# The Newsroom S01E01



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I'll admit it I'm a Sorkin Junkie and I've been looking forward to this show for a long time. 
I really loved it. When Daniels started his speech about America I was hooked. 
The only thing I wondered was, was Daniels' part meant for Bradley Whitford. I could totally see him in that role.

This show looks like it's setting up to be the West Wing meets Sports Night and I'm all in.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Can't wait to watch it tonight.


----------



## dtivouser (Feb 10, 2004)

Epic. So glad to have Sorkin back on TV. Anyone know how many episodes to expect?


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Watched this last night. Has some potential. Interesting that it's set 2 years ago, so are they going to continue with that?


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

dtivouser said:


> Epic. So glad to have Sorkin back on TV. Anyone know how many episodes to expect?


IMDB has many characters listed for 10m episodes so far.



kaszeta said:


> Watched this last night. Has some potential. Interesting that it's set 2 years ago, so are they going to continue with that?


Here is a decent article that touches on why it is set 2 years ago.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maggie-furlong/the-newsroom-defense_b_1616355.html?utm_hp_ref=tv

Basically Sorkin did not want to make up fake news stories.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

markz said:


> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maggie-furlong/the-newsroom-defense_b_1616355.html?utm_hp_ref=tv
> 
> Basically Sorkin did not want to make up fake news stories.


I think it's a good decision, since then they can spend most of their effort writing stories around the news events, and not having to make them up themselves.


----------



## dtivouser (Feb 10, 2004)

Anyone else have trouble getting Tivo to record it last night? I had a season pass but it didn't record it. I happened to flip through the channels during one of the (many) re-runs last night.


----------



## MegaHertz67 (Apr 18, 2005)

I enjoyed the show...I missed me some Sorkin dialogue. His speech that started it off was great...and the reaction of the conservative talking head, "You can't talk to me like that," was perfect.

Hindsight is 20/20 (not the show 20/20), and I'm sure the news team is going to act and react like we wish our news organizations would have acted at the time.

I wonder what Jay Leno's reaction was when the comparison to him was used disparagingly and with such frequency. I'm sure he just cried to himself as he drove around LA in some ungodly expensive and rare automobile in his jean outfit.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I was on the fence with this. I'd never watched a Sorkin show before so I don't have a baseline to measure it against. However, two critics I like (Sepinwall and Mo Ryan) panned it so I killed the SP. I watch too much stuff anyway.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I enjoyed this. A lot. It was entertaining, fun to watch, great characters, interesting story line. I'll admit I was worried this might not be all it had been built up to be, due to the many disparaging reviews (including several reviewers I like). But I didn't share any of their concerns. All the talk of "preachy", "condescending"---I never felt it. I don't categorize shows (and showrunners) as red or blue unless they hit me over the head with it. I just want my TV to be entertaining. And this was.

[Aside: If anyone would be sensitive to this particular story line, it would be me. Living not only in Texas (think RED), but in Houston (think Oil Capital of the World), this story had the potential to be over the top, judgmental, and with the advent of hindsight, self-serving. But again, I just found it entertaining. Hey, it's TV, get over it.]



cheesesteak said:


> I was on the fence with this. I'd never watched a Sorkin show before so I don't have a baseline to measure it against. However, two critics I like (Sepinwall and Mo Ryan) panned it so I killed the SP. I watch too much stuff anyway.


I'd give it a chance. I really enjoyed it. Snappy dialogue, fleshed out characters who can only get better and grow on you, and a story that moves faster than light. IOW, a Sorkin show.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

Eric Neal (the inspector they were interviewing on the phone) sounded exactly like Jesse Eisenberg. Was it him or was I just hearing things?


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Gunnyman said:


> The only thing I wondered was, was Daniels' part meant for Bradley Whitford. I could totally see him in that role.


On Piers Morgan, Sorkin stated that he had Daniels in mind from the very beginning (for what that's worth - Daniels was sitting beside him)).

We really enjoyed it.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Azlen said:


> Eric Neal (the inspector they were interviewing on the phone) sounded exactly like Jesse Eisenberg. Was it him or was I just hearing things?


Correct. Good ears!


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

kaszeta said:


> Watched this last night. Has some potential.


That's pretty much my feeling. It was reasonably enjoyable, but didn't grab me like _Sports Night_ or _The West Wing_ did. But it has the potential to improve, so I hope it gets better and I'm more that willing to give it time.


----------



## dtivouser (Feb 10, 2004)

It seems like journalists are panning Newsroom in the same way that Republicans panned The West Wing. "It's too convenient. It's not realistic. It's motivated politically."


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

My wife & I are watching now and we are both hooked already! My wife said it feels like The West Wing and Sports Night are hugging!

I have missed this style of TV!


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

scooterboy said:


> On Piers Morgan, Sorkin stated that he had Daniels in mind from the very beginning (for what that's worth - Daniels was sitting beside him)).
> 
> We really enjoyed it.


Whenever I see Jeff Daniels I can't get Harry from Dumb and Dumber out of my head. Hopefully I can overcome that for this show. I was able to stop seeing Bryan Cranston as the Dad on Malcolm in the Middle after a few episodes of Breaking Bad.


----------



## Neenahboy (Apr 8, 2004)

dtivouser said:


> It seems like journalists are panning Newsroom in the same way that Republicans panned The West Wing. "It's too convenient. It's not realistic. It's motivated politically."


Whenever a new Sorkin show comes out, there's always a period when it's no longer "cool" to like Sorkin for, well, being Sorkin. It's always mystified me. Give it a month.

That said, I really enjoyed it. Daniels looks like he can keep up the Sorkin pace well, and I enjoyed the setup for Alison Pill's character. I just hope they don't drag out the Will/Mackenzie thing. Tell us what happened and whether they're going to crap or get off the pot. If that drags on beyond the first season I'll be disappointed.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

dtivouser said:


> It seems like journalists are panning Newsroom in the same way that Republicans panned The West Wing. "It's too convenient. It's not realistic. It's motivated politically."


*butthurt*
adj


An inappropriately strong negative emotional response from a perceived personal insult. Characterized by strong feelings of shame. Frequently associated with a cessation of communication and overt hostility towards the "aggressor."


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

dtivouser said:


> It seems like journalists are panning Newsroom in the same way that Republicans panned The West Wing. "It's too convenient. It's not realistic. It's motivated politically."


True but I see conservative news organizations like HuffPo panning it as well.

Really not sure why I liked the pilot and looks to be a solid show.


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

mwhip said:


> True but I see conservative news organizations like HuffPo panning it as well.
> 
> Really not sure why I liked the pilot and looks to be a solid show.


HuffPo is conservative?


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

mwhip said:


> True but I see conservative news organizations like HuffPo panning it as well.


It is run by and was started by Ariana Huffington, a very vocal liberal.

So far, I'm enjoying this show. If it continues to be thoughtful and provocative without being preachy, I'll stick with it. Nice to see Sam Waterston too.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

Loved it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Yeah, way too much Sorkin speak, but I liked it. I think I liked it mostly because it felt a LOT like Sports Night, which I liked a lot. In fact, you can almost parallel the opening story to the first ep of SN. New "research geek" comes in, falls for the assistant producer (same in Sports Night), hotshot producer show host have a spark and a past. Big breaking story that brings the group together. Same Waterson is essentially the Robert Guilleume character. 

I know you guys love Sorkin, but WHY must he write EVERY character to sound the same way? That's what bugs me, and I found myself going through half the episode overly aware of that. In fact, I was watching with my son, and I was predicting what the characters would say next and which line they would come back to 20 minutes later.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

markz said:


> Here is a decent article that touches on why it is set 2 years ago.
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maggie-furlong/the-newsroom-defense_b_1616355.html?utm_hp_ref=tv
> 
> Basically Sorkin did not want to make up fake news stories.





mwhip said:


> True but I see conservative news organizations like HuffPo panning it as well.
> 
> Really not sure why I liked the pilot and looks to be a solid show.


This reviewer that I posted earlier from HuffPo liked it.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

TheMerk said:


> HuffPo is conservative?


D'oh! Late night.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> In fact, I was watching with my son, and I was predicting what the characters would say next and which line they would come back to 20 minutes later.


That must have made it really fun for him.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

scooterboy said:


> That must have made it really fun for him.


He was laughing. Actually we laughed quite a few times, both at the context of the show, and the speech cadence. He thought it was funny that I could describe the speech cadence before the show even started and I was spot on...and then....explain how a typical Sorkin show is delivered, and, again, I was spot on.

Luckily the context of the show is good, I just wish there was, you know, some actual emotion in the delivery.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Excellent! Emmy material already. Of course only us liberal losers will watch it.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Gunnyman said:


> This show looks like it's setting up to be the West Wing meets Sports Night and I'm all in.


Yeah, I miss Sports Night. I would still watch the reruns if they were on.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> He was laughing. Actually we laughed quite a few times, both at the context of the show, and the speech cadence. He thought it was funny that I could describe the speech cadence before the show even started and I was spot on...and then....explain how a typical Sorkin show is delivered, and, again, I was spot on.
> 
> Luckily the context of the show is good, I just wish there was, you know, some actual emotion in the delivery.


I was being sarcastic (surprise!). You (or anyone) talking through the whole show would have bugged the crap out of me.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

scooterboy said:


> I was being sarcastic (surprise!). You (or anyone) talking through the whole show would have bugged the crap out of me.


That's what the pause button is for


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I know you guys love Sorkin, but WHY must he write EVERY character to sound the same way? That's what bugs me, and I found myself going through half the episode overly aware of that. In fact, I was watching with my son, and I was predicting what the characters would say next and which line they would come back to 20 minutes later.


I haven't watched this show yet but I think that his characters don't sound exactly the same historically -- at least, not any more than Milch characters sound the same.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> I haven't watched this show yet but I think that his characters don't sound exactly the same historically -- at least, not any more than Milch characters sound the same.


I watched both Sports Night and Studio 60 (was not a West Wing fan..but that's something I might go back and revisit. In the time before TiVo/DVR, I had conflicts when it was on), but I can tell you that to me, all the characters speak with the same cadence. short bursts of dialogue, with kind of a questioning response and then another character chimes in. It goes something like this.

Character 1: My dog crossed the street and went into the neighbor's yard
Character 2: You dog?
Character 1: Of course my dog
Character 3: You know he never keeps an eye on that dog
Character 1: I know, I never keep an eye on that dog.

15 minutes later in the episode:
Character 3 to Character 4: Character 1 went across the street
Character 4: He went across the street because he never keeps an eye on the dog
Character 2: I wonder why he never keeps an eye on the dog?
Character 1: have you seen my dog?

All with a monotone rapid staccato delivery with sarcastic overtones. Rarely more than one sentence per character at a time. And one they do speak more than one sentence, it's generally a big pontificating speech.

Fortunately his stories are really good


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

I liked it. Better than anything else on right now. The one thing about those Sorkin shows I forgot about, given the amount of talking that you need to keep up with and the fast frenetic pace of the show, I can't watch it right before bed. Because it gets me all amped up.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

http://www.hitfix.com/news/newsroom-premiere-numbers-are-open-to-interpretation

"The Newsroom," HBO's drama about how people report and interpret the news, debuted on Sunday (June 25) with an audience that's very much open to interpretation.

In its first airing, the Aaron Sorkin created drama drew 2.1 million viewers. That's below the 2.2 million viewers who watched the first airing of "Game of Thrones" when it premiered in 2010, but above the premiere numbers for "True Blood" (1.4 million viewers in 2008) and "Luck" or "Treme" (1.1 million each). The numbers were far below the 4.8 million viewers who watched the premiere of "Boardwalk Empire" in 2010.

Every single one of those shows -- plus all of HBO's recent comedies which premiered to lower viewership -- were renewed for second seasons by HBO, so it's hard to imagine HBO not renewing "Newsroom."

Including its second Sunday airing, "Newroom" drew 2.7 million viewers in its first night.

Naysayers, though, will point out that "Newsroom," which drew decidedly mixed reviews, squandered more than half of its lead-in from "True Blood," which drew 4.7 million viewers in its 9 p.m. airing.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Do lead ins really matter that much on HBO, which re-airs its content several times in the week?


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

Sorkin fans may (or may not) enjoy this.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S78RzZr3IwI[/media]


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

Sorkin fan here, although I thought Studio 60 was kind of dumb. 

I LOVED episode 1. Can't wait for more. 

I keep thinking of Sports Nigh and West Wing cast members who could have played the various roles in this.


----------



## swizzlest (Sep 13, 2003)

Never watched anything Sorkin, but gave this one a shot.

Look, actual characters! There's potential for development here, so that intrigues me. I think it'll be interesting to see the dramatized retelling of news stories. It may be a cheap hook ("Hey! I remember when that happened!"), but with the right writing, it can be a really effective one.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Who wants to get political? Opening speech was excellent and spot on man I miss the America of my dad's youth where Presidents stood up and said we would put a man on the moon in 10 years. Now we shut space programs down and cut science and math. We sit around watch the world pass us. But hey we are #1 in one thing....self confidence.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

DougF said:


> Sorkin fans may (or may not) enjoy this.
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S78RzZr3IwI[/media]


I, for one, love it!


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Funny. Having watched the Making Of it wasn't looking too good. My take was Sorkin went off the deep*end and made _everybody_ an unattractive dipwad.

I also didn't like Sam Waterson always getting lines wrong.

The actual show was great. Sam did fine. The characters do have attractive aspects.

Olivia Munn? SHE is already on my nerves and we haven't seen her yet. Watch her try to get top billing.

The cast will find an ensemble groove, it'll get more and more great and then HBO will pull the plug.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Really enjoyed this first episode. I didn't expect to like this show, but I was definitely wrong.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Haven't seen it, but it's available for free stream on Tivos..


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Sam Waterston losing his temper when he is trying to cut off one of his employees who is ignoring him " DON, I AM A MARINE! I WILL BEAT THE shiat OUT OF YOU, I DON'T CARE HOW MANY PROTEIN BARS YOU EAT!" finishing with a look that says "Come At Me Bro!"


----------



## jschuur (Nov 27, 2002)

Sam Waterston's character might just be my favorite one of the show actually. Aside from Ellen of course


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

Loved the show! I loved the opening and can't wait until the next episode.


----------



## danielhart (Apr 27, 2004)

mwhip said:


> Who wants to get political? Opening speech was excellent and spot on man I miss the America of my dad's youth where Presidents stood up and said we would put a man on the moon in 10 years. Now we shut space programs down and cut science and math. We sit around watch the world pass us. But hey we are #1 in one thing....self confidence.


That president was assassinated.....yeah, I miss the good old days....


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

One thing I don't get. If she was really in the audience at the beginning, holding up those signs, why did she keep disappearing every other time he looked up?

Did she keep ducking out of sight?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

scooterboy said:


> One thing I don't get. If she was really in the audience at the beginning, holding up those signs, why did she keep disappearing every other time he looked up?
> 
> Did she keep ducking out of sight?


...and replaced herself with someone wearing similar clothes and who looked like her!


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I believe we were seeing it from Will's POV. He wasn't sure it was her, so the images were vague.

I liked it enough to keep watching. I agree that it didn't grab me like Sports Night or West Wing, but it has potential.

Love the fact that Sorkin writes much more like people talk and dares to have people taking at the same time. Something that other writer will not do.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> I believe we were seeing it from Will's POV. He wasn't sure it was her, so the images were vague.


Along those lines, it wasn't his mind playing tricks making him see her. His mind was playing tricks making him not see her half the time. Like "Surely that can't be her" so it became someone else.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> I believe we were seeing it from Will's POV. He wasn't sure it was her, so the images were vague.
> 
> I liked it enough to keep watching. I agree that it didn't grab me like Sports Night or West Wing, but it has potential.
> 
> *Love the fact that Sorkin writes much more like people talk* and dares to have people taking at the same time. Something that other writer will not do.


Really? I know NOBODY who talks with the cadence that is required by a Sorkin script/direction. Maybe it's a California thing or something.


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

I loved it. Can't wait for the next one. 

I've been re-watching Sports Night on NetFlix. Still sad that show was cancelled.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> Really? I know NOBODY who talks with the cadence that is required by a Sorkin script/direction. Maybe it's a California thing or something.


Exactly. I'm not overly familiar with Sorkin's style enough to identify them as "Sorkinisms", but I was pretty annoyed by some of the dialogue. People talk over each other, but not EVERY TIME. People have fast exchanges and conversations, but not EVERY TIME. Also at one point, I told my wife, this is The Yelling Show. How often in real life do people not only give speeches, but the other party actually LISTEN to the whole thing?

An example of this is where the british woman (sorry I'm horrible with names) was in Jeff Daniels's office. He'd just yelled at her, and she was giving a passionate speech. Daniels sat and listened to the whole thing. I've had bosses like that, and he would have cut her off after the first sentence and moved along.

For the annoyances, I did enjoy it and will keep watching.

Greg


----------



## MegaHertz67 (Apr 18, 2005)

gchance said:


> An example of this is where the British woman (sorry I'm horrible with names) was in Jeff Daniels's office. He'd just yelled at her, and she was giving a passionate speech. Daniels sat and listened to the whole thing. I've had bosses like that, and he would have cut her off after the first sentence and moved along.


Greg...I believe they were trying to show that the characters have a history with one another. Yes, you might toss a coworker out of your office when she jumps up on the soapbox. But this is a woman with whom he had a personal and professional relationship. On some level he must value her opinion, but he was acting like a petulant child at that moment because of the circumstances that got them into that office together that day.

I look forward to seeing how these characters grow and how the dynamic changes as the series goes along.


----------



## Dave_N (May 4, 2006)

dtivouser said:


> Anyone else have trouble getting Tivo to record it last night? I had a season pass but it didn't record it. I happened to flip through the channels during one of the (many) re-runs last night.


I am also having trouble with a season pass. Missed the first show and couldn't find it with a search either. Had to record episode 1 and 2 manual from the guide.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

DougF said:


> Sorkin fans may (or may not) enjoy this.
> 
> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S78RzZr3IwI[/media]


That is a nice piece of editing!

Also the funniest thing I've seen since I found the website about Harrison Ford's finger point.

The original I saw (from 2003 or earlier) appears not to be online anymore, but a Google search turns up plenty of others.


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

Steveknj said:


> I watched both Sports Night and Studio 60 (was not a West Wing fan..but that's something I might go back and revisit. In the time before TiVo/DVR, I had conflicts when it was on), but I can tell you that to me, all the characters speak with the same cadence. short bursts of dialogue, with kind of a questioning response and then another character chimes in. It goes something like this.
> 
> Character 1: My dog crossed the street and went into the neighbor's yard
> Character 2: You dog?
> ...


You forgot a couple of things. The "obvious question" and the monosyllabic affirmative. Revised scene:

Character 1: My dog crossed the street and went into the neighbor's yard
Character 2: Your dog?
Character 1: Of course my dog. I don't understand why my dog always does that.
Character 3: Is it because you never keep an eye on that dog?
Character 1: I know, I never keep an eye on that dog.
Character 2: Yeah.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Halfway through. Pretty ragged, actually. I'm used to Sorkin being smoother. Probably a decision to make it more real, more gritty. I'll have to see. Not in love. A bit disconnected. The opening scene was wonderful. The rest so far has not lived up to the opening.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Just watched it, and loved it. Only thing that I don't like about it, is that it's on HBO which means we will only get 10 episodes or so. Also loved that video clip posted earlier in this thread.


----------



## mm2margaret (Dec 7, 2010)

Loved it. Yes, its very sorkiny, but I don't care. It was interesting, and for summer, it was great. Plenty of time for it to get better too. Maureen Ryan's not my favorite critic anyway. I don' t care much at all for her opinion s or her reviews.


----------



## jay_man2 (Sep 15, 2003)

Never heard of Sorkin; watched it and fell asleep. Woke up and deleted SP.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

jay_man2 said:


> Never heard of Sorkin; watched it and fell asleep. Woke up and deleted SP.


You've never heard of The West Wing (tv show) or the Social Network (Facebook movie)?


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

jschuur said:


> Sam Waterston's character might just be my favorite one of the show actually. Aside from Ellen of course


ITYM Karen.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> You've never heard of The West Wing (tv show) or the Social Network (Facebook movie)?


I am sure he has heard of some of Sorkin's work without knowing who Sorkin is. Lots of people I know don't know anything about a show/movie past who stars in something.

My question is has jay_man2 seen any of these (without knowing who Sorkin is) and did he like any of them?:

A Few Good Men (1992)
Malice (1993)
An American President (1995)
Sports Night (1998)
The West Wing (1999)
Studio 60 (2006)
Charlie Wilson's War (2007)
Social Network (2010)
Moneyball (2011)

I loved A Few Good Men (1992) and An American President (1995) but didn't know anything about Sorkin until Sports Night (1998) and then found out he did the other two. I then realized since I liked three of his, I'd watch everything going forward.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

I finished the first one last night (barely) and doubt I'll make it to the second. The conversations are just so over the top scattered ridiculous to the point of being annoying. Totally distracting to what they're actually trying to say.

I like the premise. Just not a Sorkin fan I guess. Of the list above, I liked A Few Good Men and Social Network. Haven't seen Moneyball. The rest were below average.

If people routinely interrupted me during every conversation I would tell the to STFU and wait until I'm finished speaking.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

I just watched Malice the other day and it was unrecognizable as a Sorkin project to me short of seeing Brenda Strong and Josh Malina who have been in other Sorkin projects. It definitely did not feel like the other Sorkin stuff at all.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

I watched the first two shows and I am hooked. Where some one said that being on HBO means we might only get 10 shows, it does mean we will get more real life adult dialog. The other HBO advantage is with the fast pace of the dialog and the way the story moves, stopping for commercials would ruin it for me. I didnt notice how long the show is in length. I wonder if it can be shown on regular TV with out having to cut parts for incerting commercials.


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

In the opening monologue, why did Jeff Daniels yell "Yosemite"?

I take that it was meant as, "Understand"? But I'm unsure of the word usage.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Queue said:


> In the opening monologue, why did Jeff Daniels yell "Yosemite"?
> 
> I take that it was meant as, "Understand"? But I'm unsure of the word usage.


I took it to mean "does Yosemite make us the greatest country?"

You know. Purple mountains majesty and all that jazz.


----------



## markymark_ctown (Oct 11, 2004)

fmowry said:


> I finished the first one last night (barely) and doubt I'll make it to the second. The conversations are just so over the top scattered ridiculous to the point of being annoying. Totally distracting to what they're actually trying to say.
> 
> I like the premise. Just not a Sorkin fan I guess. Of the list above, I liked A Few Good Men and Social Network. Haven't seen Moneyball. The rest were below average.
> 
> If people routinely interrupted me during every conversation I would tell the to STFU and wait until I'm finished speaking.


I just got done watching the 1st season and agree. Really wanted to like it. Went into it hearing goods things about it and loved Sports Night, so I was expecting greatness. I liked the "news" angle of the show, but the forced romantic arc was too much. Most likely will not watch Season 2 when available on Netflix.


----------

