(S01E05) So let me get this straight. Sting has been around so long that he can just decide to make an album of songs based on the writings of a 15th century poet, play it with a lute (!), and get a guest star gig on a major network TV show? Nice. I can't wait for the day when Keith lets me write just about obscure game shows from the 1960s, in Latin.I was wondering if Sting was going to play one of his classic songs after he played his new song at rehearsal. I wasn't the only one: Harriet says the same thing at the end to Matt, and he tells her that he wasn't going to but Matt asked him to play it and he did. (Oh, and curse you NBC once again for tricking us into thinking that Matt and Harriet were going to get back together. Damn previews!)
This episode revolved around Martha O'Dell's (Christine Lahti, continuing her guest spot from last week) hanging around the studio asking questions for her Vanity Fair piece. Matt is uneasy talking around her and distracted, and the rest of the cast runs around trying to cover up the whole Matt/Harriet/Darren/Jeanie/baseball bat/Bombshell Baby boot story. And I just realized that if you've never seen the show before that last sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Meanwhile, a pushy British reality show producer (*cough* Mark Burnett *cough*) comes into to pitch a new show called Search and Destroy, which sounds like an unholy, creepy mix of Temptation Island, Blind Date, and Cheaters. Jordan and Jack both find it unsettling, but to Jack that just means it will be a hit. But to Jordan, it's just sick. She's not going to make a bid on it, and her contract says she has final say on projects, unless she is overruled by Mr. White. Jack suggests they meet with Mr. White and see what he says, because there's no way he's going to let another network have this surefire hit (not sure if it would be a hit though - who knows with reality shows sometimes).
Lauren Graham is the guest host on the show this week, and she's seen in several sketches, but did they even introduce her or mention that it was Lauren Graham? I didn't catch it, though she's on it next week and has a bigger role.
Jordan and Jack meet with White (great to see Ed Asner again - and I thought his pilot role was only a one-time thing), and though Jack gives an impassioned bottom-line based plea to get the show on NBS, White defers to Jordan and says "If you're going to let me shop for groceries, you should also let me cook the meal," or something like that. I'm not up on my Bill Parcells wisdom. After White leaves, Jack informs Jordan that Parcells hasn't won a playoff game in nine seasons.
The show goes off well again. Another great Nicolas Cage impersonation by Simon Helberg, and didn't anyone find it stunning that Studio 60 would have a Nancy Grace sketch after Saturday Night Live had one earlier this month?! But the sketches are secondary. It's the characters and the backstage drama I'm interested in. And it struck me that, little by little, without anyone even noticing it, Aaron Sorkin has created a world here. A continuing storyline that everyone is already referring to and building off of. The Matt/Harriet relationship, why Matt and Harriet both became successful on the show at the same time, and the backgrounds of the supporting cast are coming to light piece by piece. And that's a great feeling watching a TV show, when you get involved with the characters and you honestly care about what's going to happen to them. I hope that there are people at NBC like Jordan McDeere, who understand what they have on their hands here.
At the end, Martha isn't even sure what type of story she's going to write, even though she knows everything that has happened. And that moment between Matt and Harriet? Yeah, they almost kiss, while Sting plays "Fields of Gold" on his lute, but it's more of a hint of things to come, as Harriet's going to meet Darren for a date and Danny is trying to hook Matt up with a model.
TV Squad Ten: Top Ten ESPN shows from worst to first
Andy Richter: The TV Squad Interview
Have any questions for Vik Sahay of Chuck? Ask them here!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
10-16-2006 @ 11:52PM
Joel Keller said...
The sketches were pretty bad. Didn't get the Nancy Grace sketch at all, because Sorkin refuses to write anything that doesn't move at 3,000 words a minute. The only funny moment in that sketch was D.L. saying that the island's only computer is a Commodore 64.
Harriet and Matt have no chemistry. And Harriet just isn't funny in any way shape or form.
I'm still liking Jordan, Jack, Danny and all of their storylines. Danny telling that young writer to go with NBS was a nice touch. Though Jordan's disgust over that reality pilot was a little unrealistic; any network will air a reprehensible reality show if they think they can make money from it.
I wanted to see more Lauren Graham! But I guess that'll happen next week during the "after party" episode.
Oh, and how can Martha O'Dell quote people without using a tape recorder or writing notes? I'm guessing she ran to write notes right after talking to Harriet during Sting's rehearsal, but otherwise, her character's not rining true. Maybe she's just doing preliminary work, but even reporters on "long lead" stories record everything. Don't want to get sued, know what I mean?
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 12:59AM
Diana said...
I loved Nancy Grace talking about the balcony. If only the real Grace wasn't actually like that.
I didn't like this episode very much at first but upon 2nd viewing it really grew on me.
My only concern is that the Matt and Harriet relationship seems to dominate so much of the show. I like it, but I think Sorkin needs to lay off a bit. I get that he's establishing his supercouple though.
That ending was great, except for Harriet's line about Matt knocking her socks off. It just didn't fit and ruined the flow of the scene.
Sarah Paulson continues to impress me week after week. I didn't think I would enjoy Harriet as much as I do, but she's probably my favourite character now.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 1:21AM
Nate said...
Sorkin has always been on the right side of the fine line that separates drama from cheese, but Studio 60 is all cheese so far. I'm beyond tired of the "emotional" music over a reflective ending. I'm not invested in the Matt-Harriet relationship and it's just not working for me. I hardly care about any of the characters.
I miss Sports Night and West Wing.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 1:29AM
MacGuffin said...
Could someone please explain why so many people are falling all over Studio 60?
P.S. I am/was a HUGE West Wing fan, so I do love intelligent, well-written dramas
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 1:42AM
dwacon said...
If no one else will say it, I will.
Sting will prolly make a ton of loot with his lute.
Whew, feels better now.
Reply
10-19-2006 @ 9:06PM
Em said...
Is anyone else getting as irritated as me that Sorkin is using the exact same dialog as on the West Wing? I mean we could buy 3000 word per minute dialog in the White House, pregnant with meaning, but backstage on TV? On major network TV?
In fact I've tried to give it time, but after the pilot and three shows in its getting past irritating - "yeah," "what do you mean?" "Sure.""Can you give me a minute?" "yea-aah" "I think we're done here." Over and over. Geez. Doesn't he have any other dialog magic?
Ok, so past that the show is interesting, the dialog punchy, but isn't it clear that Jordon is being played by an actress who is too young, has only two looks, "deer in headlight" and "earnest ingenue." She's mostly eye candy and she's supposed to do the moral heavy lifting. She's not, unfortunately CJ Craig. So she's wrong, Jack is wrong, Danny is on vacation from the West Wing (and isn't that "Denny" from West Wing in the background as one of the producers). Its like a survivor show or something.
Will someone tell Sorkin that you just can't write the a new show with the same exact dialog as before and expect us to buy it. We liked his pontificating in Wing, but he's going to have to do more to grab us in this territory. Thank God for D.L. He's about the only breath of fresh air in the camp. At least he's the only one reciting his lines with a little more panache than, "Ya think?" "Yeah."
Frankly I like the music, but it can be overused -- so watch out. And I like that the stetches are so bad. Seeing "Danny" and other giggling at them during rehersal and during the show gives some insight as to why we have the current pablum on Saturday Night Live. Apparently the producers, writers and those responsible for programming actually thinks their riffs are clever. They are not, and the show reflects that. Maybe it will help SNL improve. It hasn't been funny, clever or relevant since John Candy left.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 12:54PM
Allen said...
I am very over the self-reflective ending with the meaningful music. Is there a drama that doesn't incorporate this? Was there any drama that did it before West Wong started?
It's boring and it just means that the writers don't have to write for five more minutes.
60 is dull.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 2:41AM
gaur said...
After the first episode I thought alright, it's not great, it's not really even good, but it has promise (nice sets), but ever since then I can't watch it without feeling ill. What is it about the show that makes me ill? Everything. It's like walking into a cloud of pretentious nausea. Since when are comedy writers and directors of late night shows celebrities? I'm sure that in real life they don't have fans asking for autographs nor have big magazines doing cover stories, nor have studio presidents and corporate leaders make it their business to care very much about them. Besides the unreality of the show on that level it's also just completely humorless and melodramatic. Am I watching a glorified soap opera written by hack writers or am I watching cutting edge drama as they would like me to think? Hack melodrama by a landslide.
If I didn't know better from reading about what really went on behind the scenes on SNL, I would think that an SNL type show would be one of the most dull places on earth if Aaron Sorkin had his way. What he did for politicians he has done for television insiders...made them into cardboard caricatures in an alternate reality where everyone is a potential character out of Hamlet instead of real people who look to have a good time as their main preoccupation in their lives.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 2:40AM
SJ said...
I don't understand the Harriet character. If she's such a good Christian why did she ever get involved with a "liberal atheist Jew"?
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 2:54AM
Jeff said...
The show may be uneven, but Nate Corddry in a lobster suit is great television.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 2:58AM
Alison said...
I feel like this show is just 42 minutes of Sorkin reminding the American public that they are not as smart, political, witty, or genuinly interested as he is.
The saccarine-covered diaologue that spews out of the characters mouth faster than the human brain can handle is both overwhelming and as far from reality as possible.
What I loved about Sorkin's West Wing (till season 4's) was Sorkin's ability to capture every type of character. The things that come out of Rob Lowe's character could never come out of Bradley Whitfords, and so one.
Try that with Matt and Danny, hell, even Jordan. They are the same witty fast-talkers and they same the same things only in different pitches. CREATE CHARACTERS who are defiend not only by action, but by their diologue. Sorkin's a genuis, but sometimes smart people just like to hear themselves talk from every angle.
Watching these characters have a too-on-the-nose retort to everything is like watching a comedian stand on his high horse and call you a dirty word while he covers it up with a smile.
I thought I liked the pilot, but maybe I just agreed with Sorkins's Network-like rant and the possibility of loving Matt and Danny. Now, I just got tired of Sorkin's rant on the watershed of TV, and can't decide who talks faster.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 2:56AM
Peter Lynn said...
When was John Candy on Saturday Night Live? Although admittedly, SCTV hasn't been as funny, clever, or relevant since he left. Or since it ended.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 3:26AM
supporter said...
Studio 60 is a good show. It might not appeal to your demographic. It may reuse the same things from West Wing and Sports Night. But the premise of this show is sound. Pop Culture is important. Its the first sign of how healthy a culture is.
Harriet is funny. Do you remember the Bear Sketch? The Meet the Press sketch? But this show isnt about the haha funny. It's about pop culture, about philosophy and entertainment, about religion and perspective, about the fact that the sanctity of God is not a license to muzzle.
It's a great premise. You don't enjoy Harriet/Matt's relationship because you think he deserves someone with bigger breasts or something. Or you dont think she's pretty enough. But 1)she's got great on the spot mannerisms, 2) she's got great mimicking abilities, 3) she can make her eyes sparkle on cue.
Dude. She's not gorgeous, but she is beautiful. Cindarella did not have 32d breasts.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 4:15AM
francisca said...
yup I like the sutdio 60 show my friend and I always watch that show together over pizza lol..
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 5:14AM
Tamara said...
I think Christine Lahti's character is annoying and I wish she would go away. I actually like Harriet but the sketches are so pathetic. The only thing to cheer me up now is 30 Rock. Studio 60 is wearing me down.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 7:33AM
David said...
The sketches were horrid! This is soppused to be better than SNL. Now I like anything that makes fun of Nacy Grace but come on, those were so bad.
And I don't get what the otherall theme of the show is. West Wing had the daughters security, the president's disease, Sam sleeping with a whore. This is just "Will they get back together or not. I don't care because I can't stand the blonde woman!
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 8:27AM
Jim said...
I was liking this show less and less every week, but I thought last night's show was the best yet.
To Joel Keler: There *are* writers out there who don't use recorders or take notes. Ever heard of Truman Capote?
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 8:39AM
Sharonlee said...
This show is great tv should be all about just relaxing and enjoying the story. Not brain surgery. After working all day I don't want to have stop and think it through. Its not supposed to be a comedy yes sometimes you laugh but basically no. Harriet & Matt will just be off & on again give it time to settle. And Matt & Danny are great. Love the whole show. No one forces you to watch if you have cable there has got to be something on for everyone!! So switch the channel already and quit complaining.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 10:42AM
ALLISON said...
You can try all you want to call this show a hit, but it's not working. The ratings are plummeting. The situations are not coming together. The characters seem bored with their jobs -- really, why did Matt come back to this show? He's miserable. Sorkin has missed the mark with this show. It lacks the snap, crackle and insight of "Sports Night" and "West Wing." It's just a lox. I predict NBC will pull the plug by Christmas and end this after 13 episodes. Sorkin is better than this.
Reply
10-17-2006 @ 9:27AM
Porchland said...
The show had progressed each week until this episode. Most of my problems with it were addressed by Joel in Post No. 1 or in the other posts, including:
* The Matt-Harriet storyline threatens to highjack the show, and it's not very interesting.
* The show sketches are by and large not funny. (I think he jury is out on whether we're SUPPOSED to think they're funny, but people keep saying "great sketch," "great show," etc., so I'm not sure.)
* Slow the crap down! I don't recall "Sports Night" ever moving this fast, and I never had trouble understanding what the characters were saying on "The West Wing."
If the ratings dive again today, I think NBC is going to have to take a serious look at whether this show gets a back nine. (I suspect Sorkin has a no-kill clause to make 13 episodes.)
Disappointed but hanging in there.
Reply