Photos
Lots of us are probably excited about the premiere of Aaron Sorkin’s new HBO drama about a news team that goes off the rails starring Jeff Daniels and Emily Mortimer and Bill Waterson Sam Waterston, but we’re all stupid and wrong. The show is going to be terrible! So says The Onion and the New Yorker and the New York Times (although the Hollywood Reporter seems to like it, or at the very least, they seem to understand why it’s a TV show? I’m really not sure WHAT the Hollywood Reporter has to say). I’ve never really understood reading or writing critiques of things that people haven’t seen yet because wouldn’t everyone rather make up their own opinion about the thing first, based on their actual experience with it, and then hear/read someone else’s opinion so that they can decide for themselves whether they agree or disagree based on actual thoughts and feelings rather than going into something with a deeply articulated pre-conceived notion of what to expect? (This is the fundamental philosophy of the Videogum Movie Club which publishes on the Monday after the movie’s release, so we can all talk about it like adults.) I guess with movies, which really have gotten very expensive these days, you could make the argument that you’re saving a struggling family of four $120. But is someone weighing whether or not to subscribe to HBO just for Aaron Sorkin’s The Newsroom? No, right? No. Don’t! I mean, I’m excited for the show and curious to see how it is, but if you were going to subscribe just for something this isn’t it. Subscribe for Game of Thrones, or Enlightened, or reruns of Sex and the City 2. But, so, like, what are these TV reviews for? Just to shit on a thing? As someone who has done his fair share of shitting on a thing, this should be right in my shittingonthingshouse, but I mostly find it kind of depressing and unnecessary. That being said, LET’S ALL PILE ON! Fuck The Newsroom now, I guess! Yeah! Post your pre-emptive completely uninformed critiques of this “terrible” new TV show in the comments. Ew, don’t you hate it? Me too!
 |
 |
You Might Also Like
 It’s Not Too Late To Not Hate Jeff Daniels |  The Newsroom Trailer, You Guys | Aaron Sorkin Fired The Newsroom Writing Staff |  A Friendly Chat With Gabe And Kelly: Aaron Sorkin’s… |
Leave a Reply
Sign inSign in with FacebookYou must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.
Whatever, man. I’m excited to see Sam Eagle working. I’ve missed him since Law and Order.
He sold me robot insurance.
Michael Fassbender
So, apparently this show is set in the recent past, starting in 2010 or so. Meaning they will cover the Bin Laden killing soonish- Sorkin confirmed as much in interviews.
That said, over/under on it being more or less ridiculous than the “Live from Abbotobad” path the Studio 60 twitter took on the story? Betting on less, but NOT BY MUCH.
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves!
I don’t think pre-emptive reviews are “just to shit on a thing”… Conversely, I’d bet any reviewer worth his or her salt would be much happier to write a review that says “this thing is great! be sure to check it out this Thursday at 8 (7 central)!”
But, if the thing sucks, they can’t really do that? Should they just not post any negative reviews and only positive ones?
My uninformed and presumptuous opinion here is that the problem might be that a bunch of critics have become mired in a stodgy approach to critique that is basically put forth as, good or bad? Fresh new angle or epic fail? It’s tiresome.
I guess I could see that, although The AV Club in particular is pretty good about not just shitting on everything regardless of merit, they’ve actually had quite a bit of open discussion about how episode-by-episode TV reviews should be taken with a hefty grain of salt, and that even great series take a few episodes to find their rhythm.
I think there’s value to them, in that they can serve as kind of a counterpoint to the marketing machine for a particular series, letting potential viewers know to what extent a new show lives up to the hype.
If you’re on the fence about an upcoming show (this series is actually a good example personally, I liked The Social Network and Moneyball but not really much else Sorkin has done– so I might check out this show if it got exceptional reviews but probably not otherwise), knowing whether this series is above or below average seems like valuable information to have.
Well put. Personally, I find the AV Club’s oft-self-cited “grain-of-salt” qualification to be something of a cop-out, with the reviewers still staking out a stance and then defending it throughout a series’ run. But that’s just how it strikes me. What you said sounds more charitable and sensible, though.
i won’t watch this for the same reason i don’t watch cable news. sanctimonious and arrogant wealthy people crying over the state of things, thinking they have original or “edgy” opinions, and most of all, assuming that a bunch of people yelling at each other is 1) making a difference and 2) entertaining.
“AMERICA IS NOT THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!” tell that to Joe the Plumber.
Snore-kin’s latest walk-and-talk has all the weight of a fart, with extra stink.
(I can’t do this. I’m probably going to love this show. I even liked Studio 60.)
More like the Newsroom Full of Shit because what a shitty show, right!
From what I’ve been able to piece together, it sounds like pretty much every other Aaron Sorkin show. Which means I’m totally in.
Is it just me or was that long speech about Philo Farnsworth a little out of place?
Bill Watterson has 2 t’s in his name, booger brain.
If anyone remembers, there was a show called The Newsroom on Canadian television(rerun on PBS) about 15 years ago that skewered network news post-OJ trial. It was The Office UK level fantastic. A couple of years later, they did a few seasons based on a post-9/11 newsroom, but not as good – more like The Office USA. My point, well I have no point. Its just a really good show.
Don’t care. It’s Sorkin. I’ll watch really anything he writes. ANYTHIIIIIIIING!!! Plus, also, in summary, to add, we’re comparing it to what? So this new Newsroom, which yeah, hasn’t even premiered yet let alone gotten a few episodes in (see superexplosive reaction to Girls after a mere 25 minutes with it), we’re saying it’s bad…compared to what? Have you SEEN or even tried to watch any of the “comedies” on CBS? Oy freakin gevay. There is literally no sane audience for that tripe, and there are SO MANY of them. So even if this show isn’t…I dunno, the next West Wing/Sports Night, is maybe what the critics are hoping? It’s still a bajillion (< real number) times better than two f'ing minutes of Two and a Half Men. So, you know, icing on the cake. Or something.
The Newsroom?!? … More like The SNOOZEroom!!! …Am I wrong?
“What’s not shocking here is that one of Sorkin’s well-loved TV Show, Sports Night, is getting rehashed for basic cable. It’s gonna be a mash-up of Sports Night and James L Brooks’ Broadcast News. Two wonderful motion picture pieces of art. While this is an obvious rip off.” -Always Assuming Plot via Poster Guy
Quo Madimus? (latin for “you mad”)
You’re right Gabe, your negative review of negative reviews is much more worthwhile.