"Friday Night Slaughter" Reaction

- Brad Templeton discusses why the show's premise doesn't work. (Or how it was a lost opportunity)

- Jay Black thinks Perry was amazing, and that the show actually worked, but he's torn over the significance of Time Batale.

- Roger Catlin analyzes the flashback.

"Harriet Dinner (2)" Reaction

- Wil Wheaton and Bob Sassone of TV Squad have major beef with Jeff Zucker. (Hey if "60" goes down, we're bringing him down, too)

- Liz of Glowy Box tells us: Aaron Sorkin hates black people. (or something like that)

- Jay Black of TV Squad is totally depressed that recent rumors mean that "60" will fade out in a wimper. That said, he loved Danny & Jordan.

- Alan Sepinwall hates that Sorkin doesn't care about what we care about.

"Harriet Dinner (1)" Reaction

Needless to say, there hasn't been much. Stay tuned as new pieces will be added on top.

- Gary Susman of Entertainment Weekly concludes that the Tom & Lucy pairing was the only relationship that approached comedy last night. Marv Wolfman hates that Tom had to lie to Lucy.

- Please read Mike Zimmer's review (on a blog entitled Kegeratornation) if you you're of the mind that many a "60" criticism is over the top. And yes, if he seems insufferable even after he introduces himself as an "Ameteur TV Critic", then be prepared, it gets worse. Much worse.

- TV Squad's Jay Black is unable to get past the onslaught of cliche: "Believe me, I used to be a high school teacher, it sucks when kids try to be ironic and post-modern in their poetry and it sucks when supposed TV geniuses try to do it on their television shows."Alex Epstein agrees.

Arianna Pushes "60" Harder Than Crack

Yet another edition of debating the merits of "Studio 6o" at Huffington Post: This time David Vaina relates embattled pro-lifer actress Patricia Heaton with "60"'s own Harriet Hayes. The ensuing discussion is of some interest:

"Studio 60" might not be the vehicle for Hollywood to turn things around with Middle America. The scenes that pit conservatives versus liberals are not just preachy and self-righteous, but may be too dichotomous and fail to capture the complexity of how people really think about and debate political and cultural issues.

But I do hope the show gets better and I know I'll be watching. Because what are the other alternatives on television where we can see the two sides of the culture war duking it out with one another and really letting us know how they feel? "Hannity and Colmes?" "Meet the Press?" Please. As much as "Studio 60" struggles at times, it's another reminder of how the intersection of politics and culture can be so much more understandable and compelling in the realm of fiction, a tradition that's been with us as far back as Homer and Virgil.

It's an intresting theme that's been playing out at HuffPost lately: "Studio 60" is shit, but even Sorkin's shit is among the most important television there is. (Even if it's not going to win anybody an Emmy)

SEE ALSO:
HuffPost: How Not to Talk About Studio 60 Over the Holidays (Chris Kelly)
HuffPost: Studio 60, SNL Gerald Ford, Cheney's Melodrama, And Other Odds And Ends (Chris Weigant)

The Pretend Show within a Show

Nearly everyone can agree that the actual "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" - the sketch show they are supposedly creating each week - is complete and utter crap. Somehow though, many followers of the Sorkin (myself included) seem to obscure this fact from what are the show's percieved bigger issues. The LA Times offers a whole different look on the topic:

Sorkin's "West Wing" was meticulously researched and seen as largely accurate about life in Washington: Did the auteur producer-writer raise the bar so high for himself that "Studio 60" is unfairly scrutinized? Is this segment of viewers in Hollywood simply too aware of what "Studio 60" gets wrong to enjoy the show?

One comedy show runner, who asked that her name be withheld, said: "The New Orleans crisis or the war has never touched my life in television."

"They never laugh," Levine said of the show's characters. "We laugh all the time. It is the one saving grace of the job."

"The fact that they don't seem to know how a sketch comedy show like 'SNL' is written, that needs to be remedied," said Joe Reid, who recaps "Studio 60" each week for Television Without Pity. "It doesn't seem authentic at all."

Gillette said Sorkin's approach to comedy just seems off. "He wants to get big ideas across and change people's minds," she said. "No comedians work that way. They go for the laughs first and the lesson second."

A Dose of Reality(?)

So, the last episode was effing amazing wasn't it? (And it's being rerun 0n the 18th!) After a brief creative hiatus (i.e.: every episode between "Pilot" and "The Christmas Show") Sorkin has returned and everything's coming up roses, right? Someone named Ashgiel at fangasm lays out the reality in all its naked starkness:

Rumor has it that "Studio 60" won't be around very long. You know the end is near when more than half the viewers from its lead-in "Heroes" drop off. Over at the big eyeball CBS, they are getting 10 million more viewers in that time-slot than the peacock.

Sure, there was an order put out for nine more episodes, but no amount of spin control can fix the fact that it has been on a steady ratings decline since the pilot aired back at the start of the fall season. It's sad for NBC which seemed to be defending this show from the outset, but that's the word from people involved with the show. It won't be long before it's cut completely from the air.

There's a big reason this show didn't work. The pilot which had a boatload of viewers was a different show than the rest of the season has been. The initial episode was more people and character oriented. The show has since degenerated into being plot driven rather than character driven. In my opinion, this is what has brought on its steady decline in viewership.

And so the big question now is: "Is it too late?" Has "60"'s audience already tuned-out? I think it will be particularly interesting, and frustrating, to look at how well the rerun of "The Christmas Show" does.

60 and Product Placement

Sam Ford at the MIT Convergence Culture Consortium blog takes a more in-depth look at the product placement debates that happened the ep before last:

A sketch comedy environment is an interesting place to test out these questions, and I thought Studio 60 did it well, with the producer standing up for the show and against the infiltration of commercial elements until he found an organic way to make the products part of a new set for the show reflecting the real strip. Reminds me of an ad back in January for King Kong that proved how Times Square makes the best possible backdrop for product placement within a show. But Kong seemed to generate a lot of discussion about product placement and branding.

Joe Marchese wrote a piece for MediaPost and beat me to the punch back on Tuesday after the show ran, recommending that everyone in the industry or who deals with product placement watch the show. Marchese writes:

The great part about the setting for the debate was the layers: the real show's writers having characters, who are writers and producers themselves, discussing the issues of product placement and possible solutions. All the while, there were all sorts of "the right kind" of product placements during the show. But getting to the right kind of product placement isn't easy. I have heard many people compare the need for separation between content creation and monetization to the need for separation between church and state, so product placement is obviously not something to be taken lightly. But in a world where the 30 second spot's effectiveness continues to be threatened, it is certainly something that needs to be revisited.

It's funny how product placement seems most appropriate when in the context of reinforcing those places where advertising has already become agreeable acceptable. I guess what I'm really getting at is the obvious point that product placement's gravest threat to 'content creation' is that it completely undermines the show's 'art' of imitating reality. As Ford points out, that's why product integration feels natural on reality TV because, as is famously contradictory, reality TV requires admitting from the get-go that it is not portraying real life.

"The Chritmas Show" Reaction...

A roundup of the latest"60" reaction from across the internets:

-DownWithTyranny! loves Ed Asner as the hero of the newly-emergent epic battle of Network Chair vs. the FCC.
-Just Another Pretty Farce has the goods for those of you wanting more of the "Christmas Myth" plotline from last night.
-BuddyTV sums up the conventional wisdom in saying: "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip finally delivered on its potential last night."
-John Eggerton at BCBeat (the blog of industry mag Broadcast&Cable) reacts to the new NBS/FCC battle: "Studio 60 is pretty darn preachy, which is no surprise for an Aaron Sorkin production, but fortunately for me its my favorite sermon."
-Dorothy Surrenders disusses the new implications for "60"'s female characters after the new Jordan/Danny and Matt/Harriet developments of last night.

That's a very cursory look at the general reaction, but, as I said, the general CW out of last night's ep was that "'Studio 60' has bounced back".

Tonight's 'The Christmas Show' a "Must Watch"

The TV Addict has apparently gotten a sneak peak tonight's show, given it five stars, and says it is the "MUST WATCH hour of TV tonight.":

The episode is classic Sorkin and is on par with the best of THE WEST WING and SPORTS NIGHT. (emphasis his)

If history tells us anything, "Studio 60" has perhaps a tiny-problem with high expectations. And that's not setting the bar high at all.

I will, however, be more than happy to have have my cynicism stand corrected.

Stanley Heaps Praise on NBC for 60, 30 Rock

The New York Times' television critic Alessandra Stanley is not known for mincing words. Never shying away from making too bold a statement, Ms. Stanley has been called "gratuitously nasty" by the Public Editor of her own paper. Perhaps that is just part of the reason why her departure from Cynic-in-Chief in yesterday's Times is a must-read:

These two very different behind-the-scenes looks ["Studio 60" & "30 Rock"] at network intrigue were among the most vaunted shows of the fall season and did not meet expectations, yet both survived the midseason tumbrel. Turns out cold-eyed corporations don’t always look at the bottom line to determine the fate of fledgling television shows. Neither series is a hit, and “30 Rock” is perilously close to a flop, but both are good enough in their own right to merit more time: “30 Rock” was moved to Thursday nights to follow “My Name Is Earl,” “The Office” and “Scrubs.”

G.E. apparently really does want to bring good things to life.

The best television is necessarily uneven. A conventional hit sitcom like CBS’s “Two and a Half Men” is consistent, if not always consistently funny, but more original material needs larger margins for error.

Stanley is right to point out that more substantive shows need more time to develop and find an audience, but that doesn't stop her from praising the show as it has unfolded already:

Each strand is beautifully written and acted; together the emotionalism grows cloying.

But the show keeps bounding back. The most recent episode produced a hilariously mirthless veteran comedy writer hired to train Matt’s rookie staffers. The perils of Jordan, who is ever on the brink of being fired, keep twisting, and backstage romances flicker and glow under the opalescent lighting that makes the series’ look so distinctive.

“Studio 60,” like “30 Rock,” is better when it’s not about network television, but about the people who happen to work inside it. And at their best, the two shows are unequaled by anything else on network television.