#1 Edited by Legion_ (1195 posts) -

...but I think it's a fantastic series. It's actually a show that is both informative and entertaining. Aaron Sorkin is mastermind, and I love how the dialouge is so snappy and fast. Jeff Daniels does a fantastic job, and fits the role perfectly. I think the reason the show has gotten a somewhat lukewarm reception is because it's not afraid of stepping people on their toes.

I'll just recommend it to everyone who wants deeper insight in topics like gun control, the tea party, sensationalist journalism and much more. You'll get knowledge on so many interesting topics, and it doesn't compromise the drama part of the show. Just awesome.

Just watch this, and you'll know what I mean. This is one of my favorite scenes in television, and certainly the best opening scene.

#2 Posted by crusader8463 (14305 posts) -

Never heard of it, but it looks interesting. I don't recall ever not enjoying an HBO series so I will give it a go.

#3 Posted by Breadfan (6586 posts) -

I love the Newsroom. Sometimes it drags, but I'd just contribute that to a new series getting its groove. I've since gone back and have begun watching The West Wing.

#4 Posted by rentfn (1267 posts) -

I enjoyed the Newsroom. The first season wasn't as impressive as the first season of West Wing. I hope it sticks around for awhile. I love his style of writing just like you talked about. The way everything flows. Also having deep conversations while walking down hallways is the best way to communicate.

#5 Posted by Unilad (479 posts) -

I found it irritably preachy.

Despite this I can't deny it's originality, creativity and all round class.

I find Sorkin can be a little of a danger if left completely on his own.

#6 Posted by joshthebear (2700 posts) -

It's fine for what it is, but not really up to Sorkin standards.

#7 Edited by TheHT (10262 posts) -

I really liked it. Some of the relationship stuff was boring, and by the end some of the swings just got annoying.

Don't know when it's starting back up, but I'm looking forward to it!

#8 Posted by TooWalrus (12970 posts) -

This show seems like something that's right up my ally. I'll definitely check it out some time (say, after I graduate, when I actually have time to sit down and watch television again).

#9 Posted by wjb (1551 posts) -

I watched the first episode and it stunk. From what I've been told by people who continued watching, some of the female characters were poorly written and the whole "let's have the gift of hindsight to provide our characters with commentary to stuff that actually happened 2 years ago" felt cheap. I like Sorkin, but he's always been hit-or-miss.

Now Girls, that's a show. AM I RITE FELLAZ WHO FREQUENT A VIDEO GAME WEBSITE FORUM?!

#10 Posted by mbkish (240 posts) -

I like it, but it is riddled with Sorkinisms. Some people eat that stuff up (like my parents), but I heard enough of them in the West Wing that it is starting to feel like deja vu.

#11 Posted by MikkaQ (10224 posts) -

It's cool, but it's a little too didactic, a little too preachy. I guess @mbkish nails it. Too many Sorkinisms. I like him in smaller doses (like Social Network).

#12 Posted by SuperCycle (330 posts) -

I liked it the first time I watched it, but when I watched it a second time and the more I think about it the more I dislike the show intensely. I like Jeff Daniels and a few of the supporting characters, I can't stand the woman Executive Producer, the young man she brought with her and his will they, won't they love interest secretary turned reporter. The show has a lot of liberal messages in it, so much so that it's hard to watch with a straight face, I lean to the left myself but it seems almost overbearingly negative towards republicans without touching on any of the stupid things that Democrats do. The whole mantra of the newsroom 2.0 is to not be a balanced program or show the opposite side of a position, which seems very unprofessional for a journalist to do. Daniels character basically uses his program as a soapbox, which would be fine if he wasn't paid to deliver the news. The whole show seems like Sorkin is looking back at past news events and saying to reporters "This is how you should have covered this" Hindsight is always 20/20 though. I did like getting better acquainted with the issues, even though they were very skewed.

#13 Posted by Inkerman (1448 posts) -

The 'looking back' on past events is a weird take, but I kind of like it. But yeah, I LOVE the show, I love the anchor, I love the love interests, and I don't actually mind the exec producer, she's definitely the weakest part of the show though.

#14 Posted by Chaser324 (5955 posts) -

@wjb said:

Now Girls, that's a show. AM I RITE FELLAZ WHO FREQUENT A VIDEO GAME WEBSITE FORUM?!

I'm man enough to admit that I've watched the first season of Girls, and I found it quite entertaining and at times almost profound. As someone that's only been out of college for a few years, I can really relate to its story of the prolonged adolescence of the modern twenty-something and the resulting simultaneous fear of and desire for independence and identity.

I haven't watched The Newsroom, although I'm a big fan of some of Sorkin's other stuff so I'm sure I'd probably like it.

Moderator
#15 Edited by Rittsy (77 posts) -

I felt like it was just a platform for Sorkin to rip on conservatives and Republicans from. He did something similar to an extent in The West Wing, but he also went after Democrats and the Left just as much; and for every crazy Republican there was also a really intelligent one whose character was actually developed. Season One of The Newsroom just felt like "Hey, the Tea Party is pretty dumb right? Let's show how dumb they are. God, they're so dumb."

#16 Posted by Sanity (1852 posts) -

You got me hooked, i have hbo so i watched the first episode online, going to watch the first season over the next week or so. It really speaks to me as someone who cant stand what journalism has become.

#17 Posted by Legion_ (1195 posts) -

@SuperCycle: In the first scene Will McAvoy calls liberals "losers" and he is a registered republican. But I'm not going to disagree that it is a series with a lot of liberal views, which I am totally fine with, considering I'm from Norway, a socialist country, and arguably one of the best countries in the world.

Just want to add that their focus on the Tea Party movement is very important, for obvious reasons.

#18 Posted by ShadowConqueror (2993 posts) -

I enjoyed it at first but lost interest when it started to seem like it was just Sorkin preaching through his characters. I just expected more from the series.

#19 Posted by Legion_ (1195 posts) -

@Chaser324 said:

@wjb said:

Now Girls, that's a show. AM I RITE FELLAZ WHO FREQUENT A VIDEO GAME WEBSITE FORUM?!

I'm man enough to admit that I've watched the first season of Girls, and I found it quite entertaining and at times almost profound. As someone that's only been out of college for a few years, I can really relate to its story of the prolonged adolescence of the modern twenty-something and the resulting simultaneous fear of and desire for independence and identity.

I haven't watched The Newsroom, although I'm a big fan of some of Sorkin's other stuff so I'm sure I'd probably like it.

Only thing I liked about Girls was this scene.

#20 Posted by SuperCycle (330 posts) -

@Legion_: Certainly the issues and topics that they covered were very interesting. I didn't know much, really anything, about the Tea Party and the state of republican decay and a lot of their topics were very informative. Aaron Sorkin is a very good writer and he's very smart when it comes to those political topics.

Having Daniels character be a republican, a "true republican", seemed like Sorkin was actually trying to deflect a lot of the criticism of the show being overt liberal propaganda. I bet he says "It can't be propaganda, my main character is a Republican!" Well it's fairly obvious that his idea of a republican is more of a centrist. Yes he did call Democrats "losers" but also spent the rest of the series making them out to be angels from up on high above.

I think my biggest gripe with the show is how he handles the personal relationships of his characters. Almost all of the women seem to be ditzy airheads that sit around talking about either which boy likes them more, or dear god I don't know how to send an e-mail in 2012. "I'm so flustered I must be adorable!" For someone that's so smart and snappy with his political dialogue, I just wish he would have handed off the personal stuff to more competent people.

#21 Posted by JasonR86 (9372 posts) -

From the ads it looked like a poor rip-off of Network. I haven't even tried watching it though so I can't speak to it. The advertising though. Man...

Online
#22 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1347 posts) -

I didn't love it, but the setting is up my alley, and I thought the first season had its moments. You've got to go in knowing it's a Sorkin joint. If you absolutely cannot deal with that, it's not for you.

#23 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4281 posts) -

The relationship stuff is my only issue. Yeah it's preachy but I actually don't mind it cuz I share a lot of its views. Hopefully it starts ripping more into the left than focusing a lot on the right. I don't need to be constantly reminded how irrelevant and out of touch the republican party has become.

#24 Posted by InsidiousTuna (359 posts) -

It's irritably preachy and overly Sonkin-esque. Even, somehow, moreso than Sportsnight and West Wing. I am certainly sympathetic to Aaron Sorkin's liberal agenda, but it makes for bad serial television.

#25 Posted by Doctorchimp (4063 posts) -

@Chaser324 said:

@wjb said:

Now Girls, that's a show. AM I RITE FELLAZ WHO FREQUENT A VIDEO GAME WEBSITE FORUM?!

I'm man enough to admit that I've watched the first season of Girls, and I found it quite entertaining and at times almost profound. As someone that's only been out of college for a few years, I can really relate to its story of the prolonged adolescence of the modern twenty-something and the resulting simultaneous fear of and desire for independence and identity.

I haven't watched The Newsroom, although I'm a big fan of some of Sorkin's other stuff so I'm sure I'd probably like it.

Yeah, as a 21 year old absolutely scraping by with people, jobs, and school, girls is pretty spot-on.

#26 Edited by MarkWahlberg (4493 posts) -

From what I've heard, the lukewarm reception is due to it being overly preachy and self-important. I've only watched bits and pieces of the show, but based on what I've seen I'm afraid I'd have to agree. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who enjoys The West Wing, despite it being occasionally too in love with itself. Just going off that opening scene alone - he completely shits all over present day America, says kids these days are the worst ever, and then goes off on how great things used to be? How the fuck is that insightful? It's a rich white guy complaining about how much better things used to be when rich white guys ran everything. He rips into how fucked everything is today while completely whitewashing and mythologizing America's past. It's absurd.

#27 Posted by Legion_ (1195 posts) -

@MarkWahlberg said:

From what I've heard, the lukewarm reception is due to it being overly preachy and self-important. I've only watched bits and pieces of the show, but based on what I've seen I'm afraid I'd have to agree. Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who enjoys The West Wing, despite it being occasionally too in love with itself. Just going off that opening scene alone - he completely shits all over present day America, says kids these days are the worst ever, and then goes off on how great things used to be? How the fuck is that insightful? It's a rich white guy complaining about how much better things used to be when rich white guys ran everything. He rips into how fucked everything is today while completely whitewashing and mythologizing America's past. It's absurd.

Sorkin is on a mission to educate. I think he's doing it the right way.

#28 Edited by boj4ngles (287 posts) -

Sorry to be a hater but I was not impressed at all. I wanted to like it because I love the concept of a drama series in a cable news station, but Sorkin is just too annoying. Every male character is mildly neurotic, pessimistic, overly rational and emotionally suppressed. Every female character is emotionally impulsive, idealistic, naive, insecure and incompetent. It's a weird gender template that is pervasive throughout his work, not just newsroom and I'm tired of it. On top of that, the show is not a great source for news, issues or ideas. He's not making any editorial arguments that John Stewart and Stephen Colbert haven't already done far more effectively and for many years.

#29 Posted by TheLastGunslinger (152 posts) -

I've only watched a few episodes so far and I like it. It's no West Wing but still worth getting into.

#30 Posted by pakalolobro420 (42 posts) -

i didnt quite understnd that video

#31 Posted by I_smell (3926 posts) -
@Legion_ said:

Hahaha, Aaron Sorkin has started a story with a Network "I'm mad as hell!" moment many a time now.
#32 Posted by Meowshi (2911 posts) -

@SuperCycle said:

Having Daniels character be a republican, a "true republican", seemed like Sorkin was actually trying to deflect a lot of the criticism of the show being overt liberal propaganda. I bet he says "It can't be propaganda, my main character is a Republican!" Well it's fairly obvious that his idea of a republican is more of a centrist. Yes he did call Democrats "losers" but also spent the rest of the series making them out to be angels from up on high above.

You just don't understand the character. Will McAvoy isn't a centrist. He's a realist. He realizes that the further the Republican party skews towards the right, the less voting power they will be able to garner during the elections. He certainly does not spend the rest of series applauding democrats; in fact, one of his most dominant characteristics is the fact that he tries to keep his political views out of his broadcasts. When he criticizes Republicans, it's not their political platform he's complaining about, but the style of governance that the current party utilizes. Frankly, it's no surprise that you don't like the character. You don't even understand him.

#33 Posted by artofwar420 (6227 posts) -

I guess I'll watch whole episodes to decide if I dig it or not.

#34 Posted by darthslughorn (26 posts) -

I think it is worth watching if you even have any interest in Sorkin's other works (West Wing, A Few Good Men, Moneyball, etc.) Sure it can get preachy, but thats not necessarily a bad thing if you can separate your own politics from those on screen, and the speed of the dialogue is absolutely amazing. It makes some shows look like they're in slow motion.

#35 Posted by SuperCycle (330 posts) -

@Meowshi: I think I have a fair understanding of his character, and I've already said that I do like him as a character, he himself is a platform for Aaron Sorkin's political views, and I agree with a lot of his political views.

When you say that one of his dominant characteristics is that he wants to keep his political views out of the broadcast, you are wrong. Almost every show he goes on a rant in some way or another expressing himself through monologue about the problems with the republican party. If he were an actual broadcaster almost 90% of what he says would be considered Liable, and he would be sued into the next millennium. The news anchor is supposed to deliver news and mediate discussion, he rarely has guests, and when he does he doesn't have guests that represent multiple political views on the subject. Their 2.0 mantra is to actually not represent multiple political views, it's to have a very opinionated program, which shouldn't be a news program.

Yes he is criticizing their political platform, because currently the Republican party is not the political party that is currently governing the United States.

He may be a Realist, a Centrist, a Republican or even a Liberal. I personally don't believe that "Realist" is a political stance, when I say that he's a Centrist I'm talking about where I think his views on the political spectrum actually lay. Democrats are to the Left, Republicans to the Right, and I feel that he's more in the middle. Of course a middle with leftist leanings. I think you can a Realist and still be a Centrist, Republican, or Liberal.

Of course I could be wrong, it's been known to happen from time to time.

#36 Posted by theguy (796 posts) -

I really enjoyed the last season even though something bugged me. It's hard to describe what bothers me about it. It lacks a kind of subtlety you get from other shows, especially British ones. It's like it's very in your face about what everyone thinks all the time. Still I really enjoy it. Looking forward to next season.