Jump to content

Are All Aaron Sorkin Shows This Pretentiously Talky?


VirginiaHamilton

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Recently, I decided to check out Sports Night (since a fair share of folks have claimed that Aaron Sorkin-helmed shows are some of the most groundbreaking and intelligent shows in TV history) and I'm finding it pretentious as hell (though I reserve the right to change my mind as I go along). Not only is the speechifying and pretentious dialogue preventing me from actually getting to know the characters and their conflicts onscreen, I'm finding myself put off by the obvious liberal pandering (as much as I do subscribe to and live by that POV, I prefer that it'd be just a wee-bit more subtle in its execution).

Are these just symptoms of this show or do all Aaron Sorkin shows suffer from these ailments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Sports Night was the first and last Sorkin show I tried to watch more than a few times. The characters constantly went around smirking at the brilliance of their one-liners. I've rarely seen a smugger show in my life, with more, as you say, pretentious dialogue. It took years for me to accept Krause, Huffman, or Charles in other roles.

His shows also get noticed for sexism.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/09/aaron_sorkin_gets_more_sexist_every_year/singleton/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep. That's Sorkin's style. Preachy, arrogant and unabashedly liberal. That's his trademark. Sometimes I've loved it (West Wing, Sports Night) other times it's just unbearable. I gave The Newsroom one viewing and couldn't take it but if you really want to see an ego-driven Sorkin trainwreck, check out Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not sure that I'd call what I've seen of Sports Night as "arrogant" just yet (I'm about halfway through the first season, as per FXX's reruns), but the sledgehammer method of its POV makes Boston Legal look subtle by comparison. If this is what makes Sorkin's shows "incredible" (as per what some have tried to sell me), then I'm going to have to pass on checking out the rest of them.

Sexism? Hmm, I'll have to pay a bit more attention to make that call (though I'll definitely check out the article). I've got my own opinion on certain privileged liberal males, but again, I don't think that I've seen enough of this show to apply it it here just yet.

What prompted this thread was an episode when Janel Maloney's character spent five minutes speechifying to Peter Krause's (who I actually do enjoy on Parenthood) character about the color of a shirt-and-tie combination because he failed to thank the wardrobe department when he'd guest-starred on The View. Had this been helmed in a more, well, subtle manner, then I would've appreciated it a lot more than wishing that he'd tell her to STFU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Thank you for the tag! It's always a pleasure to see these little pearls of memories. 
    • Uh-oh. Today just might’ve been the first Paula/Jeanne stinker. I have a feeling whose fault that might be though. So, Doug III is getting a job at the Pub?  It’s good to see him interact with other characters. I enjoyed his scenes with Roman, even though the talk of Frankie and Max seemed a little random. And it also could be really interesting now that Tate knows. Days really need to start pushing their rivalry again. We need some follow up from the punch. Tying it all to Holly, to Sophia’s pregnancy, to the guys that Doug III owes money to could be good.  But yeah, wayyy too much Leo again in today’s episode. Seriously, has anything changed with this nothing character? I thought it was all Ron’s fault, but maybe Greg Rikaart is (partially) responsible for Leo being so insufferable.  And yeah seriously, Rafe needs to throw all of these people out of his house. Including Gabi

      Please register in order to view this content

      But I do wonder who’s the mysterious voice that Gabi overheard with EJ on the night he was shot. Based on yesterday’s episode, I have a suspicion. 
    • Add me to the group of people who think that Brandon has improved. He has. There's no doubt about it. Especially compared to the beginning. And he's improving in a way that... it makes me think that he realizes what the issues are and is addressing them. Of course, he's no master of acting at this point... but I don't cringe as much as I did. And I've seen people in Bold... I won't even have to name names, because everyone knows who they are... who are becoming even worse than what they were offering in the first place. So... I'm happy that in BTG... people are actually blossoming and improving. It surely means that the atmosphere is creative and nurturing talent.  BUT and it's a big butt... his relationship with his husband is still so lacking and ghastly. I am craving to see more action from these guys. I want to see Smitty's character. If he has any. 
    • Thank you. You guys come to the rescue again. I'll take a look later.   Thank you for the info!!! Now I find myself less confused. You and @DRW50 are amazing.
    • I know Passions used this trope with Ethan and Sam to drag out the paternity, but GH seems to speed through certain stories while dragging others.
    • For any other soap, I think I’d agree, but GH, I don’t know

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Agreed, that there was some strange choices in the episode, especially at the end, but overall, that was some great drama that opens up the potential for so much future storyline. Kat vs. Eva having the most potential, especially over Tomas. I have mixed feelings about Martin/BC though. I thought he did pretty well in scenes with Smitty/MM, but the scenes of him confronting Leslie and of him throwing the books were bad lol she acted circles around him.  It’s similar to what Harding Lemay said about George Reinholt at AW; he could be brilliant in one scene, but then mediocre in the next. 
    • I know some of y'all really like Brooke Kerr, and so I've tried to give her a shot, despite her frequent flat line readings and distracted "did I leave the front door unlocked?" facial expressions. But lord, she is so bad at playing a tough-talking badass that I was actually rooting for Brad today to spill the beans to Drew. 
    • Googling does tend to ruin it.  For those of us who were teens in the late 1970s and early 1980s, you can't imagine how much fun it was to watch the show in the afternoons.  (It came on right after school.)  There weren't any "spoilers" at the time.  We would always try to anticipate how each crime and each mystery would be resolved, and we were ALWAYS wrong, because the stories are filled with so many weird twists and turns.   The head writer (Henry Slesar) and his dialogue writer (Steve Lehrman) invariably toss genuine clues directly into your face in the most unlikely ways, but then they provide a host of "red herrings" to completely confuse you and send you off on the wrong path.  Once the story reaches its conclusion, all you can think is Why didn't I figure that out weeks ago?  lol
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy