|
My only problem with that episode was the entire thing with maggie on the train getting her own little scoop by fooling and then impressing the jaded careless government worker with all that authenticity and integrity she's carrying around.
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:So that was probably the best episode the show has ever done IMO
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Thread learns Sorkin can make compelling tv in 2014, news at 10
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Pierson posted:My only problem with that episode was the entire thing with maggie on the train getting her own little scoop by fooling and then impressing the jaded careless government worker with all that authenticity and integrity she's carrying around. "WOW! Journalists CAN be good people!" — what Sorkin wants people watching that subplot to think, I guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
I think my biggest gripe was you get Toby and then Liam and the episode focuses on Toby. No one likes Toby.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
My biggest gripe is that mary mccormack got old
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Was the show this reviled in the previous live threads? I started watching it just before Season 2 and liked it a lot. I mean, I don't actually disagree with any of MrA's criticisms, except maybe a few minor points where he seems confused by a thing that happens for no reason but is actually relevant to later episodes, but everyone here seems to hate it but not stop watching.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Was the show this reviled in the previous live threads? I started watching it just before Season 2 and liked it a lot. I mean, I don't actually disagree with any of MrA's criticisms, except maybe a few minor points where he seems confused by a thing that happens for no reason but is actually relevant to later episodes, but everyone here seems to hate it but not stop watching. This was the Omega Hatewatch show of its time, yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Good to know that even this thread liked this episode as much as I did. I really hope they keep on going that string.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Was the show this reviled in the previous live threads? I started watching it just before Season 2 and liked it a lot. I mean, I don't actually disagree with any of MrA's criticisms, except maybe a few minor points where he seems confused by a thing that happens for no reason but is actually relevant to later episodes, but everyone here seems to hate it but not stop watching. In the previous threads there was a contingent of people who enjoyed it (me included) who got completely drowned out by people who hatewatched it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
blunt posted:In the previous threads there was a contingent of people who enjoyed it (me included) who got completely drowned out by people who hatewatched it. For reference, what this guy means is a contingent of people sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting any time someone brought up how much of a sexist weirdo sorkin was, or how disingenuous the entire concept of the show was
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
NEIL RUN
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
I mentioned it on the first page but basically I keep watching because I do like some of the characters on the show, and I do like some of the plot-lines on the show, and I do like the basic premise of behind-the-scenes of a newsroom trying to stay afloat and honest and relevant in the modern twenty-four-hour-bullshit-breaking-news-extravaganza. But all the things that I do like were just bogged the gently caress down by other aspects of the characters and Aaron Sorkin not realising that a news organisation, no matter how old and established, doesn't have the same gravitas as the highest government of the land.
Season 2 fixed some problems. Mainly giving Don and Sloan more screen-time, taking Don away from the ridiculous Jim-heart-Maggie plot. Genoa was fun. Season 3 has had a good start so far and I hope it stays this good because I love Sam Waterston and Jeff Bridges, and Olivia Munn is great, and I want more backroom dealing about how the news is made and poo poo and less office romance and Heartfelt Speeches About Integrity, which so far is what we've had. Also I want Mary McCormack to corner Dev Patel on a dam by the time the season ends and shoot at him as he jumps off. Doesn't have to be a big dam. Pierson fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
I actually think season 1 is head and shoulders above season 2. The highs may be lower, but Africa, Genoa, campaign trail, stupid loving Twitter translator, and REALLY loving stupid all Neal plots are so much worse. Season 1 was about dramatizing recent nostalgia, 2 was about history being rewritten by the Sorkin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:For reference, what this guy means is a contingent of people sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting any time someone brought up how much of a sexist weirdo sorkin was, or how disingenuous the entire concept of the show was About that ... How can Sloan (and Leona (Jane Fonda)) be written by the same person who wrote Maggie, Mac, Lisa and all the other insipid woomen on this show?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 08:32
|
|
|
DominoDancing posted:Good to know that even this thread liked this episode as much as I did. I really hope they keep on going that string. Will's snarky remarks and general schemey-ness is always entertaining, but the menu ploy was good man. Run, Neil, loving run. Pierson posted:My only problem with that episode was the entire thing with maggie on the train getting her own little scoop by fooling and then impressing the jaded careless government worker with all that authenticity and integrity she's carrying around. bubblelubble fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
So how come one minute people are worried that because Neil told the source how to steal the data he is guilty of espionage but five minutes later they're all "nah worst thing that could happen is that you get ten days for not revealing your source" The facts that put his wrongdoing above and beyond simply concealing the source (i.e. The fact that he asked the guy to steal more data and taught him how to do it) were never ever displaced. The threat of espionage charges should've been constant throughout the episode, it made no sense when people started ignoring it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:So how come one minute people are worried that because Neil told the source how to steal the data he is guilty of espionage but five minutes later they're all "nah worst thing that could happen is that you get ten days for not revealing your source" I think the logic goes: how are the authorities supposed to find out about Neil "nudging" the hacker? Neil won't tell them, and if he keeps his mouth shut they won't find the source so he won't tell them either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
brylcreem posted:About that ... Probably because Sorkin was writing those other characters as "wacky, all-too-human" characters without realizing that he can't write women as well as men so they come off as horrible sexist stereotypes instead. I think he wised up somewhere along the line.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:So how come one minute people are worried that because Neil told the source how to steal the data he is guilty of espionage but five minutes later they're all "nah worst thing that could happen is that you get ten days for not revealing your source" I think she just said that cause she talked to the FBI agent. None of the lawyers ever said it was suddenly no big deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Pierson posted:I mentioned it on the first page but basically I keep watching because I do like some of the characters on the show, and I do like some of the plot-lines on the show, and I do like the basic premise of behind-the-scenes of a newsroom trying to stay afloat and honest and relevant in the modern twenty-four-hour-bullshit-breaking-news-extravaganza. But all the things that I do like were just bogged the gently caress down by other aspects of the characters and Aaron Sorkin not realising that a news organisation, no matter how old and established, doesn't have the same gravitas as the highest government of the land. Aaron Sorkin has hated the internet since he got trolled on some forum like 15 years ago. This is right along with him recycling the "kidnapped relative held for ransom" plots and Sorkin inserting himself into every show as a brilliant writer. Initially The West Wing was supposed to be focused on Sam Seaborne until Martin Sheen stole all the glory. Seaborne, Matt Alby, and Will McAvoy are all Sorkin standins. The West Wing, Studio 60 and now News Night are all clones just with different makeup on. This isn't to say WW wasn't good, it was, but nothing he's done since has been able to re-capture that despite his best efforts. HUGE SPACEKABLOOIE fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Martin Sheen owned that show tho, I'm so glad that happened
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Barbe Rouge posted:I think the logic goes: how are the authorities supposed to find out about Neil "nudging" the hacker? Neil won't tell them, and if he keeps his mouth shut they won't find the source so he won't tell them either. Then why were they ever worried? Dr_Amazing posted:I think she just said that cause she talked to the FBI agent. None of the lawyers ever said it was suddenly no big deal. You mean, the people who were paid to render legal advice and look after Neal's legal interests decided not to contradict the obviously incorrect legal assertions of the non-lawyers, even though the difference between those assertions being true and them being false was whether Neal winds up in jail for 10 days or 10 years? Right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
The thing about Neil being in deep poo poo is even dumber since there was a scene in season 2 where Sloane and Don were discussing the fact that no journalist or writer had been tried under the espionage act, only threatened with it. Suddenly now its a huge deal because the plot requires it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
HUGE SPACEKABLOOIE posted:The thing about Neil being in deep poo poo is even dumber since there was a scene in season 2 where Sloane and Don were discussing the fact that no journalist or writer had been tried under the espionage act, only threatened with it. Suddenly now its a huge deal because the plot requires it.  And this would have been the case here, as evidenced by Mac's conversation with McFBI at the gunrange. The issue in this case is that Neal actively taught the guy how to get the files and asked him to get them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:
I think the other issue is that when Mac was talking with the FBI agent hypothetically, there was a misunderstanding about HOW serious and confidential the documents were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Max posted:I think the other issue is that when Mac was talking with the FBI agent hypothetically, there was a misunderstanding about HOW serious and confidential the documents were. I agree, there have been a lot of instances of the FBI or other american intellegence agencies silencing perceived threats in a whole lot of ways, many not even close to legal and quite definitive. Or at leaast thats how I perceive the american secret services throughout history, shady.....just really shady. So if thats the case then the FBI agent knows fully that certain things provoke certain extreme reactions, rather than 10 days in jail.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
FWIW none of these posts explain why all of a sudden everyone forgot about the fact that he actively participated in the espionage and stands to be prosecuted for that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Max posted:I think the other issue is that when Mac was talking with the FBI agent hypothetically, there was a misunderstanding about HOW serious and confidential the documents were. For sure. I forget, did any of the ACN guys have any idea what they had was so important?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Fetus Tree posted:For sure. I forget, did any of the ACN guys have any idea what they had was so important? None of them had seen them. Deliberately.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Those On My Left posted:FWIW none of these posts explain why all of a sudden everyone forgot about the fact that he actively participated in the espionage and stands to be prosecuted for that. I think the only person who actively forgot was Mac. You can handwave it away by saying she confused herself during the hypothetical talk with her FBI friend but still, Will and the lawyer were all about "you're going to pound me in the rear end prison." I think it was Sepinwall who had a good point about Sorkin in that, when he's at his best, Sorkin's characters are going up against a nearly immovable system like in West Wing/The American President (government), The Social Network (trying to get an internet startup off the ground), and A Few Good Men (the military). This benefits his character types (plucky, noble, good natured) because they can shine in an environment meant to push them back down. The Newsroom and Studio 60 don't have a system to fight against. I do think some of the good moments in the show are about the behind the scenes newsmaking/the business of keeping good news afloat. But its not enough to carry an entire episode on. So you get Sorkin doing relationships which didn't work well in The West Wing either (Josh and Mandy anyone?). The one saving grace here is that he may have found a nice system to bounce his Newsroom characters against and it's the government (again). Depending on if they continue the Neal/leak plot through the final four episodes. But then it becomes ACN vs the US Government/FBI over 1st amendment protections. So like The West Wing except from the side of the reporters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
This show should have been about the EPA guy. e: I mean, like, the whole series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
nooneofconsequence posted:This show should have been about the EPA guy. That series ended a couple years ago. Hoping everyone goes down by the end of the series. Sorkins final gently caress you is killing off/jailing the whole cast. That was terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
nooneofconsequence posted:This show should have been about the EPA guy. 100% agree with this. Toby graduated from HR to EPA where he still is despondent about everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
I cannot loving BELIEVE Sorkin is re-using the "tech billionaire buys cable company" plotline again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
I can't believe The Newsroom and The Office are having a crossover season. Just waiting for Mindy Kaling to waltz in and awful all over everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:I can't believe The Newsroom and The Office are having a crossover season. Just waiting for Mindy Kaling to waltz in and awful all over everything. If this show crossed over with The Mindy Project it could only improve.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Especially since Toby and Ryan are both playing exactly the same character, just in a slightly different setting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
mr. unhsib posted:I cannot loving BELIEVE Sorkin is re-using the "tech billionaire buys cable company" plotline again. This is something that shouldn't surprise us anymore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
I hate you Jim. Like, a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 13:11
|
|