The mist scene is so amazing I'm going to try and make a gif of it. I'm watching it now. There's an amazing face that Squinty McSmug makes just as he sees him that's literally like something straight out of Batman. It's incredible.
Television Aaron Sorkin's The Newsroom on HBO
- Thread starter Zen
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
Bit shit quality wise. How do you make these blasted things?
Like that.
Yes!...But keep it going until the mist bit!
Is this actually growing and getting better? Some of the stuff in here makes it sound like it's getting worse. I only saw the first 2 episodes.
It's now turned into a cross between 90210 & A shit superhero show about Trevor McDonald.
I'm captivated by it.
Also why is Will's bodyguard never around? Every so often he shows up and fecks off pretty sharp-ish. Or is he only in for a bit of light, bi-racial comic relief?
He is the shittest bodyguard ever too, he fell for the old "I'm not gonna run" trick in the car a couple episodes back and couldn't even catch a doped up anchorman on foot (well he might have had he not been arrested for being black).
Painful.
And the random moment of slapstick where Will falls out into the office without his pants on. It's hard to take the actual serious aspects seriously when they throw in stuff like that. In fact, the show would almost be better viewed as a sitcom.
This is where they jumped the shark ... in season 1. Can't take it seriously anymore. It does still bring up the odd interesting points though .. about being tougher on candidates in the debate. Here's hoping that Will's stalker snipes Maggie, Mackenzie and Don in that order. They can then reboot this in S2.
I'm captivated by it.
It needs to become a gif for when someone comes into a thread and saves the day with a winning argument.
I can't remember if I made this point in this thread or when talking about it with friends, but there's so much to 'tweak' he'd have to completely overhaul it to sort most of the problems, which would make it a new show, essentially. My guess is that this either gets cancelled during the second season or they don't get a third.
It needs to become a gif for when someone comes into a thread and saves the day with a winning argument.
His hands are in his pockets and he's wearing a sports coat. Outstanding work.
You could show people that gif and say it was from The Dark Knight Rises, they wouldn't know.
I really, really want the News at 10 start with Trevor McDonald emerging back lit from a plume of mist now.
He's retired. But the question you need to ask yourself is this; has he been retired for 8 years and become a hermit?
I don't mind it so much. Just like the West Wing or the "Left Wing" as my American politics professor used to refer to it, it's incredibly unbalanced and very idealistic but it's presented in a fairly witty and entertaining way.
He's just been disillusioned by sell out news. He needs a cause. A mission if you will. A quest to redeem news reporting for the good, the just and the true. He's just biding his time, waiting for the right moment. He's a silent protector, a watchful guardian. A dark knight (not racist) ..One day, I hope to be watching him emerge through his mysterious plume of magic smoke and say to the awe filled urchin boy I'll hang around with for some reason "You're in for a show tonight son."
He is more like Paxman than McDonald, I almost thought he was an inspiration for the character.
I've literally been watching that gif whilst listening to this for the last 10 minutes.
It's incredible. I might never do anything else again.
It's incredible. I might never do anything else again.
Yes! Goodbye Carnival weekend.
http://gifsound.com/?gif=http://i69...//www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_6x3EW3FC0&start=0
http://gifsound.com/?gif=http://i69...//www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_6x3EW3FC0&start=0
I thought it was from 24 or something.
Next episode is the last of the season too, kinda thought it was going at least 16 episodes.
Actually the scene in the clothes shop was the worst. What exactly was the point of it all?
Convince big tits to go on TV to talk about Casey Anthony (who conveniently was in the same class as her at college, much like McSmug also having high level contacts as family members).
Well yeah, I knew why they were there, but why was the scene so long, aimless and utterly unfunny? What was the point of the socialite?
This is probably my favorite bit of acting from the whole show.
I could not believe it was happening. In fact I did not understand the whole point of that segment until I read one of the reviews. Also amazing how magically how they almost always get a connection to ongoing news story. How about showing how real journalists struggle to get such sources?
That wouldn't leave nearly enough time for ranting, annoying romances and mist walking.
You had that real journalism bit when they skyped a freelance for the riots episode, what more do you want!?
It was amazing. I kept thinking it would end soon but it kept on going. They did the whole "You should buy that dress. Don't look at any other dresses. That's the one" routine twice, as if it wasn't unfunny enough the first time.
I would watch your crossover cast Newsroom/Batman movie about a superhero journalist called 'The MistWalker'. Start writing the script Mockers, potential goldmine there.
The Mistwalker is an excellent name! I'm definitely going to do it.*
*I'm almost certainly not.
*I'm almost certainly not.
The destruction of the show in here may be a tad harsh. It's certainly not the worst show going, not as laughably poor as is made out. Then again, I had no idea who Sorkin is so I'm viewing this as TV without any preconceptions or expectations. I'm also slightly left (read: very much so) but I don't think that clouds my judgement on things. I have another friend who watches it and she thinks it's a solid show. I must admit I find it watchable too.
I was talking about it with her the other day and, bearing in mind neither of us have seen Sorkin before, we found ourselves talking about these weird quirky traits in his writing. Essentially all the stuff you guys are picking up on: the spontaneous speeches, the bipolar disorder of all the characters, how the funny moments don't quite "fit", etc.
I just thought I'd throw this out there -- and it seems as though Mockney might have touched upon it lightly here -- but we came up with the fact that maybe this is being in a manner which deliberately goes against the grain of what we, as viewers, expect? So, for example, in the love triangle we expect two true lovers who we wish happiness for. However, in this, we sort of realise how ultimately pointless it all is and hate them all for just making themselves miserable. We also expect the high-functioning sociopath (Munn) to act in a certain intelligent but endearing way, which makes them our favourite. However, as Munn's character is not to dissimilar from an actual sociopath, we're confused.
Above all, we expect TV to be a battle of good vs evil, where the evil is written in such a way that we don't care what happens to them as long as good wins out. We shouldn't care about the guy that whatsherface cheated on Will with -- he's the evil man who ended up indirectly breaking Will's heart -- but we actually do care. And we care at the expense of whatsherface, who is the character we're supposed to like. That confuses us.
After about 30 minutes of what is probably crazy-people discussion we (my friend and I) decided that the show is either a) entertaining but poorly-written or b) written in a highly intelligent meta-manner in that it talks about how the news is wrong and formulaic thus the TV show itself avoids TV clichés. It's highly likely to be the former but I wonder what you guys think of the latter? Heaven forbid we actually spark up some debate on the Caf!
(Just to add, when you guys referred to a character who squints I didn't think you were talking about the guy. I thought you were referring to whatsherface [his boss] who seems to squint out of her left eye a lot. Watch it, once you see it you can't unsee it. And yes, we can't decide whether she's over-acting or brilliantly portraying an over-emotional women either.)
I was talking about it with her the other day and, bearing in mind neither of us have seen Sorkin before, we found ourselves talking about these weird quirky traits in his writing. Essentially all the stuff you guys are picking up on: the spontaneous speeches, the bipolar disorder of all the characters, how the funny moments don't quite "fit", etc.
I just thought I'd throw this out there -- and it seems as though Mockney might have touched upon it lightly here -- but we came up with the fact that maybe this is being in a manner which deliberately goes against the grain of what we, as viewers, expect? So, for example, in the love triangle we expect two true lovers who we wish happiness for. However, in this, we sort of realise how ultimately pointless it all is and hate them all for just making themselves miserable. We also expect the high-functioning sociopath (Munn) to act in a certain intelligent but endearing way, which makes them our favourite. However, as Munn's character is not to dissimilar from an actual sociopath, we're confused.
Above all, we expect TV to be a battle of good vs evil, where the evil is written in such a way that we don't care what happens to them as long as good wins out. We shouldn't care about the guy that whatsherface cheated on Will with -- he's the evil man who ended up indirectly breaking Will's heart -- but we actually do care. And we care at the expense of whatsherface, who is the character we're supposed to like. That confuses us.
After about 30 minutes of what is probably crazy-people discussion we (my friend and I) decided that the show is either a) entertaining but poorly-written or b) written in a highly intelligent meta-manner in that it talks about how the news is wrong and formulaic thus the TV show itself avoids TV clichés. It's highly likely to be the former but I wonder what you guys think of the latter? Heaven forbid we actually spark up some debate on the Caf!
(Just to add, when you guys referred to a character who squints I didn't think you were talking about the guy. I thought you were referring to whatsherface [his boss] who seems to squint out of her left eye a lot. Watch it, once you see it you can't unsee it. And yes, we can't decide whether she's over-acting or brilliantly portraying an over-emotional women either.)
All that is garbage AVARice I am afraid. I am a Television junkie and watch all sorts of shows and this show is definitely not up to the mark for network TV let alone cable like HBO where you get much more creative license.
To say in the age of shows like Sopranos, Breaking Bad, The Shield.. people want the same old game of good vs evil where they don't care about the bad side is ridiculous. People actually now want characters that are shades of grey instead of black and white.
I am not sure what's confusing about Munn's character, other that the fact it is badly written with a mish mash of jumbled character traits.
I am not comment on the love triangle stuff. If someone actually finds it endearing or watchable in any sense, then I really don't have the words.
There are several other issues - drumming up sources as a personal contacts of characters, using old news stories to establish triumphs for characters, how women are written, hero worship of central character etc... so it is not just one thing or another.
Sorkin name also matters because without it, I am certain HBO would not have ordered a second season.
I am glad you like the show and don't want to kill your enjoyment. But your defence of the show is really just wishful thinking of what you want it to be.
To say in the age of shows like Sopranos, Breaking Bad, The Shield.. people want the same old game of good vs evil where they don't care about the bad side is ridiculous. People actually now want characters that are shades of grey instead of black and white.
I am not sure what's confusing about Munn's character, other that the fact it is badly written with a mish mash of jumbled character traits.
I am not comment on the love triangle stuff. If someone actually finds it endearing or watchable in any sense, then I really don't have the words.
There are several other issues - drumming up sources as a personal contacts of characters, using old news stories to establish triumphs for characters, how women are written, hero worship of central character etc... so it is not just one thing or another.
Sorkin name also matters because without it, I am certain HBO would not have ordered a second season.
I am glad you like the show and don't want to kill your enjoyment. But your defence of the show is really just wishful thinking of what you want it to be.
Fair enough but I disagree with the notion that it's not up to the mark. At its most basic level the show provokes thought. Namely, could we actually have a news channel like this in reality? Wouldn't it be great if news became news again? I like TV shows that make you think about things and I reckon (hope, even) I'm not alone in that!
I fear you've missed my point there. People want shades of grey but they still want it on a plate. Do you watch Suits? No spoilers from me but if you do, this season is proof of what I mean. You can have shades of grey but the audience either knows which side to choose or both sides are audience-friendly. Audiences don't want to have to think too hard about things. That's why being taken for a sucker by a character in a movie is usually referred to as a "twist" as opposed to a "person behaving in their interest which totally had you fooled despite it making total sense from their perspective".
Munn's character is one of the truest portrayals of sociopathy I've seen on TV. What you think is a mish-mash is what I'd say is an accurate depiction of what real-world sociopaths can be like, particularly highly intelligent ones. Obviously some parts of her character are over-done for the sake of the show, however.
I don't think anyone finds any of the love stories entertaining. They all suck.
Agree regarding how convenient some of the writing is and how really odd it can be. I must say I'm not impressed with the way women are written and I'm glad it's been picked up on so heavily on here. I feared it was just me being overly-sensitive towards women's rights and whatnot.
To be fair I didn't mean it as a defence, I meant it as a topic of debate. I'm used to having my outlandish theories proven wrong, I just thought it'd be worth seeing how others have interpreted it.
I fear you've missed my point there. People want shades of grey but they still want it on a plate. Do you watch Suits? No spoilers from me but if you do, this season is proof of what I mean. You can have shades of grey but the audience either knows which side to choose or both sides are audience-friendly. Audiences don't want to have to think too hard about things. That's why being taken for a sucker by a character in a movie is usually referred to as a "twist" as opposed to a "person behaving in their interest which totally had you fooled despite it making total sense from their perspective".
Munn's character is one of the truest portrayals of sociopathy I've seen on TV. What you think is a mish-mash is what I'd say is an accurate depiction of what real-world sociopaths can be like, particularly highly intelligent ones. Obviously some parts of her character are over-done for the sake of the show, however.
I don't think anyone finds any of the love stories entertaining. They all suck.
Agree regarding how convenient some of the writing is and how really odd it can be. I must say I'm not impressed with the way women are written and I'm glad it's been picked up on so heavily on here. I feared it was just me being overly-sensitive towards women's rights and whatnot.
To be fair I didn't mean it as a defence, I meant it as a topic of debate. I'm used to having my outlandish theories proven wrong, I just thought it'd be worth seeing how others have interpreted it.
It's definitely watchable, but honestly, I can't think of a shitter show that HBO have made, at least in the last few years? I mean, in general it helps that the majority are full of tits, but this one doesn't even have that to save it. It's so fecking average.
Suits is the perfect example. It is a very average show, it knows what it wants to be and does not pretend to be anything else. Comparing it to Newsroom proves my point. Suits sets out to be blatantly superficial while Newsoom does not and intends to have some depth to it. But fails miserably.
Seems to be that you missed plethora of good dramas out there and are comparing Newsroom to other shit out there. Compared to best drama on TV like MadMen, BB, GOT, Homeland... Newsroom would get butchered in every single aspect. It is a bit like comparing a poor comedy flick to any latest Adam Sadler movie and hailing it to be better than it is.
It does raise some good point from time to time but it is undercut by several howlers
- The debate issue was a valid one but the way Will conducted the debate is not the answer either.
- In first episode they did not wait for proper conformation to break oil spill thing but in that congress woman death case, they continently decided to ignore a source like NPR. There is simply no logic behind many of the decisions made other than making the news team look right in every instance.
It is just filled with loads of this stuff. The whole internet angle on the show has been torture as well. The constant speeches by different characters is cringeworthy to the extreme even if I have the same view.
Infact I am suddently struggling to think why am I even watching this anymore....