so a while back I promised some Newsroom reporting.

[pocochina]

I had planned to watch all available episodes of The Newsroom before I panned made up my mind about it, but four episodes in and I actually can't take it anymore.

Comments

[elliemurasaki]

I keep meaning to find the time to watch Rachel. And Jon and Stephen, but mostly Rachel. It was easier when I didn't work nights. (At least to watch Rachel. Couldn't stay up late enough to watch Jon or Stephen.) I know all three shows are online afterwards, but.

[pocochina]

RACHEL MADDOW. I think most of us get our news from Internet People (unreliable!!! just like the NYT online!). I find that TRMS is convenient to check in on once in a while because the website posts the shows in clips, but yeah, there's not really any need to set aside time to "watch" the news.

[penny_lane_42]

Love this.

GWM's borderline-pathological refusal to acknowledge the humanity of those around him is merely a refusal to distract himself from his own greatness with manners.

YES. Gah, that's so well-put.

Anyway, now I'm ridiculously glad I'm not watching this show, though I was momentarily tempted when I realized Dev Patel was on it. But even for him I will not brave something this terrible!

[pocochina]

It drives me up a fucking wall. (Not least because it serves to fuel the rationalizations for the crap people get when they really do have a difficult time interacting with others, for whatever reason.) I think this is part of why I'm sticking with Big Bang Theory for the time being. Because ultimately the character of Sheldon is such a deconstruction of this exact thing. This tendency of his gets relentlessly mocked, and it's tied in with the more sympathetic parts of his backstory and social adeptness issues, without ever being excused.

But yeah. And sadly, you're not missing much of Dev Patel - what little he gets to do is very endearing, but everyone who's not Will or in line to kiss Will's ass gets bare minimum screen time, so.

[eowyn_315]

*pets you* Your sacrifice is a service to us all.

Also, YOU AND YOUR EPIC LINKS. I saw this post last night and was all, "This is going to need some serious QT. Must resist until tomorrow..." I especially love that Salon article, because it's pretty much all the problems I had with the first episode (which, of course, is all I actually watched). This, basically:

The thing with “The West Wing” is that the fantasy was legitimately better than the reality - these were smarter, better people than their real-life counterparts, working together at a better White House than the one we had. The problem with “The Newsroom” - and it was also the problem with “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,” Sorkin’s truly bizarre show about brilliant heroic men creating an epically unfunny and preachy version of “Saturday Night Live” - is that the supposed better alternative it presents is patently inferior to the real thing.I can put up with a lot of crap if I enjoy the basic premise of the show and the characters who populate it, especially when the writer

[pocochina]

RACHEL MADDOW FTW! That's the most frustrating flaw in the whole thing, is that this ideal show that we're supposed to be so! mad! is a nonexistent ideal? Actually does now, and did at the time, exist. But TRMS doesn't count because, um, because?

when he isn't tripping all over his ego and his privilege

Yeah. I am more and more convinced that Sorkin's problem is simply doesn't have anyone to tell him NO anymore. Not on repeated motifs, not on crappy research, not on bad analogies, not on bigoted attitudes.

You're not missing out. It gets so much worse. CAN'T EVEN HATE-WATCH. And I really would like to like it! It should be right up my alley. I wish the supporting characters got a little more exposure, because I can tell I would be able to invest in at least some of them, and because I think that would at least do a little bit to deflate the GWM-ness of it all. OH WELL.

Sorkin

[auroramama]

Well, it may be just as well not to get invested in any supporting characters, especially females, since Sorkin has that charming habit of inflicting drawn-out humiliation scenarios on female characters when he decides they've been intelligent and independent for too long. Or perhaps they've reached the Clever Quip Limit, which, like total lifetime orgasms, is much lower for women than for men. I don't know what it is that triggers it, but I've never trusted him after Natalie.

There's nothing noble about my higher tolerance for Great White Women than GWMs, but it's at least as legitimate as the usual formula.

Re: Sorkin

[pocochina]

Sorkin has that charming habit of inflicting drawn-out humiliation scenarios on female characters when he decides they've been intelligent and independent for too long.

Presumably you aren't watching, and I won't be boring you by the revelation that "too long" has been re-defined to "about three scenes into the pilot." Oh, and now he's doing self-insertion to the extent where the main character is the one doing the humiliating.

It's especially frustrating because....CJ Cregg! Amy Gardner! He can do great things for female characters, but he chooses this toxic garbage consistently.

There's nothing noble about my higher tolerance for Great White Women than GWMs, but it's at least as legitimate as the usual formula.

Agreed completely.