I Am A TV Junkie, A Blog For The Clicker Jockey

LA Times' Patrick Goldstein and Yours Truly Agree

Me, writing here on June 22:

... it occured to me that the reason I didn't enjoy the series was that I was looking for a show that started with a TV show and then looked inward to its characters for drama. Sorkin was writing a TV show about a TV show in order to look outward to world events so that he could let us know how smart he is.

Goldstein, in his piece on Aaron Sorkin, today in the Los Angeles Times:

"Studio 60," as good as some individual episodes were, never seemed to find a consistent voice, a must for must-see TV. It was, in hindsight, a bad idea, if for no other reason than it tried to graft Sorkin's fascination with social issues onto a story about career crises in the rarified world of TV comedy writers. But that made the show only more irresistible — we got to see a brilliant writer try to breathe life into a doomed premise.

We agree as much as any two people with this complex concept in their heads could agree. But I don't agree that the show was more irresistable because we were trying to see Sorkin (pictured above with Kristin Chenoweth) make it work.

And in Aaron Sorkin News ...

... Sorkin is planning a return to Broadway with his new play, The Farnsworth Invention.

This is who child genius Philo Farsnworth is:

In 1927, Philo Farnsworth was the first inventor to transmit a television image comprised of 60 horizontal lines. The image transmitted was a dollar sign. Farnsworth developed the dissector tube, the basis of all current electronic televisions. He filed for his first television patent in 1927 (pat#1,773,980.) Although he won an early patent for his image dissection tube, he lost later patent battles to RCA. Philo Farnsworth went on to invent over 165 different devices including equipment for converting an optical image into an electrical signal, amplifier, cathode-ray, vacuum tubes, electrical scanners, electron multipliers and photoelectric materials.

This script was originally slated for film according to Wikipedia, with New Line buying it up in 2004, but nothing came of it and now Sorkin has a deal with Dodger Theatricals according to Variety in a deal that might include participation from Steven Spielberg.

Why is it that I'm thinking Sorkin will find some way to insert some commentary about the Middle East into this as well? I was very passively watching Studio 60 last night while I was writing here, and it occured to me that the reason I didn't enjoy the series was that I was looking for a show that started with a TV show and then looked inward to its characters for drama. Sorkin was writing a TV show about a TV show in order to look outward to world events so that he could let us know how smart he is.

This arc with the Nate Corddry character's brother in Afghanistan being held captive just seems like it was lifted from an entirely different TV show. Imagine if all of a sudden Arthur Fonzarelli was wearing a leather jacket but he was on waterskis and jumping over a ...

... oh, never mind.

Anyhow, for more on this play, click over here.

So, Studio 60 Returns the Day After Sweeps

I was in the Phoenix Airport over the weekend and there was a guy wearing his Studio 60 logo cap and I told him that his show was coming back and he was very excited.

Of course, it's coming back when it can do the least harm, after May sweeps.

I have to tell you, given the choice of this show or a half hour of playing with my dog and then watching David Spade riff on pop culture topics, I think I'll choose the latter, unless something really interesting happens, like Aaron Sorkin stops preaching his ideology to me and actually writes some dialogue I can get with.

It's funny, he and I feel very similarly about these issues, I just don't want them mucking up my TV time. It's not the time or place.

And, once again, if this character Sarah Paulson is playing is supposed to be so effin' funny, let's see her be that effin' funny.

"Studio 60" Prognosis From the Hollywood Reporter's Ray Richmond

At his Past Deadline blog:

The show reportedly costs over $2 million per episode to make and isn't coming close to justifying that investment based on numbers that continue to head south. Last night's hour was its lowest yet: a 2.6 rating and 7% audience share with 6.4 million total viewers, according to Nielsen. It was "Studio 60's" worst performance in both total households and the crucial adults 18-49 demographic measure that advertisers use as a key yardstick for buys.

When NBC announced last week that the show was being replaced on Mondays at 10 p.m. by "The Black Donnellys" beginning Feb. 26, it also said "Studio 60" would "return to the schedule later this season." But I wouldn't hold my breath, and neither should you. More likely, the completed episodes will get burned off over the summer before winding up as "TV That's Too Good For TV" on Bravo.

Go over there and read the rest. He also has an update from someone "in authority" at NBC-Uni.

Classic Unaired Sketch From "The Soup" on "Studio 60"

And it is perfect for this blog on this day:

Watch The Soup tonight at 10 on E!

And to whomever is running the WatchTheSoup channel at YouTube, more clips, please!

Just A Little More About "Studio 60" Last Night

I get that Sorkin wants us to know that Matt Albie (Matthew Perry) is bad with women, that he has absolutely no idea of what to say or do (although he has a good idea of how to plant a big wet one on Harriet, doesn't he?), but do I really believe Tom Jeter (Nathan Corddry), knowing all this about Matt, would take word one of advice about women from him? C'mon.

And, said advice was not just foolish, but just damned stupid. Tom might have the opportunity here to save the Macao deal for NBS, and that's all he has to explain that to Lucy.

I just can't believe the character would be that stupid. That's why I changed the channel and watched the rest of the hour of Family Guy reruns on TBS.

And, I don't know if I'm going to check back in with the Studio 60 crowd next week. I'll just consider it until 9:59 next Monday night.

Just to leave on a good note, I'll mention ClothesOffOurBack.org, the auction site Bradley Whitford and wife Jane Kaczmarek run for charity. You should click over there. You never know what might be affordable from the Golden Globes red carpet.

So Joe, When Did You Turn Off "Studio 60?"

I turned off Studio 60 at 10:23, when Tom lied about going to the dinner with the that guy's daughter. Wouldn't Tom know that this guy Matt is hardly the guy to take bad advice from, and it was ridiculously bad advice, unnaturally bad, and it took me right out of the story.

I really did try.

Yesterday's LA Times Suck-Uppery to Aaron Sorkin

Sheesh! Get this (from yesterday's Los Angeles Times and Deborah Netburn):

A little less than a month ago I wrote a story about comedy writers who hate Aaron Sorkin's most recent show "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip." The show is a behind-the-scenes look at a "Saturday Night Live" style sketch comedy show, and, as I noted in the piece, legions of comedy writers love to talk about how much they hate it.

Last week, no less than Sorkin himself singled out my story as an example of the shoddy hate journalism that "Studio 60" must contend with. "Folks, it is not at all difficult to go on the Internet and find opinions of disgruntled people, I don't need to tell you that," he said to a room full of reporters who were visiting the "Studio 60" set. "So, that L.A. Times piece was a piece of nonsense. …Really … that was god-awful."

Well, Sorkin is right about one thing: It is not difficult to look on the Internet and find people who don't like his show. Much more challenging is finding people who really love it. But Sorkin supporters are out there. So, while it has been an interesting experience having a celebrated TV producer publicly hate my guts, in an attempt to see the other side of the story, I now present some of "Studio 60's" staunchest defenders.

And she goes on to find people on the internet who like the show, and she quotes them.

Well, of course there are some people who like the show. We are a nation of 300 million people. And about seven million of them watch the show. Some of them, like me, are truly disappointed with the show, and that's ... okay (with my apologies to Stuart Smalley).

So I guess Sorkin has browbeat at least one of his critics. I know that my piddling little TV blog is way off his radar, but if it wasn't (like if I was "Dilbert 27" the poster at AintItCool.com that the show referenced weeks ago) would he be arguing with me, too?

Here's an idea -- instead of complaining about critics, Sorkin could work on refocusing his show on the sketch comedy show that is at its core. Less time with the FCC business from last night, less time on the Macau business, and more about the show within the show. Sure, it cuts storylines for Steven Webber and Ed Asner (both who are great and I enjoy watching), but isn't this a TV show about making a late-night comedy show? And is that not big enough a bite to chew?

The other thing Aaron Sorkin could do is start a political blog or a free speech blog to vent those frustrations there instead of on prime time network television.

The show was certainly better last night, even if it was a bit too romance-centered. Everyone is asking everyone out, stealing kisses behind walls, etc.

Shouldn't it be funnier in the writers' room? I would love to see any of those people even crack a smile.

My Sunday Afternoon With Homer, Bravo and "Studio 60 ..."

So, I'm spending a little time laying here with Homer (pictured) watching two hours of Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip on Bravo, an NBC-Uni cable channel which I guess scheduled this run of the last two episodes in order to try to coerce us channel surfers into reconnecting with the show in advance of its return tomorrow night.

Some of you will also remember that I gave up a few weeks ago on the show. And I have to tell you why I'm here in front of it now, it's because of the plot point where Aaron Sorkin tells me through Bradley Whitford's character that the opinion of some guy writing on the Internet just doesn't matter (he complains to the reporter played by Christine Lahti about some guy post at AintItCool.com).

And so, I'm giving him three more hours of my life -- these two this afternoon and tomorrow night. And I hope you'll come back on Tuesday to find out if I think it was a waste of my time or if I'm excited again like I was after I watched the pilot online in September.

I will say that I liked that they brought Mark McKinney in (that's a big move, it opens a whole area that was cut off before with the young writers providing more fodder than the clash between Matt and Ricky & Ron), and I really like that they're lingering a bit on the musical acts that they're bringing in.

I'm just hoping for a bit of a lighter touch when the show returns tomorrow night.