The West Wing - 7A WF 83429 (09.24.03)
 

Well then ...

I'm really not sure what to say about this episode, so I guess I'll just start the thread and come back later.

das

9pm can't come soon enough for me.

It was okay.

But for me, an okay West Wing isn't good enough. Even when the West Wing was floating aimlessly from lost plot thread to lost thread, the episodes themselves had a cadence, the balance of the large story and the small moments, the drama and humor.

This episode...well, felt very much like John Wells put it together, not Aaron Sorkin. John Wells is no hack, but when I tune in on Wednesdays, I want the AS touch, which we will no longer have.

But maybe its a fluke, maybe it can get back to it previous level with that writing staff that's been sitting around for a few years...they had to be doing something while AS was on a shroom fueled writing binge, I hope they were practicing.

The sky is not falling....but its overcast today.

I liked it. It didn't disappoint at all. Can't wait till next week.

well, considering that sorkin and schlamme have now left the show, this was a pretty good hour of television.

firstly, there were two particular moments that were outstanding. 1). when josh was in leo's office in the first half, the look on his face was just unreal. i don't know how to describe it but, brad whitford is doing such a great job in this role it's umbelievable. and 2). charlie sitting outside bartlett's room. his character has come so far from the timid 18-20 year old we first saw 4 years ago. his dedication to bartlett was compelling. ps. i really want to see him whoop jean paul's a@@.

like das said, i don't know exactly what to think about this storyline. right now, i think that i am so glad that it's back but torn between the fact that sorkin is no longer there. don't get me wrong, i did like the show but i am just not sure how it compares to what has come before. it wasn't as good as the S2 premiere but it was still pretty good. the part near the end where josh and donna are walking home and they cut to the shot of the crowds got to me quite a bit. that and the fact that once again, we see that donna is utterly in love with josh (although she won't admit it). she is there for him, period.

all in all, a solid opening to S5. oh, yeah. nina siemaszko :drool:

This is what is bothering me a bit too. I very much liked the episode, and I have no problems with it. It was very, very good. However, there was no witty banter ... anywhere. The discussion of what to call a deficit was it, and that wasn't that funny. What I find myself asking ... myself ... is whether this is a sign of things to come or a sign that the situation was so overwhelming that there was no cause for humor.

I just don't know what to think, other than this is one of the finest casts of acting talent ever assembled for television. From top to bottom, these guys are so good it just floors me sometimes. And I think John Goodman is absolutely fantastic in this role; although the dog thing was too much.

The jury's still out, and I feel like I'm in a holding pattern. Next Wednesday can't get here soon enough.

das

Thought the episode was pretty decent. I'm interested to see where the story will go. John Goodman was excellent, but the way his character acted scared me a bit. It's probably just the bleeding heart liberal in me though... ;) Anyway, not as bad as I was afraid it was going to be, but as kevin75 already said, not as good as the s2 premiere.

das,

i was also thinking about the lack of witty banter, but then i thought, "there wouldn't be any witty banter" normally i say bring on the snappy dialogue, but in this case, there really isn't an appropriate place for it, what with the seriousness of the story.

oh yeah, one more thing. what does everyone think the outcome of the story will be? :thumbsup: or :thmbsdwn:? me, i hope that she come back, but knowing the network execs, they could certainly screw it up.

Well, there was a nice line about why Toby didn't get pictures of the twins... Something to the effect of "something came up at work". But outside of that, there wasn't much.

On the other hand, when Mrs. Langanham (sp?) died, was there really alot of witty banter?

I have a question for all you constitutional law experts out there: How does Bartlet regain the presidency? Does he just write a letter and send it to congress telling them that he's ready to be president again? Can it be refused? And if John Goodman's character nominates a VP, is Bartlet obligated to honor the nomination?

That's why it's bothering me. :) Is it because of the story or because there's no Sorkin, and will it always be this way? These things I just don't know.

Speaking of Mrs. Landingham, I really liked the way they brought President Bartlet back to the church with his family. I kept thinking of him dropping the cigarette in 'Two Cathedrals' after her death.

das

I'm seriously hoping it was the overwhelming situation thing. That's why I wasn't so disappointed... they've cracked jokes in the face of a lot of things, but so much poop has hit the fan that it's impeding the spin of the blades. :)

It's actually very easy; all Bartlett has to do is send a letter to the House that says he's fit for duty and he's president again. He doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. It can't be refused. However if Goodman's character nominates a VP and the Senate approves him, then Bartlet can't do a damn thing about it other than ask for that guy's resignation.

The more I think about it, the more I think Goodman's character SHOULD nominate a VP that's republican. I certainly don't like it one bit; but that means that it's good writing.

Now to the lack of witty banter, that sucked! You can tell the AS effect is gone from this episode; even if it's a little bit of a sad episode, there's still good dialogue to be had but not here.

Does anyone remember why AS left, and if there's any possibility he can come back? Does he have any other shows planned?

Thanks for the answer huzefa.

i seem to recall that he and nbc had a falling out. nbc was mad that he was delivering scripts late and such. as for what he is up next... this was at AICN..

----------------

http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/display.cgi?id=16150


“West Wing” creator Aaron Sorkin is all over the news, what with the show’s fourth best-drama Emmy in a row, and the show’s first Sorkin-free season set to launch Wednesday.

It’s been almost five months since Sorkin announced he’d be resigning his roles as writer and showrunner, and fans, to judge by our new deluge of emails, are becoming increasingly keen to learn what he’s doing next.

Well, not TV, at least not right away. He revealed at the Museum of Television & Radio about two weeks ago that he was planning a return to series TV, but did not discuss timing or premise.

The New York Daily News reported on Aug. 18, however, that Sorkin’s next TV project would be something similar to Sorkin's old ABC series “Sports Night”: a backstage comedy-drama for Warner Bros. revolving around a fictional “Saturday Night Live”-like show.

Before his return to series TV, Sorkin says, he’ll be writing a play for Dublin’s Abbey Theatre and finishing a feature screenplay about Philo Farnsworth, who invented the TV picture tube, and Farnsworth’s lengthy legal battles with RCA’s David Sarnoff.

"I can make glass tubes." :up:

das

The way i understood it:

In the season finale there were two letters signed by John Goodman's character and President Bartlett. One was Bartlett's resignation, elevating the Speaker to presidential authority. The second letter was the Speakers resignation, reinstating Barlett to presidential authority. All Bartlett has to do is hand the second letter to the congressional leadership and everything is back to normal (except for the speaker being out of a job, and the whole VP thing...)

Still in the thick of it. One question, who's playing the eldest daughter Elizabeth?

Nope; the second letter was a letter to the congressional leadership stating that the President is now fit to resume his duties. The resignation of the speaker was a whole other letter (a third letter if you will).

Well, i figured i understood it wrong anyway. :)

I need one of those slick blue constitution books they were carrying around in the finale.

;)

Elizabeth is played by Annbeth Gish.

I'm going to place myself in the camp that didn't enjoy the episode. Without the banter, the characters just didn't feel like themselves. I found Toby to be especially un-Toby-like. I felt like I was watching completely different people. I'll continue to tune in and give it a chance, but things aren't looking too well.

Oh, and it was Cliff Gardner who blew the glass tubes.

"They should make Congressional medals for people like that."

Das,
I'm agreement with you and others about the missing the witty banter...I'd like to think it's because of the weighty events of the show, but it's probably because of the new leadership running the show. But if what that AICN posting has is true, that new show he might do eventually sure sounds like it has potential.

clemente and das covered anything that I would have hoped I would have by posting. Felt a little off tonight and only time will tell if it is due to the loss of AS and TS or what not.

Anyone else not like the lighting scheme that was all over the episode? Almost everything seemed to be shot like it was just after sunrise.

I knew she looked familiar!

She was the one who replaced Scully in the last season of the X-Files.

She also looked a lot like Amy Gardner (Mary Louise Parker). So much so that I thought it was her in the limo.