That reminds me, I have to renew my grandpa's robot insurance.

I may not agree, sir, but I'll defend your right to use awesome metaphors with my life.

Hypothetically, anyway. I'm hoping that it won't come to that.

Seriously, that was awesome.

Last VIP tickets I got were for a prescreening of Paris Hilton's The Hottie and the Nottie but my girlfriend and her roommate insisted on leaving and sneaking into Juno 15 minutes in. Juno was actually worse.

I didn't see Charlie Wilson's War, but accordinjg to Fabio, if you didn't like it, blame Philip Seymour Hoffman.

Hoffman SAVED it.

"Above average"? I thought part of the problem (the huge, huge problem) with Studio 60 was that Matt Perry and crew were being portrayed as comedy geniuses and yet every sketch they actually showed appeared to have been put together by people only vaguely familiar with the concept of a comedy sketch, or even comedy - like Martians watching MadTV and attempting to mimic it.

Wait, what? Did you watch it?

The Jeff Daniels character is foundering, behaving erratically, (although it makes an interesting scene). He's acting like a bastard, and his career is, in his own words "a sinking ship", and the person who is clearly coming in to fix everything is the lady with the British accent.

In "Studio 60", the character who was clearly portrayed as the savior of network television was the Amanda Peet.


It's true that the sketches in Studio 60 weren't great. I didn't have a big problem with that. I liked the Nancy Grace sketch.

That's how it works. There's a woman behind the scenes holding everything together with duct tape so the Great Man can be all idealistic and save the world by making an angry speech once a week.

In Sorkinland, ladies exist to give the Sorkin Surrogate the tools he needs to be the messiah.

In Studio 60, the Amanda Peet character was the boss, and she was clearly the one making the decisions that had some cultural impact.

The guys were making a comedy show. It was a place where the culture wars were being played out, but were they supposed to be saving the world? I don't see that at all, in any sense whatsoever.

Is Jeff Daniels the TV anchor going to save the world? Well, he didn't do it this week.

I think this whole "save the world" business is a construct you made up to

Once again, i feel obliged to explain how a TV show works. The TV show is it's own world. In both shows, the woman saves the world.

Now, you could probably argue that it's sexist, and I'm sure you will. I'm sure you're going to shift your position while pretending that you're not, like you just did. I'm looking forward to it.

oops

a construct that you made up to make what the man does seem more important.

It's true that Sorkin a male, writes mostly about male characters. I'll give you that one.

Huh, that's weird, I wonder why Xenocide considers meandering, overly aggressive, ultimately meaningless tirades to be the height of empowerment, as opposed to actually creating or doing anything.

...oh, right.

Kudos to John Holmes for going for broke and giving us the old "I hereby define all your future arguments as backpedaling so I don't have to make any real effort when I respond to them" trick. Most people wait until twice as long into a fagdance before they resort to that.

Zero points to Cabre for coming off as the Smithers to John's Monty Burns.

Seriously, though, I hope you're not expecting some sustained debate on the merits of a TV show that at best exists to keep HBO viewers distracted until the network can serve up more southern vampires. If you can't see Sorkin's fetish for messianic white guys whose job it is to teach the world to sing by now, then you're probably still working your way through your West Wing boxset, blinded by echoes from a distant era when his work was still good.

yes, definitely, which is totally why I posted all the replies that I did to John in the Sorkinisms thread:

http://www.poetv.com/video.php?vid=109540

maybe you shouldn't hit the "messianic" note so hard when you are clearly so far up your own ass that you can only take your own word and experience as gospel.

listen, I'm still not sure exactly where I fall on Sorkin, but I hate lazy, belligerent criticism even more than lazy, belligerent television. and i really think claiming that the mouthpiece of the organizations that Sorkin is obsessed with is somehow The Superhero Who Will Change the World is an unfair, reductive way of looking at his work. waaaaaaay more unfair than criticizing his crappy jokes or unoriginal character work.

it's true that his protagonists' screeds come with just a liiiittle too much reaction shots of random people nodding their heads and clapping with their eyes, but usually Sorkin goes to great lengths to emphasize how useless and broken they are without their support systems. to put so much emphasis on the character whose OCCUPATION is to be a public face is, from my standpoint, mostly due to an unchecked patriarchal worldview.

you CAN'T see the executive producer or the White House Chief of Staff as a respectable figure for societal change, because it's a role that isn't lavished with all the fake decorum or illusion of dominance that's associated with roles usually restricted to white, heterosexual males. you have to degrade and downplay their prominence, or else you'd just be another member of the "fagdance" apparently.

sure, he could make a front-facing character who was a minority or a woman, but would you really be satisfied with the lengths he took to degrade their character in order to elevate their staff as much as an Albee or a... (crap, what is Jeff Daniels called on this again?), despite not actually having the authority of that perspective's experience? seriously doubting it.

tldr: fuk y'all both

>>Kudos to John Holmes for going for broke and giving us the old "I hereby define all your future arguments as backpedaling so I don't have to make any real effort when I respond to them" trick. Most people wait until twice as long into a fagdance before they resort to that.

Actually, I was identifying your LAST argument as backpedaling, because that's what it was, and I was challenging you to come up with something better.

This wasn't backpedaling, but it wasn't exactly an argument, either.

>>Llisten, I'm still not sure exactly where I fall on Sorkin, but I hate lazy, belligerent criticism even more than lazy, belligerent television. and i really think claiming that the mouthpiece of the organizations that Sorkin is obsessed with is somehow The Superhero Who Will Change the World is an unfair, reductive way of looking at his work. waaaaaaay more unfair than criticizing his crappy jokes or unoriginal character work.

God, I wish I'd said that.

It's a TV show, like "30 Rock", or "The Office" I find it to be about as realistic and as entertaining as either of those.

I may not agree with you about the jokes and the characters, but those are valid criticisms for a TV show. I do believe it's often deeply flawed writing that sets things up in obvious ways, way too much Aaron ex machina. I would not be willing to be against THE NEWSROOM moving inexorably toward the crapper, like STUDIO 60 did.

We will bury you.

Baby boomers are the worst period generation period ever period

At least until dot dot dot

hey you decrepid baby boomer, WWD clearly said you're the worst generation, "Period.", meaning you achieved the greatest level of worseness that has ever been or will ever be.

you are the modern dark ages.
the low point in our species' evolution.
the bacterial slime under the lowest turd of any of our civilizations.
the quicker you die off, the faster we can start getting out of the shithole you are digging us into.
suicide is the best way you can contribute to society.

Your incomprehensible vileness sort of uncuts your point. People ,my age don't talk like that.

Latter, children, I'm off to get some cardio!

I hope you have a heart attack and die.

I'm not kidding.

Take as many members of your worthless generation with you as you can.

To the gym?

I'm not making this up, my doctor described my last ekg as "perfect".


And it was covered by Medicare.

:)

The fact that you think what bothers us about baby boomers, is you using medicare, is one of the reasons you need to kill yourself. asap.

So it bothers you that I think it bothers you?
That totally works for me.

I love you guys. The idea that I can piss you off just by breathing is a beautiful gift. I wasn't going to exercise today, but I just walked five miles at a good clip. I'm printing this page, and taping it to my motherfucking refrigerator.

Truly baby boomer narcissism knows no bounds

When you die,　I'm going to piss on your grave, and there's nothing you can do to stop me.

Well, I think you may have added ten years to my life, so I think you've earned the right.

You guys should all come piss on my grave. Make it a party!

>>Truly baby boomer narcissism knows no bounds

You know something? I don't see the difference. We had better music, you have better phones, and that's about it. Same cushy birth, same arrogance, same sense of entitlement.

And on the other hand, these are such generalizations that they really have no meaning. There are all kinds of people in a generation. Do you think I'm really responsible for the state of the world because of my age? I've never made more than ten dollars an hour. If you drive a car, you're more responsible for the mess that the world is in than I am.

I've changed my mind, JHM. You've been on a spamming tear lately, and I was hoping you'd get tired. But Cena_mark has been pretty boring and poeTV should have a regular exhibit among its members. A narcassist baby boomer who has convinced himself that he's not attracted to messed up teenage girls really hits it out of the park.

Baby boomer music is all shit, just like the baby boomers themselves.

I'm going to shit on your grave, too.

Don't forget to wipe your ass.

Hooker, is Aaron Sorkin a teenage girl?

Did you know that I found that book you mentioned on Amazon, and it turns out that when you said I had a "lolita complex", what that really means is that I'm an underage girl with a compulsion to seduce older men? You're batting zero.

It's pretty normal to be attracted to younger women, and i do think younger women are attractive, but I can't imagine younger women and myself together. What would we talk about? Anyway, at my age, it's just not about the cock anymore. I don't have sex with younger women, I don't talk about having sex with younger women, and I don't think about having sex with younger women. Whatever that leaves, I've made my peace with it.

Sorry, but to the real world, it's pretty obvious that I'm the normal one here. I don't think I can read anybody's mind over the internet, and I'm not interested in shitting on anybody's grave. That's all crazy stuff. The question is, am I a malevolent troll, provoking crazy people because I'm bored? I don't know. I really do like discussing video clips..

Just so everyone feels safe, can you promise to stay away from schools, playgrounds, malls, and movie theatres?

Careful. They could end up bringing back Dream On.

Lets bring back SEX AND THE CITY!

I liked Dream On.

As far as I know they did bring back Sex and the City; they just call it "Girls" now, and the main characters aren't wealthy so it's supposed to be more socially conscious or whatever.

They're not wealthy, they just have trust funds with parents paying for overpriced schools and 2 years of living in New York for unpaid internships and could escape their situation at any time by crawling back to mom and dad.

Mad Men?