MovieChat Forums > Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip (2006) Discussion > Did anyone watch Studio 60 BEFORE they w...

Did anyone watch Studio 60 BEFORE they watched the West Wing


I saw West Wing first, and then I moved on to Studio 60 and I personally feel that as a result I finished up liking Studio 60 a lot less than I would normally have.

Studio 60, has all the right ingredients, lovable characters, good and engrossing central conflicts, and intelligent and witty dialogues. However, because I was switching over from West Wing to Studio 60, the former of which deals with the inner workings of the white house, to the latter which is essentially not even about the inner working of a comedy sketch show, but rather about the lives of the people who are involved with a comedy sketch show. Sure at times the show has to deal with the inner workings of the show, but its not exactly aiming to take us behind the scenes, much like the West Wing did, and to go on who is to say to it would have been better had it done so.

So suffice it to say that the subject matter of Studio 60 so dramatically pales in comparison to what the West wing was dealing with, that its hard to feel the same level of ... well ... reverence for Studio 60 that one had for the West Wing.

The second question I must ask is why must I compare West Wing and Studio 60. Infact that comparison seems to flow naturally, and I often ask whether Studio 60 needs to be compared to the West Wing, and why can't it be judged indpendantly. Like for instance, I saw Social Network before I saw the West Wing, but had I not done so, and had I seen the Social Network after I had been introduced to President Bartlet, would I be allowed to compare West Wing and Social Network and say, the former deals with the West Wing, while the latter with the initial years of the formation of facebook, and a behind the scenes look at how it was formed, which though interesting is not exactly the same as a behind the scenes look of the White House. Would I have been making this comparison, and I find I believe that I would have been able to look at the Social Network independently of the West Wing. Secondly even if I did make a comparison facebook is one of THE websites of our times, and so I would most definitely have given the subject more points than the inner workings of a fictitious TV Show. However, I do believe I would be making comparisons between the two.

So why then I ask do we have to make a comparison between the West Wing and Studio 60 and judge them in light of each other? I suppose it is the general narrative style of the shows that are so similar, the way each episode is structured, the overall narrative style for both shows seems so similar, right down to the credits text, which is exactly the same, to the unmissable long conversations that the characters have while walking around in corridors or while walking from Point A to Point B on the sets of Studio 60, to the fact that there are a lot of cast members which are common to both shows.

I therefore feel that as a viewer one is forced to look at the West Wing and Studio 60 in comparison to one another and in doing so because the central topic that West Wing deals with is so much more important than what Studio 60 deals with, the payoff of having seen an episode of the West Wing and learnt a little bit more about the White House, would almost always be greater than having seen an episode of Studio 60.

Thus, I feel that in structuring Studio 60 to be so similar to the West Wing, the creators did a great disservice to Studio 60, as there is no way that a show about a sketch comedy, could payoff the audience more than a show about the white house.

So even though Studio 60 is a show that would/should have gone down as one of the best shows on TV with some excellent characters, it will instead forever be in the shadows of the West Wing.




reply

I did watch Studio 60 before West Wing. In fact i stayed away from West Wing because i thought it would be over my head from the politics side of things. (at the time Studio 60 aired, i really wasn't paying attention to politics) Even when i finally watched West Wing, the politics side did go beyond me, and i spent many episodes googling, what i am sure are, simple terms and concepts. But continued to watch it because the writing of the characters was fantastic. As are the characters in Studio 60, as are (eventually) the characters in Sports Night. (point of interest, i also watched Sports Night before West Wing, since it was also a short series, and i wanted to see if i liked Matthew Perry being dramatic or was i an Aaron Sorkin fan.)

I greatly enjoyed all of the Aaron Sorkin shows. I am very much enjoying Newsroom as well. But comparing WW to S60, i honestly enjoy S60 more. I am fully aware S60 has many faults, ones that show up only in this series as compared to the others. But WW had a problem keeping characters around, consistent, or arcing story lines fully fleshed out. If i recall correctly, Josh had a deep but mostly ended relationship with someone in the 1st season. A budding relationship in 2nd or 3rd, and these ladies quickly get pushed to the background until they disappear. This is a very small example. I loved coming back to Josh and his political antics every episode. But watching them all in a row, i want to know what happened to one person or one story line. It seemed every season, or every half season, whole arcs would change or turn quickly. Generally with little resolve or even mentioned what happened to them.

In S60, the show seemed to focus more on the people in this world, as opposed to a world influencing the people. I could care for the people and their strafes more easily. And my man-crush on Matthew Perry aside (yes, i'm in some weird niche minority) i related to his relationship troubles more than any other relationship trouble between any other Aaron Sorkin characters. My life didn't even mirror anything Matt Perry's character did or was done to him. Just that back and forth of wanting a person and self destructing to deny some semblance of happiness seemed wackily human. (as i only recently learned, loosely based on Aaron Sorkin's once relationship with Kristen Chenoweth)

Again, i don't mean to say WW was bad at character development and stories, but maybe WW was more like a practice run at this one section of writing. I feel all the other Sorkin shows after got this nailed. As for similar delivery of lines and the hallway walking/talking are seemingly style choices for Sorkin. As is his need to put Gilbert and Sullivan references in his shows. And somewhere put in a rendition of "Will you Still Love Me Tomorrow".

Maybe if i was more politically minded, i might have liked WW more. Maybe if i liked sports some, i would have like Sports Night more. But i love sketch comedy, and enjoyed watching "behind the scenes" of that life more. (and i know the show has the weird thing that its about the funniest sketch comedy writers, and all the sketches shown were lukewarm or barely chuckle worthy. I assume if the show kept going, they would have had writers just for the sketch bits. But i did find the comedy of the non sketches pretty entertaining and enjoyable.)

Luckily his writing is very similar in everything he does. So while i am sad all canceled and finished shows are no more, i can enjoy the parallel universe characters in Newsroom ... despite it not having a definitive 'is it coming back' as of yet.

reply

I did! I have yet to dip into the west wing but I grabbed all the dvd sets for $10 and now its only a matter of time really.

The public perception of the Studio 60 is in total agreement with you, but I hope anyone that ever decides to go through Sorkins works will find it worth the time.

Never go up against a Sicilian, when death is on the line!

reply

I haven't watched West Wing, but I loved Studio 60.

reply