The Exchange: Michael Atchison

Michael Atchison is both a fellow Mizzou nerd (he's written a great book, True Sons, covering the history of Mizzou basketball) and a fellow music nerd. He makes up one half of the lovely music blog, Teenage Kicks. And he agreed to take part in Exchange #2. (To read, Exchange #1 with Erik Loomis, click here.) In this post, we cover mostly musical issues...why it's okay to dislike Dave Matthews Band (even though they're great!), why The Hold Steady is so important, why it's been easier to admire Radiohead than actually enjoy them recently, why (once again) Curtis Mayfield is the greatest ever...it's all there.

Let's get right to it. We pick up discussing an Exchange #1 topic, Johnny Cash vs Ray Charles.

Michael Atchison: I love Johnny Cash. I once stood about ten inches from him, a moment I’ll always remember. He casts a long shadow over the history of the popular music of the past fifty years. And he’s not close to Ray Charles.

Cash carved a niche in a tradition forged by Hank Williams and he became a key player in the broader cultural transformation as part of that epochal roster of Sun Records artists. Charles, on the other hand, is absolutely ground zero of a revolution, the place where soul music started, where the secular and the spiritual first collided in often difficult and spectacular ways, where the music of an oppressed minority became the most popular music in the world. The line goes from Ray Charles to James Brown to complete global domination. His influence is incalculable.

I could be wrong...

The Boy: As long as you agree that Curtis Mayfield dwarfs them all, we're cool. Actually, it's hard to pick against Ray matching him up against anybody. It's easy to think Dylan was more influential, and as a Dylan nerd I'm inclined to immediately think he was, but was he? Put it this way--the people Ray influenced were a lot stronger than the people Dylan influenced. Dylan influenced a bunch of people to try to be like him, and almost all of them (Springsteen aside...and Bruce was aiming for Freddy Cannon and Motown as much as Dylan) failed. Um, Donovan? Hello? I guess you could say Neil Young was heavily influenced by Dylan, and needless to say that worked out pretty well, but still...

And speaking (sort of) of Springsteen...your blog thinks very highly The Hold Steady, who were clearly influenced by "E-Street Shuffle"-era Springsteen. Sell them to me. I got their album a few months ago (I'm listening to it right now), and while it's fun and relatively strong musically, the vocals were almost TOO derivative of Bruce Circa 1973 for me to take them seriously. Maybe I'm just revolting against them because Rolling Stone loves them so much?

MA: First off, I love Curtis Mayfield. That two-disc comp with the Impressions is near-perfect, and I’ve been spinning Curtis periodically of late.

As for Dylan, I think you short change him some. It’s not just about the obvious direct influence on someone like Springsteen, it’s the changing of the level of literacy across the board. But frankly, I’m less interested in him as an influence than as an artist, where he has very, very few peers.

The Hold Steady is my favorite band since the Replacements, who were my favorite band half of my life ago. In fact, I thought I was too old for “favorite bands” at this point, but those guys knock me on my ass like I never thought I’d ever have happen again. Though they get lots of Springsteen comparisons (especially for the most recent album), I never would have thought to compare Craig’s vocals to Bruce’s. He’s all about hard cadences and edges (really, I guess, sort of like Dylan circa 1966, but even harder). The first Hold Steady album I heard was their second, Separation Sunday, which I wrestled with for months before it revealed itself to me in its full, wretched glory. The first two albums (Almost Killed Me came before, and I got that one shortly after I got the second one) are far more idiosyncratic than the one you have. They rock hard and the song structures are less conventional, with Craig free to roam about without verse-chorus-verse constraints. His words are unbelievable. Sometimes ridiculously funny, sometimes heartbreakingly sad. And Tad’s riffs are massive, straight out of the Thin Lizzy book. It probably shouldn’t work but it does. I think there are a lot of very good bands working now (New Pornographers, Marah, Wilco to name a few) but I don’t think any of them can touch the Hold Steady. I know plenty of people who don’t like them at all, but I don’t know anyone who just likes them a little. If you’re in, you’re all in.

TB: That's all I needed to hear. I'll hop on emusic and get their other albums, stat.

And yes, as far as Dylan goes, his artistry is unmatched. Paul Williams' 3-part Bob Dylan, Performing Artist series was fantastic in showing that, no matter what the quality of his recorded output was at any given time, his performances (both in how he performed and the songs he chose to perform) always revealed an entirely different level of artistry that almost nobody else has ever possessed. My point was just that, the more people tried to reveal overt Dylan influences in their music, the more their music probably stunk. However, he's had a more broad influence on just about everybody, whether they know it or not.

As for slightly younger bands/performers (i.e. those who weren't in existence before about 1990) who have become extremely influential (in music and in spirit/vibe)...I'm seeing Pearl Jam and Dave Matthews Band as the leaders of that pack. PJ's influence has come in waves--first, their actual sound was ripped off or borrowed by about 25 major label groups, and now, they and Green Day are carrying the "speaking truth to power through music" torch that seems to be influencing quite a few bands. As for DMB...their impact has been a little more subtle. They pretty much drew out the business model for building a grassroots fanbase and using the internet to their advantage--their approach has been imitated by bands at every single level of fandom at this point--and because of that they're pretty much assured of selling out amphitheatre-level venues for the rest of their lives. Thoughts on who else is approaching this level of influence?

MA: like the idea of Pearl Jam – principled band that connects on a mass level – more than I like the band itself, but there’s no doubt that they cast a long shadow. As far as influence goes, it was huge once (and I think maybe for the wrong reasons; record labels tried to churn out as many PJ sound-a-likes as possible) and probably still is. Still, I suspect that any group of guys who grew up in the 1990s wanting to rock somehow absorbed PJ pretty deeply. I just wish they weren’t so short on song ideas in recent years. I have the album that came out last year, and it redefines “OK” for me.

As for DMB, suffice it to say that I’m not a fan. As a grassroots marketing phenomenon, you may well be right. I do respect how they did that, and they probably did pave the way for a lot of other similar bands to follow.

I guess I haven’t given much thought to the level of influence of more recent vintage bands, though I’d put Radiohead near the top. There are a lot of top-notch Brit bands who cut their teeth on them. And this may be a little provincial, but Uncle Tupelo – who were Blue Note regulars back in my day helped launch a whole generation of alt.country bands. Back when they started, there just wasn’t much music like that. Now it comes in waves.

I love both PJ and DMB, but it's different for each of them. With Pearl Jam, it's almost a knee-jerk, gut-level defense of them ("DON'T YOU DARE SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT THEM!"). I love their earnestness and dedication to both rock music and causes they appreciate. I love how Eddie treats his audience from the stage. I love how they still make better rock music than almost anybody else (their last album was not my favorite, but it was more than OK!).

As for DMB...while I've seen them live about 15x more than PJ, and while they're most directly responsible for my love of live music and made a giant impact on my musical tastes between about 1998 and 2002, when somebody tells me they're not a fan, I just say that I understand. While it's rewarding to delve deeply into their catalog, I've not been a fan of almost any of their singles (same goes for PJ, actually), their music is a pretty acquired taste, and their fanbase--a unique amalgamation of frat dudes, stoners, and complete music nerds like me--is one of the most whiny, self-righteous fanbases out there (and I say that as a member of the fanbase!). I don't defend them nearly as much as PJ, even though I love both equally.

As for Radiohead...you're probably right. For a while there, I was thinking they were almost too ground-breaking and unique to actually influence anybody because it went too far over people's heads (kind of like Outkast on the hip hop side), but you really are starting to see influences, and not just on British bands. Bands like Arcade Fire are also starting to delve into the noise/synth area, though slowly. And Uncle Tupelo...you're absolutely right on this one. The band's rootsy sound has not aged at all and still sounds crisper and much edgier than a lot of the alt.country bands out there today (Jayhawks, etc.). And really, since breaking from Uncle Tupelo, Jeff Tweedy has turned Wilco into even parts UT and Radiohead...it's been fascinating watching them slowly incorporate more and more tricks into their arsenal.

And before we move on to TV shows, I need to ask...since we're talking about Radiohead...Kid A or Hail to the Thief? I was going to ask about The Bends versus OK Computer, but there's only one right answer to that question (OK Computer is leaps and bounds above Bends in every way, though OK wouldn't have existed without the experimentation on Bends).

If we’re picking between The Bends and OKC, I think it’s a lot closer than you do. I’ll take OKC, but not by much. And after The Bends I think it’s a distant third to whatever comes next.

I’ve admired more than enjoyed Radiohead since those two albums. I’d rather listen to Hail to the Thief than Kid A, if only because it’s not so insistently difficult. “Punchup at a Wedding” is probably my favorite latter-day Radiohead tune.

If we’re really moving on to TV next, be forewarned, I’m not likely to be of much use. Between writing the book and having two kids who are now three and six, my evenings haven’t allowed for much regular TV viewing the past few years. I think the last show I saw every episode of was Sports Night, and that’s been off the air for years.

How much have you delved into one of Good Nonsense's favorite shows and targets, Studio 60 (funny how that works...we can't stop complaining about it, but we keep watching it...then again, it's been off the air for a few weeks...hard to keep watching it then)?

(And I do think The Bends is an absolutely fantastic album...it's just that OK Computer took everything that was good about Bends and multiplied it by 10. Hail to the Thief is almost certainly--to me--their best since OKC...I'm all for being challenged, and I'm all for bands taking big risks...but there still has to be some semblance of melody and music, and a lot Kid A and Amnesiac was sorely lacking in that category. Thief was very a very encouraging sign as to what may lie ahead for them. They kept the weirdness and added melody back into the equation.)

Studio 60 is the one thing I’ve watched pretty consistently this year (I’ve tried to keep up with The Office, but I’ve missed it a bunch). My 'Teenage Kicks' partner Trip watches, too, and we’ve had many discussions about it. I think Sorkin is much better when he plays small ball. When he makes personal interaction the focus, he has a really deft touch, and the dialogue can be almost musical. When he goes for grand themes (especially political ones), he’s ham-handed and clunky, telegraphing everything he does. He ought to go back and watch every episode of Sports Night. Those characters all felt real and there was genuine warmth between them. There are good characters on Studio 60, too, but it feels like some of them were hatched as archetypes (Matt and Harriet, especially) more than as people. He needs to fix that.

I like the 'archetypes' comment. That pretty much nails the problem with Studio 60. It's like he had all these different exchanges in his head, and he had to cram them into places they didn't belong. I do almost hope that Studio 60 is renewed (though it gets more doubtful by the day) simply because, when he gets all the pre-conceived dialogues and scenes out of his head, he'd still have some decent characters and settings to work with. I love Timothy Busfield's dopey character. I like the potential of Bradley Whitford and Amanda Peet (and though it was super-slapsticky and predictable, I laughed really really hard when the fake baby's eyes popped out of its head...but that's just because I have a very high sense of lowgrade humor). I like the two rookie writers. D.L. Hugley and Nate Corddry's characters at least have potential.

I just hate the Matt/Harriet plot, and I hate the skits. Even though he got away from showing bits of the skits, even the ideas being discussed stink. He really needs to hire a real comedy writer just for the ideas. It's rare that a show has had such distinct strengths and distinct weaknesses--usually a show with such weaknesses is just an overall trainwreck and easy to dismiss--and it's obvious we've held the show to a higher standard because it's Sorkin, but still...it needs work. Maybe it would just be easier if the show were canceled, but hey...I'm an eternal optimist (obviously, since I'm also a Mizzou fan).

And just to let you know, I did in fact hop on eMusic and pick up the Hold Steady's Separation Sunday. Not bad. I like the lyrics more on that album than Boys and Girls in America, though the spoken-word delivery still has some growing on me to do. The music and the riffs are just spectacular, though. And I also picked up the new Arcade Fire. Usually the 2nd release from an indie band (i.e. the first release where they actually had a recording budget and good equipment) is overindulgent and loses the spirit of the first. Well, Neon Bible is definitely overindulgent, but I think (upon first listen, anyway) I might actually like this more than Funeral. The melodies are just fantastic, and the instrumental excess actually kind of fits their sound. What new releases have caught your eye?

I’ll tackle the new release question first and then finish with The Hold Steady. The new Arcade Fire is in the mail to me now (along with new releases from LCD Soundsystem and Jesse Malin). I’ve actually been listening to the Malin disc for a few months thanks to a dub of an advance copy that showed up in my mailbox. He’s a four-on-the-floor rock and roll troubadour and true believer in the tradition of Springsteen, Lou Reed and Graham Parker. And while I don’t think he’s as good as any of them, he’s pretty damn good. It’s nice to have the cobwebs cleared every once in a while by some fierce, no BS rock and roll. (my buddy Trip has written about Malin extensively on Teenage Kicks.)

My favorite recent release is almost certainly Lily Allen’s Alright, Still . . . That’s just a big box of fun. A smart, epic, funny pop album. I’m also deeply enamored with Field Music’s Tones of Town. Think Beach Boys, XTC, the Format. Lots of knotty, circular melodies. Really luminous in places. Other recent offerings to get my stamp of approval: new ones by Peter Bjorn and John, The Good the Bad and the Queen, and the Shins. Two of my very favorite songwriters – Lucinda Williams and Ron Sexsmith – have new albums out this year, but neither has done much for me so far. I’ll have to listen with fresh ears later.

Some recent (and upcoming) releases that I’m looking forward to acquiring: Ted Leo and the Pharmacists, Amy Winehouse, the Ike Reilly Assassination (the first tune smokes), Andrew Bird, Antibalas, Modest Mouse (I’m interested to hear what Johnny Marr brings to the mix) and the Fratellis.

This will be my last bit of proselytizing on The Hold Steady. As I mentioned before, I wrestled with Separation Sunday for months before it revealed itself to me in its full, decadent, literate glory. Craig Finn’s delivery is what it is. You’ll either like it or you won’t. But I think he has enough charisma to make the razor-blades-and-whiskey voice work (of course, I also think Bob Dylan, Tom Waits and Shane MacGowan are world-class singers and I’ll fight anyone who disagrees).

One thing I love about him as a writer is that he trusts his audience to bring a certain sort of knowledge to the table. If you don’t know Kate Bush’s “Running Up that Hill,” there are a couple of lines in “Hornets! Hornets” (Separation Sunday’s lead track) that will fly right by you. But if you know that song, you’ll just laugh to yourself and think “holy, $*#%, that’s brilliant.” He can also being scathingly funny, like on “Stevie Nix,” when he sings:

She said you remind me of Rod Stewart when he was young
You’ve got passion, you think you’re sexy, and all the punks think you’re dumb

He drops something that great into every song, but it takes a while to hear them. Sometimes it’s like doing the New York Times crossword puzzle. You look at the clue to 68 across (“Bow over?”) twenty-three times before you realize that you’re looking for “retie” and you think “jeebus, it was right there in front of me all the time.”

But Finn is more than just clever and funny. He’s also blindingly brilliant in his vivid depiction of the characters that populate The Hold Steady’s records. Is there anyone working today who can top this?:

Your little hoodrat friend has been calling me again
And I can’t stand all the things that she sticks into her skin
Like sharpened ballpoint pins and steel guitar strings
She says it hurts but it’s worth it

Tiny little text etched into her neck
It says “Jesus lived and died for all your sins”
She’s got blue-black ink and it’s scratched into her lower back
Says “Damn right He’ll rise again!”

I’ll end there because I can’t possibly top that.

I guess I'm pretty behind on new artists. I haven't gotten too in-depth with many of the ones you mentioned. Here are some random thoughts...

-- I saw Lily Allen on SNL, and she was pretty good. She falls into that 'quirky female singer-songwriter' category, which is fine as long as you're good at it. Meanwhile, I absolutely LOVE Amy Winehouse's single, "You Know I'm No Good." Got it as the 'free single of the week' at iTunes a while back and heard it on the local adult-alternative station here in Como the other day. Great stuff. That type of music--where you can hear R&B and rock and everything in between--is exactly where I want music to go, and I'll probably end up with her album pretty soon. Can't say I'm all too impressed with the whole "screw rehab--I love being a drunk" attitude, but hey...good music covers up a lot of faults, sadly enough.

I too am quite interested in the new Modest Mouse lineup. Loved their last album, even after I'd heard "Float On" on the radio for the 657th time. Meanwhile, the other new release I'm really looking forward to, which is QUITE off the beaten path, is the Brother Ali release coming out in a few weeks. Normally when you describe someone as an "albino rapper from Minnesota", one would think you were talking about some funny novelty act, but Brother Ali is one of the most talented, charismatic (and totally serious) rappers around. He represents all that hip hop is supposed to be--he has his own style, he talks about the pain and events of his own life instead of creating some false persona, and he's honed his craft over the long haul. However, I'm thinking I lost a lot of people with the "albino rapper from Minnesota" thing, so I'll stop there!

Anyway, any last words for the smart, witty, and adoring Good Nonsense audience?

Actually, I think Lily Allen falls into the “cheeky British bird intent on dominating the globe” category. She’s so fresh and funny (“oh my gosh you must be joking me/if you think that you’ll be poking me”) and charismatic. I doubt that she’ll ever be as massive on this side of the pond as at home, but I wouldn’t mind if she were. I also appreciate that she’s a pioneer of The New Way of Doing Business. She put her demos up on myspace and found a public waiting to devour them. And she has taken all the right influences – the Specials, the Streets, Kirsty MacColl, the Slits – and digested and used them in a way that’s not the least bit derivative. As for Winehouse’s “Rehab,” I have the same queasy reaction (let’s just say I’ve had some ugly, real world family history), but it wouldn’t be the first time a great tune triumphed despite a questionable point of view.

I’ll look forward to hearing Brother Ali. I wish there was more contemporary hip hop that I loved on a gut level rather than simply admiring on an intellectual level. I liked J Dilla’s Donuts disc that came out last year, but that seems to be in an entirely separate category (like DJ Shadow or the Avalanches), and I understood the critical huzzahs draped on Ghostface Killah’s Fishscale but, honestly, I can feel assaulted and dehumanized by the violence (in theme and delivery) of it. And can we put an end to the between-song skits? Does anyone enjoy these things? If so, please explain.

I still love hearing a great hip hop single on the radio, but it has been a long time since I’ve been taken with an album the way I was with The Low End Theory or The Score.

It’s been a pleasure doing business with Good Nonsense. Let’s do it again some time.

Actually, one more thing: Aaron Sorkin is writing a musical with the Flaming Lips. Good? Great? Apocolyptically bad? Oh, and here's Brother Ali's myspace page...the bio's pretty gutwrenching.

I sampled a little of Brother Ali. I’m predisposed to like fluid beats like his. I’ll have to spend some time with it.

As for Sorkin and the Lips, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that they’ll do something brilliant. I’ll reserve judgment.

Sounds good to me. Thanks for taking part. Next time you're in Columbia, I'll burn you a "Why it's okay to like DMB" disc!

Read More...

Summary only...

Studio 60 on the Sorkin Strip

Okay, let’s admit it’s a failure. “Studio 60 on the Sorkin Strip.” I made clear early on that I was on the side of this show, at least its first year, solely on the basis of the first year of “Sports Night” and “West Wing.” But I also made the point that, by the second year, the gifted child that is Aaron Sorkin, flitting and fluttering about, would start to wear. I was wrong. It started by the second show. And it’s because NBC has indulged an ego that has finally gone straight over the top. We’ve suffered through the frictionless, fictionalized Aaron’s Romance with Kristin for far too long (pray to God, it wasn’t really this vacuous and passionless or they never would have lasted . . . oh). Now we’re about to be treated to Aaron’s Battle with Drugs. No, please, no. Aaron, you’re just not as interesting as your mirror keeps telling you. You had the makings of a great show with that cast and premise, and some of the characters and plots have been inspired. It could have been a champion. But it’s not. And it never will be so spare us the drugs and the false tragedy. Let it be over.

It’s time to pull the plug.

Read More...

Summary only...

Random Entertainment Notes

We’ll do it in berlin niebuhr-esque bullets...

• Isaiah Washington goes to rehab for...using offensive words. Didn’t know Slur Rehab existed.
  
  
• A very healthy return for Veronica Mars this week. The previous episode (which aired, like, 2 months ago) was the best of the season, and this was probably a close second. Do not underestimate the strong contribution the Mac character (Tina Majorino) makes to this show. This was easily the most amusing episode of the season, and it’s not a coincidence that she had more of a role in this episode than the rest of the season combined to this point. Her deadpan humor and social awkwardness go right in line with Veronica’s, but when one of Veronica’s fake personas gets them into awkward situations while ‘on the case’, Mac’s honest reactions to these situations (like the thought of posing nude for an anti-fur calendar) are a fantastic contrast to Veronica’s.
  
  They decided to stretch out the “Logan + Veronica” thing for at least one more week, which was both exciting and disappointing. It further reaffirmed that they care about each other to an insane degree, which is nice, and their chemistry is quite strong after a season and a half of this, but it just delays the inevitable breakup (though according to the previews for next week, it might not have delayed it very long).
  
  
• While I’m loving VM again, I still don’t really know what to do with Studio 60. Monday’s was one of the best episodes of the season, and it was still almost every bit as frustrating as it was enjoyable.
  
  Good: All of Steven Weber’s scenes. He’s great. The boardroom scene with Ed Asner was quite good (other than the shaky plot device of having the newspaper on the table, pointing the way to Mr. Macao), and I'm actually really liking the "soldier curses on live TV" plotline. The “man to man” conversation with Mr. Macao.
  
  Good: Amanda Peet and Bradley Whitford continue to have great chemistry.
  
  Bad: The stalker-esque moves Whitford’s Danny took toward winning over Peet’s Jordan was, in a word, creepy. In two words, horribly creepy. I was actually glad when those attempts didn’t actually win her over because that would have been unrealistic and lazy.
  
  Good: The two new writers (Lucy and Darius) have been very good for Studio 60 as a whole. Two very good characters.
  
  Good: No horrible skits to watch in this week’s episode.
  
  Bad: Two horrible skits (Militant Fruit of the Loom and Husky Gymnast? Are you kidding me?) were still prominent, though they were only discussed and not actually shown. Either way, ugh.
  
  Good: The chemistry between Matthew Perry and Sarah Paulsen continues to improve.
  
  Bad: Their relationship continues to be completely stagnant and unrealistic (though bonus points go to Paulsen’s character for basically telling Matt to poop or get off the pot).
  
  I guess two steps forward and one step back is still a net gain, though. Bottom line is, I will continue to watch, I will continue to be encouraged by the strong aspects of the show, and I will continue to grow tired and frustrated by the weak aspects. I sure am showing some strong will there, aren’t I?

Read More...

Summary only...

This and That

Headline of the Day I: "Bonds: McGwire, Rose belong in Hall of Fame". Really, do you need any better reason for those two never to be put in the Hall? But, if the Man with the Blow-Up Head wants them in a Hall, how about the A--hole Cheater HOF? But, you Barry, you'll get my first vote. And Clemens will get my second. . . . Headline of the Day II: "Winning A Nobel Prize Adds Nearly 2 Years To Your Lifespan, New Research Says". Steve Martin used to talk about how to become a millionaire. First, get a million dollars. . . . One of the hallmarks of classiness in people is how well they can turn what might be insulting or embarrassing into something good, for themselves and others. Here, find out how Kevin Bacon is doing something cool and charitable with the whole "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" thing. And see who he got the idea from. Thank you, Kevin, can we have another? . . . And finally, here's a piece on "Studio 60," indicating that the cigarette lighter has gone off over Sorkin's head. Less "inside" stuff and "sketches" and more romance, Bradley and Amanda, Matthew and Sara. The problem here, of course, is that his romances are just like the rest of what he does, amusing, well done, and zigging/zagging here and there and too often just getting silly. Still, it will be nice to see first parts for a while. Whitford and Peet definitely have chemistry and could go somewhere. Maybe as much chem as Whitford and Perry, but that "going somewhere," while possibly amusing, would pretty much finish the series off. Not that there's anything wrong with that. (Oh, c'mon, like you couldn't see that line coming.)

Read More...

Summary only...

The Best Case for Euthanasia

Okay, with our thanks given, let's talk murder. Or, really, just mercy killing. After Monday's "Studio 60," it's right and proper that we kill Harriet Hayes. Not Sarah Paulson. I like her. Her character. The dull, uninteresting, air-sucking, show-killing character. She's not believable and her storylines take too much of the show for no good purpose. Kristin Chenoweth is a mildly interesting third-tier performer, but a send-up of her travails isn't interesting enough to make her interesting, much less someone playing her.

We get it. Life's hard for a Christian in Hollywood. Pressures to be heathen are everywhere. But Pat Robertson, gay marriage, hot Christian lingerie shoots? It's . . . not . . . working. And her romance with Matthew Perry's character? Show of hands from everyone who really wants to see them together. . . .

Okay, then. Kill her. Car wreck, vengeful lunatic, stage light on her head in the middle of a performance, I don't care. The stories that could come off of any possible demise will be infinitely better than the ones they've had and the ones down the path they're on. Paulson will get points for being such a trooper through this mess, the suction on the show will end, and maybe we can get to something worth of "Sports Night"'s successor after all before the plug is pulled on the show. Please. I mean it. Kill her.

Talk about giving thanks . . . .

Read More...

Summary only...

Aaron Sorkin's next show...

Ken Levine has an exclusive excerpt from Aaron Sorkin's next show (via LG&M)! I really do want to like Studio 60, and I continue to watch it, but it's unbelievably frustrating. The characters are mostly good, and about 70% of the dialogue is very entertaining, but the plots and the other 30% of the dialogue are horribly forced (the ongoing debate about gay marriage sprinkled throughout last week's episode was completely and totally out of place). And, as has been documented many times in many places, the skits are awful. Cheeses of Nazareth? Ugh. I do remember that there were moments square-peg-round-hole dialogue in Season 1 of West Wing, and I realize that sometimes that's necessary for character development. And I realize that there's a chance this show hits its rhythm once the characters are fully established and the show pretty much writes itself (like at least the last half of WW season 1 and most of the next 2-3 seasons). But...hurry up already. I keep defending this show against the complaints of The Butterfly, and it gets harder to do so every week.

And another thing...you're talking about a late-night comedy show, and the only references to drugs or out-of-control behavior are in-passing dialogue? No plots based on this? Come on.

Read More...

Summary only...

Deep Thoughts from TV Squad

I like TV Squad's site, usually for its episode summaries but also for quick hits like these. Here, they note how well Lauren Graham did in her cameos on "Studio 60." She really did bring some chem to her scene with Danny and Matt, and she would definitely do Sorkin right. (That didn't come out the way I meant.) TVS speculates how much better she might have done with Sarah Paulson's role, but Sorkin clearly sees that character as angelic. Graham inspires many things but not "angelic." Still, it would be interesting to see her again when her current show finally succumbs to the rigor mortis (if "Studio 60" doesn't beat it to it). . . . And, here, the original author of "Friday Night Lights" offers a learned and deeply thoughtful commentary on his competitor, "Dancing with the Stars," and its viewing audience: "American is getting what it deserves--crappy, stupid artificial reality TV . . . it's distressing that so many people are flocking to a show that's obviously contrived and ridiculous." He didn't notice this until his series started getting whomped? But, uh, . . . ditto.

Read More...

Summary only...

Time to Retire

Okay, that's it. "Studio 60" just seems old to me, rehashed plots and characters from Sorkin's mental reportory company of a dozen or so. Last night they introduced their combo Jeremy ("Sports Night")/Charlie ("West Wing") character and tried for the "hallowed vet/wronged writer" hook (and failed). They also did the standard Sorkin "my father doesn't appreciate how talented I am but I still love him" secondary story. The only time the show has energy is when Steven Weber is on the screen. They said Gary Larson decided to stop doing "The Far Side" because people could start seeing how he was doing it. We're seeing how Sorkin does it, like those sentence games where they give you dice with nouns, verbs, and adjectives and have you roll out sentences. He's got about 5 of each type and the sentences are getting familiar. As I said in an earlier post, it's like watching "Ghostbusters II," entertaining but you've seen it before. Unless/until that changes, I don't think it will survive this season.

Speaking of forced retirements, noticed where the Cowboys finally benched Drew Bledsoe. This is a guy whose name is in the same record lists as Unitas, Namath, Fouts, and Marino. Notice any similarity? All were statues in the pocket (so is Manning, really, the Peyton one). The difference? Their teams protected them and gave them good, smart receivers (Berry, Maynard, et al.). Dallas has a chorus girl front line and receivers who improvise (T.O.) or don't adjust their patterns when the O-line is crumbling like crepe paper. I've seen 3 Bledsoe interceptions this year, all due to badly run routes, yet no one calls for receivers to be replaced. Well, now the idiot throng has gotten their QB of choice and maybe he'll be a dream come true. Or maybe he'll be J.P. Losman. But Bledsoe was treated by Dallas like a prize race horse pulling rickshaws and deserved better at the end of his career. I don't care if he's pissed and not taking it well. He shouldn't. Rabid football fans and owners are among the most mentally and socially retarded people on the planet, and Dallas leads the league in both (even with the Redskins in the league). Don't worry, Drew. You did what you could with what was given you and it was fine.

Maybe Sorkin could do a series on you and save both reputations.

Read More...

Summary only...

Maybe Not Even "Sports Night"

"Sports Night" managed two seasons. Will "Studio 60"? (Really should have thought that Sarah Paulson character through, Aaron.)

Read More...

Summary only...