|
Post by otherscott on Apr 30, 2018 14:41:51 GMT -8
"In The Shadow of Two Gunman - Part 1"
Tremendous episode. Maybe better than anything they did in Season 1. It was just skillful how they interwove the character plots in this, between making Hoynes a major character in this episode and connecting that with his attempt to run for presidency and how Josh drifted away from his campaign, to that great scene with Leo and Bartlet in the flashback at the end of that meeting in Nasau and connecting that to Toby's origins on the campaign.
I was actually kind of worried going into this episode that things were going to become overdramatic which is not in the wheelhouse of the show at all, and they really did a good job putting a lighter touch on it and really grounding and deepening some of the characters in ways that made a lot of sense for the episode.
Just really impressed, will be back talking about Part 2 later tonight.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on Apr 30, 2018 14:49:28 GMT -8
Jeremy can you move this to the West Wing section of the forum? I momentarily completely forgot there was a separate forum for The West Wing.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Apr 30, 2018 16:24:52 GMT -8
Yep, it's a great episode, and still one of the best season premieres ever. I think you're going to like this season a lot.
Also, thread moved.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on Apr 30, 2018 20:08:14 GMT -8
"In The Shadow of Two Gunmen- Part 2"
Ah, nothing to temper my enthusiasm for the second season after building it up by starting the episode with a very bad Sam flashback scene and then follow it up with the return of clumsy CJ. It also didn't feel like the flashbacks interwove themselves quite as well, and didn't really shine a light on the characters featured in the same way the previous episode did for Leo, Josh and Toby. I also thought the 10 second gun control commentary was a little clumsy and either should have been fleshed out more or avoided entirely.
That said, terrific Bartlet-Josh material at the end both in flashbacks then in the present sequence. Just a little bit of a disappointment that the episode didn't continue to build a little bit more for me after having such a great jumping off type. Also disappointing they didn't have Sam join Mandy in the time-space continuum vortex she got sucked into at the moment the shooting happened.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 2, 2018 19:23:52 GMT -8
"The Midterms"
Really a terrific walk and talk sequence pre-credits. The psychic/ physicist gag was one of the few times I've laughed out loud on this show, even though it was admittedly hokey it still worked.
After that they just kept walking and talking to the point of parody though. I really thought it was going to be the gimmick of the episode that every scene featured some sort of walk and talk, but it sort of settled down in the second half.
Overall it was a pretty solid episode. It was a little bit unfocussed from a thematic perspective, it was really trying to cover too many things at once. I think if it stuck to the psychology of the staffers out of the shooting and kind of expanded the Toby storyline which was by far the best one and really made the episode, it would have been more successful overall. Still, the episode was good. Despite the overabundance of walking and talking, it was good.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 3, 2018 4:26:13 GMT -8
Interesting that you'd make note of an overabundance of walk-and-talks in this episode, seeing as it was directed by Alex Graves, whose episodes are not usually known for sweeping hallway conversations. But I suppose Thomas Schlamme's artistic stamp can be witnessed all over the series, even when he's not behind the camera.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 3, 2018 5:50:43 GMT -8
To me I think it was much more a writing decision than a directing one, at least that's my theory on it. Especially the opening scene with CJ, the main purposes of the scene really seem to be a) to tell us the status of Josh and b) the quick dialogue, characters fading in and out, traditional walk and talk nature of it - which would be carried throughout the episode.
If I had to guess they were really going for a theme where the characters were too busy to deal with their own personal demons regarding the shooting, and nothing shows how busy people are like having to have conversations in the hallway on the way somewhere else. And then the second half of the episode slows things down to really deal with the emotional heft the whole situation had taken on them.
That combined with your analysis of power and that being a driving frustration for these characters, I'm actually really excited to see the places where this season goes.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 3, 2018 6:21:57 GMT -8
It's a fallout episode, no question, and it pales in comparison to the two-part premiere. But I appreciate its necessity to the ongoing story, particularly once you see how Season Two builds upon itself as it goes along.
(Also, I expect you're not going to love the next episode, but it's one of only a few bumps in S2's road.)
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 3, 2018 18:20:43 GMT -8
"This White House"
You thought I'd be against an episode where Sam gets utterly steamrolled in a debate, Jeremy? Remember who's watching this.
Actually I didn't think this was a mis-step at all. I mean it's not going to end up on a list of best episodes anytime soon, but that's more because it's a table setter for introducing Ainslie than anything else. And I really enjoyed Ainslie in this one - it's nice that they allowed her to argue point for point in that scene in Leo's office, for instance. That was definitely not seen or heard from in either Season 1 and DEFINITELY not The Newsroom. I also LIKE the optimism that bipartisanism is possible in areas where both parties should have the same goal, such as protecting the life and well-being of the president of this (non-existant?) African country.
So yeah, it was a fine episode. Interesting to see the issues Jeremy had with it when I read the review.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 3, 2018 20:04:45 GMT -8
"And It's Surely To Their Credit"
Well...that episode turned ugly quickly. The West Wing has a tendency to deal with women in a bit of a patronizing matter, and it looked for a second like this episode wasn't going to do that. It was going to let Ainslie stand for herself and then give CJ a great scene where she shows up a general marshall.
Well.............................then knight in shining armor Sam Seaborn comes and fires some sexist jerks to restore Ainslie's honour and Bartlet overrules CJ on the general and we're back to our patronizing square one. It wasn't great.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 4, 2018 5:35:51 GMT -8
Actually I didn't think this was a mis-step at all. I mean it's not going to end up on a list of best episodes anytime soon, but that's more because it's a table setter for introducing Ainslie than anything else. And I really enjoyed Ainslie in this one - it's nice that they allowed her to argue point for point in that scene in Leo's office, for instance. That was definitely not seen or heard from in either Season 1 and DEFINITELY not The Newsroom.Well, that's not saying much. There are entire seasons of Friends that are more bipartisan than a single episode of The Newsroom. But, fair enough. I've noticed that plenty of people seem to have more problems with the season's fifth episode than its fourth. I get that, but the fifth episode ends with Gilbert and Sullivan, so I can't bring myself to truly dislike it.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 4, 2018 6:12:00 GMT -8
Well, that's not saying much. There are entire seasons of Friends that are more bipartisan than a single episode of The Newsroom. But Jeremy, you don't understand. Jeff Daniels character in The Newsroom is a Republican. That show is therefore bipartisan in its very nature!
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 4, 2018 6:42:12 GMT -8
I think the scene in the Season Two finale where Will McAvoy explains why he's "technically a Republican" may be the most painfully awful monologue that Aaron Sorkin has ever written. And the fact that he's explaining it to a conservative woman only makes it worse.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on May 5, 2018 9:24:43 GMT -8
"The Lame Duck Congress"
That episode was not the most enthralling The West Wing has ever had to offer. One thing I will give the show credit for, as it was mostly noticeable in this episode where it didn't do it as well which kind of brought attention to how well it usually handles it, is being able to avoid getting into complicated political discussions that really can't be accurately conveyed within the course of an episode. For the most part I didn't really understand the impact of this nuclear treaty ratification they were trying to call a lame duck congress to pass, but considering how often they deal with this sort of stuff and the frequency in which this sort of lack of understanding the impact happens, that's a pretty impressive ratio.
I'm a little worried about Ainsley Hayes. I think she's in danger of being "Will McAvoy'd" - which is to say basically become a Republican in name but not actually continue to have any Republican opinions because Sorkin doesn't believe any intelligent person would.
Anyway, episode was okay, not anything to write home about.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on May 5, 2018 10:40:15 GMT -8
"In The Shadow of Two Gunmen- Part 2" Ah, nothing to temper my enthusiasm for the second season after building it up by starting the episode with a very bad Sam flashback scene and then follow it up with the return of clumsy CJ. It also didn't feel like the flashbacks interwove themselves quite as well, and didn't really shine a light on the characters featured in the same way the previous episode did for Leo, Josh and Toby. I also thought the 10 second gun control commentary was a little clumsy and either should have been fleshed out more or avoided entirely. That said, terrific Bartlet-Josh material at the end both in flashbacks then in the present sequence. Just a little bit of a disappointment that the episode didn't continue to build a little bit more for me after having such a great jumping off type. Also disappointing they didn't have Sam join Mandy in the time-space continuum vortex she got sucked into at the moment the shooting happened. I think Jeremy nailed the problem with Part II: "Whereas Part I gave us backstories for the male staffers, Part II provides us with info pertaining to the women." And, uh, Donna still isn't quite there on her own merits, nor is Abbey. I don't think she ever really fully gets there until the Wells years, the occasional "Dead Irish Writers" aside.
|
|