The Newsroom [HBO - Spoilers]

Heraldoffreeent

dogsears wrote: »

I've just seen the whole of Ep 4. I see some were cribbing about the wedding stuff - I have to be honest, I'm an unabashed Sorkinophile and Ave Maria is so totally all about The West Wing and the scene in the first season when Josh is stressing about his sister and the Ave Maria comes on and he says that Schubert was quite mad you know - a scene I always loved and quite obviously so did Sorkin and this was his grand reprise of that (while he still could) - and for that I loved it.

There's a few things that have made their way over from the West wing, the makey uppy failed African state of Kundu being another.

squonk

While I watched this episode I thought it was the best episode of the entire show so far. Well paced and tense at times, it had drama and comedy and angst all wrapped up in a well executed box, or so I thought. Not having seen TWW I really liked the Ave Maria piece and how well it fitted into the overal episode. Two things really grated though during the episode. The first, when Will & Mac are in bed and Will's phone rang. Mca's dialog at that point was SO bad... "Is it Charlie... Is it Rebecca... Is it Charlie... Is it Rebecca..." STFU woman! Very poorly executed! How it could have been filmed, checked and not filmed again once Sorkin realised it didn't owrk I@ll never know. Also, Charlie's rant at the new media guy ending with something like "I don't like him. We're enemies now!". All that was needed was "Mom, the new media guy is a dufus and I hate him. I just do!". We've Charlie built up as a hardened old news type who's canny and sharp yet we get him uttering dialog straight out of a moody 15 year old's mouth who doesn't want to go to summer camp!

Although it was still a great episode, comeing away and thinking about it started to show some cracks. Sloane getting the bait and switch from Todd. Since Charlie pointed out the issue with the food, I'd have thought Slaone should have picked up on that. She's a smart lady and is portrayed as such. She's also well connected and knows her business so it seems very unlikely and strange that something like that would have been brushed off by her.

The HR guy... seriusly... what a waste of film and screen time!

In the end it's so frustrating. There's genuine brilliance in there but it just gets sidelined by the silly details.

errlloyd

[quote="squonk;93273290"We've Charlie built up as a hardened old news type who's canny and sharp yet we get him uttering dialog straight out of a moody 15 year old's mouth who doesn't want to go to summer camp!

Although it was still a great episode, comeing away and thinking about it started to show some cracks. Sloane getting the bait and switch from Todd. Since Charlie pointed out the issue with the food, I'd have thought Slaone should have picked up on that. She's a smart lady and is portrayed as such. She's also well connected and knows her business so it seems very unlikely and strange that something like that would have been brushed off by her.
[/quote]

I actually always think Charlie has been quite childish and petulant. Even after the meeting with Slone his dialogue was childish. So I thought that was in character.

Similarly I also think Slone has no actual cop on. She's very good at her thing, markets and economics. But she's niave about the world.

I'm not saying your perspective is wrong. I just find it interesting we have such different perspectives of the characters.

squonk

I'm not disagreeing with you Errlloyd. That's a good take. The sloane incident was subtle and I've seen over the years that very intelligent people can often have no cop on really. I remember eading a quote years ago saying "There are a lot of very intelligent people in MENSA with no common sense whatsoever". I can see Cloane falling into that category alright.

I also don't necessarily agree with you about Charlie but it's usually more subtly handeled, "I don't like him. We're enemies now!" is laying it on a bit thick though. Actually I'd say I disrespected many 15 year olds with my comment. I'd say it's more 5 year old dialogue territory really.

Hyzepher

"I don't like him. We're enemies now!".

That actually wasn't the exact quote, now was it.

squonk

Hyzepher wrote: »

That actually wasn't the exact quote, now was it.

I think it was the gist. I honestly can't remember and why nitpick? Perhaps you could have posted the original quote to elucidate us? It's the quote bar some other inane babbling.

SherlockWatson

squonk wrote: »

I think it was the gist. I honestly can't remember and why nitpick? Perhaps you could have posted the original quote to elucidate us? It's the quote bar some other inane babbling.

It was something like "We are sworn enemies now, he and I"

It was OTT as Charlie has been since the start, always prone to outbursts and in this case because he is a seasoned producer who is being patronized by a guy he obviously doesn't like nor respect.

It's you who is the one nitpicking tbh.

The Black Oil

I kinda liked it, though I didn't care a lot for the wedding (Ave Maria's another matter, though), or shades of Jim/Maggie revisited.

Kirby

The line made me laugh. That was the point of it and it succeeded. Let's not over analyse it.

Machismo Fan

Charlie's always been my favourite character on the show. Great mix of wise and crazy. Plus Sam Waterston is awesome.

steve_r

Thought I'd weigh in on this weeks ep:

I still think the overall storyline is very interesting, and the journalistic dilemmas they face regarding the leaking of info that could have very serious consequences. That said, I felt the ending was corny, and took away from the good work done before.

To pick up on the point about Mackenzie, I don't think her character is well written (similar to Sam now). That makes it very hard for the actor, and I don't think she's a good fit for the role in the first place, even though I do see why Sorkin would like her. CJ in TWW had a much more grounded character who only made the big speeches where necessary so in some ways that's an easier role to play.

The takeover is still stupid, and seems like a really forced way to bash new media. Jim relationship was also used to make that point, and I felt the argument was unfair and unbalanced.

This isn't me hating on the show btw. I like it, and its certainly interesting, I just wish it grabbed me as much as TWW.

The Pooka

Oh man; thought the show had hugely improved earlier in the season, but with that most recent episode it's well and truly sh*t the bed

h2005

Disappointed with that episode. Weakest episode this series.

syklops

ErrLLoyd wrote:

Similarly I also think Slone has no actual cop on. She's very good at her thing, markets and economics. But she's niave about the world.

She has admitted as much at least once if not more than that in the show.

gavmcg92

h2005 wrote:

Disappointed with that episode. Weakest episode this series.

Completely agree. Very poor episode. Sort of got the impression that they realised that and tried to save it with Charlie's passing. Even that didn't really help. Very very poor.

Seifer

Dunno what episode you guys were watching...

The scenes with Will's father were brilliant; re-watched them all after the reveal and the writing is fantastically clever.

Don in the field was a nice little thought exercise on trial by internet, Sloan's evisceration of the app guy very entertaining and Jim and Maggie's efforts to get on the plane were great because you knew Snowden wasn't going to be on it.

Penn

Yeah I enjoyed the episode a lot. Probably the lack of Will for most of the episode might have knocked it down a bit, but Don's scenes were fantastic imo, Sloane's takedown of the ACNgage guy was great and the bits of Will we got were brilliant. Jim and Maggie was weak for the most part but at least their story is nearly fully resolved now.

KerranJast

Seifer wrote: »

Don in the field was a nice little thought exercise on trial by internet

It ironic given how today the Internet lost it's **** at Sorkin for even touching that storyline with the AVClub in particular going completing so far up its own arse that it can't even reference the actual presented plotline correctly.

FlyingIrishMan

I thought it was another great episode, the Don sections in this episode were brilliant and one of the more interesting topics brought up. I usually like the AVClub but they royally fcked up the review for this episode spending the majority of the review talking about people's right to accuse someone of rape and missing the point completely.

JohnDaniels

When Maggie said 'you know where we are going'. Was I the only one that thought Jim was about to join the mile high club?

Weak episode overall. I hated the way Charlie went out.

squonk

It was a bit meh. I hadn't twigged that Will's cell mate was his father. In fairness to the guy he emoted quite a bit about Will that is along the lines of what I think about the character.

Sloane's takedown of the ACNGage guy was entertaining but I was left wondering what the pont was ereally. It's laregely like she wanted to quit while making a big statement at the same time. It was all a bit like playground squabbling. I just don't buy that you buy a cable network this month and completely revamp its output within a couple of weeks. I definitely thought Jim was getting the Mile High Club treatment. Waht a tease!

Charlie's death was just cheap. Last week we had the Will/Mac snap wedding with great gravitas and import. This week, we had Charlie keel over for a very dramatic ending. The episode would have been a bit of a filler without it but filler is fine at times and needed. In this case we got some nice background on Will. If he wanted to kill off Charlie then it would have been better at the end of Season 2 so we could see the aftermath and how each character adjusts. I thought it was just cheap drama whoring really.

I guess I'm still pretty positive about this show. It's improved a lot and is, for its current faults, far better than Season 1 and 2.

I liked how they handled the Snowden incident though. In earlier seasons where news broke and they dropped everything to follow a story from beginning to end was just terrible. I liked how in this case Snowden was a catalyst for the drama but not really part of it. That's how they should have played earlier seasons.

Hyzepher

Initially I thought Will's cellmate was a plant to try and get the name of the informer. It was a twist that he was imaginary.

Charlie looked like he was conflicted between reporting news and protecting his staff. On one hand he loathes the new format of trash news but on the other he's forced to comply to ensure jobs are saved - it was played very well.

The whole episode was to reinforce the idea that news needs to be relevant, unbiased and protective. All the storylines reflected this.

The ACNgage and rape stories were mirrors of each other - questioning the motivations for wanting certain news/facts/hearsay to be aired. With Sloane and Don arguing the case against knee-jerk journalism

CastorTroy

Of my 3 guesses of what would happen I got 1 right.

When Will's cellmate mentioned the plan that will said he didn't tell him, I knew he was imaginary.

I thought Jim was joining the Mile High Club.

I thought everyone would walk out with Sloane and Mack.

I understand Charlie's death. Was nearly there last week whne he was getting worked up, but this pushed him over the edge

S.M.B.

I hated this episode and I'd share some of the views that the AV Club review brought up? What exactly am I/them missing?

I had been really enjoying this season but I hated this weeks episode. It lost me early on in its run time so every little misstep was amplified for me.

The Pooka

S.M.B. wrote: »

I hated this episode and I'd share some of the views that the AV Club review brought up? What exactly am I/them missing?

I had been really enjoying this season but I hated this weeks episode. It lost me early on in its run time so every little misstep was amplified for me.

Yeah, I thought the rape subplot was pretty spectacularly tone-deaf - would maybe have been *slightly* more palatable if they'd left it after the dorm room discussion with both sides laid out, but for Don to then make the decision he thought was best for the girl was the nail in the coffin there. Throw in the imaginary dad scenes being uber on-the-nose and the ending with Charlie just leaving a bad taste in the mouth... I can't even describe it properly, but the whole episode just felt really, really 'off'. Not what you want with only one week left!

S.M.B.

Yeah, I've read various arguments trying to defend the plot ranging from it's just two opposing viewpoints, neither of which reflect Sorkins stance to the story isn't about rape at all, it's about old media versus new media.

I've yet to read one that I'm comfortable with.

But there were so many other moments which I found offensive.

The male Russian who decided to rinse Jim. WTF?

ixoy

Also felt it was the weakest of the season. The Jim / Maggie plot was pointless and boring - it showcased to me the show's weakest element: The soap opera relationships. Even worse it's the least interesting relationship.

Will's story line was fairly decent, although his dad does have a point about them all being a bit smug..

Sloane's piece was fairly good but again it really felt like Sorkin was once more having an OTT rant about the Internet. Didn't help he picked a stereotypical slimy IT guy - a cheap means of not having to actually debate the issue.

I did like Don's storyline (and haven't read any of the controversy). I did like how he tried to discuss the concept of what she was doing (which is a separate thing to the actualities of her case).

Charlie's death was not only obvious in this episode but also very very cheap. Bump off a character (death off screen), play some music over it, have a character be told to the credits. Sorkin can do better (and did a better piece in 'The West Wing').

Hope the last episode makes up for it but most likely we're just going to see them all quit ACN and do something like forming their own station whilst treating us to an extra helping of soap opera moments via funerals and relationships.

Foxtrol

S.M.B. wrote: »

Yeah, I've read various arguments trying to defend the plot ranging from it's just two opposing viewpoints, neither of which reflect Sorkins stance to the story isn't about rape at all, it's about old media versus new media.

I've yet to read one that I'm comfortable with.

I really don't see how people are having such issues with that portion of the plot. Just because you mightn't agree with a certain point of view doesn't mean it shouldn't be put out there. TV (be it fact or fiction) doesn't always have to make you feel comfortable, especially when dealing with issues which are so emotive for both sides.

S.M.B.

Foxtrol wrote: »

I really don't see how people are having such issues with that portion of the plot. Just because you mightn't agree with a certain point of view doesn't mean it shouldn't be put out there. TV (be it fact or fiction) doesn't always have to make you feel comfortable, especially when dealing with issues which are so emotive for both sides.

While I'm all for shows opening up a debate on certain issues I also think it's incredibly difficult for the subject to be tied up in a way that doesn't lean towards the show runners beliefs.

Sorkin appeared to be discussing something a lot more abstract than justice for rape victims but he was doing so within this context which is obviously a very sensitive subject.

Given my exposure to the show I felt it was inferring that Don was doing the morally correct thing by refusing to go through with the news piece. Maybe we're supposed to take issue with his actions but there's very little prompting me to think this is the case.

So just because I don't agree with a certain viewpoint it doesn't mean it shouldn't be put out there. It also doesn't mean I can't take offense to a viewpoint that the show seems to be condoning.

But maybe the characters of the newsroom are a lot more complex than I'm giving then credit for. I just don't see it myself.

Hyzepher

It wasn't that the rape story wasn't newsworthy, they we objecting to the decision to have the victim and alleged attacker interviewed at the same time.