West Wing Season 5
Dec. 1st, 2008 03:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakAka the one nobody likes.
With all my tendency to root for the fannish underdog - that would be not the character written as an underdog but those characters, shows, movies or seasons whom fandom ignores or dislikes - I can see why, and if I hadn't had the whole thing on dvd, I might have disliked it, too, waiting week after week or month after month for new episodes. As it is, I don't feel ire (except for one particular retcon, more about that later), but I don't feel the urge to rewatch episodes any time soon, either, except maybe The Supremes. And I do look forward to the new (writing) team finding its feet next season.
The rapidfire style of dialogue that was Sorkin's trademark noticably doesn't come easily to the other writers, but I think that's not really the reason why this season feels odd. For starters, most of the episodes and storylines are rather dark, which btw makes the upbeat cheerful credits music sound disconcertingly wrong. But most importantly, several of the relationships feel harsher. This is not necessarily a bad thing - but had I been the headwriter, I probably wouldn't have chosen to let it happen at the same time. So Leo comes down hard on Josh and CJ. Josh at one point orders Donna to spy on Toby via Toby's new assistant (which she rightly ultimately refuses, but he did order her), and is a complete jerk towards his intern Ryan. Toby has his big fallout with Will. Abbey blames her husband for Zoey's kidnapping and freezes him out for half a season. Amy Gardner seems to be the newest victim of the WW "character gets written out unceremoniously" syndrome (though maybe I'm wrong and she'll be back next season - if it's true, though, I'm really annoyed, both because I like Amy and because I wanted more of her relationship with Abbey Bartlet), though at least she gets given some vague on screen reasons for this. Now, I'd call none of those things ooc, and I can see in each individual case where the characters come from. But as I said - I wouldn't have let it all happen in the same season.
The one thing that did strike me as ooc and a really irritating retcon was the Hoynes episode. Now, Hoynes through four seasons has been presented as ambitious, absolutely, but basically an honorable man (which is one reason why Bartlet when the rest of the team wanted to ditch him pre- reelection wanted him to stay despite them not being friends). He came through for the administration when it counted. And they basically did a Dukat on him. (For non-DS9 watchers: this is what I call making an ambiguous character EVIL (tm) so our heroes can loathe and fight him without any reservations. Tends to come with either sudden outbreaks of lunacy or sexual misdemeanour, or both.) With the suddenly revealed one night stand with CJ a decade ago being the equivalent of Dukat's cult leader impregnating his followers turn. Given that Hoynes and CJ had some none too friendly interaction early in s1, where something like this in all likelihood would have come up, I find this even harder to believe than Hoynes being stupid enough to think a tell-all book would relaunch his career.
On to more fun matters. The new VP being played by Gary Cole is a great bonus, since the two very different roles I've seen him in - as Sheriff Lucas Buck in American Gothic and as Captain Matthew Gideon in Crusade - had endeared him to me as an actor. The conception of the role is also good - making Bob Russell a lightweight nobody at the start takes seriously and thus underestimates as opposed to Hoynes who was a heavy weight and the Democratic champion pre-Bartlet, thus avoiding a doubling of characters. Although the President's willingness to nominate a VP he thinks off as mediocre probably looks worse today than it did then. *bites tongue at parallel in recent campaign* Also, Russell wooing Will away shows an advantage of Sam being replaced as a character. It wouldn't have worked with Sam and his being a devoted Bartlet follower from if not the first, then the second hour. But Will is new to the White House. He has no personal ties to the President, and it's probably news to him that working for the VP equals high treason for most of the White House staff, and certainly for Toby. BTW, loved CJ equalling this with Toby asking Will to be his date at the Prom and being told Will has another date already. Or that Toby intended to move on to higher things. And he does a future to think of, so Will deciding to take Russell up on his offer was completely understandable. In earlier season, he'd probably have been back indignantly and at once when discovering Russell (or his wife) had leaked the oppositional research, but this is when everyone gets a bit less idealistic, and so he decides to stick it out for now. Since this gives us more Gary Cole, I'm all for it.
If we're talking about actors: this was the season of familiar faces. Bob from Heroes! Terry O'Quinn! Jason Isaacs! And zomg Glenn Close! OMG Robert Picardo! And was that Christopher Walken? Much as I love Terry O'Quinn, though, I can't help but notice not one but two recurring black characters were replaced by white characters, which I'm more conscious of now than I would have been a decade ago. Pity. (Except for the part where I always enjoy Terry O'Quinn on my screen, but still.)
Other developments I noticed: CJ seems to have taken over the Jed Bartlet's conscience role a bit from Toby this season. And she finally articulates what would have been my problem had I been watching the show as broadcast, or rather, the reason why I wouldn't have been shipping Josh/Donna back then: "You need something in your life that doesn't revolve around Josh Lyman." Because by working for Josh basically 24/7 and being in increasingly more obvious love with him, Donna really hasn't something else. Incidentally, this is also why I don't ship movieverse Tony/Pepper in Iron Man (the "I have no one else" was a turn-off rather than a turn-on for me), whereas I think comicverse Tony/Pepper might work now (because at this point, she has a happy - no bad pun intended - marriage behind her, they have plenty of alternatives, and a lot of other important relationships in their lives).
Individual episodes: the fake documentary was okay, but nothing special - I'm used to experimental episodes being something like what Joss Whedon pulled off with Hugh, Restless or Once More With Feeling - but I did love The Supremes, and not just because of the guest stars. It was a great mixture of idealism and realism, and the guest stars interacted beautifully with the regular crowd and it build on earlier episodes. The other episode that I bet was controversial but which sticks in my mind and I thought was really well-written was Gaza. I was a bit afraid of this very messy subject being tackled in a black and white way, but I thought the script pulled it off, allowing both Israelis and Palestinians to make their case.
What struck me about the finale: as opposed to the s3 finale - where Jed Bartlet giving the order for the secret assassination was what the storyline had led him to - here the crucial challenge he rises to is NOT to give the order for a bombardment, despite public feeling but with the awareness of the consequences to the entire world if followed "bomb the hell out of them" urgings. Can't help but wonder whether this was meant as a deliberate contrast to Bush at the time.
In case I didn't mention it before: I approve of Debbie. And Lily Tomlin in the role.
Lastly: at one point I thought "what a pity Leo isn't a woman, then he and Abbey would have passed the Blechdel test" - because as opposed to how fanfiction would have done it when they were locked up in a room together, they didn't talk about the mutual man in their lives and their respective relationships with him, or had angry arguments about who is closer, but talked about Abbey and her career.
With all my tendency to root for the fannish underdog - that would be not the character written as an underdog but those characters, shows, movies or seasons whom fandom ignores or dislikes - I can see why, and if I hadn't had the whole thing on dvd, I might have disliked it, too, waiting week after week or month after month for new episodes. As it is, I don't feel ire (except for one particular retcon, more about that later), but I don't feel the urge to rewatch episodes any time soon, either, except maybe The Supremes. And I do look forward to the new (writing) team finding its feet next season.
The rapidfire style of dialogue that was Sorkin's trademark noticably doesn't come easily to the other writers, but I think that's not really the reason why this season feels odd. For starters, most of the episodes and storylines are rather dark, which btw makes the upbeat cheerful credits music sound disconcertingly wrong. But most importantly, several of the relationships feel harsher. This is not necessarily a bad thing - but had I been the headwriter, I probably wouldn't have chosen to let it happen at the same time. So Leo comes down hard on Josh and CJ. Josh at one point orders Donna to spy on Toby via Toby's new assistant (which she rightly ultimately refuses, but he did order her), and is a complete jerk towards his intern Ryan. Toby has his big fallout with Will. Abbey blames her husband for Zoey's kidnapping and freezes him out for half a season. Amy Gardner seems to be the newest victim of the WW "character gets written out unceremoniously" syndrome (though maybe I'm wrong and she'll be back next season - if it's true, though, I'm really annoyed, both because I like Amy and because I wanted more of her relationship with Abbey Bartlet), though at least she gets given some vague on screen reasons for this. Now, I'd call none of those things ooc, and I can see in each individual case where the characters come from. But as I said - I wouldn't have let it all happen in the same season.
The one thing that did strike me as ooc and a really irritating retcon was the Hoynes episode. Now, Hoynes through four seasons has been presented as ambitious, absolutely, but basically an honorable man (which is one reason why Bartlet when the rest of the team wanted to ditch him pre- reelection wanted him to stay despite them not being friends). He came through for the administration when it counted. And they basically did a Dukat on him. (For non-DS9 watchers: this is what I call making an ambiguous character EVIL (tm) so our heroes can loathe and fight him without any reservations. Tends to come with either sudden outbreaks of lunacy or sexual misdemeanour, or both.) With the suddenly revealed one night stand with CJ a decade ago being the equivalent of Dukat's cult leader impregnating his followers turn. Given that Hoynes and CJ had some none too friendly interaction early in s1, where something like this in all likelihood would have come up, I find this even harder to believe than Hoynes being stupid enough to think a tell-all book would relaunch his career.
On to more fun matters. The new VP being played by Gary Cole is a great bonus, since the two very different roles I've seen him in - as Sheriff Lucas Buck in American Gothic and as Captain Matthew Gideon in Crusade - had endeared him to me as an actor. The conception of the role is also good - making Bob Russell a lightweight nobody at the start takes seriously and thus underestimates as opposed to Hoynes who was a heavy weight and the Democratic champion pre-Bartlet, thus avoiding a doubling of characters. Although the President's willingness to nominate a VP he thinks off as mediocre probably looks worse today than it did then. *bites tongue at parallel in recent campaign* Also, Russell wooing Will away shows an advantage of Sam being replaced as a character. It wouldn't have worked with Sam and his being a devoted Bartlet follower from if not the first, then the second hour. But Will is new to the White House. He has no personal ties to the President, and it's probably news to him that working for the VP equals high treason for most of the White House staff, and certainly for Toby. BTW, loved CJ equalling this with Toby asking Will to be his date at the Prom and being told Will has another date already. Or that Toby intended to move on to higher things. And he does a future to think of, so Will deciding to take Russell up on his offer was completely understandable. In earlier season, he'd probably have been back indignantly and at once when discovering Russell (or his wife) had leaked the oppositional research, but this is when everyone gets a bit less idealistic, and so he decides to stick it out for now. Since this gives us more Gary Cole, I'm all for it.
If we're talking about actors: this was the season of familiar faces. Bob from Heroes! Terry O'Quinn! Jason Isaacs! And zomg Glenn Close! OMG Robert Picardo! And was that Christopher Walken? Much as I love Terry O'Quinn, though, I can't help but notice not one but two recurring black characters were replaced by white characters, which I'm more conscious of now than I would have been a decade ago. Pity. (Except for the part where I always enjoy Terry O'Quinn on my screen, but still.)
Other developments I noticed: CJ seems to have taken over the Jed Bartlet's conscience role a bit from Toby this season. And she finally articulates what would have been my problem had I been watching the show as broadcast, or rather, the reason why I wouldn't have been shipping Josh/Donna back then: "You need something in your life that doesn't revolve around Josh Lyman." Because by working for Josh basically 24/7 and being in increasingly more obvious love with him, Donna really hasn't something else. Incidentally, this is also why I don't ship movieverse Tony/Pepper in Iron Man (the "I have no one else" was a turn-off rather than a turn-on for me), whereas I think comicverse Tony/Pepper might work now (because at this point, she has a happy - no bad pun intended - marriage behind her, they have plenty of alternatives, and a lot of other important relationships in their lives).
Individual episodes: the fake documentary was okay, but nothing special - I'm used to experimental episodes being something like what Joss Whedon pulled off with Hugh, Restless or Once More With Feeling - but I did love The Supremes, and not just because of the guest stars. It was a great mixture of idealism and realism, and the guest stars interacted beautifully with the regular crowd and it build on earlier episodes. The other episode that I bet was controversial but which sticks in my mind and I thought was really well-written was Gaza. I was a bit afraid of this very messy subject being tackled in a black and white way, but I thought the script pulled it off, allowing both Israelis and Palestinians to make their case.
What struck me about the finale: as opposed to the s3 finale - where Jed Bartlet giving the order for the secret assassination was what the storyline had led him to - here the crucial challenge he rises to is NOT to give the order for a bombardment, despite public feeling but with the awareness of the consequences to the entire world if followed "bomb the hell out of them" urgings. Can't help but wonder whether this was meant as a deliberate contrast to Bush at the time.
In case I didn't mention it before: I approve of Debbie. And Lily Tomlin in the role.
Lastly: at one point I thought "what a pity Leo isn't a woman, then he and Abbey would have passed the Blechdel test" - because as opposed to how fanfiction would have done it when they were locked up in a room together, they didn't talk about the mutual man in their lives and their respective relationships with him, or had angry arguments about who is closer, but talked about Abbey and her career.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-12-02 12:22 am (UTC)I do have to say I did like the idea of Donna seeing didn't have to be at Josh's beck and call, and I don't ship them. I am not however a fan of the Hoynes/CJ episode, but the confession at the end by Allison Janney was spectacular. I know from interviews Allison seem to hint (with out being professional) that she didn't like the idea either and joked she had to warn her mother.
Given that Hoynes and CJ had some none too friendly interaction early in s1, where something like this in all likelihood would have come up, I find this even harder to believe than Hoynes being stupid enough to think a tell-all book would relaunch his career.
Sure makes you look at CJ going to Hoynes to see if he was Danny's source a hell of a lot different. It however does fit into the CJ we met before Bartlet - very unhappy and not too sure of her self.
except maybe The Supremes.
Welcome to t he glory that is Debora Cahn - her episodes for two years we're the only ones I wanted to watch over again... well, maybe Lift off from season 6 - but I adore C.J. Curious your take on that little development.
And was that Christopher Walken? </>
Do you mean Christopher Lloyd?
In case I didn't mention it before: I approve of Debbie. And Lily Tomlin in the role.
How can you not. :)
no subject
Date: 2008-12-02 07:26 am (UTC)Debbie: yes indeed. I think the show was clever in letting a year pass between Mrs. Landingham's death and Debbie becoming Jed Bartlet's chief secretary; by this time, the viewers are ready for a new character and can appreciate her in her own light.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-02 01:41 pm (UTC)