June 27th, 2012
Galley Friend Mike Russell passes along this very funny / kind of damning clip-job on Aaron Sorkin’s self-plagiarism(s). Worth your 7 minutes.
That said, I kind of love Sorkin’s work. Most of the criticisms of Sorkin qua a writer are valid. And yet, his voice is so distinctive and strong that, for me, it’s kind of hard not to love. For me, anyway, though I tend to enjoy strong authorial voices in my TV writing (see Amy Sherman-Palladino, Joss Whedon, etc.)
My enjoyment of Sorkin’s work may be aided by the fact that I’ve never paid much attention to his off-screen self.
-
Self-imitation is the sincerest form of self-flattery.
Like all good liberals, Sorkin always recycles.
-
I find some of that supercut pretty silly, in the sense that most of it is language that everyone uses. “Not for nothing” is a pretty common phrase, even in just everyday language.
-
My enduring love for Sorkin stems from Sports Night. I loved that show, and own it on DVD. I even manage to think endearingly of his repeated plot lines — which are legion — as “call backs.”
But after Bush-Gore, he kind of lost the ability to portray the other side of an argument. What made the show interesting was that all the main characters were Democrats, but the Republicans were portrayed as a party with different (and equally valid) ideas about what’s good for the country. After Bush-Gore, Republicans were portrayed as Iago. And that’s boring. There’s no tension if the only two choices are good and stupid/evil. And why would half the country watch your show if they’re constantly bombarded with how stupid/evil they are?
I mean, I really wanted to like Studio 60, but that show featured a story about how there was this strange Christian girl who wasn’t totally engrossed in her hatred of liberals. None of the other characters could wrap their heads around how strange it was, and how totally unlike all the other Christians out there. I couldn’t wrap my head around the fact that Sorkin had apparently never met a Christian.
I still want to like Newsroom. But I’m worried that Sorkin is lost in some echo chamber of liberal ideas. He’s started mistaking bumper stickers for objective fact. And that’s just not as interesting. He needs a smart Republican friend. Stat.
-
Sorkin dated Kristin Chenoweth in 2006, right when the show was on. She was (still is) a nice Christian girl who didn’t hate liberals. (Heck, she dated Sorkin.)
-
You have to give Sorkin credit for making “Moneyball” into a good movie. The degree of difficulty bonuses for “Moneyball” and “The Social Network” are huge.
-
Such a skinny Alec Baldwin, though.
-
I watched the season finale last night and I’m so confused. On the one hand, I love Sorkin’s dialogue and pacing. Unabashedly. But his politics are becoming more and more outlandish.
I mean, the “news” portion started with Will MacAvoy talking about how the Tea Party would label him a RINO. But he’s not the RINO. The Tea Party are the RINOs. MacAvoy apparently misses the irony, because he has claimed to be a registered Republican several times, but he has never once — not in the entire season — agreed with anything any Republican has ever said, nor has he done anything but attack Republican positions. That is not an exaggeration.
And then the “news” portion closed with MacAvoy calling the Tea Party the “American Taliban.” And this was supposed to be the cheer line. The line that brings the audience up out of its seat.
I love Sorkin’s writing. I really do. But his politics are actually starting to undercut his characters. If he can’t find one single issue on which his “Republican” character acts or thinks like a Republican, then his character looks either dishonest or stupid.
Someone needs to talk to Sorkin. Please. I’m begging here.
SkinsFanPG June 27, 2012 at 3:50 pm
I can’t stand Sorkin, except for The Social Network, that was a great movie.
What I respect about Sorkin is that he readily acknowledges that he knows basically nothing about politics or policy. He has consultants explain to explain the basics, but he acknowledges that he couldn’t debate the finer points of just about any issue. He’s a liberal, but not a high-minded liberal, and he is fine with that.
He’s not Damon or Affleck demanding Karl Rove be tried for treason for outing Valerie Plame (oops on that one guys), he’s basically just a guy with a worldview of: gov is well-intentioned and good, smart elites should make decisions for the masses, the average middle-class person doesn’t know what is good for them.