The Newsroom [HBO - Spoilers]

Richard Dower

Season 2 - Sunday July 14th - HBO.

syklops

Richard Dower wrote: »

Season 2 - Sunday July 14th - HBO.

Can't wait! I've practically memorised season 1 at this stage.

I've heard rumours Don will be dating Sloan. I'm a little heart broken I have to admit. Yes, I know she isnt real. I'm really curious how they will resolve the death threat story arc.

LOI Stats

Richard Dower wrote: »

Season 2 - Sunday July 14th - HBO.

Excellent. Great show. Something to look forward to. A re-watch is in order soon.

I don't think I'll bother with season two unless there is a serious overhaul of the format. Sorkin's sanctimonious preaching grew weary early on in season one and the standard of writing was very poor with unbelievable characters, ridiculous situations and a sense of smugness that was hard to over look. There is a lot of potential in the premise but Sorkin seems more concerned with Maggie and Will's love life than he does in saying anything new or interesting about broadcast journalism.

syklops

One thing I'm really looking forward to in Season 2 is that there will be less haters pontificating over it. There will be less won't there? Please?

mikom

syklops wrote: »

One thing I'm really looking forward to in Season 2 is that there will be less haters pontificating over it. There will be less won't there? Please?

Depends......... will the show be as up it's own hole as last season.

syklops

mikom wrote: »

Depends......... will the show be as up it's own hole as last season.

If you don't like it don't watch it!!!!

This show is like the Margaret Thatcher of TV shows. It just seems to attract people who love to hate it, and hate it vocally.

mikom

syklops wrote: »

If you don't like it don't watch it!!!!

This show is like the Margaret Thatcher of TV shows. It just seems to attract people who love to hate it, and hate it vocally.

A big hit in Argentina so.............

Basq

I don't understand people's sudden aversion to other people on forums criticising a TV show.. the same thing is happening in the 'Community' thread and it's even been suggested we split the thread into people that like it and people that don't. W..T.. F?

If people are watching a TV show... they're presumably doing so in the hope that it may improve.

Simple as that..

squonk

syklops wrote: »

If you don't like it don't watch it!!!!

This show is like the Margaret Thatcher of TV shows. It just seems to attract people who love to hate it, and hate it vocally.

I think it attracted a lot of people who wanted to like it, and saw that there were some things there to really like but who were just getting totally fúcked off with the smugness, stupid concentration on inane coupling storylines and watching Sorkin literally creaming himself putting 20-20 vision on old news stories going 'Now this is how I'd have done it'. Well mate, just get a job in a real newsroom then. It's like watching someone who has the potential to be Ussain Bolt turning up, running the odd great race but more often than not ending up down the rankings because he was at McDonalds for a few weeks and out on the p|ss the night before the race. Total waste of potential.

mikom

Basq wrote: »

it's even been suggested we split the thread into people that like it and people that don't. W..T.. F?

Sounds like a really boring thread.

squonk

Yeah indeed! Even with shows I love, like Nikita for example, I'm not above pointing out stupid plot lines. it's like any show, you get a few who like it and some who don't and some who are on the fence. I'll give Season 2 a chance to see if it improves. Most other shows I'd have given up on but between the strong cast and the notionally strong writing team this show brings, it's grabbing itself a bit more leeway. Honestly though, when I saw the thread title on the new items list, my first though was "Ah no, that turdfest is coming back soon". So, I might not be sticking with it for long if Season 2 doesn't shape up.

syklops

Basq wrote: »

I don't understand people's sudden aversion to other people on forums criticising a TV show.. the same thing is happening in the 'Community' thread and it's even been suggested we split the thread into people that like it and people that don't. W..T.. F?

There is nothing wrong with criticising a show. Practically every thread on this forum has people criticising shows. I enjoy criticising shows as much as the next guy. The Newsroom for some reason that I can not fathom does not get your average run of the mill criticism it gets all out hatred. If I thought a show was "up its own arse", I wouldn't watch it, never mind hang out in the thread dedicated to discussing it.

Basq wrote: »

If people are watching a TV show... they're presumably doing so in the hope that it may improve.

Some people perhaps, some people also love to hate it and love to snipe about it on online fora. I don't know why this particular show attracts people in that way.

PhiloCypher

syklops wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with criticising a show. Practically every thread on this forum has people criticising shows. I enjoy criticising shows as much as the next guy. The Newsroom for some reason that I can not fathom does not get your average run of the mill criticism it gets all out hatred. If I thought a show was "up its own arse", I wouldn't watch it, never mind hang out in the thread dedicated to discussing it.




Some people perhaps, some people also love to hate it and love to snipe about it on online fora. I don't know why this particular show attracts people in that way.

Did bit ever occur to you that the reason this show might get more criticism then other shows is down to the pedigree of the man behind it and that furthermore if the criticism is exceptional that perhaps it is because it is warranted.

This isn't a newsroom fan site if you want a back slapping circle jerk where people compete over who loves the show more then maybe you should post there rather then telling people they shouldn't post here because they have a different opinion then you.

Footoo

syklops wrote: »

If you don't like it don't watch it!!!!

This show is like the Margaret Thatcher of TV shows. It just seems to attract people who love to hate it, and hate it vocally.

Yup... it's called hate -watching and all the cool kids are doing it.

http://www.vulture.com/2012/12/hate-watch-newsroom-killing-gallery-girls.html

don ramo

its like i said most people watch the show because its aaron sorkin, and expect every episode to be as good if not better than the west wing, but at the end of the day the west wing was so good because of the crew and cast that made it, it wasnt solely sorkin who made that show great, and people need to get over it and accept the newsroom for being the newsroom and the west wing for being the west wing,

its a good show, well above average, but its not a tap on the west wing, and i dont think it ever will be,

Footoo

don ramo wrote: »

its a good show, well above average,

In fairness, that's your opniion. The show has received mostly negative reviews from critics (a lot which were scathing)and the consensus from the general public isn't all that great either. A lot of the positive opinions seem to come from fans of The West Wing who make give Sorkin a bit more leeway imo

don ramo

Footoo wrote: »

In fairness, that's your opniion. The show has received mostly negative reviews from critics (a lot which were scathing)and the consensus from the general public isn't all that great either. A lot of the positive opinions seem to come from fans of The West Wing who make give Sorkin a bit more leeway imo

i do love the west wing, as a lot of people do, but i think most people when talking about the show often refer to either sorkin or the west wing, and draw comparisons from that, which is unfair in my opinion, also a lot of people love tearing sorkin to shreds, just like anything else that is popular, its always cool to pick on something that is successful, the simple fact is if people dont like a show then they shouldnt watch it, and until the numbers fall to unacceptable levels the show will be considered a success and continue on for a few seasons,

i dont argue the first season was a bit hit and miss, but to rate it as a failure and bad tv it absurd, it would probably come in at the bottom of a list if that list contained, Breaking bad, game of thrones, homeland, and justified, and probably 4 or 5 others shows i cant think of right now,

PhiloCypher

don ramo wrote: »

i do love the west wing, as a lot of people do, but i think most people when talking about the show often refer to either sorkin or the west wing, and draw comparisons from that, which is unfair in my opinion, also a lot of people love tearing sorkin to shreds, just like anything else that is popular, its always cool to pick on something that is successful, the simple fact is if people dont like a show then they shouldnt watch it, and until the numbers fall to unacceptable levels the show will be considered a success and continue on for a few seasons,

i dont argue the first season was a bit hit and miss, but to rate it as a failure and bad tv it absurd, it would probably come in at the bottom of a list if that list contained, Breaking bad, game of thrones, homeland, and justified, and probably 4 or 5 others shows i cant think of right now,

The simple fact is if the criticism is too much for you that you have to utter such banal harrumphing statements like if you don't like it don't watch it in this thread then maybe you should find a newsroom Fansite to post in where you can put it on the pedestal you obviously think it deserves.

Any show with a creator with the pedigree of Sorkin is gonna be judged more harshly due to to raised expectations that's just the way it is and I don't think its unfair in the slightest tbh.

And before you tar me as being critical to be cool gang I'm a big fan of the west wing and take no pleasure in being critical of the show, I really want it to be great but so far the show is underdelivering and until it improves I'll continue to call a spade a spade right here in this thread thank you very much.

syklops

PhiloCypher wrote: »

The simple fact is if the criticism is too much for you that you have to utter such banal harrumphing statements like if you don't like it don't watch it in this thread then maybe you should find a newsroom Fansite to post in where you can put it on the pedestal you obviously think it deserves.

Any show with a creator with the pedigree of Sorkin is gonna be judged more harshly due to to raised expectations that's just the way it is and I don't think its unfair in the slightest tbh.

And before you tar me as being critical to be cool gang I'm a big fan of the west wing and take no pleasure in being critical of the show, I really want it to be great but so far the show is underdelivering and until it improves I'll continue to call a spade a spade right here in this thread thank you very much.

Thats directed at me I suppose. Well I am sorry if my earlier comments offended you but people using phrases like "Depends......... will the show be as up it's own hole as last season.", while I am trying to discuss this show get on my wick.

I am not looking for a fan boy site where we all discuss how marvellous it is, I a happy to discuss the pros and the cons, but for some reason people can't do that when it comes to the Newsroom.

Seeing as my comments began this whole haters Vs. lovers debate I think I should chime in.

If you read back through my thoughts on the show you will find that I repeatedly discussed, in depth why the show is a failure in my eyes so I'm not going to go into again.

The Newsroom is not a good show and Sorkin is not the genius many claim he is. Sure he's been behind some damn fine films and one of the greatest shows in television but in all the instances where he hit pay dirt, both critically and commercially he was working with others. He was either adapting anothers work or there ere other writers involved in the production. The Newsroom is all Sorkin and that's the shows biggest problem. He has taken what could be an intelligent, light heated look at news media and turned it into a soap box that he can preach from. This may not have been too bad were it not for the fact that he has not got a single original or new thing to say on the matter. Michael Mann's film The Insider tackled the issues of broadcast journalism in a far more adult and intelligent manner and managed in 40 minutes to say more about it than Sokin has in nearly ten hours.

Now why did I continue to watch the show? Well there was potential in the concept and the talent both behind and in front of the camera promised so much. That and the fact that both people I know and people on here kept calling each new episode the best yet and how it was unmissable TV. I could have easily just not bothered after 4 episodes but considering that there was only 10 episodes overall and it was Summer, it's not like I was spoilt for choice.

Sadly, much as I wanted to enjoy the show it just never worked for me. Each episode came across as a sanctimonious sermon where nothing of any note was said. The show feels a lot like Hung, in so much that it was a good concept but the writers never did anything with it beyond the obvious. The Newsroom could work as a 42 minute drama or equally well as a 22 minute comedy but something has to go. The office politics and love lives of the characters are not interesting. The whole love triangle that played out in season one was banal and lifted directly from The Office. The characters are nearly all one note and not one of them is in the least bit believable which is down not to performances but rather the poor writing.

I hate to think that people can be so blinded by a love of something that they disregard all criticism as nothing more than haters going to hate. If you are blinded to any faults in something then I don't believe you can truly enjoy. I adore the Wire, Breaking Bad and Oz but I can find faults with all three shows and discussing them with others, watching as the shows' writers work with these faults offers a rich and rewarding experience. Simply ignoring them and brushing off any criticism does not.

syklops

syklops wrote: »

I am not looking for a fan boy site where we all discuss how marvellous it is, I a happy to discuss the pros and the cons, but for some reason people can't do that when it comes to the Newsroom.

If you read back through the thread you will find plenty of discussion about the show. In fact of all the big shows from last year The Newsroom was one of the most discussed.

syklops

Deleted User wrote: »

If you read back through the thread you will find plenty of discussion about the show. In fact of all the big shows from last year The Newsroom was one of the most discussed.

So it must be me thats the problem.

JP Liz V1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EP7aBZ2DuI

Season 2 will see several guest stars including Jane Fonda, Patton Oswalt, Marcia Gay Harden and Meryl Streep's daughter Grace Gummer

syklops

syklops wrote: »

So it must be me thats the problem.

If you fail to see the in-depth discussion of the show over the threads 29 pages then yes, the problem must be yours.

mikom

syklops wrote: »

Thats directed at me I suppose. Well I am sorry if my earlier comments offended you but people using phrases like "Depends......... will the show be as up it's own hole as last season.", while I am trying to discuss this show get on my wick.

I am not looking for a fan boy site where we all discuss how marvellous it is, I a happy to discuss the pros and the cons, but for some reason people can't do that when it comes to the Newsroom.

I think it is an echo chamber you seek not a discussion forum.

IMO The "high" point of last season was the pot brownie incident.
Wilfred was a better show though.

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Season 2 will see several guest stars including Jane Fonda, Patton Oswalt, Marcia Gay Harden and Meryl Streep's daughter Grace Gummer

Cool, guest stars, just like in the latter days of the simpsons...........

squonk

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Season 2 will see several guest stars including Jane Fonda, Patton Oswalt, Marcia Gay Harden and Meryl Streep's daughter Grace Gummer

Not too happy about that. Sounds like a prank to keep viewers watching a fairly poor show. I love a good VIP cameo but it works well in light entertainment but mightn't fit with the tone of the Newsroom. Once again, I really wish they'd decide what they are, serious cutting drama or light entertainment. Not both.

PhiloCypher

syklops wrote: »

Thats directed at me I suppose. Well I am sorry if my earlier comments offended you but people using phrases like "Depends......... will the show be as up it's own hole as last season.", while I am trying to discuss this show get on my wick.

I am not looking for a fan boy site where we all discuss how marvellous it is, I a happy to discuss the pros and the cons, but for some reason people can't do that when it comes to the Newsroom.

The problem is you take outlier comments that don't represent the actual tone of the discussion in the thread and extrapolate them into some haters conspiracy against a show you obviously hold in high regard .

There have been 421 posts in this thread If you managed to find 10 posts as seemingly dismissive of the show as that quote I'd be very surprised , those sort of posts likely stand out in your mind because they seem diametrically opposed to how you view things not because of their prevalence in this thread.

tommy2bad

squonk wrote: »

Not too happy about that. Sounds like a prank to keep viewers watching a fairly poor show. I love a good VIP cameo but it works well in light entertainment but mightn't fit with the tone of the Newsroom. Once again, I really wish they'd decide what they are, serious cutting drama or light entertainment. Not both.

I thought it was obviously light entertainment, a rom-com for 'smart' people. Or at least those who think their smart.

The big problem is that the social commentary comes across as forced rather than a character trait of the er! um! characters.
Pity 'cos the cast are talented at this kind of fast comedy but the context is out of date so we know where it's going as news and the romantic entanglements are clinched. It still makes good light summertime viewing, not too taxing on the mind and pleasant enough.
Bit like The Mentalist or True Blood in ways.

don ramo

being fair i dont think the show is blinding praised here, there are clear issues that need to ironed out on the show, just like when the west wing started, they brought in a dismissed characters in a snap for no reason,

the time jumping aspect was badly handled, and needs to stop, it was annoying when they were having an argument in one episode, and in the next they were covering a newstory that was clearly 4 months after the one in the previous episode, yet the same argument was being had,

the issue with any problems from season 1 is that they cant be rectified till season 2, because in the cable world they normally have the filming wrapped by the time it airs, unlike on network tv where your shooting about 3-4 weeks behind the airing schedule, so you can rectify problems within 6-7 episodes generally,

like i said its not a top top show, but it is for me one of the better ones,

squonk

tommy2bad wrote: »

I thought it was obviously light entertainment, a rom-com for 'smart' people. Or at least those who think their smart.

LOL but it doesn't come across as particularly light, or particularly entertaining for that matter . I get you though but it reeks of pretentiousness. I'd say that Hart Of Dixie, love it or hate it, is one successful way to do a rom-com. It's light, you can dip into it. It's completely farcical and you don't find yourself caring about it too much. The real problem is that smart people likely will want a fresh perspective on news and maybe some wry humour as well. They're less likely to want silly set pieces and coupling nonsense.

soggy biscuit

When is this starting back anyone?

don ramo

soggy biscuit wrote: »

When is this starting back anyone?

14th of july in america

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McVXNEdi8K4

soggy biscuit

Looking forward to it now, great show.

squonk

I'm not actually as enthusiastic about this coming back as I was anymore. Very much hope it's not a continuation of the big pile of **** last season was.

don ramo

squonk wrote: »

I'm not actually as enthusiastic about this coming back as I was anymore. Very much hope it's not a continuation of the big pile of **** last season was.

yeah it deffinately had its issues, and it didnt set the world on fire in the ratings either, but im sure they can rectify any issues the show had,

i do expect this season to really step it up from the first, there is potential for this to be a great show,

squonk

yeah Don, I have high expectations that a lot of work will have been done to rejig the series and rectify the problems that were there last season. If they don't hit the ground running though, I could well be out after the first 2-3 episodes.

golfball37

I enjoyed this. Its still better than 90% of the shows on TV even if it is pushing an agenda. If you can't block that out and watch it as an entertainment piece then its the viewers problem imo.

ben.schlomo

Its pushing an agenda the same way Sorkin did in West Wing, nothing new. If they sort out the silly, hammed up, uber-emotional nonsense then its a good show, i wouldnt be overly confident that they will though, being four seasons into WW it stays throughout.

expectationlost

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Its pushing an agenda the same way Sorkin did in West Wing, nothing new. If they sort out the silly, hammed up, uber-emotional nonsense then its a good show, i wouldnt be overly confident that they will though, being four seasons into WW it stays throughout.

was west wing ever that bad? maybe occasionally but not it wasn't so upfront bad

fisgon

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Its pushing an agenda the same way Sorkin did in West Wing, nothing new. If they sort out the silly, hammed up, uber-emotional nonsense then its a good show, i wouldnt be overly confident that they will though, being four seasons into WW it stays throughout.

If they could somehow get rid of the Emily Mortimer character, that would improve it no end. I found it painful to watch and listen to her last series.

Any news on series 2?

don ramo

ben.schlomo wrote: »

i wouldnt be overly confident that they will though,

you have to understand the difference in boths shows developments, the west wing had casting issues and character motivation issues in its first season, but seeing as TWW was made on network television it was 24 episodes long, so it was shooting a month or 2 behinds its intended air date, and most of the early issues were rectified by the end of season 1, but when it comes to premium cable like HBO, with 12 episode orders, you generally have the whole series shot before the first episode airs,

therefore on premium cable channels any initial teething problems you have and negative audience reaction cant be addressed till the following season,

which is why i said earlier that i expect a marked improvement this season,

expectationlost

don ramo wrote: »

you have to understand the difference in boths shows developments, the west wing had casting issues and character motivation issues in its first season, but seeing as TWW was made on network television it was 24 episodes long, so it was shooting a month or 2 behinds its intended air date, and most of the early issues were rectified by the end of season 1, but when it comes to premium cable like HBO, with 12 episode orders, you generally have the whole series shot before the first episode airs,

therefore on premium cable channels any initial teething problems you have and negative audience reaction cant be addressed till the following season,

which is why i said earlier that i expect a marked improvement this season,

did sorkin think he did anything wrong in the newsroom?

don ramo

expectationlost wrote: »

did sorkin think he did anything wrong in the newsroom?

i hope he does, HBO like him which is why he got a second season, he just scratched the 2 million viewer mark with 3 out of 10 episodes, show like game of thrones and true blood have set a high marker on HBO recently, breaking the 2 million mark in their first seasons and growing year on year, the same will be expected of The Newsroom,

The Black Oil

Sorkin said that he felt one of the reasons Studio 60 failed was down to his writing mistakes. I don't think he's beyond criticising his own work.

The Black Oil

The Black Oil wrote: »

Sorkin said that he felt one of the reasons Studio 60 failed was down to his writing mistakes. I don't think he's beyond criticising his own work.

I loved Studio 60! It's far superior to the Newsroom, so I'm amazed that the latter got a second series when the former didn't.

Kirby

expectationlost wrote: »

was west wing ever that bad? maybe occasionally but not it wasn't so upfront bad

As somebody who watched The West Wing after watching The Newsroom, I think people are letting nostalgia get the better of them.

I'm near the end of the sixth season and TWW is just as up itself and preachy as the newsroom is. Characters take themselves way too seriously. That "fly on the wall" documentary episode in the fifth season was cringey beyond belief. Talk about melodrama. Sam's character was completely ridiculous too. No adult would behave like that in the work place.

And you have the classic Sorkin verbal diarrhea syndrome in full effect. Somebody probably needs to sit Sorkin down and explain that talking at warp speed doesn't make what you sound more intelligent, it makes you sound insecure.

Really, they are similar enough shows with similar issues. The West Wing was better because they had more episodes to showcase themselves. Give the newsroom time. I'm sure it will get better.

Pinkman

Kirby wrote: »

As somebody who watched The West Wing after watching The Newsroom, I think people are letting nostalgia get the better of them.

I'm near the end of the sixth season and TWW is just as up itself and preachy as the newsroom is. Characters take themselves way too seriously. That "fly on the wall" documentary episode in the fifth season was cringey beyond belief. Talk about melodrama. Sam's character was completely ridiculous too. No adult would behave like that in the work place.
.

Sorkin left TWW at the end of Season 4 so that is why there was a dip in quality of the writing. I still think the Presidential campaign and election in season 7 was brilliant though.

ben.schlomo

Pinkman wrote: »

Sorkin left TWW at the end of Season 4 so that is why there was a dip in quality of the writing. I still think the Presidential campaign and election in season 7 was brilliant though.

Ya im like Kirby in that i started TWW after Newsroom, but i had previously watched Season 7 which i loved. TWW has some woefully cringe throughout the first four seasons but it was pulled along and above by Sheen, Dule Hill and John Spencer.

I think that the biggest problem with the show apart from the atrocious writing and characters is that it's a show for people who want to sit down and pat themselves on the back because "that's what I think to". Sorkin repeatedly takes digs at Fox News, CNN and MSNBC for pandering to their audience only to do exactly the same thing and pander to his audience. I really hope that season 2 can address some of the issues as there is a lot of potential there, just thus far the execution has been poor.