PDA

View Full Version : 'Studio 60’ Cancellation Iminent



NatiRedGals
10-29-2006, 09:29 AM
'Studio 60’ Cancellation Iminent

Sunday, October 29, 2006

By Roger Friedman

* E-MAIL STORY
* RESPOND TO EDITOR
* PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION

AP

Matthew Perry

Matthew Perry

*
*

'Studio 60' Concellation | Standing Ovation for 'Bobby' | Regis Is King, as Usual

Studio 60’ Cancellation Iminent

Here we go: despite receiving an order for three more episodes on Friday, the Aaron Sorkin NBC drama “Studio 60 on Sunset Strip” is about to be put out of its misery.

Cast members are already confiding in friends that the end is near. It’s likely NBC will pull the plug shortly I am told by insiders.

Last week, Studio 60 had 7.7 million viewers. Compare that with competing "CSI: Miami," with 17.5 million. That gap cannot be closed.

But ‘Studio 60’ has trouble internally at NBC, forget its intramural rivals. According to ratings stats, the “Saturday Night Live” behind the scenes soap opera loses almost half the viewers delivered to it a few minutes earlier by another new show, “Heroes,” which has become a surprise cult hit.

On Monday, ‘Heroes’ had 14.3 million viewers. The substantial drop off with 'Studio 60' is probably the last nail in its coffin. The order of the three extra episodes is considered by insiders to be a contractual move, and not one based on faith that they will ever be made or aired. The all important demo situation didn’t help: 'Heroes' had 15 percent of viewers aged 18-49. Studio 60 had 8 percent. The notion that 'Studio 60' is a big draw for NBC among desirables is, sadly, blown on those stats.

Sorkin and friends will argue that NBC has done something wrong, or that the audience isn’t smart enough. Alas, in this case, neither is true. 'Studio 60'—as I wrote on August 7th after viewing the pilot—is just a bad show. There’s nothing wrong with the acting, directing, or dialogue writing. But the premise is faulty. No one cares whether a bunch of over caffeinated, well off yuppies, some with expensive drug habits, put on a weekly comedy sketch show from Los Angeles.

Even worse: no one cares whether or not the people from the Bartlett White House puts on a comedy show. That’s what 'Studio 60' is, essentially: the "West Wing" annual talent show. There’s so much earnestness involved in this endeavour, you start to think that nuclear war will be declared if the 'Studio 60' staff doesn’t air some joke—usually one we don’t hear anyway. The whole thing just feels weighted down and frankly, not entertaining.

There is one winner to come out of 'Studio 60,' however: Matthew Perry. In this show he’s proven himself to be a star on his own separate from "Friends." His comedic timing and ability to ad lib, toss off lines, and give restrained physical reactions is what keeps 'Studio 60' even remotely interesting. We can only be hopeful that someone comes up with a great new show for him quickly—but a comedy that’s funny, not a drama that isn’t.

NBC will probably fill the lost 'Studio 60' timeslot with 'Deal-No Deal: The Next Generation,' or some such thing. So the losers here will be the audience, which is about to be pummelled by more reality and game shows. It’s too bad because around the dial there are good new dramas. Despite its heavy “thirtysomething” feel, “Brothers and Sisters” is worth keeping if only for Sally Field, Ron Rifkin and Rachel Griffiths. (But there a mistake was made, too: killing off patriarch Tom Skerritt in the first episode.)

Oh well: I hope Regis is warming up the holiday edition of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." We’re ready!

(Story continues below)

Advertise Here
Advertisements
Related

*
Column Archive
Full-page Fox411 Archive

Standing Ovation For 'Bobby'

Emilio Estevez’s terrific movie, "Bobby," got a standing ovation last night at its premiere sponsored by the Times of London for the London Film Festival.

Estevez looked mildly shocked on stage as a full Odeon theatre, with guests including likely future prime minister of England Gordon Brown, honored him for his work on this outstanding film.

"Bobby," as I told you some weeks ago, is a Robert Altman-like story of many different characters at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on June 4, 1968, as Kennedy makes his way there to celebrate winning the California primary.

Last night, a few of the cast members including Christian Slater, Joy Bryant, Svetlana Metkina and Freddy Rodriguez (of "Six Feet Under" fame) came with Estevez and his new fiancée to accept the kudos.

The screening — and following swellicious party at Claridge’s — was such a hot ticket that Estevez’s other guests included Oscar-winning directors Anthony Minghella and Hugh Hudson; actors Jason Isaacs, Eric Bana, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers as well as Americans Elizabeth Banks and John Michael Higgins, who came over from shooting “Fred Claus” nearby with Judi Dench, Vince Vaughn and Kevin Spacey.

The screening was also such a success that later at Claridge’s, Slater showed off a previously unknown talent: he performed with the 12-piece swing band that the Times had hired, credibly crooning Frank Sinatra’s hits like "Come Fly with Me" and "Luck Be a Lady Tonight." Who knew Slater could give such a credible show? Maybe a Broadway musical is in his future.

But it was Emilio’s night, and he was a bit overwhelmed. The eldest son of Martin Sheen (and brother, yes, of Charlie Sheen) has been absent from Hollywood for 10 years after a wild ride as part of the Brat Pack with Demi Moore and Rob Lowe and as star of the "Mighty Ducks" movies for Disney. The latter, however, was what did him in.

“I made a deal with the devil,” Emilio told me. “Disney wanted me to do another 'Mighty Ducks' movie. I wanted to direct a film called 'The War at Home.' Disney said they would put it out. So I made the 'Mighty Ducks' and they opened it on 2,000 screens. Then I made 'The War at Home,' with Kathy Bates and my dad. Disney opened it on four screens and it died. It just about killed me. I quit the business. I said, that’s it.”

It’s nothing new about Disney, of course. The much-praised small drama should never have been released by them. It made $35,000 and disappeared without a trace.

Estevez — who’d been briefly married to Paula Abdul and had seen the ups and downs of Hollywood from all sides — packed up his tent.

Luckily, he didn’t go away forever. "Bobby" springs from the stories of the people who were shot by Sirhan Sirhan in the Ambassador kitchen when he assassinated Kennedy. It’s kind of a brilliant idea, since no one remembers that there was collateral damage that day (none of the people died, but they were badly wounded).

Estevez combined several of the characters, and invented others in the hotel. The result he says, is “that we could have called the movie 'Ordinary People' if that title didn’t already exist. The movie is about those people.”

"Bobby" is filled with cameos by famous actors, many of whom are Estevez’s friends. They are not the usual Oscar-worthy crowd — no Denches or Blanchetts, although Anthony Hopkins and Harry Belafonte have some wonderful scenes together as the former doorman and security guard of the hotel now facing retirement (watch Hopkins’ wordless reaction when he’s told Kennedy has been shot. It’s perfect).

But the movie, strangely enough, soars with more unlikely types. Sharon Stone as the hotel beautician is a revelation, and will likely gain a Best Supporting Actress nomination.

If Moore were in the movie longer, she’d be there too. But her performance, however brief, as Stone’s customer, is the best work she’s ever done.

On the male side, Jacob Vargas, Laurence Fishburne and Rodriguez — who may also get an Oscar nod — are wonderful as kitchen workers.

William H. Macy, Slater and young Shia LaBeouf — who’s also the star of the current "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints" — are memorably good.

Estevez’s next stop with "Bobby" is the American Film Institute on Nov. 1, where the movie gets it’s Los Angeles premiere.

But paparazzi be warned — Charlie Sheen is not coming.

“He says he has to memorize his lines for 'Two and A Half Men,'” Emilio says, rolling his eyes.

Regis Is King, As Usual

The big news is that our pal Regis Philbin is going to be the honorary Grand Marshall of the annual Hollywood Parade on Nov. 26. The reason — and this is shock — is that Regis has turned 75 and the parade is that age, too.

Regis is 75? He looks and acts a generation younger! Mazel tov …

Meanwhile, Dr. McChokey, aka Isaiah Washington, infamously of "Grey’s Anatomy," will appear as well. If he can get Patrick Dempsey and T.R. Knight to join him, that will a trickier maneuver than any of the surgeries he performs on the show …

Sting and Trudie Styler are hosting a screening and dinner Nov. 6 for the aforementioned “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” in New York. The honorees will be stars Chazz Palminteri and Dianne Wiest, each of whom is the subject of awards buzz. Expect Robert DeNiro to put in an appearance at Florence Gould Hall. He gave Chazz his start with "A Bronx Tale" …

Tickets are still available for a delicious music industry event on Monday night. Nordoff Robbins Music Therapy Foundation has every big chef in town coming to cook and shmooze and raise money for this vital charity that supports children with autism, among other things. Expect many "Sopranos," and a variety of celebs. Call Sunny Ralfini at (917) 544-0799 for more information.

Donder
10-29-2006, 10:16 AM
I'm disappointed to hear about Studio 60. I know I'm in the VAST minority here, but I started out watching Heroes and Studio 60 and now I'm only watching Studio 60. I realize I must have bad taste. ;)

I'll admit I started watching it because I'm a Matthew Perry fan. Hopefully the writer is right and he'll turn up again soon.

MWM
10-29-2006, 10:46 AM
What's funny is there was a major bidding war from the networks for this show and NBC paid a lot for it. NBC will lose a boatload of money. I watched the first couple of episodes and didn't think it would last. the characters were all too cliche and the show had a bit of an anti-Christian tone to it, which automatically eliminates a large portion of the population from being viewers. It was just missing something that made it not compelling. It had potential, but it didn't deliver.

RedsManRick
10-29-2006, 10:52 AM
I thought it was a decent show, but it was just too self-aware. That works when you are doing a show on the US Presidency -- we want those sort of hyper intelligent obsessive people running the county. But when you put that cast on a studio in LA, it just comes across as self-indulgent, self-important, and arrogant.

KronoRed
10-29-2006, 05:28 PM
Wow, could this writer pat himself on the back a little more about a show he hated being canned?

TeamBoone
10-29-2006, 05:33 PM
I must admit I didn't care for the first episode. It was just way way too "busy" and hard to follow. I always give a show a second chance though and maybe even a third if I feel the second episode is better than the first. I did it with this show and Friday Night Lights, whose first show I didn't just dislike, but hated!

Both have improved tremendously... if other people did the same, perhaps some shows with pretty lousey pilots would survive.

Studio 60 has an excellent cast, with the possible exception of Amanda Peet. I normally really like her work, but in this show I feel like she's just going through the motions and doesn't put much effort into her character.

And I don't get the anti-Christian thing... I don't see that at all.

KronoRed
10-29-2006, 05:35 PM
As a Christian I really didn't see it, they were attacking the far right fringe who I can't stand either.

I guess it could be anti-Christian that Harriet is an AWFUL character, but I blame the actress just as much as the writing on that one.

MWM
10-29-2006, 05:43 PM
Amanda Peet is one of the reasons I tuned in. I really like her. But she was an awful choice for the part. And I'm not a Christian myself, but I perceived a slight anti-Christian tone in the first two episodes. The story line centered around a skit called "Crazy Christians" and their right to put it on the air. And there was a couple of lines by Matthew Perry to the christian female character I thought were digs at religious folks. It was simply my conjecture that a lot of mainstream Christians probably tuned out after that if they were watching. Again, purely speculation. And Krono, I'm not so sure that the masses of Christians would appreciate their faith being poked at like that, even if they're going after the far right. Again, I could be wrong because I'm not of the faith myself, but it's such a polarizing topic these days that it wouldn't surprise me if some folks would rather just not have to listen to Hollywood make light of their faith.

11BarryLarkin11
10-29-2006, 05:46 PM
I love Studio 60! The only problem I have with it is that the show within the show isn't as funny as it needs to be. But, I don't think it deserves the ax.

But, I've just about had it with network television, so maybe that's why I like Studio 60. :)

I loved the West Wing, but that was the only showed I watched on TV with any regularity in the past few years. And, this year, the two shows I've gotten into are evidently both going to be cancelled. I think Kidnapped and Studio 60 are the best new shows this year and evidently neither is going to be around for long.

KronoRed
10-29-2006, 05:51 PM
Amanda Peet is one of the reasons I tuned in. I really like her. But she was an awful choice for the part. And I'm not a Christian myself, but I perceived a slight anti-Christian tone in the first two episodes. The story line centered around a skit called "Crazy Christians" and their right to put it on the air. And there was a couple of lines by Matthew Perry to the christian female character I thought were digs at religious folks. It was simply my conjecture that a lot of mainstream Christians probably tuned out after that if they were watching. Again, purely speculation. And Krono, I'm not so sure that the masses of Christians would appreciate their faith being poked at like that, even if they're going after the far right. Again, I could be wrong because I'm not of the faith myself, but it's such a polarizing topic these days that it wouldn't surprise me if some folks would rather just not have to listen to Hollywood make light of their faith.

Oh I'm sure a lot of people just turned it off when the topic came up, to me it didn't matter, I'm secure in my faith not to give a crap what a writer says about it, all in the view point.

Later episodes didn't really touch the subject, except for Harriet seeming to say "I'm a Christian" for no reason at all sometimes, that annoyed me more then anything.

Chip R
10-29-2006, 06:25 PM
I saw the first 3 episodes and it was a good show but not as great as the hype surrounding it. I think the difference between Studio 60 (and Sports Night, perhaps) and The West Wing is that on TWW, these people were rnning the country and doing something important. We wanted them to do well. The behind the scenes working of a late night comedy show (or a sports highlight show) isn't that important. Nobody cares if they fail cause if they do, they will just put on a show the next week - or day.

It seems that these days, some shows aren't cancelled cause they are bad. They are cancelled because they don't get the ratings out the gate. I can't blame NBC too much. They hyped the show to the stars and it was expensive. If it paid for itself, great. If not, then it gets cancelled. I'd still rather watch a mediocre Studio 60 over a reality show any day of the week.

I also thought it was a little tough on Christians but I think it was somewhat balanced out by having a person on the show that was a Christian and who was not a stereotype. I think that writer was a little too gleeful about the cancellation. It wasn't exactly TWW puts on a talent show. Only Brad Whitford was a regular in both casts.

Johnny Footstool
10-29-2006, 07:11 PM
Studio 60 was an excercise in joylessness -- a uber-heavy drama about comedy that wasn't funny. It's Sorkin's self-indulgent and overblown "Use Your Illusion" I, II and III.

Unassisted
10-29-2006, 08:53 PM
Mrs. U thinks that "Studio 60" would have worked better as a half-hour show, since there's no more than 22 minutes of good stuff in each episode.

I like "Studio 60" OK, and I haven't grown to dislike it. Last week's episode should have hit home for those of us who grew up in Ohio, as Tom Jeter showed his stick-in-the-mud parents from Columbus around the studio. On another board I read, some people from the midwest were offended by the portrayal of the parents. I was more touched by that storyline than offended.

I would have bet that "30 Rock" would be cancelled first. I felt it was more self-indulgent.

I'm starting to wonder if I'm a jinx this TV season. I was enjoying "Smith" and "Kidnapped" until they met their cancellation fates.

The new show I have grown to dislike is "The Nine." I swore off watching that show after last week's yawnfest. Now that I don't like it, it will probably gather more Emmy nominations than any other show and be picked up for a full-season this week. :rolleyes:

LoganBuck
10-29-2006, 11:36 PM
I wrote off S60 very quickly. I hated the pilot, and the second episode was not any better. The characters were self centered freaks, and I didn't much care for the anti-Christian jabs. I can take a little, hey I still watch Nip/Tuck, but the comments on S60 didn't seem to benefit the characters as much as take a swing at the masses. I chose to watch other shows, no biggie. I have never seen a new episode of Law & Order.

minus5
10-30-2006, 10:01 AM
I absolutely enjoyed Studio 60. Frankly I didn't see it as uber heavy. The writer of the article seems to have an issue with the television industry and his ike for it seems to be his basis why it was a bad show. Regardless of the writing, acting, etc. Seems kind of a goofy reason to me but hey... I think that this was good television, I enjoy the subject matter and I think that it is a shame that they are pulling the plug instead of trying a new slot first. Oh well.

RichRed
10-30-2006, 10:36 AM
I like Studio 60. Sure it has its weaknesses and I can see what some say about the premise not being interesting enough. But for me, good writing and acting can make it interesting. It's been uneven in spots but it's a new show. I really think it could develop into a very good show given a little time. Looks like it won't get the chance though. Hooray, more reality TV and game shows.

Johnny Footstool
10-30-2006, 10:48 AM
Sorkin is usually a great writer, and part of good writing is tone. Sorkin nailed it with "Sports Night" but missed the mark badly with "Studio 60."

Natty Redlocks
10-30-2006, 09:12 PM
I can't say I'm surprised. I, too, starting watching Studio 60 with high hopes and found myself not caring at all.

What I don't like, though, are all these unfair slams lumping together all reality and game shows. Some are well done. Some aren't. Just like "real" shows.

Okay, I'm done now.

Caveat Emperor
10-30-2006, 09:47 PM
Studio 60 was an excercise in joylessness -- a uber-heavy drama about comedy that wasn't funny. It's Sorkin's self-indulgent and overblown "Use Your Illusion" I, II and III.

This show was/is too snarky for it's own good.

The West Wing had a good twinge of snark to it, and also didn't hesitate to throw some anti-Christian Right jabs early on in it's career (the pilot episode involved a morally bankrupt Christian-Coallition type leader trying to blackmail the White House when Josh Lyman slipped up and made an anti-Christian comment on telelvision) -- but the West Wing wore it's heart on it's sleeve. The majority of the cast members were people with a genuine desire to do right and make a positive difference in the world.

It's a lot easier to get attached to a cast like that than the unlikeable bunch that populates Studio 60.

KYRedsFan
10-31-2006, 12:40 AM
Ugggh, hated this show from the start. Just so self absorbed. Sorkin's commentary on our social scene just being beaten over my head got quite old as well.

Razor Shines
10-31-2006, 01:45 AM
Amanda Peet is one of the reasons I tuned in. I really like her. But she was an awful choice for the part. And I'm not a Christian myself, but I perceived a slight anti-Christian tone in the first two episodes. The story line centered around a skit called "Crazy Christians" and their right to put it on the air. And there was a couple of lines by Matthew Perry to the christian female character I thought were digs at religious folks. It was simply my conjecture that a lot of mainstream Christians probably tuned out after that if they were watching. Again, purely speculation. And Krono, I'm not so sure that the masses of Christians would appreciate their faith being poked at like that, even if they're going after the far right. Again, I could be wrong because I'm not of the faith myself, but it's such a polarizing topic these days that it wouldn't surprise me if some folks would rather just not have to listen to Hollywood make light of their faith.

As a Christian I have to say that the show didn't offend me at all. I did however find it absurd at times. I really wanted to like the show and watched every episode, but the fact that they kept making a big point of how you can't make fun of Christians on TV while making fun of Christians on TV was odd. If they wanted to make a statement about which religion you can't make fun of we all know which one they should have gone after. If they were going to make fun of Christians they could have done it much better. I loved Arrested Development, and they were definetly no friend to Christians or the right, but it was funny and that's all I cared about.

registerthis
10-31-2006, 10:04 AM
I don't think Sorkin will ever top seasons 2 - 4 of West Wing. Simply some of the best television drama that has ever been made, IMO.

redsmetz
10-31-2006, 12:01 PM
I was disappointed to read the article. We were surprised when we turned the tube on last night and found Friday Night Lights on (are we supposed to believe those players are high school age??? - yeah and John Wayne was 22 in all those WWII flicks!).

I've liked the show, but it clearly has flaws. I especially liked the side story in the last episode with the old comedy writer who was blacklisted and the search for a black writer - I thought that was well told and gave additional depth to the black character.

It's a very busy show and there are holes in the story lines that don't always make sense - for instance Harriet's Christianity - Hollywood tends to make cartoonish characters who are religious. There are few shows that do it well. The best was NYPD Blue who gave their religious story lines some substances. I had a friend from my high school days who was a writer for that show and I've regularly told her how well those episodes were. On Studio 60, it's almost implausible that a conservative Christian would be associated with the show if it's a SNL type show.

KronoRed
10-31-2006, 05:26 PM
Harriet is the problem, for those who watched the West Wing in season one, Harriet is exactly like Mandy was, a character who just comes across as annoying and unlikeable, last weeks episode rocked because she was barely in it.

Hopefully Sorkin can kill her off somehow, that would get ratings ;)

Chip R
10-31-2006, 05:52 PM
Harriet is the problem, for those who watched the West Wing in season one, Harriet is exactly like Mandy was, a character who just comes across as annoying and unlikeable, last weeks episode rocked because she was barely in it.

Hopefully Sorkin can kill her off somehow, that would get ratings ;)


I don't think she's that much like Mandy. I think a problem with Harriet is they kept trying to push her together with Matt because of their past relationship and make it the Matt and Harriet show. They didn't push Josh and Mandy together even though they used to be an item.

minus5
11-13-2006, 04:38 PM
On November 9, 2006, NBC announced that the show had been picked up for a full season, citing its favorable demographics as the reason.[13]. According to NBC's press release: "Studio 60 has consistently delivered some of the highest audience concentrations among all primetime network series in such key upscale categories as adults 18-49 living in homes with $75,000-plus and $100,000-plus incomes and in homes where the head of household has four or more years of college."

KronoRed
11-13-2006, 05:41 PM
Woohoo

minus5
11-13-2006, 05:42 PM
My thought exactly :thumbup:

Sweetstop
11-13-2006, 06:33 PM
I'm glad, too. The show gets stronger each week. I'm on the 50-something side of the demographic they mention. I like Matthew Perry in this alot. I always thought he was the only thing about Friends worth watching (though I didn't that much) and could easily handle a more challenging role. I've also been impressed w/ D.L. Hughley.

Unassisted
11-14-2006, 10:03 AM
The ratings for s60 still aren't very good. I think the renewal says more about how desperate NBC is than it does about the quality of the show.

IMO, the "Nevada Day" two-parter is easily the best pair of episodes yet. But it's becoming clearer that the sketches in the show-within-a-show aren't funny. I wonder if it's intentional?

minus5
11-14-2006, 10:50 AM
Actually NBC's ratings have been coming back this season. They are nearly neck & neck with CBS (#2) now (still behind them but just by a hair).

Hoosier Red
11-14-2006, 11:00 AM
You don't think the sketches are funny?
I thought Science Schmience was hysterical. My wife and I were talking about how if Saturday Night Live did anything remotely as funny, we might still watch.
Jesus Christ:Network standards guy was pretty funny too but obviously (and probably intentionally a rough draft.)

Ironically the sketch Judd Hirsch walked in on in the first episode could have been substituted for the opening sketch on Saturday Night Live later that week.

redsmetz
11-14-2006, 12:12 PM
You don't think the sketches are funny?
I thought Science Schmience was hysterical. My wife and I were talking about how if Saturday Night Live did anything remotely as funny, we might still watch.
Jesus Christ:Network standards guy was pretty funny too but obviously (and probably intentionally a rough draft.)

Ironically the sketch Judd Hirsch walked in on in the first episode could have been substituted for the opening sketch on Saturday Night Live later that week.

I think you're right. We're saying the show's rough drafts and run throughs, etc. They're not the finished product. I think the week they actually played out the Science Schmience with Rob Reiner actually was more humorous than the rehearsals and writing sessions.

My wife and I thought the conclusion of the John Goodman scenes ended so abrubtly with that patented Sorkin fast dialogue that we were like "What???" so it wasn't clear to us how they put two and two together.

Unassisted
11-14-2006, 12:36 PM
You don't think the sketches are funny?
I thought Science Schmience was hysterical. My wife and I were talking about how if Saturday Night Live did anything remotely as funny, we might still watch.
Jesus Christ:Network standards guy was pretty funny too but obviously (and probably intentionally a rough draft.)

I don't think they're funny, so much as provocative, to give an appearance that the show-w/in-a-show is edgy and controversial. The appearance of envelope-pushing seems to feed the drama. It's likely also tweaking the networks for the boundaries they impose on producers.

By themselves, the sketches never leave me wanting more. And I think it may be intentional, so that the comedy doesn't overshadow the drama.


Ironically the sketch Judd Hirsch walked in on in the first episode could have been substituted for the opening sketch on Saturday Night Live later that week.

I agree. That was very SNL-like. I don't think much else of the content from the "show" has resembled SNL. Considering that sketch was from the last show that preceded Matt and Danny's arrival, maybe the message is that the real-life SNL is stale?

KronoRed
11-14-2006, 12:41 PM
The show seems best when it ignores the sketches and ignores Harriett, stick to life behind the scenes, writers, production people ext.. and I think it's a great show.

Chip R
11-14-2006, 01:11 PM
I finally got to watch an episode last night after either forgot to tape it or the weather screwed things up but I thought it was a good episode.

I think what people need to realize about the skits on the show is that they are there just as background basically and the skits actually being funny is not the point. Sorkin's not a comedy writer and he's writing the show. I mean most of the skits on SNL aren't funny and they have comedy writers writing those. It'd be a story if the skits on Studio 60 were funnier than the ones on SNL.

Hoosier Red
11-14-2006, 01:14 PM
It'd be a story if the skits on Studio 60 were funnier than the ones on SNL.


That's the thing Chip, I think they are for the most part. Or at least more creative.

Chip R
11-14-2006, 01:34 PM
That's the thing Chip, I think they are for the most part. Or at least more creative.

Yeah, but criticizing Studio 60 for the skits not being that funny is like criticizing MASH or ER or House because the operations aren't that in depth or accurate.

Sweetstop
11-14-2006, 01:57 PM
Like someone else said, the skit ideas being tossed about and rehearsed are background, showing the process, script-stuffers ala Sorkin...full of topical subjects, points of view, etc. As it should be realistically, some of them sound funny, some don't. Personally, I liked the 'Cheeses of Nazareth' idea.

Razor Shines
11-17-2006, 08:02 PM
The show seems best when it ignores the sketches and ignores Harriett, stick to life behind the scenes, writers, production people ext.. and I think it's a great show.

I agree that's why I started watching the show, that kind of stuff has always interested me.

Unassisted
11-18-2006, 09:57 AM
Yeah, but criticizing Studio 60 for the skits not being that funny is like criticizing MASH or ER or House because the operations aren't that in depth or accurate.

At least MASH and ER used medical advisers that attempted to make it seem real. There's no evidence that the sketches on s60 are even an attempt at humor. It's like they are works of art in a gallery that everyone on the show sits back and views with a wrinkled brow and a nose to the grindstone because they have to beat that clock that's always counting down in Matt's office.

Scrap Irony
11-19-2006, 11:04 PM
The second show, wherein the boys parodied Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore was classic. If SNL had done that, it would rank as one of the top five bits of all time.

Aceking
11-21-2006, 12:33 PM
For the record, the advisor on their sketch comedy is Mark McKinney from Kids in the Hall and briefly SNL.

I thought last night's was possibly the best one since the pilot. That show is always at its best wen it's about the show.

(Mark's best known as the "I'm Crushing Your Head!" Guy)

Hoosier Red
11-21-2006, 12:37 PM
The second show, wherein the boys parodied Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore was classic. If SNL had done that, it would rank as one of the top five bits of all time.


I thought that was the end of the first episode,

"model of a modern network tv show"

SteveJRogers
11-26-2006, 04:20 PM
For the record, the advisor on their sketch comedy is Mark McKinney from Kids in the Hall and briefly SNL.

I thought last night's was possibly the best one since the pilot. That show is always at its best wen it's about the show.

(Mark's best known as the "I'm Crushing Your Head!" Guy)

I think that is also what DL Hughley's backstage (of the actual show) role is for as well, someone to make sure the comedy is actual sketch-like comedy.

klw
12-07-2006, 02:10 PM
Now the skit of the Santa Claus edition of "To Catch a Preditor" on Monday was very funny and well done.

BuckeyeRed27
12-07-2006, 02:17 PM
Now the skit of the Santa Claus edition of "To Catch a Preditor" on Monday was very funny and well done.

Agreed. I actually thought the last episode was really good. I have been casually watching and usually don't finish the whole episode, but I did watch the whole thing.

Chip R
12-07-2006, 02:25 PM
I tried to tape it but I accidentally had the tape near the end and only caught the 1st 10 minutes. Sorkin seems to have a knack for writing wonderful X-Mas episodes.

MWM
12-07-2006, 02:30 PM
I watched the first two episodes and didn't watch again until the second half of this week's episode. I thought the writing was weak and the show was very preachy, and like I said in another thread, I hate preachiness in TV shows or movies, even when I'm in agreement with what's being preached.

Chip R
12-07-2006, 02:32 PM
I watched the first two episodes and didn't watch again until the second half of this week's episode. I thought the writing was weak and the show was very preachy, and like I said in another thread, I hate preachiness in TV shows or movies, even when I'm in agreement with what's being preached.


I was going to say the same thing in that thread, MWM, about S60 being preachy. They are very heavy handed about it.