The Newsroom - new HBO series from Aaron Sorkin (1 Viewer)

[Ash]

"So Will, tell me more about these shot clocks. I find your American customs so fascinating!"

I think it was closer to "Why are there two clocks on the screen." - which sounds legit from a soccer fan

Soccer could use a GD shot clock.

 

[Ash]

Third group. It's not challenging or condescending, just an entertaining fictional television show.

I'm in that group. I still think it's a great show although I liked the first season more.Also, I may be in the minority but I thought Maggie looked pretty damn good when she was all drunked up in the bar two episodes ago.

That was the reaction my misspent younger years led me to as well.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I'm halfway through season 1. Nothing to add, just a :blockdot:

 

[SIDA!]

woah, i loved the episode. thought it was the best one of the year.

My gf and I have just started watching this show in the middle of this season. I have been rolling my eyes at so much of it being that I have a libertarian/conservative outlook on things and laugh at the supposed magical ability for liberal journalists to keep their bias out of their work and the liberal "leanings" of Sorkin.

So my exposure to the show is limited and maybe not as jaded as it would be had I watched from episode 1 of the first season.

But, we enjoyed last nights episode the most. Our brain froze on the "pimp slap". I saw the shot clock thing a mile away and found the closing scene to be somewhat disappointing and jarring. I get the whole indignation and anger toward the scummy producer and the lawsuit -- but the reality is that other heads must roll to even begin the effort to regain the audience's trust.

 

[SIDA!]

Really not sure why its so hard to believe that it occurred to her to look at the shot clock while she was reviewing the interview footage after having a conversation about shot clocks

It's not. It was the lengthy shot clock conversation with Will, which would never happen in a BILLION years which has me

I'd say the worse part is how they didn't even need the shot clock...which admittedly would be hard to spot in its small placement during the interview...but that they focused on that when there was a clear jump in the video at the point the General "verified" the story. It went something like...guy dribbling the ball in the back court...to guy shooting off the wing.

I agree. I found the shot clock angle a little too convenient/simplistic.

As an aside, since I am new to the show and not sure what the timeline is for all of this, I had a question about the college football game that Will is watching.

The interview with Stomtonovich occurred during March Madness. I am assuming the story ran shortly after the interview. Let's say April.

Doesn't the shot clock/soccer/football conversation happen just a couple of months later? It is a pretty big error if true and I doubt it is. So can someone give me a quick timeline breakdown after the Stomtonovich interview?

 

[The Dude]

woah, i loved the episode. thought it was the best one of the year.

My gf and I have just started watching this show in the middle of this season. I have been rolling my eyes at so much of it being that I have a libertarian/conservative outlook on things and laugh at the supposed magical ability for liberal journalists to keep their bias out of their work and the liberal "leanings" of Sorkin.

So my exposure to the show is limited and maybe not as jaded as it would be had I watched from episode 1 of the first season.

But, we enjoyed last nights episode the most. Our brain froze on the "pimp slap". I saw the shot clock thing a mile away and found the closing scene to be somewhat disappointing and jarring. I get the whole indignation and anger toward the scummy producer and the lawsuit -- but the reality is that other heads must roll to even begin the effort to regain the audience's trust.

Generally i agree with what you said - but Lena was more offended that the worm brought down what she built. Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

That's where Sorkin goes off the rails. In what state is this kind of "scapegoating" an actionable offense? In what universe should a producer who deceptively edits raw footage not be fired?

 

[dparker713]

Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

That's where Sorkin goes off the rails. In what state is this kind of "scapegoating" an actionable offense? In what universe should a producer who deceptively edits raw footage not be fired?

Yeah, the lawsuit is ridiculous.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

That's where Sorkin goes off the rails. In what state is this kind of "scapegoating" an actionable offense? In what universe should a producer who deceptively edits raw footage not be fired?

Yeah, the lawsuit is ridiculous.

Many are.

 

[joffer]

Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

That's where Sorkin goes off the rails. In what state is this kind of "scapegoating" an actionable offense? In what universe should a producer who deceptively edits raw footage not be fired?

Yeah, the lawsuit is ridiculous.

Many are.

 

[The Dude]

Also, by admitting institutional error (or whatever phrase it was) - they give merit to Dantana's lawsuit. If the institution failed - then Dantana is being used as a scapegoat.

That's where Sorkin goes off the rails. In what state is this kind of "scapegoating" an actionable offense? In what universe should a producer who deceptively edits raw footage not be fired?

Agreed - but if Charlie et al take the blame for it as their responsibility - I think that games merit to the wrongful termination.

And I am not flat out defending it - just rationalizing the thought

 

[Chase Stuart]

I love the snappy dialogue. It's one of my favorite aspects of the show. One of the reasons I did not care for the first two episodes of this season was that type of dialogue was missing. There was no life to the dialogue. But the last two episodes that has returned and I've enjoyed them much more as a result. It honestly doesn't matter to me if people don't talk like that in real life. It's entertaining and that's why I'm watching.

I thought the "N-head Ranch" scene was hysterical. Really good dialogue that they kept strong and at a fast pace for like 90 seconds.

 

[northern exposure]

I never saw anything in Maggie, but I'm quite enamored with Emily Mortimer.

I agree with you.

 

[Apple Jack]

It just occurred to me how much Charlie is like Leo.

 

[Chase Stuart]

All of the criticisms of this show are valid. It's completely ridiculous. But it's also kind of fun to watch.

Kind of how I feel. I'm not sure I would recommend this to people in real life, and admit that I like it, but I can't pretend that I don't like I show when I've watched the first two seasons (I'm now caught up) in like a week. It's entertaining, and the two male leads are great.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

However Sorkin the coked out egomaniac who can't handle poor relationships with women is wearisome.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Renewed for season three.

 

[Gr00vus]

However Sorkin GordonGekko the coked out egomaniac message board alias who can't handle poor relationships with women Jason Wood is wearisome.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Renewed for season three.

good. I like it - despite the new butch Maggie

 

[Gr00vus]

I thought this last episode was pretty good, except for the on air goofy faux pas stuff. I couldn't understand what it was Charlie yelled at the end - #### <something>? Should be interesting to see what words Sorkin puts in Daniels's mouth in the next one in regards to the conservative rant.

 

[General Malaise]

I liked last season a little better, but I'm enjoying this one too. More Jane Fonda, much less Maggie. More Don, much less Jim. Neal is terrific. Wish they'd do more with him. I thought his interaction with the finger puppet protesters was very good and wish they did more there. Loved the interaction with Sloan and Elliott. That was gold.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I thought this last episode was pretty good, except for the on air goofy faux pas stuff. I couldn't understand what it was Charlie yelled at the end - #### <something>? Should be interesting to see what words Sorkin puts in Daniels's mouth in the next one in regards to the conservative rant.

I think he just threw his hands up in the air and said slurred "I mean what the ####?"

 

[Fennis]

I thought the previous episode was a great way to end the season. I was surprised to see two more episodes. I really wish it ended with Jane Fonda's yelling "Get it back!"

 

[Chase Stuart]

Solid episode -- the show is still entertaining, should be a good season finale.

 

[packersfan]

I'd give last season an A. Thought it was an incredible season.

I'd give this season a B with a shot at a B+ with a strong finale.

Interested to see what they do with the Will firing Mac angle.

 

[lakerstan]

I love Olivia Munn to begin with, but really enjoying what she/they have done to grow her character.

 

[Gr00vus]

Caught a few minutes of The Ghost In The Darkness last night. I had forgotten Mortimer was in that as Kilmer's wife- she looked very nice in her head to toe dress for the 3 minutes of screen time she had.

 

[Beerguzzler]

This show is really picking up steam. Loved tonight's episode.

 

[Raider Nation]

Best episode of the series to date. Superb. We had to suffer through a lot of drivel this season to get here, but wow was it worth it.

 

[Shrugs]

Full-blown AIDS.

 

[The Dude]

I have been supportive of the show - but I thought last night was weak

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I thought the finale was hokey, but I at least thought it put to rest a lot of the problems I have with the show.

I've always thought that the show's "will they or won't they" dynamics were the absolute worst. Particularly the stupid running plot with Will and Mac (and I also thought it was weird to have a show with a bunch mature professionals where everyone was some kind of clueless single). Will and Mac will be more interesting as a married couple, hopefully.

Similarly, I never believed that Don and Sloan would just dance around such an obvious mutual attraction for months on end. Both characters are written as fairly fearless truth-tellers. So put the couples together and focus the show on these people trying to be good at their jobs. Because maybe once I know Maggie as a full-fledged character, I can give a **** about who she ends up with.

 

[TLEF316]

Yeah, I was kinda surprised they went with the wayne's world mega happy ending, but whatever

 

[Sinn Fein]

Was reading something on-line today that suggests that Sorkin is not completely on board with a third season - part of the reason for neatly wrapping up everything with a nice little bow. Assuming there will be a third season, It will almost certainly be delayed - Sorkin claims to be too busy, plus they might want more real-life time to elapse for more news stories to develop to give them more material with which to build story lines.

 

[packersfan]

Solid season. I thought the first season was significantly better but this one was solid and rallied strong after two weak episodes to open the season.

Looking forward to Season 3.

 

[The Dude]

I think the disappointment from me was 3 episodes ago Fonda's "Get it back!!" seemed to be setting up the final 2 episodes. But they did nothing to deliver on her statement.

Fonda's statement should have been the season finale.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I think the disappointment from me was 3 episodes ago Fonda's "Get it back!!" seemed to be setting up the final 2 episodes. But they did nothing to deliver on her statement.

Fonda's statement should have been the season finale.

They kind of failed to deliver on a lot of things. I'm fine with them not immediately gaining their credibility back. That would have been pretty silly and unrealistic.

I didn't particularly understand having Will tell Taylor to come at him with the Republican stuff to only have him repeat what he said a million times before. I was thinking that he'd make the obvious observation that he viewed himself as a Republican in the same way that he understood the real, authentic Mitt Romney to be a Republican eight years ago. Which would have been inappropriate in election coverage but very Sorkin-y.

 

[Gr00vus]

Was reading something on-line today that suggests that Sorkin is not completely on board with a third season - part of the reason for neatly wrapping up everything with a nice little bow. Assuming there will be a third season, It will almost certainly be delayed - Sorkin claims to be too busy, plus they might want more real-life time to elapse for more news stories to develop to give them more material with which to build story lines.

That sure did seem like a series finale rather than a season finale. It felt like they made a pretty big course correction for the final 2 episodes in relation to how the rest of the season had gone. Plus they dropped the whole flash forward thing.

Forget all that though - did you cut your hair yourself?

 

[packersfan]

Was reading something on-line today that suggests that Sorkin is not completely on board with a third season - part of the reason for neatly wrapping up everything with a nice little bow. Assuming there will be a third season, It will almost certainly be delayed - Sorkin claims to be too busy, plus they might want more real-life time to elapse for more news stories to develop to give them more material with which to build story lines.

That sure did seem like a series finale rather than a season finale. It felt like they made a pretty big course correction for the final 2 episodes in relation to how the rest of the season had gone. Plus they dropped the whole flash forward thing.

They didn't drop the flash forward. The timeline caught up with it three episodes ago.

 

[Gr00vus]

Was reading something on-line today that suggests that Sorkin is not completely on board with a third season - part of the reason for neatly wrapping up everything with a nice little bow. Assuming there will be a third season, It will almost certainly be delayed - Sorkin claims to be too busy, plus they might want more real-life time to elapse for more news stories to develop to give them more material with which to build story lines.

That sure did seem like a series finale rather than a season finale. It felt like they made a pretty big course correction for the final 2 episodes in relation to how the rest of the season had gone. Plus they dropped the whole flash forward thing.

They didn't drop the flash forward. The timeline caught up with it three episodes ago.

Why would you say that? The flash forwards were all interviews for some yet to be had court hearing. These last three episodes they're just deciding whether to settle or go to court. You're saying all those interviews were just prep work to decide whether they were going to court - because it sure didn't seem that way to me.

 

[packersfan]

The interviews were all being done in conjunction with the lawsuit Dantana filed. The suit was going to go public the morning after Election night. All of the flash forwards were building up to Election night. There was no more need for flash forwards because the two timelines had now caught up with one another.

ETA - I suddenly feel like I'm back in the "Lost" thread.

 

[Gr00vus]

The interviews were all being done in conjunction with the lawsuit Dantana filed. The suit was going to go public the morning after Election night. All of the flash forwards were building up to Election night. There was no more need for flash forwards because the two timelines had now caught up with one another.

ETA - I suddenly feel like I'm back in the "Lost" thread.

I'm saying it wasn't obvious to me that the two timelines had caught up with each other. They just made the decision to go to court on Election night - so you're saying they were doing all that interview prep work prior to deciding to go to court (i.e. fight the lawsuit) rather than settling?

 

[General Malaise]

Loved the scene were Don was talking to the attorney about suing Dantana. Great TV. Love this guy's chops.

 

[joffer]

Loved it. Sorkin in can be corny, but I love his stuff.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The interviews were all being done in conjunction with the lawsuit Dantana filed. The suit was going to go public the morning after Election night. All of the flash forwards were building up to Election night. There was no more need for flash forwards because the two timelines had now caught up with one another.

ETA - I suddenly feel like I'm back in the "Lost" thread.

I'm saying it wasn't obvious to me that the two timelines had caught up with each other. They just made the decision to go to court on Election night - so you're saying they were doing all that interview prep work prior to deciding to go to court (i.e. fight the lawsuit) rather than settling?

In fairness, Sorkin's own writing is a bit incoherent on this point. Particularly when he has Jim's girlfriend refer to him being in "depo prep." He was not in depo prep because no deposition would be close to being scheduled.

It's fairly common for a potential plaintiff to provide the defendant with a copy of a civil complaint before formally filing the suit and serving the defendant (essentially, as a settlement ploy). And it's certainly not unheard of in those circumstances for a defense attorney to then conduct interviews with the key defense witnesses. To get the story straight, to determine who would be a good witness, to figure out who might have key documents, etc. I haven't generally seen such interviews conducted by a $1,000/hr trial lawyer and several associates before, but hey, dramatic license.

What seems odd in this case, is that the actual interviews strike me as irrelevant. Jerry doesn't have a cognizable wrongful termination claim under any legal theory I can think of. He'd lose on a motion to dismiss, before discovery could even start. So even if ACN's fear is the public embarrassment of the complaint, the interviews seem like a colossal waste of money.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The interviews were all being done in conjunction with the lawsuit Dantana filed. The suit was going to go public the morning after Election night. All of the flash forwards were building up to Election night. There was no more need for flash forwards because the two timelines had now caught up with one another.

ETA - I suddenly feel like I'm back in the "Lost" thread.

I'm saying it wasn't obvious to me that the two timelines had caught up with each other. They just made the decision to go to court on Election night - so you're saying they were doing all that interview prep work prior to deciding to go to court (i.e. fight the lawsuit) rather than settling?

Yeah, Dantana said to ACN, "If you don't pay me, I'm going to sue you."

So ACN's lawyers met with ACN's employees to figure out whether ACN should pay Dantana. (These weren't depositions or anything. Just meetings between lawyers and clients to figure out what to do.)

They decided not to pay him. So now Dantana is going to sue.

 

[Gr00vus]

The interviews were all being done in conjunction with the lawsuit Dantana filed. The suit was going to go public the morning after Election night. All of the flash forwards were building up to Election night. There was no more need for flash forwards because the two timelines had now caught up with one another.

ETA - I suddenly feel like I'm back in the "Lost" thread.

I'm saying it wasn't obvious to me that the two timelines had caught up with each other. They just made the decision to go to court on Election night - so you're saying they were doing all that interview prep work prior to deciding to go to court (i.e. fight the lawsuit) rather than settling?

Yeah, Dantana said to ACN, "If you don't pay me, I'm going to sue you."

So ACN's lawyers met with ACN's employees to figure out whether ACN should pay Dantana. (These weren't depositions or anything. Just meetings between lawyers and clients to figure out what to do.)

They decided not to pay him. So now Dantana is going to sue.

Thanks for enlightening me. I assumed wrongly that they wouldn't have spent all the time and money on those interviews before they'd decided to go to court. I guess if we get a season 3 we might see some follow up on what happens with the lawsuit, which frankly is a shame because that entire subplot was much less interesting to me than the other stuff they had going on.

I liked last night's episode by the way, even with the neatly wrapped up happy endings (except for the now anorexic, ginger straw headed Maggie).

 

[packersfan]

Given how Sorkin dismissed a major storyline in Season 1 this season (Will being the subject of death threats online) without even mentioning it I wouldn't be surprised if we never hear another word about the lawsuit again.

 

[Gr00vus]

Given how Sorkin dismissed a major storyline in Season 1 this season (Will being the subject of death threats online) without even mentioning it I wouldn't be surprised if we never hear another word about the lawsuit again.

I'd be fine with that. Why manufacture drama when there's so much real material to dive into? The really need to introduce a legitimate political foil as a regular. The main characters are just different points on the liberal/progressive spectrum, which makes it tough to have any meaningful conflict around the actual news events themselves. I guess Leona and her son are probably more conservative, but they don't pop up that often.

 

[packersfan]

Given how Sorkin dismissed a major storyline in Season 1 this season (Will being the subject of death threats online) without even mentioning it I wouldn't be surprised if we never hear another word about the lawsuit again.

I'd be fine with that. Why manufacture drama when there's so much real material to dive into? The really need to introduce a legitimate political foil as a regular.

Seemed like they tried to do a little of that with Taylor. I wouldn't mind seeing her return.