NOT Cancelled! Rumors of death greatly exaggerated

  • Avatar of Glenn11523

    Glenn11523

    [21]Nov 3, 2006
    • member since: 06/28/05
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 659
    JoeyBro wrote:
    Well Glen, I take your invitation.
    In that others here have taken the time to quote your name correctly, one would think you could do the same.
    JoeyBro wrote:
    It is the hypocrisy of this show. IT talks and talks about changing TV, but doesn't walk the walk. Crazy christian sketch is only aired on the fake show, not the real show. Do what you're preaching. People who laud this show for being witty and brilliant are being snowed by style. It says Matt Albie is genius comic writer, but they allow the subpar sketches so far to represent him. Then Harriet ultra christian character sounds so without merit because she is on a show that makes fun of them. Whole romance has no believability to it at all. Compare Matt and Harriet chemistry with McDreamy & Meredith chemistry. Plus You knock your socks off is not up there with You complete me or Here's looking at you kid.
    Actually many, including myself have listed your point about the "show within the show" as a weak part.  We are not in denial of this point, we just happen to see the many other quality parts of the show. (oh, and by the way, it is "you knock my socks off" but with such brilliant points to be made, who can expect you to find the time to edit what you write, or even proof-read it.
    JoeyBro wrote:
    Then I sum up with the posts about these executives who are killing us with programming that makes Studio 60's message seem painfully ironic. Networks make lots of money, but do they re-invest that money into making the next generation of hits. No they re-invest it in the samething that made money before. CHances had to be taken on Cheers, Cosby Show, Friends... So they think lightning strikes the same spot hundreds of times? It's about having a sense, not cents.
    Back to the flawed logic, first what exact "chance" had to be taken on "Cheers?" It was a forumla sitcom (I loved it and watched it) and the networks simply floated up to see what worked.  Second, regarding your lightening allusion, please see http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/0107lightning.html for proof of your flaw there.
    JoeyBro wrote:
    Sitcoms are probably dead because they became so expensive with Cheers, Raymond, Seinfeld, Friends...making profit margins smaller with the high salaries that no executive would even want to have successful comedy anymore. Dramas are less character driven thus lower salaries. Of course reality shows have even less overhead. They may have killed off the comedy because of the cost. Studio 60 premise rings empty in this world of sell outs. Then Studio 60 sells out its own premise by being as hypocritical. Do Good TV as well as talk about doing good TV.
    I'm sorry what is your point here? Is it that salaries are too high on comedies? Because actually Studio 60 has high salaries already (some pretty talented folk and all) and it is a drama.  Or is your point that Studio 60 is "hypocritical?" Because that is simply a circular argument of the point you made (and I agreed with at the start of this thread).
    JoeyBro wrote:
    Well if you still think they are doing good TV despite what I've said then your entitled to your opinion. Rock on yourself!
    I do, I am, I will.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of shosho1962

    shosho1962

    [22]Nov 3, 2006
    • member since: 11/04/06
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 1

    JoeyBro, I think you are missing the point....Studio 60 is NOT a sketch comedy show, it's a show about MAKING

    a sketch comedy show....  I don't need to see the crazy Christian sketch - that was just the impetus for the whole thing.  Even if the snippets of sketches we are shown aren't hilarious, that's kind of the point.  It's a drama about a comedy, for heaven's sake.  I didn't tune into this show in the first place because I was expecting belly laughs, I wasn't hoping for a sequel to Friends, I didn't think it was SNL part II.   I tuned in because I recognized that, with the cast involved, this was going to be a show worth watching.  I have NOT been disappointed.  I'm thrilled that this #1) isn't a show about doctors or lawyers or crime labs and #2) isn't a show built around a series of one-liners and insults  and #3) actually contains real actors with real talent, not Joe Average who lives down the block trying to make a quick buck eating bull testicles...

    I'm glad it appeals to a more intelligent, more upper middle class audience.  I appreciate having to think about what I'm watching.  If I wanted to sit in a stupor with the TV on, I'd watch The Bachelor or America's Got Talent...

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of tjaman

    tjaman

    [23]Nov 4, 2006
    • member since: 04/23/05
    • level: 32
    • rank: Whammy!
    • posts: 16,306
    Thank you. Well said. And welcome.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Smokey2003

    Smokey2003

    [24]Nov 5, 2006
    • member since: 08/31/03
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 12
    Christians do shows that make fun of christians. I'm sure the entire cast of saturday night live does not consist of atheists and agnostics - so try not to define the nature of other people's faith due to over exposure from Televangelist trash. Not every christian is on a holy crusade.

    The challenge is to talk about changing TV while staying on the air long enough to do so. Would have been nice on HBO, though. Anyway it's not its responsibility to change TV, the issues are brought up but it never sells itself as a holier than thou show on a mission. All your real points about whether or not the show is good are addressed in your first paragraph of your last post, Joey...and they don't really hold much water. The christian angle works, and that kind of chemistry would work better for you if you ever saw a pair of comedic minds come together like that. That being said the show takes about as much liberties with realistic dialogue as, say, Deadwood did with an accurate representation of Gold Rush lingo - it's Sorkin - clearly scripted but charming and witty enough to be forgiven and encouraged. You don't like the show - cool - and I guess your reasons are fine...until you call it hypocritical because it hasn't changed the face of television - there you're being unrealistic.

    I know a lot of it is numbers and advertisers but a good show is a good show despite the politics behind it, and plenty of those good shows wind up cancelled...even my beloved HBO is no exception to the rule. Numbers are just numbers.

    Though, tjaman...the reality show angle is raised everywhere - it's America's latest guilty pleasure. We hate them and can't stop watching. But it does raise many overlooked issues apart from that - doing that doesn't give it any kind of responsibility to change the face of television...what an arrogant if not just daunting task. The job, is to entertain, if it inspires people to change TV - yay! But that last part isn't important. It's an art, not a crusade.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of tjaman

    tjaman

    [25]Nov 5, 2006
    • member since: 04/23/05
    • level: 32
    • rank: Whammy!
    • posts: 16,306
    Fair enough, but I was just including it as one argument they were making among many. And I agree with all the points you raise. Excellent post.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of TeaCake911

    TeaCake911

    [26]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 07/06/06
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 304
    I find JoeyBro's entire argument as hypocritical, considering his screename seems to support Matt LeBlanc's failed rehashing of his former 'Friends' sit-com glory days. Hows that for formulaic television, 'Bro'?

    Anyway, the Harriet character's religion was the centerpiece of the latest episode, I fail to see how anyone could ever call this show 'hypocritical' with a straight face. Her 'double-life' so to speak, as a devout Christian on a show that often times makes light of religion was highlighted, and the show even found time to make commentary on organized religion's stance on homosexuality. Please correct your very flawed arguments, JoeyBro, as you've been proven wrong again and again (and probably wouldn't have made the arguments in the first place had you been actively watching the show to begin with.) I'm all for debating, but you seem to be talking about an entirely different show here, and as this is Studio 60's forum, off-topic discussion isn't really wanted here. NBC has proved time and again that they will back this show despite lackluster ratings (at least for the first season), heck, they even went to bat for it in spite of the ridiculous purchasing price during the show's bidding war between networks. Nobody can really blame them if they end up canceling the show at this point (which I hope won't happen, but it is a real possibility.) But they at least have not been hypocritical in regards to the ideals of the Jordan character about 'good TV' vs 'common denominator TV'. Did any else catch that veiled attack on CSI: Miami by Matthew Perry in the latest episode? Gold.

    Also, let's not fool ourselves into thinking that if the show ran on HBO instead of NBC, that it would have gotten a longer shelf life by default. I'm sure a lot of people on this very forum still think back sadly on the early demise of Carnivale, cut off by a premium channel at the climactic cliffhanger of the second season's finale. It was a good show, but the ratings didn't make it profitable. It's not just NBC and networks that do this-- this is how the business of American TV in general works with/without a Nielsen box or advertisers to worry about.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JoeyBro

    JoeyBro

    [27]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 07/29/05
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 227
    You are right teacake they are holding onto this pitiful show by any means even getting Heroes to run 1 minute over to give Studio 60 a boost, so the initial rating will be higher than the real official one later this week. It still went down 5.1 to 4.7 and like I said there 3.2 to 3.3 in 18-49's improvement is inflated by that run over. Even with 3.3 it is only half Heroes 6.6 in 18-49. The execs don't believe in the show, they know if it goes they go(pink slip). The show is being kept because supposedly it attracts the advertiser preferred upper crust who make $60,000 or more. Thus it's Elitist and that means it isn't going to be popular. It is viewed by the upper classes who make up 20 percent of the population who own 80 percent of the country. Why do people with bigger wallets like this show? For one they have to liberal so that cuts the audience down. TWo they have to be on their high horse meaning people who are in these classes and are the so called winners in this game of monopoly. Thus the winners always think they are right because they are winners. This show plays into that because it preaches its righteousness. Sorkin doesn't have to prove Matt is a genius comic writer, he just has to tell you and you have to agree. Sorkin doesn't have to have show the crazy christian sketch to show how controversial it is, you have to take his word for it The way the show is done and the SMALL audience it gets are made for each other. Preaching to the choir. You guys are all correct and everyone else is wrong. I see it in your posts like you like its righteousness/agreeing that upper crust is more intelligent, I don't quote your handle names exactly(did I forget the esquire or roman numeral at the end) and you don't engage my arguments directly, you avoid them by correcting my syntax. Why should you engage, you don't have to prove a thing just like Sorkin. Again in the latest episode is another example of how Sorkin runs from proving his points. He has interesting scenario about gay marriage, but he takes no stand and cuts it off to send Tom to spend time in NEvada for a speeding ticket. It's another chance to show some edge on topical content. He plays it safe and goes with safer plot thing about who is going to do the show tonight. NBC probably said you can say what you want to say about gays, but don't take sides and don't focus on it. Again Studio 60 theme of being new, bold and anti-network gets cut off because Sorkin is doing the un-JOrdan Mcdeere thing. Sorkin can only point to a button, but not push it. We call that muckraking when someone complains without offering any progress. What do you call people who say one thing, but do another. Oh yeah hypocrits. Oh another line to add to the terrible Knock MY socks off: Tom says Etu daisy to a bassett hound. Shakespeare is rolling in his grave.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Diogo22

    Diogo22

    [28]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 06/09/05
    • level: 15
    • rank: Ginsu Knife
    • posts: 704
    joeyBro can I ask a question? do you object to the show as a whole, not liking almost anything about it, or do you just care a little bit about, but don't agree with the direction it takes in its stories? because, for a guy who claims he doesn't like it, you sure go out of your way (in length and in detail) to point out why you don't. I guess the real question is... why this show? there must be dozens of shows you don't apreciate this season on the various networks. do you really take time out of your day to point out in detail what you find wrong with each and every one of them? I'd just like to know why this one, or why you "hate" it so much, partly because I seem to notice a general "hating" for this show, and not just an "I don't like it", as would be expected from any show/viewer, but the curious thing is, most people who don't like this show really "hate it" with a passion, and that seems to me to be quite an unjustified feeling to have for any tv show, or pretty much anything in life really... it's just a bit of fun.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of osustudent06

    osustudent06

    [29]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 11/07/05
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 131
    ~Even if the show's ratings held even, or even slightly dipped, I would consider this a win. Considering the Country Music Awards were on ABC, taking up a good share of the TV audience.

    ~I do not understand any argument about if NBC execs let Studio 60 go, they lose their jobs. Inside information there? Or an exaggeration? NBC execs will do what is best for the company. If Studio 60 continues to make money, and build on its ratings, the show will stay on the air, no matter what the people who dislike the show think.

    ~Elite liberals: Of course this show has a liberal base. Most people who enjoyed Sorkin's writing (and maybe politics) on The West Wing gave this show a shot. Most of the people on here, sorry everyone, "have a fetish." The fact that the show has a "rich base" is good for NBC, good for Studio 60, and good for me! It is possible that it allows a different look at the ratings.

    ~Matt is a genius comic writer. Danny is a good producer. Tom, Harriet, and Simon are funny. Yes, that is what the character developments leads us to believe. And I buy into it. I don't go into a show looking for reasons to tear it down. I'm sure I could with ANY show. Even this one. But, I choose not to so I can enjoy the quality writing and quick jokes.

    ~Dancing around issues? It was written that Sorkin has danced around the issues. He has been criticized for not airing Crazy Christians. Yet, this past episode, he took some shots at the religious right in the "Jesus Christ" sketch. Check. Gay marriage issues. He puts out Harriet's side, Matt's stradling opinion, and let's the viewer decide. Since when does he have to come out and tell people how to think? One of the goals of The West Wing was to "raise the level of public debate in this country." On this election night, I take this to heart.

    ~Not following their morals? Well, it's tough. Right? Is anyone perfect? Nope. Studio 60 is about a show and network that is trying to raise the standards of tv. I think The Apprentice and The Biggest Loser is still on the NBC slate. Time to separate NBC from NBS. Aaron Sorkin is a writer - not the person who decides what is actually on television. If the NBC Studio 60 even has us discussing, one way or the other, the quality of teleivision, then I think Aaron Sorkin is happy.
    Edited on 11/07/2006 7:38pm
    Edited 2 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of tjaman

    tjaman

    [30]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 04/23/05
    • level: 32
    • rank: Whammy!
    • posts: 16,306
    JoeyBro wrote:
    You are right teacake they are holding onto this pitiful show by any means even getting Heroes to run 1 minute over to give Studio 60 a boost, so the initial rating will be higher than the real official one later this week. It still went down 5.1 to 4.7 and like I said there 3.2 to 3.3 in 18-49's improvement is inflated by that run over. Even with 3.3 it is only half Heroes 6.6 in 18-49. The execs don't believe in the show, they know if it goes they go(pink slip). The show is being kept because supposedly it attracts the advertiser preferred upper crust who make $60,000 or more. Thus it's Elitist and that means it isn't going to be popular. It is viewed by the upper classes who make up 20 percent of the population who own 80 percent of the country. Why do people with bigger wallets like this show? For one they have to liberal so that cuts the audience down. TWo they have to be on their high horse meaning people who are in these classes and are the so called winners in this game of monopoly. Thus the winners always think they are right because they are winners. This show plays into that because it preaches its righteousness. Sorkin doesn't have to prove Matt is a genius comic writer, he just has to tell you and you have to agree. Sorkin doesn't have to have show the crazy christian sketch to show how controversial it is, you have to take his word for it The way the show is done and the SMALL audience it gets are made for each other. Preaching to the choir. You guys are all correct and everyone else is wrong. I see it in your posts like you like its righteousness/agreeing that upper crust is more intelligent, I don't quote your handle names exactly(did I forget the esquire or roman numeral at the end) and you don't engage my arguments directly, you avoid them by correcting my syntax. Why should you engage, you don't have to prove a thing just like Sorkin. Again in the latest episode is another example of how Sorkin runs from proving his points. He has interesting scenario about gay marriage, but he takes no stand and cuts it off to send Tom to spend time in NEvada for a speeding ticket. It's another chance to show some edge on topical content. He plays it safe and goes with safer plot thing about who is going to do the show tonight. NBC probably said you can say what you want to say about gays, but don't take sides and don't focus on it. Again Studio 60 theme of being new, bold and anti-network gets cut off because Sorkin is doing the un-JOrdan Mcdeere thing. Sorkin can only point to a button, but not push it. We call that muckraking when someone complains without offering any progress. What do you call people who say one thing, but do another. Oh yeah hypocrits. Oh another line to add to the terrible Knock MY socks off: Tom says Etu daisy to a bassett hound. Shakespeare is rolling in his grave.


    You are ... so irrationally upset.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of hal9000_basic

    hal9000_basic

    [31]Nov 7, 2006
    • member since: 01/16/03
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 129
    Ratings: D+
    Quality: C+
    Chance for season two: 25%

    Here’s the biggest problem with NBC's “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip”:
    Who cares if the fictional show gets bad ratings? Why does it matter if
    Matthew Perry’s Matt can’t reconnect with Sarah Paulson's Harriet?
    Aaron Sorkin’s “West Wing” had gravitas — decisions made by President
    Bartlett or policies enacted by the Administration affected millions of
    citizens. There’s just nothing at stake on “Studio 60” and viewers know
    it. NBC thought it had the next great thing and all they have now is a
    very expensive series that’s falling flatter than one of the fictional
    show's sketches.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Glenn11523

    Glenn11523

    [32]Nov 8, 2006
    • member since: 06/28/05
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 659
    Diogo22 wrote:
    joeyBro can I ask a question? do you object to the show as a whole, not liking almost anything about it, or do you just care a little bit about, but don't agree with the direction it takes in its stories? because, for a guy who claims he doesn't like it, you sure go out of your way (in length and in detail) to point out why you don't. I guess the real question is... why this show? there must be dozens of shows you don't apreciate this season on the various networks. do you really take time out of your day to point out in detail what you find wrong with each and every one of them? I'd just like to know why this one, or why you "hate" it so much, partly because I seem to notice a general "hating" for this show, and not just an "I don't like it", as would be expected from any show/viewer, but the curious thing is, most people who don't like this show really "hate it" with a passion, and that seems to me to be quite an unjustified feeling to have for any tv show, or pretty much anything in life really... it's just a bit of fun.
    Amen!

    tjaman has tried, others have tried, I have tried, you have tried and still he prattles onward, undaunted in his single-minded determination to thrust disjointed arguments peppered with generalizations, anger and fallacies, into the faces of those who dare to disagree with his rather confined and limited point of view.

    I am awed by such dedication to mediocrity.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of TeaCake911

    TeaCake911

    [33]Nov 8, 2006
    • member since: 07/06/06
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 304
    hal9000_basic wrote:
    Ratings: D+
    Quality: C+
    Chance for season two: 25%

    Here’s the biggest problem with NBC's “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip”:
    Who cares if the fictional show gets bad ratings? Why does it matter if
    Matthew Perry’s Matt can’t reconnect with Sarah Paulson's Harriet?
    Aaron Sorkin’s “West Wing” had gravitas — decisions made by President
    Bartlett or policies enacted by the Administration affected millions of
    citizens. There’s just nothing at stake on “Studio 60” and viewers know
    it. NBC thought it had the next great thing and all they have now is a
    very expensive series that’s falling flatter than one of the fictional
    show's sketches.


    Is this a quote from a source you would like to share with us? Or a personal review? It sounds like a personal (read: 'amateur') review to me, IMHO.

    All good shows don't need to have 'everything at stake' to be entertaining. Look at a show like ER. The tension and epic-level of the drama isn't lesser just because it's about a few isolated injury cases in Chicago. Comparing the West Wing to Studio 60 is an apples/oranges comparison at best, if Sorkin wanted to do the same show, he would've named it West Wing 2.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of hal9000_basic

    hal9000_basic

    [34]Nov 9, 2006
    • member since: 01/16/03
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 129
    Sorry, forgot to give the URL. Taken from yesterday's USA Today Entertainment Section. Reviewer was reviewing all the new fall shows and those likely to be cancelled.
    Studio is having pitiful ratings. Not my view but his.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of tjaman

    tjaman

    [35]Nov 9, 2006
    • member since: 04/23/05
    • level: 32
    • rank: Whammy!
    • posts: 16,306
    Oh. USA Today.

    The font of all knowledge.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Glenn11523

    Glenn11523

    [36]Nov 9, 2006
    • member since: 06/28/05
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 659
    tjaman wrote:
    Oh. USA Today.

    The font of all knowledge.
    LMAO (on the floor!)
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Glenn11523

    Glenn11523

    [37]Nov 9, 2006
    • member since: 06/28/05
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 659
    What ever happened to JoeyBro?  I mean here we have the show picked up for a full season, probably a second season ordered as well.  We have stabilizing ratings, critical acclaim, intellectual defense of the show, and its value, and suddenly JoeyBro has fallen off the face of the earth. 

    Perhaps he has had to find another show to attack in an effort to win others over to his particularly slanted point of view on what is wrong with modern society and television today.  Or, perhaps being that angry and stringing together illogical, flawed arguments got to be too much for the poor fellow.

    Hope he is ok.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Diogo22

    Diogo22

    [38]Nov 9, 2006
    • member since: 06/09/05
    • level: 15
    • rank: Ginsu Knife
    • posts: 704
    probably crying somewhere, or bugging the guys at FNL or 20 good years. thank GOD for that
    Edited on 11/10/2006 4:08pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Dirk13

    Dirk13

    [39]Nov 14, 2006
    • member since: 12/01/04
    • level: 16
    • rank: Church Lady
    • posts: 1,042
    migh thoughts reflect glens, you dont have to LOVE the show to post here, but gee, VENT much? This forum is after all for discussion about the show amongst people who generally appreciate it, not write out completely wasteful posts about how "pitiful" the show is, it's even in the forum rules not to "seethe" about the show.

    and now that the show is being picked up, Joe's massive rantings since it started, at least at some point are showing their obtuseness. I vividly recall him making a topic after about the 2nd episode saying "kiss it goodbye".

    Hopefully this will put to rest some of the massive harping on ratings numbers and minute misunderstanding about fake sketches as reasons to completely dump on the show everyweek, by people like that.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of luv0817

    luv0817

    [40]Nov 14, 2006
    • member since: 08/03/06
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 47
    Thank God! I do not want S60 to be cancled! I love it way too much! I hope people start realising what an awesome quality show it is! Yay NBC for staying behind it!!!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.