I have this thing I do on social media. If I'm watching something, and someone says something funny or interesting, I'll quote it online. People get extra points if they figure out what it's from. Extra points for what? I don't know, exactly. Just for being cool, I guess?
I haven't done that in a while because I've been watching The West Wing. An unusual choice for me, I know, but I have weird tastes. What drew me to the show is that it's about a US presidency. What's it like to be on the inside of something like that? But the thing is, when someone says something funny or interesting on this show, there's usually a bunch of background that makes the statement funny. If I explained the quotes, then they wouldn't be quite so interesting. And a joke that needs to be explained is never funny.
It's a good show. A bit of a time capsule, though. I found it odd that they didn't do anything with 9/11 when it happened, but maybe it would have been too raw at the time. The thing I found the most off-putting, though, is that while it's good, its entirely disposable. Anything the show had to say about, say, power for example was said about specific fictional situations and really had nothing to do with real life applications. It didn't really give you something to think about, and it wasn't a very timeless show.
There is one time it asked a question I was interested in knowing the answer to. Leo McGarry is the chief of staff, and it turns out he's an alcoholic. An even bigger surprise is when the VP turns out to be an alcoholic, too. They go to meetings together. But is national security more important than the "anonymous" part of AA? As an alcoholic, my immediate response is to say no, it doesn't. But that's defensive, and I'm not even in AA. When I thought more about it, I think national security *is* more important. In the specific case mentioned on the show? Not so much. But in general, I think maybe the country would need to know if one of their leaders is an alcoholic.
One thing I can say for the show is that it constantly changed. It was not the same show it was when it started. One of the regulars was found guilty of, essentially, treason. Other regulars changed their roles, like the press secretary going on to be the chief of staff after McGarry has a heart attack that sidelines him. And then the actor who played McGarry had a real life heart attack and died. I know that wasn't part of the show's plan, especially since he was running as VP to Jimmy Smits in the final season, but it certainly changed the show.
One thing I wish they didn't do was consummate Josh and Donna's relationship. It is possible for a man to just be friends with a woman. In fact, it happens a lot more often than TV would have you believe. Everyone talks about how Josh and Donna have to be fucking, but for six of seven seasons they weren't. They were professional, and they had a platonic relationship. It's something that's not depicted enough on TV. I feel like this might have been a studio note, to have them kiss in a moment of celebration, and to have that kiss evolve into an actual romantic relationship. It felt forced, like all studio notes do.
I don't think watching the show was a waste of time. I enjoyed myself. I just don't think it's going to stick to the ribs like, say, Supernatural for example.
OK, now its time to watch something more my speed. I just started Guy Ritchie's The Gentlemen on Netflix last night. So far, so good.
No comments:
Post a Comment