The Newsroom [HBO - Spoilers]

Rfrip

civis_liberalis wrote: »

Rfrip, sorry to hear you didn't like it. I was very entertained by it and look forward to another season of it. I thought some of the episodes were excellent TV. Maybe I'm rather easily please, but there ye go.

Maybe it was just my mood at the wkend! I'd love to know what I thought of it if I hadnt seen the west wing.
I just found it all so clichéd

syklops

The Black Oil wrote: »

Some mixed feelings with 2.08 and 2.09. There was a drop in quality with these last two episodes. I think mainly because they put the personal stuff back in focus, more so in the finale. Some of the set ups were too obvious - Charlie bumping into the girl and knocking over the drinks, ergo Jim finds out, blah blah and no, I don't really care for him Skyping in every other scene. I have mixed feelings on the show's smacking down of Republicans and dialling up the Sorkin-speak. Whether I agree with it or not, I just don't know if it's serving the show well creatively. But more than that, the frustration I have with the show in these last two is it's sometimes like Sorkin is just ticking boxes. Look, I like him. He's had a lot of success in the past and is certainly not beyond criticism. I don't think the show is designed for intellectuals. That smacks of being a 'well, all Apple users are iSheep' take on things. Whilst I didn't praise the US House of Cards as much as some others did, I did like how it built the relationships between the characters - Newsroom hasn't been as successful here. Who knows what goes in the show's writers' room.

Despite being a long term supporter of The newsroom, Id agree there was a drop in something in 8 and 9. I was at home last night and had a couple episodes recorded on my parents Sky+. I had the choice of Genoa part 2 and election night parts 1 and 2, and I went with Genoa despite having seen it far more times than election night. Episode 8 is setting up episode 9, but 9 feels very much like a last episode ever. Genoa was expertly done in my opinion.

Sweet Jesus it was some pack of cheesy writing. I watched all of it over the wkend and by the end I didn't care who resign got fired or other wise.

There an awful awful lot of comments like this on this thread. Articulate this for me. If you didnt like it, why did you keep watching it? You said you watched the entire thing over the weekend, so 9 episodes yeah? You spent 9 hours out of the weekend watching something you didn't like? Why? Why do that to yourself?

Rfrip

Because i wanted to finish it out in the hope that it redeemed itself in the final episode. That ok with you?

I'd watched season 1 and had enjoyed as it filled somewhat the void since the west wing

syklops

Rfrip wrote: »

Because i wanted to finish it out in the hope that it redeemed itself in the final episode. That ok with you?

Did it?

The news and hows its made has only ever been parodied, with the likes of Drop the Dead donkey so, how is it clichéd?

Rfrip

syklops wrote: »

Did it?

The news and hows its made has only ever been parodied, with the likes of Drop the Dead donkey so, how is it clichéd?

No it didnt

I'm talking bout the stories of Sloan n don n the ending. Also with all the senior staff wanting to resign. That's what i call clichéd. All got a bit yawnsome

I feel like I'm defending my opinion to Sorkin himself here!!!!

syklops

Rfrip wrote: »

No it didnt

I'm talking bout the stories of Sloan n don n the ending. Also with all the senior staff wanting to resign. That's what i call clichéd. All got a bit yawnsome

I feel like I'm defending my opinion to Sorkin himself here!!!!

Sorry but if you read the thread there has been a lot of one line comments along the lines of "What a pile of sh1te", so Im simply asking you to qualify your statements.

Did Genoa not grab you in any way?

Rfrip

syklops wrote: »

Sorry but if you read the thread there has been a lot of one line comments along the lines of "What a pile of sh1te", so Im simply asking you to qualify your statements.

Did Genoa not grab you in any way?

Yep I've read the thread and giving my opinion!I'd almost preferred it if they didn't show him editing the tape. I'd have liked it if the penny had dropped when mac realised.

But that is just my mere humble opinion

syklops

Rfrip wrote: »

Yep I've read the thread and giving my opinion!I'd almost preferred it if they didn't show him editing the tape. I'd have liked it if the penny had dropped when mac realised.

But that is just my mere humble opinion

Theres nothing wrong with giving your opinion and there is nothing wrong with not liking the program. I'd just like people to say why, what with this being a discussion forum.

We both seem to agree on The West Wing. How would you feel if someone said that they thought the West Wing was crap and then didn't say anything else?

Rfrip

syklops wrote: »

Theres nothing wrong with giving your opinion and there is nothing wrong with not liking the program. I'd just like people to say why, what with this being a discussion forum.

We both seem to agree on The West Wing. How would you feel if someone said that they thought the West Wing was crap and then didn't say anything else?

If someone said to me the west wing was cheesy and clichéd then I'd think oh that's a pity, I loved and then leave it at that!

syklops

Rfrip wrote: »

If someone said to me the west wing was cheesy and clichéd then I'd think oh that's a pity, I loved and then leave it at that!

That would certainly be conducive to a discussion in a discussion forum.

Rfrip

syklops wrote: »

That would certainly be conducive to a discussion in a discussion forum.

Clearly I must be a valued member of boards then!

evilivor

Truth/Fiction.

'We were wrong': CBS's Lara Logan apologizes for Benghazi report

-- CBS correspondent Lara Logan apologized Friday and said the network was "wrong" for a "60 Minutes" report that raised questions about the Obama administration's response to last year's attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.

The assault left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

"In this case, we were wrong. We made a mistake," Logan said on "CBS This Morning." "That's disappointing for any journalist. It's very disappointing for me."

A primary source for the "60 Minutes" report on October 27 was a security contractor using the pseudonym "Morgan Jones," later identified as Dylan Davies. Davies told CBS he was able to reach the Benghazi compound on the night of September 11, 2012, scale a wall and even fight off a militant.
Also on Friday, the publisher of a book containing Davies' account said it was suspending the sale and publication of the book. Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, is recommending that booksellers not sell "The Embassy House" and return the books, spokeswoman Jennifer Robinson told CNN.

The "60 Minutes" story broadcast October 27 cast doubt on whether the Obama administration sent all possible help to try to save Stevens and his three colleagues. The story was then cited by congressional Republicans who have demanded to know why a military rescue was not attempted.

On Friday, Logan responded to questions from CBS's Norah O'Donnell, who pressed her for details about Davies.

"What we know now is, he told the FBI a different story to what he told us," Logan said. "That was the moment for us when we realized that we no longer had confidence in our source and we were wrong to put him on air, and we apologize to our viewers."

Logan was also asked about how CBS vetted Davies and his story.
"We verified him, confirmed who he was, that he was working for the State Department at the time, that he was in Benghazi at the special mission compound the night of the attack," Logan said. "He showed us -- he gave us access to communications he had with U.S. government officials."

"The Embassy House" tells the same story Davies told Logan. Davies also told Logan that he acted in violation of his employer's orders to stay away from the compound.

Since the revelations about problems with the story, Logan said CBS has tried to contact Davies but has not heard from him.

SherlockWatson

Found this recently and watched the two seasons over a short period of time, I really enjoyed it myself, thought Sam Waterston was absolutely brilliant, looking forward to season 3 - if there is one.

don ramo

SherlockWatson wrote: »

Found this recently and watched the two seasons over a short period of time, I really enjoyed it myself, thought Sam Waterston was absolutely brilliant, looking forward to season 3 - if there is one.

there certainly will be a third season, it was renewed not long after season 2 ended, i think sorkin is working on a steve jobs film, so there may be some kind of delay, maybe a month or two,

the show really benefits from block viewing, its one of them shows that would really annoy you when you watch week to week,

dogsears

don ramo wrote: »

there certainly will be a third season, it was renewed not long after season 2 ended, i think sorkin is working on a steve jobs film, so there may be some kind of delay, maybe a month or two,

Didn't HBO rein back on 3rd season talk shortly after Jeff Daniels tweeted about it? I think they said they wanted to make a 3rd season but needed to work on schedules etc with AS. But since then there's basically been radio silence. I'd have expected to hear something further by now if there was going to be a season 3 in 2014.

The Black Oil

Yeah, I think so. I wouldn't be so confident about a third season at the moment...

SherlockWatson

Well I for one really hope that their is another season.

Jeff Daniels really nailed the role imo and played it perfectly.

The moment with Will, Don, Mac and Charlie after the gifford shooting was brilliant, "You're a ****in newsman Don I ever tell you otherwise, you punch me in the face" gave me chills.

Definitely will be getting a rewatch from me before the summer.

kryogen

I would watch a 3rd season, I enjoyed the show, but at the same time, I wouldn't really be that bothered if it didn't get renewed. I feel it was an opportunity missed overall.

gavmcg92

Really looking forward to another series. Obviously not as fast paced as some other series on tv at the moment, but still great to watch.

squonk

Wouldn't be bothered about the shows loss at this point. Definite improvement this season but still too much silliness and just a slightly above average show overall. I'd expect this ensemble to be way above average. If the show is cancelled then Sorkin has nobody to blame but himself.

JP Liz V1

Thrill wrote: »

Newsroom to get a third and final season.



http://www.deadline.com/2014/01/newsroom-renewed-final-season-hbo/

I wonder was it Sorkin's plan or HBO's to end after 3

JP Liz V1

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I wonder was it Sorkin's plan or HBO's to end after 3

Given that it took them so long to officially renew the show I would imagine that HBO took the decision to end the show. I'm surprised that it got another series and assume that it was done in part so as to keep Sorkin happy.

huey1975

Noooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

aidan_walsh

Not really that big of a surprise. Hopefully the show will live up more to the promise of what we saw in Season 2 with the original news storyline.

I Heart Internet

Yeah, 3rd and final season sounds about right.

The show is entertaining but I don' think it has the legs for anything more than that.

syklops

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Yeah, 3rd and final season sounds about right.

The show is entertaining but I don' think it has the legs for anything more than that.

I suspect Sorkin suspected that 2 would be the last. A lot of storylines got dealt with Mac and Will, Sloan and Don etc.

Its possible with these storylines, a big gripe with many the show can find new ground and improve.

Although, its a bit of a catch 22 situation. A program which shows the inner workings of the media and sometimes critiques the media is not going to be popular with the media. Where do HBO get their stats on how popular a program is? The media.

Coconut Joe

Deleted User wrote: »

Given that it took them so long to officially renew the show I would imagine that HBO took the decision to end the show. I'm surprised that it got another series and assume that it was done in part so as to keep Sorkin happy.

Can't remember where I read it but the claim was Sorkin was the hold out as he wanted to concentrate on his movie scripts.

dogsears

Not especially upset at the news Season 3 will be the last. I think Sorkin relaxes a bit when there's a clear end date in sight. Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if he never did TV again (or perhaps after the Chateau Marmont project happens, if ever). He must know by now (perhaps since the end of Studio 60?) that he'll just never do a West Wing again, so why keep setting himself up for the fail, with all the attendant mass critical pile-on. It might just be a movie every couple of years from this point.

aidan_walsh

Aaron Sorkin is sorry for some things about The Newsroom

The setting was the Tribeca Film Festival, where Jon Favreau (the former Obama speechwriter, not the other one) asked Sorkin about what he’s learned about the press, after two years of appearing to scold it about how it does its job. Unexpectedly for a man who often seems to respect only those members of the media he himself invents, Sorkin apologized—to them and to everyone.

“I’m going to let you all stand in for everyone in the world, if you don’t mind. I think you and I got off on the wrong foot with The Newsroom and I apologize and I’d like to start over… I think that there’s been a terrible misunderstanding. I did not set the show in the recent past in order to show the pros how it should have been done. That was and remains the furthest thing from my mind. I set the show in the recent past because I didn’t want to make up fake news. It was going to be weird if the world that these people were living in did not in any way resemble the world that you were living in… Also, I wanted the option of having a terrific dynamic that you can get when the audience knows more than the characters do…

So, I wasn’t trying to and I’m not capable of teaching a professional journalist a lesson. That wasn’t my intent and it’s never my intent to teach you a lesson or try to persuade you or anything.”

...

What Sorkin does know, however, is that he’s finally getting better. “I feel like I’m just now starting to learn how to write it,” he said of The Newsroom, framing the first two seasons as “a learning curve, and unfortunately, those lessons are learned in front of several million people.” Now that the show is entering its third—and final—season, Sorkin says, “I wish that I could go back to the beginning of The Newsroom and start again.”

Kirby

Wow. That's both brutal and refreshing to hear. I cant think of many other show runners who admit that out loud.