Aaron Sorkin Apologizes For "The Newsroom"

[stopbush]

Too late. That show sucked:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/22/aaron-sorkin-the-newsroom_n_5190493.html

[Vashta Nerada]

1. I'm still trying to forgive him for "Sports Night".

[stopbush]

2. It was embarrassing the last two years to see DUers fawning over his latest

unrealistic crapper.

[Orrex]

3. Ain't that the truth.

There was a desperate, "clap your hands if you believe" air about the whole thing.

[brooklynboy49]

4. Ah, memories

Reminds me a lot of what this forum looked like in 2008 (I lurked).

[Chan790]

9. Some of us actually liked it.

Not coming from an uncritical place, (Among my many life-foibles, there was a year and change spent in NYC working as a screenwriter so I know what it means to be less than thrilled with the outcomes of the alchemy of someone else putting your words into moving images) I think he's being harder on himself than his audience is on him.

It's not his best work...but frankly it's better than The West Wing which I always hated and of which "It was embarrassing...to see DUers fawning over his latest unrealistic crapper." could accurately sum up my feelings thereupon. It wasn't the massive critical success I think he was hoping for, but I'd ascribe a lot of that to the fact that the critics for-the-most-part work for the same media he was largely showing their baboon-red ass. The bigger problem was that the plots were hammy...but that's a problem of subject; the back-end of news production is piles of boring next to piles of sausage-making...realism would make unappealing television.

Maybe it was a little too Man of La Mancha, but we need newscasters more like Will McAvoy and less like Chuck Todd, Candy Crowley and Bob Schieffer; there aren't two sides to every story, not every viewpoint is valid, abject neutrality is a trap, and the job of news-media is to challenge topicality in pursuit of truth--I'd much rather know the biases of my newscasters than have them pretend they don't have an opinion or can't hear the absurdity of the partisan talking-points they're trying to balance uncritically.

[brooklynboy49]

6. A personal all-time fave of mine

Nobody writes dialogue like Sorkin, and he was never better than in Sports Night.

[stopbush]

22. You're right. Most people write dialogue that's not as convoluted and unbelievable as Sorkin.

People don't talk that way. Never have, never will.

[warrior1]

5. The Newsroom is just fine

I don't know what he's talking about.

[Auggie]

12. I agree. I never had issues with it ...

though if Sorkin wants to make the show even better, great.

[Paladin]

7. A DU circular firing squad over "The Newsroom"?

Hey, that's all right. Thank God we have such a huge variety of other left-leaning TV dramas to choose from, these days.....





(Sarcasm alert for the clueless.)

[Orrex]

11. If anything, the paucity of left-leaning tv demands that the existing examples be better

[Paladin]

13. In a perfect world, yeah.

But a Sorkin production rendered at 50% effectiveness still beats the shit out of "NCIS" or "Duck Dynasty." I don't think his apology was necessary......

[Orrex]

14. Yeah, that's a little weird

An apology for a poorly executed program strikes me as more of an exercise in ego-bation than a useful addressing of the show's shortcomings.

[stopbush]

24. In the REAL world, it isn't Aaron Sorkin vs the rest of TV (ie: Duck Dynasty) in the quality sweeps.

There are plenty of shows that beat the shit out of Duck Dynasty AND The Newsroom.

Mad Men is one of them.

[Paladin]

26. I've never missed a "Mad Men" episode, so I'm not going to argue with you. (nt)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. The first couple of episodes were pretty good, but

it rapidly went downhill. The characters were so annoying that eventually I got to hating all of them and just quit watching. I especially disliked the British woman (Maggie) and the girl with no eyebrows and eyes like one of those nocturnal primates. The style of dialogue writing was equally irritating - one character would say something (always pretentiously witty and clever) and another one would immediately repeat what the first one just said, and then they'd all talk over each other. It had a few good moments but after awhile it just got on my nerves because it was like every character had drunk too much Red Bull and nobody would ever stop babbling.

[Aristus]

10. My computer won't load the HuffPo page.

Still, I don't think he has anything to apologize for. I like the series.

Based on some of the replies above, Sorkin's outlook is too idealistic for some TV viewers. And that's fine. We can't all be Don Quixote. But in a country torn by cynicism, pettiness, selfishness, a media-driven distrust of public service, and popular entertainment driven by a race-to-the-bottom attitude toward the dumbing-down of American discourse, Sorkin's visionary outlook, optimism, unapologetic embrace of intelligence, wit, selfless service, and unblinkered love of country is refreshing.

It sure got me through the awful years of George W. B*sh.

Sports Night remains, in my opinion, one of the best written, half-hour sitcoms in the history of television.

The West Wing, to this day, is still one of the best serial dramas in history.

I still want Sorkin to create another such drama, set in the 'TWW' world, and concerning the international figures and staffs at the United Nations. He could call the show Nations and give us back the hopeful narratives that made 'TWW' so special. I'd tune in to watch that...

[charlie and algernon]

15. oooo, I like that

Perhaps throw in cameos of former Presidents Bartlet and Santos and current President Seaborne.

And of course Nancy as either Secretary of State or UN Ambassador.

[joeybee12]

16. It was an agenda, not a program...everything they did I agreed

with, but it was lousy drama. Jeff Daniels was brilliant, though, although the ex-flame/producer was awful.

[hibbing]

20. Agree

Daniel's was great, I thought the rest of the characters were so cliche and quite lame that I found myself grrrrr..ing at the vapidness.

Peace

[joeybee12]

21. I really WANTED to like it...

But couldn't at all...one other good character was Jane Fonda's son...they really picked a good actor for that...you really did believe he was that kind of asshole!

[Arugula Latte]

17. I thought it was a good show.

[Iggo]

18. Too many big words?

[stopbush]

25. Writing via Roget's isn't my idea of being creative, nor does it inspire intelligent dialogue.

All it does is a erect a wall between reality and any message one is hoping to deliver.

[Va Lefty]

19. Don't see what he has to apologize for

I like the show, although I thought first season was better than 2nd.

[nirvana555]

23. I liked the first season for the most part. Really, really didn't like season 2. I was pissed

that Jeff Daniels won an Emmy over Brian Cranston even though I really, really like Jeff Daniels. I was pretty disappointed in the show. It's bordered on being ridiculous IMHO.

[Duppers]

27. wtf?!

Was 1000 better than most un-watchable shit on the tube.

Hubs & I enjoyed it.

[wickerwoman]

28. It's not the show he needs to apologise for

but the appalling, retrograde depiction of the female characters.

Maggie and Mack are the two most irritating and unrealistic women to hit a TV show since the early 80s at least. Wasn't "Working Girl" the last time a women being clumsy was seen as the way to give an otherwise idealised power career woman who can still pull off fuck-me pumps a relatable character flaw?

Any actual woman as hysterical, attention-whoring and self-absorbed at work as they are would have been quietly shown the door from their professional careers before they made it past the intern level.

[davidpdx]

30. I disagree

I don't see either of them that way. Mac is a very intelligent woman and speaks her mind. Maggie is by far my favorite character, who is complex.

Honestly have you watched even watched the show?

I suppose you would say the same thing about C.J. and other female characters on The West Wing as well.

[wickerwoman]

32. I have watched the show

and I was a huge fan of the West Wing. CJ never stood up in the middle of a staff meeting to tell everyone to ignore an email she just incompetently sent about how she cheated on her boyfriend, now her boss. She was good at her job and she had a relatable, if slightly heightened, personality. In 7 seasons we learned about 2 things about CJs personal life (she dated a secret service agent discreetly and her father had Alzheimers) and she did neither of those things on the clock.

All Maggie and Mack do is constantly disrupt work meetings with their personal shit. If I had a coworker who spent as much time as Maggie does in staff meeting throwing literal tantrums about her relationship with another guy at work she would have been fired years ago.

[davidpdx]

29. I'm one of the fans of the show, so I'll beg to disagree

The way the second season started (the false start that is) was where it went wrong). They wrote and filmed a few episodes and Sorkin went to HBO and said he wasn't happy with them and they let him scrap them and start over. In doing that they got lost in the "internal story" about the leak and ended up letting the "external stories" (the real ones) that they were re-framing get away.

The episode that they posted a clip of at the bottom of the Huffington Post was actually one of the best seasons from Season 1. Some people don't seem to follow the intent of The Newsroom, which is to criticize the MSM for the crappy way they jump ahead of and tell news. The shooting of Gabby Giffords was one of the instances where the MSM fucked up and those who did should have zero credibility for doing so.

Even with false start in Season 2, it is a very good show.

[stopbush]

31. I'll remind you that Sorkin is the one apologizing for the show, even after the false start

and rewrite.

If he's so great at writing shows doesn't he also have some sense of what constitutes bad writing?

[davidpdx]

33. Yes, I have no doubt he he knows he could have done better

The writing in the second season wasn't as good as the first. That is also why the show is only going to be on one more season. My guess is had the show's writing been better in the second season that it would have left the door open for more than three seasons.

As for his apologizing, that may be to save face to try to get those who stopped watching to come back in season 3.

[DiverDave]

34. The opening show

where he talks of the US's past is inspiring.

We DID make big things, we cured diseases, had a war on poverty...
Since then? PROFITS is all we are about, and it has cheapened us as a people.
But if you want what we should be about, his answer to that girl
is classic,