Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

[shmeep]

I've been looking forward to this show for ages and I'm thrilled to say it's even better than I thought it was going to be. Strong cast and writing, instantly engaging storyline, the Pilot left me in awe. I'm impressed with NBC for having the guts to air such a show, especially since it is mocking the mediocrity that is Saturday Night Live and it also makes some harsh comments about the quality of television in general. I'm hooked already. Also...Bravo will be airing the pilot a couple of times this week for anyone who missed it. I love that. It will be on Wednesday at 11 (if I'm not mistaken).

Here's a little blurb about the show:

OK, I'm going to make a bold statement here, so I hope you're sitting down. I assume you are because you're in front of a computer, but if you're standing for some reason, please, sit down.

All set? OK, here goes: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip is the best new show of the fall.

And I say that even though I haven't yet seen the other show being touted as the best new show, ABC's The Nine. The tape is sitting to the left of me as I type this, so I'll be watching it soon (thanks ABC for sending me a tape instead of a DVD. What, is this 1999?). But I can't imagine that the show has the combination that Studio 60 has after two episodes. One is the obvious quality right out of the gate (creator, writer, director, cast, etc), and the other is this incredible, palpable feeling you get watching it that, even though everything doesn't work across the board, you know it could get even better. That the strong moments far, far outweigh the bad moments.

And it's straight out entertaining as hell.

The quick premise: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip is a long-running Friday night musical/variety show on the NBS network (*cough* SNL *cough*). Creator and producer Wes Mendell (Judd Hirsch) knows that the show has become a stale, unfunny shadow of its former self (*cough* SNL *cough*), and during a live broadcast, he interrupts the opening sketch about President Bush and goes off on a rant, criticizing the network and their shows about eating bugs and becoming Donald Trump (*cough* NBC *cough*). This pretty much guarantees his firing from boss Jack (Steven Weber), who orders new NBS president Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet) to come up with a solution to fix the show.

Her idea? Hire back the show's original head writer and producer Matt Albie and Danny Tripp (Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford). Both were let go four years earlier. Now, they have become famous in the movie biz (Matt has just won the Writer's Guild award), but McDeere knows that she can get Danny to come back to the show because she knows his secret (it involves cocaine). Will Matt and Danny want to come back to the show that kicked them out?

I'm not giving away any spoilers to tell you that, duh, of course they come back to the show. But it's how Sorkin gets them back and how the cast plays off of each other that's so much fun. Perry and Whitford are a marvel together (you really believe they're best friends), but anyone who saw them together in a few West Wing episodes know that. And the supporting cast? In any other show, people like Steven Weber, Sarah Paulson, and D.L. Hughley would easily be the leads. That's how strong this ensemble is. Add to those names Nate Corrdry and Timothy Busfield. That's impressive.

I'm also impressed at how Aaron Sorkin sets all of this up. Is there anyone else working in TV today that can immediately drop you into a world and make it seem believable, instantly? He did it with The West Wing, making politics entertaining and understandable, and he does it here too.

I sense two problems with the show, but they are more viewer-oriented than show-oriented. One, will people want to invest their time in a quality drama that you actually have to pay attention to every single moment and be able to keep track of a dozen characters with interconnected storylines (Danny has a cocaine problem, Jack is the one that fired Matt and Danny four years ago, Harriet is a Christian who once dated Matt, etc)? I'd like to say "yes" because of Lost, but this show isn't going to have mysterious hatches and action and smoke monsters and clues to follow. It's intelligent comedy, sparkling dialogue, and wit.

The second problem is, will viewers want to watch a TV show about a TV show? One that is really insider-ish about the industry and its history? I would say that people shouldn't be worried about that. It's not like you need a TV encyclopedia next to you to understand what's going on, though it helps to be a fan of television and some of its classic moments. Ultimately, thought, this show is about the characters, the relationships. And even though it's in the "drama" category to the right, this is as much as workplace comedy (The Office, NewsRadio, Dick Van Dyke Show) as it is heavy drama. It's a great mix.

I still find it amazing that everyone from TV bloggers to The Washington Post's Tom Shales is still pushing the idea that a show like this might not work because unlike The West Wing they can't deal with big, important issues. One, they are (censorship, religion, drugs, the media), and two, Sports Night was set at a sports network of all things, and they dealt with important issues all the time, and very well.

And why is everyone shaking their heads that NBC has two shows (this show and 30 Rock) on the air about the behind the scenes goings on at an SNL-like show? So what? CBS can have 12 CSI shows and NBC can have 35 Law and Orders, but two shows about the same thing is too much!

This show is typical Sorkin: smart, fast-paced, idealistic, and, ultimately, romantic (and more than a little autobiographical). By the end of the first episode, when Matt and Danny have a heart to heart in the back of fake cab on the set and Jordan tells them they can do a controversial sketch on next week's show, you'll be rooting for Matt and Danny to come back and take SNL Studio 60 to the top. And, at the same time, rooting for Aaron Sorkin to do the same with Studio 60. It's TV for adults, and there isn't much on TV for adults these days.

[anna]

Yes! This is such an amazing cast. Perry and Whitford! Having watched the air crackle around them in their scenes together in West Wing, I'd sign up to see the two of them hang wet laundry together - but to listen to them toss more Sorkin dialogue back and forth! Bliss.

[inuvik]

I watched it too and enjoyed it somewhat. It seems a little self-important to me, dropping names and just a general tone. But still very interesting! Or maybe I am reading things into a tone that isn't there, knowing this is the most hyped show, and highly rated, show this season.

Great music at the end, to hear Queen!

I won't bother with a thread, and not to hijack this one, but I really liked Men in Trees (even if it is on ABC).

[shmeep]

inuvik said:

I watched it too and enjoyed it somewhat. It seems a little self-important to me, dropping names and just a general tone. But still very interesting! Or maybe I am reading things into a tone that isn't there, knowing this is the most hyped show, and highly rated, show this season.

I didn't get much of a self important or name droppy vibe from the show. The setting is Hollywood and the show revolves around an SNL knockoff that regularly has celebrities hosting it so there will be a lot of guest stars so to see that as name dropping seems a bit harsh. Was it name dropping on The West Wing when a politician made a cameo? It was just part of the setting. I can see where it could seem self important, but that may be just because of Sorkin's writing style and the amount of ego there is supposed to be among the TV execs on the show. The most self-important scene was in the opening when Judd Hirsh's character had his meltdown and ranted about the poor quality of television--but most of what he said was true and it was beautiful to hear such sentiments voiced on the network that is about the worst offender out there.

I can't vouch for the realism of such a show, since I know nothing of this type of setting first hand, but I love it when writers don't insult our intelligence by adding a lot of exposition to the dialogue for our benefit. Have you ever noticed that a lot of shows and movies and even books do that? They have characters say things to each other that they both already know just so the viewer/reader will be let in the loop. That always stands out to me because it's clunky and unrealistic. Sorkin plops us down right in the middle of some drama and allows us to figure it out for ourselves and I am deeply grateful to him for giving us credit for being able to do it. One would think a show like this might be confusing, but I found I was able to follow it easily and I even remembered most of the character's names.

And Nate Corrdrey! Former Daily Show correspondent and younger brother to Rob Corrdrey--also a *sob* former Daily Show correspondent. I think this show will make him a star. If it does as well as it appears it will, Matthew Perry might just end up being the most successful "Friend" after all. I was worried about him for a while there and he was always my favorite one.

[housemouse]

I finally watched the pilot last night, and I am hooked! I loved it from start to finish. Although I watched friends, Matthew Perry was never really on my radar, he was just kind of there (all of the cast did that for me - kind of blah), but last night I noticed him and he was great. I get the feeling he is doing this because it is good TV, not to make more money. Bradley Whitford - wow. I also loved Nathan Cordry and it is good to see Timothy Busfield (Trapper John anyone?) again.

I loved the fact that one of "the big three" is outwardly Christian, this is not something ever seen on network TV. I also loved that Whitford's character is in trouble because of his dirty blood test. Sorkin is taking a page from his own life there, and that is impressive.