I know I'm late on my Sopranos entry for you. I'm still thinking it through! But it's on my mind! I love The Sopranos and I've seen it all through twice and some episodes even more but I haven't thought deeply about the show even though it deserves all the deep thoughts.
I know I need to watch The Wire. I started it but I haven't really progressed. I've got mixed feelings on TWW's handling of politics, even if my general love for the show is huuge and ever-lasting. It feeds into the terrific prompt that you gave me for December- which were the best and worst reps of politics on the show. IMO, Sorkin picked and chose which elements of politics appealed the most to him and laser focused on those and just discarded the elements that he found too sordid and tiresome for his TV show and the later writers mostly followed Sorkin's lead. Like, Sorkin loved the broader debates between a congressperson and a staffer on how to vote and wrote those conversations well...but didn't want to get around to the inevitability of the lobbyist's role or the PAC's role because the money-talk is boring and sordid. Sorkin was kind of "eh" on military incursions in S1-2 and frequently wrote failures or near failures in American military action but after 9/11, he wanted pretty much write military incursions and the Situation Room as the Coolest Thing Ever that generally works. It's a funhouse mirror of how a writer(s) would tell a story about the White House more than a documentary. I can see how it would grate on others but it really works for me.
lol, no worries, I am here for Sopranos talk if/whenever you feel like it!
I rewatched several long stretches of the show last month, and a lot of the stuff you're mentioning is similar to my most recent impressions. I love the show overall, but this problem is a big one. I did wonder how much the S3/4 focus on military operations was about...just, How Things Were right after 9/11, particularly in terms of political media.
I know I need to watch The Wire. I started it but I haven't really progressed. I've got mixed feelings on TWW's handling of politics, even if my general love for the show is huuge and ever-lasting. It feeds into the terrific prompt that you gave me for December- which were the best and worst reps of politics on the show. IMO, Sorkin picked and chose which elements of politics appealed the most to him and laser focused on those and just discarded the elements that he found too sordid and tiresome for his TV show and the later writers mostly followed Sorkin's lead. Like, Sorkin loved the broader debates between a congressperson and a staffer on how to vote and wrote those conversations well...but didn't want to get around to the inevitability of the lobbyist's role or the PAC's role because the money-talk is boring and sordid. Sorkin was kind of "eh" on military incursions in S1-2 and frequently wrote failures or near failures in American military action but after 9/11, he wanted pretty much write military incursions and the Situation Room as the Coolest Thing Ever that generally works. It's a funhouse mirror of how a writer(s) would tell a story about the White House more than a documentary. I can see how it would grate on others but it really works for me.
Reply
I rewatched several long stretches of the show last month, and a lot of the stuff you're mentioning is similar to my most recent impressions. I love the show overall, but this problem is a big one. I did wonder how much the S3/4 focus on military operations was about...just, How Things Were right after 9/11, particularly in terms of political media.
Reply
Leave a comment