Boxes and something about an elbow
The West Wing - 3.3 Ways and Means
Quite a while before we saw the President in this ep, and no Stockard Channing, because Abbey wasn’t in the ep.
So, the age of subpoenas had begun. Although I totally took Babbish’s accusation to CJ of maybe wanting one big win after a hard time for her (I think I must have been reassured that she was staying the first time I watched it after the President talked to her but I obviously never even bothered worrying this time around), for me she made a convincing enough case politically about needing a less reasonable enemy. It obviously won Leo over, and the rest of the team were behind it by the time they got the win. But anyway, it was such a pleasure to watch her get what she wanted move by move, partly because it’s simply nice to see CJ succeed and show off her smarts ad ability. (Even though this move will probably lead to other difficulties, be they political or legal, that they can’t know about yet.)
I also liked the Ainsley-Babbish interaction, reminding us he was her boss now and they would have worked together.
Meanwhile Sam was worried about the fire - not much to say about that, because this didn’t quite seem like the raging fires the world has had to suffer over the past few years, although there were claims of environmentalism thrown at the White House (mostly undeserved). The later point of Bartlet trusting in experts/scientists landed with more weight, but the other storylines had more salience for me.
With the estate/death tex, we got to see the White Houses’s weakness most clearly (which will get expanded on in the next episode). We also got to see that Bruno and his team had carved out their niche - the presidency and campaign were the bailiwick of our guys, while the new people were more focused on the campaign, but they were all working together slightly better, with Bruno learning Margaret’s name, Bruno failing to get the tape to work, me snerking at VHS. (The podcast noted that Sam and Connie didn’t have all that much chemistry although Hrishi really doesn’t seem to have admitted or recognised how much of a Sam/Ainsley shipper he is.)
Toby had a little moment of hubris, claiming to speak for Doug that they should be moderate. (Toby, hubristic? Shocker.) What I liked there was that it had already been made clear that if the Republicans thought they could repeal this Bill, where would it end over the forthcoming period? And so The Veto became a thing.
I also liked that we saw different takes on the legislation, from nomenclature to the understandable point that the Black caucus had different views-in hindsight, a totally valid point from the podcast that the placement of Latino and black voting blocs like that was othering minorities-and Bartlet’s observation about the American Dream and wealth.
I found the way the pen was brought into all that wonderful, a tangible example of the point that Charlie was making - that they needed a replacement to fill Mrs Landingham’s post. Bartlet’s grief was nicely given its due, but not overdone.
But going back a step, with Victor Campos, what was also dawning on our team was that loyalty wouldn’t cut it. Former supporters were looking for a new reason to continue supporting Bartlet, which showed up their weakness in another way.
Meanwhile, what was Ainsley thinking, setting Donna up with someone who worked for the other side right now? Even if Cliff’s transfer moved it from problematic to prohibited professionally, it wasn’t as if these were normal times, this was the run-up to an election, and things were getting spicy. Maybe she too could see Donna was frazzled, and sure, they were cute together (although yet another lawyer who knows more than Donna, SIGH). Of course Frazzled!Donna didn’t have to go try to date someone else because she couldn't have Josh. But she did, and then while everyone else celebrated CJ’s/their win, she got jostled into a realisation about what a mistake she’d made.
3.4 On The Day Before
To continue with Donna’s romantic travails, I thought I knew what she wanted to tell Josh when he gave her the chance, but there was the reveal that she’d seen Cliff again, which both made me wish I’d been a little more attentive to on what days what had happened in the previous episode (I plead guilty to ignoring the title cards), but based on the first date, made me ask REALLY? Had it gone so well that Donna, or more likely Cliff, would override his saying they really shouldn’t date? (Also, the podcast took it as read that it had been more than a date, which I hadn’t picked up on.) The second date reveal led to high drama from Josh (his furious face more than the door slam), and it was personal betrayal, heightened by their bein Josh/Donna. But seeing Cliff a second time felt like it was straining credibility to create DRAMAH for me. Possibly the point made on the podcast for ‘Ways and Means’ about how little sex goes on on The West Wing compared with other dramas is relevant. Because yes, Donna doing up Josh’s tie was erotically charged. Also, Josh mentioned Tony Bennett, who I’d jt heard was retiring.
This question of loyalty links in with Charlie having practically everyone try to urge him into taking the immunity deal - and I was glad to see this given my previous worry about his financial status. I also liked that every interaction was specific and different (e.g. he said more to CJ than the others, though his line about watching her change ?? Granted, she had enough seniority to treat it a a bit of cheek, not sexual harassment, but The West Wing could offer plenty of material for a ‘This is sexual harassment at the workplace’ video for a HR department in the 2020s. Only it wouldn’t be on VHS.) His reasons, as stated to Leo, for refusing and the point that he wanted to be known as loyal and trustworthy into the future was fair enough for me. (But quixotic according to the podcast?)
We also got to see competent!Press Secretary CJ versus a reporter who didn’t know the rules of the game and got SCHOOLED. I enjoyed the win too much to care about the niceties of whether CJ was too mean, and I think that diretly addressing the point about why she’d changed outfits in public would have been déclassé. There was just enough showing that, unlike the reporter, she did know her subject for me.
The attack in Israel felt like a good bit of drama, as we hadn’t had any international stuff in the previous episode, and all attention had been on the domestic politics of re-election. (Interesting to hear on the podcast that there had been a very similar incident when they’d finished the table read and that this was filmed before 9/11.) It had the potential to be huge, which was avoided in the episode, ultimately foucsing on the personal tragedy of two brothers (and all the unmentioned non-American tragedies, I should remind myself.) Bartlet’s perspective as a father worked while the other staff - who hadn’ been in on the situation either - floundered.
They had thought they knew what they would be dealing with at that dinner. I liked that they were taking up the cudgels with the difficult governor from the previous episode as well as following through with The Veto. I enjoyed watching the process of the new guy receiving the Bill, to the realisation that they’d lost votes and that Democrats i.e. their own people were trying to take advantage of the White House’s weakness.
Loved that Leo’s permission to, what was it, use the elbow? My brain only grasped ‘American sports thing’ and moved right on to metaphor for letting them off their leashes. It freed Sam to come up with reaching out to Republicans with the deal, snubbing their would-be blackmailer. Josh found another approach with the Governor, recognising he was on their side, proably it was because he was more about the policies than personal aggrandisement. It hadn’t occurred tp me, but the podcast put this down to Josh reacting to his mistake over tobacco seems right. The Republican’s reminder that there was a less binary way to do things, even at this point in the cycle, was a nice check for Toby and Sam, and it was mostly an episode of wins, even if a lot of them were for now only.
And sick!Abbey was mainly there to be a mother, although I suppose we were to take it that things were better between her and Jed?
This entry was originally posted at https://shallowness.dreamwidth.org/468561.html.
Quite a while before we saw the President in this ep, and no Stockard Channing, because Abbey wasn’t in the ep.
So, the age of subpoenas had begun. Although I totally took Babbish’s accusation to CJ of maybe wanting one big win after a hard time for her (I think I must have been reassured that she was staying the first time I watched it after the President talked to her but I obviously never even bothered worrying this time around), for me she made a convincing enough case politically about needing a less reasonable enemy. It obviously won Leo over, and the rest of the team were behind it by the time they got the win. But anyway, it was such a pleasure to watch her get what she wanted move by move, partly because it’s simply nice to see CJ succeed and show off her smarts ad ability. (Even though this move will probably lead to other difficulties, be they political or legal, that they can’t know about yet.)
I also liked the Ainsley-Babbish interaction, reminding us he was her boss now and they would have worked together.
Meanwhile Sam was worried about the fire - not much to say about that, because this didn’t quite seem like the raging fires the world has had to suffer over the past few years, although there were claims of environmentalism thrown at the White House (mostly undeserved). The later point of Bartlet trusting in experts/scientists landed with more weight, but the other storylines had more salience for me.
With the estate/death tex, we got to see the White Houses’s weakness most clearly (which will get expanded on in the next episode). We also got to see that Bruno and his team had carved out their niche - the presidency and campaign were the bailiwick of our guys, while the new people were more focused on the campaign, but they were all working together slightly better, with Bruno learning Margaret’s name, Bruno failing to get the tape to work, me snerking at VHS. (The podcast noted that Sam and Connie didn’t have all that much chemistry although Hrishi really doesn’t seem to have admitted or recognised how much of a Sam/Ainsley shipper he is.)
Toby had a little moment of hubris, claiming to speak for Doug that they should be moderate. (Toby, hubristic? Shocker.) What I liked there was that it had already been made clear that if the Republicans thought they could repeal this Bill, where would it end over the forthcoming period? And so The Veto became a thing.
I also liked that we saw different takes on the legislation, from nomenclature to the understandable point that the Black caucus had different views-in hindsight, a totally valid point from the podcast that the placement of Latino and black voting blocs like that was othering minorities-and Bartlet’s observation about the American Dream and wealth.
I found the way the pen was brought into all that wonderful, a tangible example of the point that Charlie was making - that they needed a replacement to fill Mrs Landingham’s post. Bartlet’s grief was nicely given its due, but not overdone.
But going back a step, with Victor Campos, what was also dawning on our team was that loyalty wouldn’t cut it. Former supporters were looking for a new reason to continue supporting Bartlet, which showed up their weakness in another way.
Meanwhile, what was Ainsley thinking, setting Donna up with someone who worked for the other side right now? Even if Cliff’s transfer moved it from problematic to prohibited professionally, it wasn’t as if these were normal times, this was the run-up to an election, and things were getting spicy. Maybe she too could see Donna was frazzled, and sure, they were cute together (although yet another lawyer who knows more than Donna, SIGH). Of course Frazzled!Donna didn’t have to go try to date someone else because she couldn't have Josh. But she did, and then while everyone else celebrated CJ’s/their win, she got jostled into a realisation about what a mistake she’d made.
3.4 On The Day Before
To continue with Donna’s romantic travails, I thought I knew what she wanted to tell Josh when he gave her the chance, but there was the reveal that she’d seen Cliff again, which both made me wish I’d been a little more attentive to on what days what had happened in the previous episode (I plead guilty to ignoring the title cards), but based on the first date, made me ask REALLY? Had it gone so well that Donna, or more likely Cliff, would override his saying they really shouldn’t date? (Also, the podcast took it as read that it had been more than a date, which I hadn’t picked up on.) The second date reveal led to high drama from Josh (his furious face more than the door slam), and it was personal betrayal, heightened by their bein Josh/Donna. But seeing Cliff a second time felt like it was straining credibility to create DRAMAH for me. Possibly the point made on the podcast for ‘Ways and Means’ about how little sex goes on on The West Wing compared with other dramas is relevant. Because yes, Donna doing up Josh’s tie was erotically charged. Also, Josh mentioned Tony Bennett, who I’d jt heard was retiring.
This question of loyalty links in with Charlie having practically everyone try to urge him into taking the immunity deal - and I was glad to see this given my previous worry about his financial status. I also liked that every interaction was specific and different (e.g. he said more to CJ than the others, though his line about watching her change ?? Granted, she had enough seniority to treat it a a bit of cheek, not sexual harassment, but The West Wing could offer plenty of material for a ‘This is sexual harassment at the workplace’ video for a HR department in the 2020s. Only it wouldn’t be on VHS.) His reasons, as stated to Leo, for refusing and the point that he wanted to be known as loyal and trustworthy into the future was fair enough for me. (But quixotic according to the podcast?)
We also got to see competent!Press Secretary CJ versus a reporter who didn’t know the rules of the game and got SCHOOLED. I enjoyed the win too much to care about the niceties of whether CJ was too mean, and I think that diretly addressing the point about why she’d changed outfits in public would have been déclassé. There was just enough showing that, unlike the reporter, she did know her subject for me.
The attack in Israel felt like a good bit of drama, as we hadn’t had any international stuff in the previous episode, and all attention had been on the domestic politics of re-election. (Interesting to hear on the podcast that there had been a very similar incident when they’d finished the table read and that this was filmed before 9/11.) It had the potential to be huge, which was avoided in the episode, ultimately foucsing on the personal tragedy of two brothers (and all the unmentioned non-American tragedies, I should remind myself.) Bartlet’s perspective as a father worked while the other staff - who hadn’ been in on the situation either - floundered.
They had thought they knew what they would be dealing with at that dinner. I liked that they were taking up the cudgels with the difficult governor from the previous episode as well as following through with The Veto. I enjoyed watching the process of the new guy receiving the Bill, to the realisation that they’d lost votes and that Democrats i.e. their own people were trying to take advantage of the White House’s weakness.
Loved that Leo’s permission to, what was it, use the elbow? My brain only grasped ‘American sports thing’ and moved right on to metaphor for letting them off their leashes. It freed Sam to come up with reaching out to Republicans with the deal, snubbing their would-be blackmailer. Josh found another approach with the Governor, recognising he was on their side, proably it was because he was more about the policies than personal aggrandisement. It hadn’t occurred tp me, but the podcast put this down to Josh reacting to his mistake over tobacco seems right. The Republican’s reminder that there was a less binary way to do things, even at this point in the cycle, was a nice check for Toby and Sam, and it was mostly an episode of wins, even if a lot of them were for now only.
And sick!Abbey was mainly there to be a mother, although I suppose we were to take it that things were better between her and Jed?
This entry was originally posted at https://shallowness.dreamwidth.org/468561.html.