Studio 60 at IMDB and at Wikipedia.
It turns out I’m way behind the curve. I was waiting until I’d seen a few episodes of this show to decide what I really thought of it, but now, three weeks on, ratings are already failing badly for it, and nearly everything I could say has been said, from the positive:
Steven Berlin Johnson
To the negative:
I’ve watched the first two episodes of STUDIO 60 and I don’t like it.
Lee Goldberg
To the pragmatic stance of Warren Ellis, who speaks at length about it both here, where he examines the pilot, it’s potential and it’s downfalls, and here, where he makes some very valid complaints about the third episode.
For the most part I agree with everything these guys have said so far, and Goldberg and Johnson’s comments sections contain some interesting and valid viewpoints, too (although some of Goldberg’s issues seem preoccupied with certainly stylistic similarities between the production design and general look of this show and The West Wing, which I really disagree with. They couldn’t look more different… Studio 60 looks much darker and studio-lit than The West Wing, and much more jazzy).
However, I’m a little worried that I’m going to end up as a Studio 60 apologist. I’m on episode 3, and I have to say that I’m really enjoying it. I was already concerned that this show would end up playing “Futurama” to The West Wing’s “The Simpsons”… like Futurama, it’s not as easy to pin down as it’s counterpart…
The West Wing, while dealing with the very complex issues inherent in it’s political and grave setting, still zipped and fizzed from the first second of the first episode, and as such, while always intelligent, it was also instantly accessible. The humour meant that the drama, when it came, was thrown into sharp relief and had all the more impact… put another way, the stuff you were meant to care about was clearly signalled by the laughter stopping. And because the subject matter was often so dry, the show required a lighter touch to keep it popping.
It maintained the balance between it’s disparate elements right up until Sorkin left at the end of season four, at which point “the funny” seemed to leave with him.
Studio 60 doesn’t highlight it’s standout moments as clearly as The West Wing, and ironically considering it’s central concern is comedy, it’s not as clearly funny as it… in fact, the moments of wit and sparkle in the script and performances almost seem to have the volume deliberately dialled down on them. If that’s the case, you can’t blame them for making the decision… any broad comedic gestures Matthew Perry makes are going to evoke Chandler Bing, whether that’s fair or not, and in a way, they were really asking for trouble making this about a comedy show, rather than something more serious, so maybe playing it so straight is in some way an attempt to create a thematic balance. Problematically, it creates a schizophrenic effect which already has people switching off.
The problem is that, regardless of what Sorkin et al are trying to do, that humour three-way of The West Wing, the presence of one of the Friends players, and the comedy show-within-a-show have created an expectation of hilarity that just isn’t delivered here. And that’s crippling it in the ratings.
I choose to think that this was a deliberate (if naive) choice, rather than sudden uncharacteristic incompetence. I trust the people working on this show… Sorkin aside, you’ve got Judd Hirsch, Felicity Huffman, Matthew Perry, Bradley Whitford, Rob Reiner and Timothy Busfield all at play in the first three episodes. I personally believe that if these people wanted to make me laugh out loud for 40 minutes, they could… they have done before. Admittedly, when showtime hits, some of the sketches that are meant to be funny are either painful instead, or else amusing but several years out of date.
(I don’t agree with some that have complained about Studio 60′s anachronistic use of a Gilbert and Sullivan homage and subsequent studio-audience rapture as unlikely, but that’s mainly because my main experience of HMS Pinafore comes from The Simpsons and also probably Fraiser, both of which use it to great comedic effect.)
I feel like Judd Hirsch’s explosive monologue at the top of the pilot sets the real tone for the show, berating the American entertainment media and by extension it’s audience as it does: It seems to be telling us that the Studio 60 is going to be darker and more emotionally raw and confessional than it is funny. That speech is hard to watch, and because I haven’t seen Network I can’t compare it to that the way everyone else (including the text of the show itself) has. Instead, I can’t help thinking of Oliver Stone’s Talk Radio. In it, there is a scene in which Eric Bogosian’s Barry Champlain finally, totally, frustatedly loses it in monologue with his audience, and there’s a second, echoed perfectly in Hirsch’s speech, where he becomes even more frustrated, because the same audience thinks it’s all part of the show.
What that tells me is that these people live a double-life, and half the time they don’t even realise they’re doing it until they try to stand up and talk directly to the audience as themselves. That the relationship with the audience, trying to please them at the same time as trying to keep their integrity and personality intact, is part of what this story is going to be about.
I’m trying not to look at Studio 60 as a comedy drama but as a drama that happens to be made by smart, often funny people, and it’s working for me so far. Sorkin’s going to be penalised for being funny before now, and that sucks a little, because looked at alongside the other ongoing drama series that have come out in recent years, Studio 60 stands up pretty well.
It will be interesting to see what path the show takes now… the first three episodes fit together well as a series opener, dealing as they do with Matt and Danny being asked to take over the show, producing their first show, and then producing their second show unprotected by the artificial boost in audience figures that the controversy of their return caused. However, I don’t feel that it necessarily has to follow a definitive and finite arc, even though it’s clear that Sorkin has some issues that he needs to get off his chest and it would be a shame if he ran out of things to say after this early personal (and occassionally self-indulgent) stage.
However, all I really hope for is that Studio 60 entertains me for 40 minutes a week, and it’s doing that at the moment. It’s one of those “vocation” shows, like ER, CSI or LA Law (the only law firm drama that I can think of at the moment) that I find personally quite engaging: One thing it does have in common with The West Wing is that it’s about (for the most part) intelligent and talented people who ultimately want to do the best job possible at the role that they have found for themselves. Who despite their personal flaws and egos are driven, passionate and have pride in their work. These are not traits that are found in many real-world workplaces, including mine, and as such, Studio 60 provides me with some valuable escapism, which I’ll miss if it’s not there any more.
(And yes, I’m aware that it’s particularly broken of me that my idea of escapism is a well-run, competent workplace, but as a wise man once said, “that’s how I’m livin’”)
Comments are disabled for this post