticism by highlighting people who think they have the right to hijack certain causes to evolve their own careers.
IF you're wondering whether I'm a liberal, yes, I am a democratic liberal, but Will's explanations of what and where the Republican party should actually be, made me understand the Right more and where those minds are coming from.
So Will called the Tea Party the American Taliban...apparently "real journalism" is turning Daily Kos books into news stories? I'm a right winger who loved The West Wing, but the politics of it were much more bearable because the opposition fought back, and they were fictional. When Sorkin does this real "hindsight" style, he attacks real people who are unable to defend themselves, and it just gets annoying after a while. There was plenty of craziness to cover on both sides of the aisle, Sorkin should try doing that every now and then. He can't make Will a believable Republican if he doesn't attack the other side from time to time as well.
That said, Sorkin's writing keeps me coming back. He's really good at that, even though the plots sometimes get annoying.
You are posting as a guest. To post as a user, please Login or Register.
Remember My Info