Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

[Crothian]

To me it seemed like a good episode for focusing on the cast and crew and the higher ups. I liked that. It was nice to see others get a little more screen time.

 

[hafrogman]

There was negative editorial press? Everything I read from critics and entertainment 'reporters' was very positive... (It was just not enough of the audience that tuned in.)

Entertainment Weekly listed it as "Worst Show of 2006"
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20006523,00.html
A lot of people seemed to turn on it after it was seen that the ratings weren't going to be what was expected. And as Alzrius said, a lot of the criticism was simply that it wasn't as good as it had been hyped up to be.

*sigh*

 

[Ranger REG]

It's officially canceled. Once the sets have been demolished (and the sets have, in fact, been demolished), you don't come back.

I'll happily watch the last few. Shame it didn't catch on with a wider audience.

I thought it was going to be better than 30 Rock.

Heh. Just recalling that promo where Alec Baldwin is glad to be working for Aaron Sorkin, only to find out he's on the wrong show.

 

[Felon]

Studio 60 was a lame show that deeply deserved cancellation. It was not sharp. It was not smart. It preened itself on sharp smartness that it didn't actually deliver. People being all cocky and strident and making banter that largely consists of trying to screw up each other's witty metaphors is not all that "sharp". Being snobbish and condescending towards mainstream televeision (which Jordan refers to as "illiterate programming") does not inherently qualify as "smart".

I would agree with Alzrius that it was unfair for critics to compare it unfavorably to the West Wing, except that the show set itself up for that by pretending that every week's show was turning into the next Cuban Missile Crisis. You've got a chairman and a persident of a network just hanging around this show having endless debates about content that really doesn't even have much impact simply because most folks go to bed before it comes on.

In the first episode, Judd Hirsch gets up and delivers his little networksesque shpiel that's supposed to decry the dumbing-down of what was once a showcase for brilliant satire. Now, this is supposedly a reference to Saturday Night Live losing its teeth, but in actuality it's romanticizing some era of SNL that never was. I remember Chevy Chase taking pratfalls over ottomans as Gerald Ford, for Pete's sake.

Then there's an episode where they have a crisis over the sudden cancellation of a sketch about an inept bank robber taking hostages, all because some guy somewhere killed his family. Now, there's almost always someone somewhere being held hostage, so what is the message here? It's always in poor taste to have a sketch ever? Sorry, they really push the premise of Stuido 60's relevance too hard.

And the real nail in the coffin? The show-within-the-show was a flop. Sorkin just could not figure out how sketch comedy works. Remember the big, brilliant opening sketch they do on the second episode to demonstrate the edgy new direction? And it was what? The cast singing to the tune of the "Modern Major General" song from the Priates of Penzance. Oh yeah, Gilbert & Sullivan references are THE cutting edge. So many folks can relate. Most of the sketches we got to see (like the fake news and Jesus Christs as the head of Standards & Practices) was just trying to take Sorkin's talent for snide banter and package it as sketch comedy, and that just doesn't cut it.

What a disappointment. Everything it was trying to accomplish needed to be executed with a much higher degree of subtlety. The best I could say about the show is that it had a few cute chicks.

Of course, the real irony is that in the face of all its smug condescension, it wound up getting replaced by "The Real Wedding Crashers".

 

[Ranger REG]

Of course, the real irony is that in the face of all its smug condescension, it wound up getting replaced by "The Real Wedding Crashers".

And how is The Real Wedding Crashers any better than Studio 60?

 

[Crothian]

I disagree with Felon. I think the show worked. I also think people read to much into what they were trying to do. some people do think today's TV is being dumbed down and this show was just coming from that point of view.

 

[takyris]

My feelings are mixed. Like I said, I'll happily watch it, but seeing it after the long hiatus tonight, I was struck by both how much I enjoyed watching Cal try to keep the wheels moving and all the actors segued from character-arc to show-politics seamlessly (which I loved), and Harriet holding all the other actors hostage to make them talk with her about her relationship with Matt. THUD. Give me the bomb-sniffing dog any day.

I liked the banter, and I liked the politicking, and I wish the show-within-the-show had been better written, and that the Matt & Harriet thing hadn't killed the fun. I thought that the show was better when it tried to be funny with occasional flashes of surprising depth instead of deep and powerful with occasional flashes of humor.

 

[Felon]

And how is The Real Wedding Crashers any better than Studio 60?

That was sort of the point, mate. TRWC is the sort of lowest-common-denominator nonsense that Jordan wouldn't have touched with a ten foot pole.

 

[Felon]

I disagree with Felon. I think the show worked. I also think people read to much into what they were trying to do. some people do think today's TV is being dumbed down and this show was just coming from that point of view.

Studio 60's position wasn't just that mainstream American TV is dumbed-down, but that mainstream Americans are dumber than the people behind Stuido 60. Remember the way they portrayed a focus group as a bunch of morons? Remember Jordan sitting behind the glass criticizing one guy's mispronunciation of Commedia Dell'Arte as if he were a moron for not knowing about something that most people have no reason to know anything about? And meanwhile she was pushing some unfeasible show about the United Nations.

Like I said, the show needed a more subtle approach--the kind that allows people to arrive at their own conclusions rather pushing their message down the viewer's throat. If you want to play the smart crowd, you gotta treat people like they can make up their own minds.

I'm trying to understand the "reading too much into it" point-of-view. They certainly presented many fairly minor situations with the most extreme gravitas. The problem with doing so is that there really isn't much at stake. Even the threat of cancellation doesn't mean much after the writers walk otu (the only people even close to being seriously invested in the continued existence of the show).

Say, anyone remember the name of the superhero character that the writers took with them? Short-Attention-Span-Man or something like that?

 

[PhoenixDarkDirk]

Say, anyone remember the name of the superhero character that the writers took with them? Short-Attention-Span-Man or something like that?

It was Peripheral Vision Man.