|
In The Good Guys (tv) Whitford plays a badass cop with a badass mustache. Highly recommended to everyone. It only got one season though  It's on Netflix instant!
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
myron_cope posted:In The Good Guys (tv) Whitford plays a badass cop with a badass mustache. Highly recommended to everyone. It only got one season though It's amazing how completely different his character is on the Good Guys compared to The West Wing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
Or his character on The Mentalist (though most of it is off-screen) also watching the episode Life on Mars only shows what a disappointment Mr. Sunshine was.
Dancingthroughlife fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Aug 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 02:21
|
|
|
Was Moira Kelly a coup for the casting director or something? I know that Lowe had a bigger contract than everyone (besides Sheen) and part of it was being first billed in the opening credits, but why is she second? After that it goes alphabetically (again except Sheen) but it's weird that she'd get second-billing and then get written off the show within a season.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 03:51
|
|
|
kalensc posted:Was Moira Kelly a coup for the casting director or something? I know that Lowe had a bigger contract than everyone (besides Sheen) and part of it was being first billed in the opening credits, but why is she second? After that it goes alphabetically (again except Sheen) but it's weird that she'd get second-billing and then get written off the show within a season. She was/is mostly a VA and can sing. Personally I view her as one of the Big Voices(pundit)who may have kept the message on the rails during the election campaign but once it came time to governing and being realistic in the White House vs the Congress and the Senate she lost out. She was basically a Bruno that stuck around instead of growing roses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 04:27
|
|
|
"It's nice when we can do something for prostitutes once in a while."
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 13:55
|
|
|
I just started watching The West Wing recently, and it's absolutely fantastic. I'm on season 4 right now, but what can I expect with the post-Sorkin episodes? Does it take a pretty steep dive from there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 14:16
|
|
|
Mr.Bond posted:I just started watching The West Wing recently, and it's absolutely fantastic. I'm on season 4 right now, but what can I expect with the post-Sorkin episodes? Does it take a pretty steep dive from there? I think season 5's the only one I would really call weak, and it's still good TV - just not up to the show's other seasons. 6 and 7 are both great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 16:14
|
|
|
For me, season 5 has the deepest lows and highest peaks. It's certainly different, but it's not worse. And, the new Amy Gardner doesn't ruin the episode anymore. Can't stand her early portrayals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
Mr.Bond posted:I just started watching The West Wing recently, and it's absolutely fantastic. I'm on season 4 right now, but what can I expect with the post-Sorkin episodes? Does it take a pretty steep dive from there? Beginning of Season 5 is weak, but it'll improve, just bear with it. And wait till Alan Alda comes on (season 6/7 I guess?), it becomes fantastic again. One of the most fantastic episodes of TV ever for me was The Debate, an episode which was broadcast live, where the actors playing the democratic and republican candidates had to just do a debate (scripted of course but still, pretty balsy). There are two versions - one from the West coast broadcast, one for the East. e: that's like season 7 I think though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2011 13:32
|
|
|
My least favorite part of Season 5 compared to the other seasons is from where the drama comes from. Previously it was in the day to day goings on in the government, and in Season 5 it's all about huge world events (Tornado, Israel, Zoy [Though did Sorkin set that up at the end of Season 4 or did somebody else have a hand in that?]).
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
I just finished up a series rewatch that I'd been doing the last few months. Maybe the third time I've gone through the series, but it's a pretty excellent ride even now. Season 5 is still pretty hard for me to get through, everything is just slightly off. The episodes are darker and more depressing. The focus shifts from the day-to-day quirky minutia of a likable cast of characters to those characters being overwhelmed by a barrage of catastrophic (both nationally and personally) events. There's little to no whimsy that made the show so fun, it tries way, WAY too hard to be inspiring, the drama is unbelievably heavy-handed and a lot of the dialogue is a distinct step down from what you're used to, or it's being delivered by the more bottom-rung actors on the show, or both. For example, I know a lot of people like the episode The Supremes, and while it's got two pretty great guest stars and might be the season's best episode, to me it's still a great example of the bad direction the show was going at the time. ONE episode wherein the administration nominates TWO judges to the Supreme Court, and, as if that is not enough, one happens to be the first ever female Chief Justice? And the entire pie-in-the-sky plan works out just peachy-keen thanks to the fantastic coincidence that the awful terrible reprehensible ultra-conservative judge the Republicans insist on just happens to be a swell dude that everybody involved likes a lot? Rubbish. But, unlike most of the rest of the season, entertaining rubbish. The season 5 flaws are probably more noticeable on a more speedy re-watch. However, even on my third watch, it's actually pretty unbelievable how well the show picks up midway through season 6 and the momentum it carries to the end of its run. I would put the final season right there next to the first season as the series' best, despite the fact that the focus of both seasons are so different, as are most of the main characters. Other nitpicks have been mentioned in this thread already, but I just want to also mention how silly Sam's return is at the end of the series. For one, if you were going to bring him back it would have made tons more sense to bring him back for Leo's funeral as opposed to like two weeks after. Are we supposed to expect that's an event he wouldn't even consider attending or be invited to? For another, if you're going to reintroduce him, well what the gently caress was he doing this whole time again? Sure, other characters in the series were dropped and never mentioned again, but those characters were, you know, never mentioned again. Also they were side characters. It's nothing more than silly fan service, and sure it's no big deal but it's silly the first time and it's silly on rewatches. Also, Kristen Chenowith is a great addition to the cast and really adds a lot to the final seasons. Buane fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Aug 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:00
|
|
|
Sam got mentioned a few times in between his loss in the Congressional campaign and his return as Josh's deputy. Filling in the blank that after he lost he stayed in California to go back into private practice for a ton of money isn't exactly difficult there. It was a nice cameo to bring things full circle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:08
|
|
|
I think the conservative judge might have been a slight nod to Earl Warren, a Republican appointee that surprised many conservatives by handing down very social liberal decisions.
scarymonkey fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Aug 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
The whole "whether or not to watch post-Sorkin TWW" thing baffles me a bit. Jonathan Wells' TWW is still better than most of the garbage that's been on TV in the past 15 years. You know the characters; why not watch it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:21
|
|
|
scarymonkey posted:I think the conservative judge might have been a slight nod to Earl Warren, a Republican appointee that surprised many conservatives by handing down very social liberal decisions. Eisenhower said his biggest mistake was appointing him to the court. History would be a lot different if he was not appointed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:23
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Sam got mentioned a few times in between his loss in the Congressional campaign and his return as Josh's deputy. Filling in the blank that after he lost he stayed in California to go back into private practice for a ton of money isn't exactly difficult there. Sam was mentioned exactly once in between appearances, and that one mention was a reference to the past. His whereabouts go completely ignored for four years. Not to mention everybody - Sam included - talk several times about how he'll come back after he loses the special election. If there was an explanation for his exit it would be fine to bring things full circle. As there wasn't, it's empty-headed fan service. The final season was great so it really doesn't drag anything down, it's just something that calls attention to a weird point in the show's history. scarymonkey posted:I think the conservative judge might have a slight nod to Earl Warren, a Republican appointee that surprised many conservatives by handing down very social liberal decisions. Which is fine, but it's still way too convenient and over-the-top. My problem is more with that season than that episode, like I said it's probably the best of season 5 regardless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:25
|
|
|
Buane posted:Sam was mentioned exactly once in between appearances, and that one mention was a reference to the past. His whereabouts go completely ignored for four years. Not to mention everybody - Sam included - talk several times about how he'll come back after he loses the special election. I can think of twice off the top of my head (called Josh after the senator flip in season 5 and mentioned in the Josh vs. Toby episode in season 6). scarymonkey posted:I think the conservative judge might have been a slight nod to Earl Warren, a Republican appointee that surprised many conservatives by handing down very social liberal decisions. I didn't get that at all. What I did get from the discussion with Chief Justice Baker Lang was that they were highlighting that Justice Mulready was different than the Republican justices who get appointed in our world, in that he would often come to the liberal result from an originalist viewpoint. If anything, that would make him pretty close to Hugo Black.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Hugo Black. Ah yes the one who was a member of the KKK and supported the Civil Rights movements. (To be far he had to be a member in order to get elected) bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Aug 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:32
|
|
|
Mr.Bond posted:I just started watching The West Wing recently, and it's absolutely fantastic. I'm on season 4 right now, but what can I expect with the post-Sorkin episodes? Does it take a pretty steep dive from there? The characters are largely creatures of their actors at that point. The dialog and overall drama aspects of the show suffer somewhat in season 5 but the writing catches up by the mid point, at the latest. Had Sorkin trusted his writers a bit more during the first 4 years it probably would have resulted in a less jarring noticability in the first half of the 5th season. Then again, if he hadn't been as crazy-obsessed with the creation of the script then maybe we wouldn't have the stellar episodes that made season 5+ possible. *edit* I also would contend that a specific selection of 4 episodes of this series would be a far more effective audio-visual tool than forcing "government" classes in high school to show "the mutiny on the bounty"
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:33
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Ah yes the one who was a member of the KKK and helped to pass the civil rights amendment. (To be far he had to be a member in order to get elected) There's no such thing as the Civil Rights Amendment and Black was out of the Senate decades before any of the major civil rights laws passed Congress. However, your point is still valid; Black did vote in the majority in most of the Warren Court discrimination cases, and papers later revealed that he was one of the justices for pushing for even more in that regard. It's regrettable that Black is only remembered for the KKK stuff, because few white southerners did more to end the Jim Crow era than Hugo Black. Anyways, Justice Black is one of the great American jurists and represents a constitutional philosophy that basically doesn't exist anymore. That sort of constitutional textualism was what I got from Mulready in the exchange over DOMA. There are very few modern conservatives that would actually strike DOMA down on Tenth Amendment grounds as Justice Mulready posited, and perhaps none that would have called it an easy case. In that sense, his votes would not be predictable in the typical liberal or conservative sense. The real problem is that the Republican counsel for Senate Judiciary never would have suggested someone like that, she'd have suggested a typical Republican establishment lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:41
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:There's no such thing as the Civil Rights Amendment and Black was out of the Senate decades before any of the major civil rights laws passed Congress. However, your point is still valid; Black did vote in the majority in most of the Warren Court discrimination cases, and papers later revealed that he was one of the justices for pushing for even more in that regard. It's regrettable that Black is only remembered for the KKK stuff, because few white southerners did more to end the Jim Crow era than Hugo Black.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 03:45
|
|
|
With regard to Sam's return, it made sense that Josh would seek him out for the new administration, but the way they handled it was a real disservice to the character. If you trace his arc, he was a disillusioned corporate lawyer who found new purpose and fulfillment as a speechwriter and policy advisor at the highest level of government. Think back to the speech he gave Mallory, about realizing what he wanted most was to be "the guy in the room." It's difficult to imagine that he would go back to practicing corporate law again after the election when that very opportunity was waiting for him at the White House. It's even more difficult to imagine that he would need as much convincing to work for Santos as he did for Bartlet the first time. Basically, I feel like they really wanted to recreate the original "Josh brings Sam onboard" moment without thinking of how they were regressing the character. It would be like CJ turning down Santos' offer so that she could go back to working in entertainment PR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 04:00
|
|
|
ShakeZula posted:With regard to Sam's return, it made sense that Josh would seek him out for the new administration, but the way they handled it was a real disservice to the character. If you trace his arc, he was a disillusioned corporate lawyer who found new purpose and fulfillment as a speechwriter and policy advisor at the highest level of government. Think back to the speech he gave Mallory, about realizing what he wanted most was to be "the guy in the room." It's difficult to imagine that he would go back to practicing corporate law again after the election when that very opportunity was waiting for him at the White House. It's even more difficult to imagine that he would need as much convincing to work for Santos as he did for Bartlet the first time. Plus, that awful line at the end. "Home sweet home." Ugh. Please.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 07:31
|
|
|
At the end of season 7 there's a handful of transition episodes of the Santos administration. I thought they were all really well done and makes me wish there was one more season. Seeing Josh as Chief of Staff and Santos asking him "What's next?" was really great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 09:55
|
|
|
I'm giving this show another go. Last time around I made it to somewhere in season 3 and then stopped for some reason. Nearing the end of season 1 now and a couple of things stood out as funny to me. David Proval (Richie Aprile on Sopranos) as Toby's rabbi. I've never really seen him in anything else so he will always be Richie Aprile to me. The CSI girl as Zoey's bodyguard and her mention of Graveland and even the full title of one of their albums. I mean, Graveland is well known in the "underground" metal scene but basically the only way anyone outside of that would ever know about them is because they're probably on some FBI list somewhere of hate music. Although I suppose that is what happens if you actually do some research when you're writing scripts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
ShakeZula posted:It's difficult to imagine that he would go back to practicing corporate law again after the election when that very opportunity was waiting for him at the White House. It's even more difficult to imagine that he would need as much convincing to work for Santos as he did for Bartlet the first time. Sam doesn't go back to corporate law. When Josh visits him again in season seven he's in southern California instead of New York and says that he's happy working there because he's "making a difference". It's heavily implied in the episode that he's working at some sort of firm that specializes in legal advocacy for environmental issues, so it would be a complete reversal from his last legal career insuring oil tankers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2011 22:43
|
|
|
t3ch3 posted:Sam doesn't go back to corporate law. When Josh visits him again in season seven he's in southern California instead of New York and says that he's happy working there because he's "making a difference". It's heavily implied in the episode that he's working at some sort of firm that specializes in legal advocacy for environmental issues, so it would be a complete reversal from his last legal career insuring oil tankers. Speaking of which, I thought it was a nice touch that that particular plot point resurfaced again at the end of Season 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 13:34
|
|
|
Just bought seasons 6 and 7 off Amazon - the seasons are going for about 16 apiece! Gonna finish up season 5 soon. It really hasn't been as bad as people made me expect, though except for "The Supremes" it never really reached the heights of other seasons. I'm not a huge fan of Will's arc so far; does it improve in seasons 6 and 7?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Chamberk posted:Just bought seasons 6 and 7 off Amazon - the seasons are going for about 16 apiece! Will is never enjoyable. In season 6 he becomes a more important character, but rather annoying. In season 7, he's barely present, outside a handful of episodes. So that's good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
I'm just used to liking the actor from Sports Night. He seemed like a cool guy in season 4, but his decision to go over to Russell really weakened him and made him such an ancillary character.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Will's insistance in season 6 that Russell is the only candidate (when he's the anti-Bartlet) was incredibly annoying and I was so happy he got his comeuppance by losing. Seriously, gently caress Will. Plus who cared that he slept with Kate Harper in season 7? I had a hard time caring about her too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
Dancingthroughlife posted:Will's insistance in season 6 that Russell is the only candidate (when he's the anti-Bartlet) was incredibly annoying and I was so happy he got his comeuppance by losing. Seriously, gently caress Will. Plus who cared that he slept with Kate Harper in season 7? I had a hard time caring about her too. He always went around like he didn't understand that Russel was forced on Bartlet by Speaker Hafley, and keeps running around screaming that he can't see what Leo and Jeb saw in him (nothing)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 03:38
|
|
|
What was Will's rationale for Russel being the best candidate? Was it just that he was VP? That's all I remember, but really very few Vice Presidents actually go on to be elected President after.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:08
|
|
|
Diabolik900 posted:What was Will's rationale for Russel being the best candidate? Was it just that he was VP? That's all I remember, but really very few Vice Presidents actually go on to be elected President after. Will thought he could mold Russell into being whatever he wanted since Russell was such a blank slate, and Will also assumed there was something great about Russell because Bartlet and Leo picked him. Russell was the clear frontrunner for most of the cycle, as most untarnished VPs of popular presidents would be. I'm sure that helped.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:11
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:I adopted 3 month old brother/sisters kittens today and my roommate suggested name them Josh and C.J.. Great idea, or greatest idea?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:23
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:So my roommate and I have settled on CJ for the girl, but we're debating between Sam and Leo for the boy. Thoughts? Toby. Solid cat name plus Toby is the best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:44
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:So my roommate and I have settled on CJ for the girl, but we're debating between Sam and Leo for the boy. Thoughts? Definitely has to be "Jed". Great name for cats and people. edit: Or how about Potus? Captain Equinox fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 05:19
|
|
|
Currently burning my way through the series for a 7th time (outside of two episodes I can't stand). I love, so much, any scene that had Dr. McNally interacting with Admiral Fitzwallace. Ryan Pierce should get a spin off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 06:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
Charlie and Mrs. Landingham!
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 06:55
|
|
