TVSquad

What about the fact that everyone was watching MSNBC? If the show is about a show on "NBS", wouldn't it have made sense to have a fake news organization to go with NBS?

Oh wait, NBC has to plug MSNBC because nobody's watching (whoops - that's another show)...

Reply

My big problem with tonights episode is that suddenly Matt is suppost to be relying on the writers when before now, he hated the other writers and didn't use them? You think he would be happy to no longer have to deal with the writers, but no matter. A fairly soild episode.

Reply

By the way, that "new writer" who comes in and helps Darius and Lucy is played by Mark McKinney, who, if you recall, Sorkin brought in to give him ideas about the sketches portrayed in the show. Judging by the quality of the sketches, I'm guessing Sorkin decided to give McKinney an acting job in order to justify the guy's salary, as it doesn't look like he was even consulting McKinney about the sketches.

Reply

I liked the episode, but I think the whole timeline was pasted together poorly. We found ourselves getting lost a couple of times. I have to admit it wasn't their best episode, but still 1000 times better than most of the drek with cops and lawyers.

Reply

This episode annoyed me. I like the interaction between Matt and Danny, but everything else was handled poorly. Suddenly the two amateur writers are "pros"? What was the deal with that serious "comedy" writer? Jordan I could care less about, and we all know she won't get fired.

And let's admit it, Harriet is an annoying character...though I did like how the cast's reacted to her attempts.

Howie Mandel was annoying, but the best part of the episode was the performance(s) by Corrine Bailey Rae.

Reply

This episode needed Timothy Busfield.

Reply

"and also brings in a writer who used to be on the show but got out of comedy when his wife and kids were killed in a car accident. Looks like he's going to be a new regular too."

This guy, as noted earlier, is Mark McKinney who also writes the sketches. He is justified in being paid that much because he was one of the five Kids in the Hall castmembers who created arguably the best sketch comedy show ever. This is the first episode I've seen, and though I've heard the sketches Mark McKinney's written for Studio 60 haven't been that good yet (this from Slate.com), his character in this episode was the most intriguing so far.

And if you couldn't guess who got Jordan pregnant, it's Steven Weber (not going to bother looking up his character's name). That's why in the preview for next week he says he "has to resign."

C'mon, people! I'm new to the show and I figured it out already?

For it being my first episode ever, and hearing it wasn't exactly awe-inspiring, I did enjoy the hostage/writer bit. I may have to follow this show now.

Reply

OK guys.

As much as I love your reviews, I feel the need to point something out:

Mark McKinney is a writer for Studio 60. Bringing him in is a delicious piece of casting. And bringing him in against type. He was co-credited one or two episodes ago for the entire episode or two. I love the circularity of it.

Beyond that, do you remember the dustup concerning the plane crash that occurred in the opening minutes of the Emmys? Many felt that having Conan get in a plane crash in the opening was offensive due to the plane crash that had happened the same day in the U.S. Aren't we all so sensitive in these post-9/11 times? What was a brilliant opening was tainted, and pissed off the sponsors. I thought that storyline was a great dig at "American Sponsor Sensitivity", but it broke my heart that the first sketch by the writing freshman was cut. After calling their families and all. It was redeemed, but it wasn't theirs.

The whole thing with Harriet unable to tell a joke without character was very telling to me. I think they were trying to distinguish her as a "character actress", and they were for the first time trying to show her as flawed. She can speak the words of others, and provide a great deal of humor, but when counted on herself: she's screwed. Character actor...albeit a good one.

Jordan did utterly blow it tonight...but I think it was intentional. I think that maybe she is consorting with Danny (or maybe her boss), no one knows it, and she is afraid to start answering questions because of where they might end.

I'm glad that they are giving screen time to the "rookie that passed out in drag". He deserves it. When he was agonizing over filling in on the news on the earlier Pahrump episodes, he was in the same place as the guy he was replacing two episodes earlier. And he was able to hold it together until the commercial.

Good episode. Good hiding of Peet's pregancy (which I realize was a surprise to the writers/producers of this show). Great that they are finally beating Harriet up for her bad listening skills.

-AC

Reply

I have to start by saying that I'm a big fan of the show and an admirer of Sorkin's ability to show the best of people in difficult situation. However, to be quite honest, I was a disappointed with this week’s show. Like with the whole hostage situation, I feel it was stupid to make a sketch about a hostage take-over when, at the beginning of the show, Josh (I'm sorry, Danny) said that it (real hostage situation) would end badly. DUH

But that’s not what’s bothering me the most. The real thing that annoys me is that this show display’s everything red states hate about blue states (I’m a democrat by the way). This is best demonstrated by how Jordan’s character is behaving. She want’s to tell everyone how they should be acting (Danny too by the way but in a less obvious way) but she can’t analyze her own situation the same way she does others. She doesn’t do the stupid interview not because she’s pregnant (I’m sorry but she gets no brownie points from me on that front) but because of the universal liberal principles; this is what I should do in a perfect world. I get not wanting to feed the story but common, if it had happened to one of her employees, she would’ve told them to do the stupid interview. Just play the game. We don’t live in an ideal world yet (despite Sorkin’s best effort) Sometimes, little girl’s have to grow up.

Reply

I enjoyed this episode thou the spitting thing I found
simply strange and somewhat disgusting. Peat was jawdroppingly gorgeous at the start of the interview. It also nice to see the kids in the hall.

Reply

Ok, I say this as someone who has some sour grapes from being rejected by SNL twice (a long time ago), but in the real world, Lucy and Darius would never have been hired. All writers applying for any comedy show have to submit a portfolio, usually on a very fast (24 hour) turnaround, of completely original ideas (and, btw, sign a waiver saying that if someone else happens to come up with the same idea, we won't sue). There's writer's block and then there's being a bad writer. Darius shows promise, but... I do like them as characters, though.

McKinney as writer and actor is brilliant. Kids in the Hall was a far better show than SNL has ever been, though it was written and shot in blocks... That's the other thing that bugs me about this show: since when are writers and performers separate? One of the challenges I faced way back when was that SNL only had "room" for one woman writer who wasn't also a performer. (That has since changed dramatically).

Okay. That's my rant. And this was the first episode where the sketches were mildly amusing as opposed to outright terrible.

Reply

It made no sense for the "real-life hostage situation" to be the central drama of the episode, despite the fact that it was a fictional news story that had nothing whatsoever to do with this show's characters. Yes, they had to drop a sketch because of this, to do that they could have put the whole thing into a single line of dialogue. At least on "The West Wing," when the characters saw something unfolding on the news, it actually affected them because they often had some say over what happened.

And in continuation of the "product placement" theme from last week.... This show seems like nothing but an advertisement for "Saturday Night Live." The opening sketch was exactly like an "SNL" opener, complete with the show's producer participating in a Lorne Michaels-style cameo. The musical guest already was a musical guest on "SNL" this year. And the first commercial when the show was over was something about a behind-the-scenes look at "SNL." Unfortunately, the more this show plays up the importance of a late-night comedy show in the nation's culture, the more inconsequential the real "SNL" actually seems.

Last, but not least, the only way B12 shots would have such a quick effect on people with bad cases of flu was if it was laced with speed.... And as we all know, late-night casts haven't done that sort of thing since the mid-'80s.

Reply

"I read somewhere that Danny was going to be the father, but have they even hinted that the two have gotten together? Did I miss that?"

I think my TiVo ahs the plot for next episode as Danny confronting his feelings for Jordan, which may be romantic feelings, and he could possibly be a more father figure than the real father.

Reply

"I think my TiVo ahs the plot for next episode as Danny confronting his feelings for Jordan, which may be romantic feelings, and he could possibly be a more father figure than the real father."

I definitely see where you're coming from. I've had mixed feelings about what their relationship exactly is from the beginning. And I'm thinking now that it has to be romantic. Though I neither dislike or am completely happy with the idea of Danny being the father, it's the best way to go... I swear, though, if the writers chose to spring a flashback as a way to tell us they had sex...

Reply

I thought this was a really good episode. It's better than almost everything on UK TV at the moment (I'm from London).

This episode had lots of good moments and I like the Sorkin seems to have finally gotten the balance right between the sketch show and the behind the scenes stuff. I liked Jordan's stance that nobody cares about the private life of a network exec and by doing interviews she would be flaming the fire.

Also did anyone notice that the fact that Harriet was the only one not to get sick as she didn't take part in the spitting contest at the start of the show whereas most of the other staff did.

Reply

Jesus, Howie Mandel is a horrible actor.

Reply

Yeah this was just a bad episode. The first 6 episodes were blah and lifeless and lame. This one had emotion that emotion is bored.

What was the point of this episode? I watched it and nothing happened. The writers were fired last week and this week it's like "we're screwed" and that's it. I hope the father is some off screen person. I will laugh if it's her ex husband.

And after all your complainnig about this episode you still called it good. The show can be complete shit and you have shown you don't care because you want to bone Aaron Sorkin.

And the flu thing was so over the top it was like a BAD (I word you might want to learn) Sci-fi Channel Saturday night movie.

Reply

The sketches werent't bad this week. At least they were more in keeping with what SNL does.

The flashbacks were confusing. The show did not flow well.

Jordan blaming being hormonal for her bad interview was just lame. Does Sorkin really think this way? Another cliche is to have the pregnant lady swoon -- has anyone in real life ever swooned when they're pregnant? And don't say she swooned because of the virus, because I've never swooned when sick either.

Harriet is becoming more and more annoying.

I don't think any of the guys impregnated Jordan. Most likely she went the artificial insemination route. That way Sorkin can have weeks of arguments about sex and gender and how science has rendered men obsolete.

Reply

On Sunday, the Chicago Trib TV critic wrote that this show promised one thing and is delivering an entirely different product. She comments on everything we have criticized here. Like her, I too long for less Sorkin preachings and more emotional interactions among these interesting characters.
P.S. I did think the DOND opener with Howie was actually funny this week.

Reply

What I find particularly insulting about this show is that the writing is so pretentious with all the blaring preaching at the audience and I'm guessing we are supposed to find this show "intelligent" because of all this yammering - but, then, the skits within the show are so juvenile and uncreative it's stunning.
If Sorkin wants to sell me that his characters are more enlightened in some ways than the rest of the country, he should be doing all he can to cook up some truly inspiring witty satire for the sketches. As it is, they are as bold and compelling as a child's finger paints.
Rant over. Not watching again.

Reply