Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip (2006–2007) User Reviews

Comedy Isn't All Funny Business

[Erico_77375 · 9/10 · 8 August 2006]

After having seen the pilot episode of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, I am left with a sudden sense of excitement for the series to begin. The show hits the gate hard as a veteran executive producer of a late night comedy show (Judd Hirsch) goes on a verbal assault on live television, a moment straight out of Network (which the news media quickly catches onto). The studio is in complete disarray only minutes after the show ends, especially since the network's new president (Amanda Peet) as only been on the job for one day. How can they repair the damage done? Why not call in the two men who made the show a hit (Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford), and have since been fired two years prior. But things aren't going to be so easy to fix since there are execs just waiting to shred all three of them to pieces.

The show is pure Aaron Sorkin: it's witty, intelligent, and heart-felt about issues. It's also a blast to watch as a cast of incredibly talented actors and actresses work together to make Sorkin's words shine. But one thing Studio 60 isn't is a retread of either Sports Night or The West Wing. It's a completely different monster. This time, Sorkin's looking to dive deep into the worlds of Hollywood, Mass Media, and Big Business. With Perry and Whitford, we have televisions new odd couple, both incredibly funny both alone and together. Peet brings her A-game with her as she takes on her most ambitious part yet. And let's not forget some great contributions by D.L. Hughley, Timothy Busfield and Steven Webber. And this is coming straight from the pilot. Who knows where the show will go from here. But I know where I'm going to be on Monday nights.

Strong, dialogue driven show.

[DangerWedge · 9/10 · 26 September 2006]

I've enjoyed Sorkin ever since I saw A Few Good Men. Sports Night gets regular repeats in my DVD player, and while I never quite got in to West Wing because of scheduling problems on my end, what I did see always impressed me. So I was waiting very eagerly for Studio 60 to premiere. It didn't disappoint.

Now, this show is probably not for everyone. Sorkin doesn't lob softballs at us. He wants us to think, he's not going to spell every little thing out for the audience. Some see him as being preachy, but I'm afraid they not seeing for the forest for the trees here. Some also accuse him of anti-whatever propaganda, but fail to acknowledge or account for the existence of counter balance in the show itself (IE anti-Christian sentiments in S60, although one of his main characters is a level headed and likable Christian woman).

The cast is sublime. Matthew Perry pretty much does what he does, but now he can be the edgier actor he wanted to be. Bradley Whitford has always been underrated and he doesn't fail to impress me here. All of the other members of the supporting cast (including Timothy Busfield, who was looking surprisingly John Ritter-esquire in profile) are worthy. I've seen tons of criticism for Amanda Peet as the newly named president of the network, but I honestly can say I'm buying it. She does have a tendency to make the same face for everything, but otherwise, she's playing the part as it's written. Sometimes it's not the actor, it is the character (see Holmes, Katie and Begins, Batman), and I think this is one of those times. She's playing a relatively young powerful female exec like I'd expect her to. Kinda wink wink like, with a poker face.

Overall, I think this show, only 2 episodes in, is already one of the best shows on the network channels today. Hopefully NBC will give it the due course it deserves, even while it openly mocks the network.

Great show!

[bromley-6 · 9/10 · 14 August 2006]

Saw the pilot on NetFlix, and it's everything one should expect from Sorkin, Schlamme and this cast...sharp, tense, funny, and exhilarating television. Even if you don't care about behind-the-scenes drama or live TV or Saturday Night Live (which the show is based on), check this out...it's got a ton of drama, heart, and fun. Hopefully Sorkin will take time to develop each character. My only issue with the episode is that there's too much to cover, so we only get quick glosses of characters, but it's just a pilot, so it's OK to serve as an introduction. Matthew Perry, Amanda Peet, Brad Whitford, Timothy Busfield are all perfectly cast and show new range. Can't wait for the season to get going.

Intelligent, even handed, courageous. You knock our socks off!

[amamistyed · 10/10 · 2 October 2006]

What a joy. Can you imagine someone actually answering a reporter in a press conference with the TRUTH? Even if it costs them? In Aaron Sorkin's world things are set aright and, while he clearly has questions, he sets out to answer them in a righteous and evenhanded way bringing thoughtful debate to the minds of the audience which, thankfully, he seems to believe can participate in thoughtful debate.

In Sorkin's world there is loyalty unlike almost anywhere on earth. Both in his personal loyalties and those of his interesting, full of life characters, bursting with individuality, personality and beautiful DIALOG...YES! So much incredibly wonderful dialog.

The unique and enduring music of W.G. Snuffy Walden adds such depth of emotion and intent to Studio 60. Music that moves us and causes us to feel with the characters we laugh and cry with and love to see again and again.

Sorkin and Schlamme bring actors we thought were pretty good, some we already really liked a lot, many we didn't even know their names - but now we do...and we always will. Because their talent has been revealed in the most profound way. And, after the pilot, I felt I knew them well and loved them each - a lot.

People enter from stage right and left - set builders, camera people, runners and a fantastic PA played by Merritt Wever who won my heart in the first episode. And I thought...only Sorkin would use this lucky girl in this way and she'll be so great...is so great...

And there are the cameos. Judd Hirsch, Ed Asner. Precious bits of time. As in The Wrap Party where the famous Eli Wallach was exquisite as the old writer/veteran who was once blacklisted in Hollywood. I cried. Very brave lines here, wonderfully acted by all involved. What a piece of film!

And with so much story and so many personalities, there is always room for one more...and one more that amazingly fills a new important space. No fillers here. Enter Christine Lahti...pure class. One more of the unique women in his script. Women who are strong, intelligent, interesting, funny...as well as loyal and led by their integrity. They vary in personality, careers, education, physical appearance and age. They are each absolutely beautiful in ways that most writers/producers/directors haven't seemed to notice nor use yet.

And there are the love scenes between Matthew Perry and Sarah Paulson. Truly amazing, awesome love scenes. Filled with depth and respect; fired with emotion and among the most beautiful ever filmed.

Week after week the story builds, the characters deepen and the anticipation of what is to follow is delightful...because we know the foundation will always be there. We know we can trust Sorkin to always be true.

The most recent: Nevada Day was absolutely great. One of the funniest things I've seen in years. I laughed until my sides hurt. What wit! and what an amazing ability to take real life people and their situations, examine truth and controversy while at the same time making us laugh out loud. And John Goodman, who would never disappoint us if all he did was enter the room...he is so good...was perfect as the judge from Pahrump...yeah Pahrump Nevada. Well, you've just got to watch this one.

The content always is intelligent, honest and courageous. The writing, directing, set design, costume, makeup - all pure talent, pure art. The acting is as acting should be - believable and strong: Perry, Whitford, Peet, Paulson Busfield, Hughley, Weber, and every one in between. Each actor is excellent and important. The show is important. I only hope there will be 130000 episodes.

Thank you Aaron Sorkin and Thomas Schlamme and a most incredible ensemble for giving us your very best every time. You knock our socks off.

Studio 60 deserved better!

[breeanalaine · 10/10 · 21 June 2021]

I will forever be mad that NCB cancelled this show. Studio 60 is the perfect example of a show that would've thrived on a streaming service, sadly it was ahead of its time. Is it perfect, no. Is it Sorkin's best, no (but that is a tall ask), but it is a million times better than the majority of shows renewed for a second season and deserved better. The pilot episode and the Christmas episode are two of the finest hours of television ever made. It is my second favourite of Sorkin's shows and the short one season makes for excellent comfort viewing. The cast is phenomenal, so nice to see Matthew Perry in a more dramatic role, he's excellent. Bradley Whitford, Amanda Peet, Steven Webber particularly shine with Sorkin's dialogue. The main complaint I see against this show is that the sketches are not funny, and to that I say the Dateline Santa from the Christmas episode of Studio 60 was funnier than any sketch I've seen on SNL in recent years. It's a travesty this show wasn't given the chance it deserved, I believe with a second season it really would've found it's audience, but I will rewatch it forever because it's perfect to me.

Chandler who?

[tadeja-korenc-1 · 10/10 · 30 September 2006]

I will not only be talking about Matthew Perry here, i promise, but i need to say this. I am a Friends fan. A can-quote-them-in-the-middle-of-the-night, know-and-own-every-episode kind of fan and i was worried about Mr. Perry, it's just the curse of playing a certain role for 10 years. I must admit, hands down, he is brilliant! Fantastic! Not once did i think of Chandler or Friends for that matter and i applaud him.

Now, Ms. Peet is wonderful too and i did not know she was this talented, i must admit. And Bradley Whitford - i loved him in West Wing, i love him here. I could in fact go on and on about the casting of this show, which is brilliant (Sarah Paulson - OMG), but i don't want to make this comment too long.

I was looking forward to this show and i am not disappointed! The writing is superb, engaging, the dialogues are quick and witty and intelligent! I am a sucker for shows that make me think, that make me watch open mouthed and leave me shell shocked and in not being able to believe the 45 minutes are gone. I re-watched it a couple of times just because i knew there were things i missed in the first run.

To Mr. Sorkin and everybody who is creating this show: you're doing an amazing job! I am hooked. And i so hope this show is here to stay!

Cancellation an insult to viewers

[thnoyes · 10/10 · 22 June 2007]

I have emailed NBC twice about canceling this show. One of the few intelligent, well written, thought provoking shows I have seen in a while. What's the alternative, Singing Bee or watching women compete for a date? I have looked forward to viewing this show and am very disappointed in it's cancellation. Was it an air time problem or another season needed to gain viewer ship? I enjoyed it's complication-a good story along with great acting is becoming so rare these days. To hear statements that contain some reference as to what people are really thinking is such a refreshing switch from the pc crowd.Perhaps another network will see it's possibilities and pick it up. I just wish all those who made Studio 60 could know that some of us admired their work and will miss the show.

Brilliant and Original. TV's been waiting for something like this!

[oggy-3 · 10/10 · 26 December 2006]

In a time of Apprentice, Fear Factor, Bachelor and a dozen police/crime scene shows, Studio 60 brings diversity to network television. This is a very witty and thought provoking show, which offers philosophical views on many topics, relative to today's society.

We've seen how police stations, hospitals, and the White House work, now we get to see how network television works. The show incorporates a lot of self-irony and probably borrows a lot of material from real life experiences behind the scenes of network TV.

Like many others, I was afraid that Mathew Perry would not be able to put the Chandler character behind, but I was pleased to find out, that he did it, and he did it in style. I believe Perry has grown a lot as an actor and he is shining. The rest of the cast is also great, and so far it looks like this show has no main character - this has proved to be very successful in the past.

I realize that the audience of this show is naturally limited, but I really hope it stays, because I believe it has the potential to become a classic!

An instant classic?

[randy-377 · 10/10 · 19 September 2006]

Apparently so. From the first kinetic moments, Studio 60 blazes through an hour of swift dialog, brilliant speeches, and a storyline that can go any which way. The camaraderie of Perry and Whitford feels genuine. Whitfords bottled nervous energy which could often become annoying on TWW is perfectly contained if not explained by a history of drug use. And the concept of the show seems remarkable fresh. Who knew? One must love Sorkin for his loyalty (the Albie/Tripp relationship must be Sorkin/ Schlamme) with West Wing regulars showing up. One can only hope Allison Janney gets a regular spot. Some have suggested the show is quite unlike The West Wing, which I disagree with...its the same cinematographer, the same lighting, the same run over dialog Sorkin is famous for...and who cares? It works, and you know it works when you feel exhilarated watching a show, and yearning for the week to pass quickly to see what happens next, and that is exactly what happened. Loved it.

hooray for the return of intelligent dialog !

[shamankewl-1 · 7/10 · 23 November 2006]

in the TV world of cop-shop-talk, overly hyped courtroom drama, and inherent idiocy of reality shows, it's a welcome change & refreshing to hear smart, funny dialog between characters, and plot lines with hints of addressing serious American cultural issues. "Studio 60" is an intelligent pleasure to watch, and Aaron Sorkin makes great use of talented actors he's worked with before, from Timothy Busfield, Matthew Perry, D.L. Hughley, Bradley Whitford, Evan Handler (recently from "Sex in the City") plus lots of other familiar faces...and the chemistry & witty dialog flows from beginning to end. I've enjoyed every show; cant wait to see more...

It was too good to survive. A Eulogy for Studio 60

[ecpower1 · 10/10 · 7 June 2007]

It is funny, smart, articulate, and touched the heart all at the same time. So of course word is that is has been canceled! It ran so briefly before getting pre-empted several times, that it barely got seen, yet NBC saw fit to shoot it down, and will be putting on several live game shows and other reality garbage of that ilk. Worse than that, they now torture us with the last new episodes, so that we might be bereft when it is gone. I wish there was a way to save the show, but networks rarely let shows live long enough to find their audience. NBC barely let it run long enough for anyone to find it. I think the best episode was the "Disaster Show," and watching Allison Janey and former "West Wing" lover Tim Busfield work together. What a hoot. What a waste that such a clever show will be lost to TV history.

TV on the TV : great show, but too good for TV.

[moimoichan6 · 7/10 · 21 August 2007]

Witty dialogs, credible situations, attaching characters, excellent actors, great mise en scene : "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" had everything to be a major hit on television. Except that it isn't neither a fantastic/sci-fi/teenager project, neither a show about doctors or cops, but about the reality of the world of television, and it may have been a little to intelligent, witty and realistic for TV.

Matt Alby (Matthey Perry, who plays what a realistic Chandler could have become if he had kept writing) and Danny Tripp, now famous writer, director and producers for the big screen (a little bit like, say, Soderbergh and Clooney) have to come back to the TV weekly show as executive producers, writer and director, that make them famous. The show used to be sarcastic, critical and funny, but the deterioration of the audience's needs (in the producers'mind at least) this last years make it just like another mediocre and consensual show. They'll have to fight the executives of the major that produces the show, the internal conflicts that prevent it from being good, and the clock in order to give "Studio 60" all it's glorious past again.

The story is quite passionating, and you really learn how a TV show is made while watching it. Aaron Sorkin really share his knowledge here and all the situations seem sincere and true. But don't get me wrong, it's far from being a documentary : the more you go in the series, the more the situations could become unpredictable and even absurd (see for instance the "Nevada Day" episode, with the great John Goodman in a great part). So, you'll also get your part of surprises, action and comedy. And of course, like in every show, the personal life of the characters become as important as their work, and you'll also get your part of romance, betrayals, quiprocos and love stories.

But after a promising first season, I've heard that the show have now been canceled. I've always thought something was missing in the show (surprise, maybe, all this is too well crafted ?), and I was waiting for the second season to see if this sentiment will be erased. But now, I guess I'll just miss the show. The last five episodes, witch formed the final arc, are quite disappointed, for they're way too dense, with flashbacks and multiple resolutions, as if everything has to be told in five hours. This five hours could have been a great second season in my opinion, and it's really a shame it won't be. But at least, if you've learn how a network works while watching this show, you won't be surprised it's been canceled.

Sorkin starts by making a bold promise to the viewer and then allows posturing and romanticism to run the show away from that promise

[liquidcelluloid-1 · 6 April 2007]

Network: NBC; Genre: Dramedy; Content Rating: TV-14 (language and adult dialog); Perspective; Contemporary (star range: 1 - 4);

Seasons Reviewed: 1 season

Even though he only has two shows to his name, Aaron Sorkin's style is so distinct and instantly recognizable that most TV viewers already know what they are getting with "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip". So this review is strictly for the Sorkin fans, who may find it thrilling or befuddling to watch him spend every bit of capital he attained from "The West Wing" to go back to the behind-the-TV-scenes "Sports Night" well.

"Studio 60" starts off like a firecracker. Fresh out of rehab and angry as hell at the state of TV today, Sorkin opens the show with Judd Hirsh as the head writer for the title series, up to his intellectual ears in reality TV and network pandering to both the lowest common denominator and political interest groups, lashing out in and on-air meltdown of biblical proportions. Right off the bat "Studio 60" says everything I have been dying for a TV show to stand up and say: that it doesn't have to be like that and all it takes is one show that doesn't believe that the audience is stupid to make a difference. But is "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" that show?

On her first day on the job, NBS programming executive Jordan McDiere (Amanda Peet) must deal with the crisis at Studio 60 while being fought at every turn by programming president Steven Weber. As someone who believes in the Hirsch character's TV outlook, she hires highly regarded and controversial former writers Matt (Matthew Perry) and just-out-of-rehab Danny (Bradley Whitford) to add some class and edge to the late-night sketch comedy series. Studio 60, itself is a transparent "Saturday Night Live" satire starring Simon (D. L. Hughley), Tom (Nathan Corddry) and Matt's crush and the show's token Christian Harriet Hayes (Sarah Paulson). Timothy Busfield is a kick as the show's frazzled director.

How can it loose? Perry giving a bitter twist on his "Friends" persona, Whitford - the breakout actor from "The West Wing" - given a lead role and Aaron Sorkin back in his element. NBC taking it on the chin every Monday night. Sign me up. Even though it appears Sorkin has abandoned his trademark rapid-fire dialog and the history lesson are now limited to the fictitious history of the studio, his angry liberal rants and fairy tale romanticism is still in tact.

As much as I wanted to like his latest creation, if only for having the guts to cleverly lacerate its own network, it became hard to get past the elephant in the room. The show within the show… makes no sense. The show is never able to decide if it wants to parody the inane political posturing, lame character sketches and Christian-bashing of "Saturday Night Live" or if it wants to be better than "SNL". All the characters walk around talking about how intellectual and satirical Matt and Danny's jokes are. Yet every time we actually see "Studio 60", it delivers a lame Tom Cruise impression in Celebrity Jeopardy, "The Nicholas Cage Show" or Hughley hosting "Pimp My Trike" (the most infamous 15 seconds in the show's history). I might as well be watching "SNL". The show smartly never shows us Matt's infamous "Crazy Christians" sketch. "Nations" is looking pretty good right now.

Oh, there is some great stuff here. The 2nd episode, "The Cold Opening" is from start to finish exceptional. In it we actually see the elaborate musical number the show has been concocting for the last hour (rare for behind-the-scenes shows to show us the final product so this was refreshing). A sub plot involving a ticking clock until show time that mocks Matt is icing on the cake. "The Wrap Party" in which Hughley seeks out an original, cliché-free black comic to write for the show is also fine work and "The West Coast Delay" in which the show races to prevent a plagiary accusation is a hoot. Also working is a budding relationship between Tim and freshman writer Lucy ("The Office's" Lucy Davis, always a delight) that under Sorkin's eye has an adorable puppy dog innocence (another Sorkin staple).

But before the fledgling first season comes to its end the show has lost its focus entirely. Sorkin makes two crucial mistakes. First, he becomes overbearingly single-minded in a mission to prove to the audience that the Christian right and the FCC are the two greatest threats to American life. Again and again Matt and Harriet go up against each other over false-premise debates about religion, gay marriage, middle-America etc. Second, his desire to get all the characters together (including the most likely of couples) buries the show in the same hopelessly romantic pabulum that helped kill "Sports Night". Both of these tones take away from what the show does best.

What "Studio" does best is recreate the sweaty chaos of getting a live show on the air and those late night writing sessions where no idea works. I love that most of the stories existing in the minutes before the show or between the end of the show and a wrap party that nobody seems to make it to.

"Studio 60" is an entertaining watch, brave for network TV, with solid writing and capable performances, but Sorkin goes on auto-pilot and allows it to wander of the reservation into an edgeless, warmed over "Sports Night" clone, toning down the TV industry inside-Baseball in an attempt to garner an audience that wouldn't appreciate him anyway. Only those that like "Studio 60" a lot will be the ones disappointed by it. Yes, I still think TV can be successful without pandering to the "Cheaters" crowd, but you have to take it all the way. Playing both sides against the middle doesn't work either.

* * * / 4

What killed Studio 60?: a post-mortem

[agoac · 4/10 · 27 February 2007]

Any review of a failed show will obviously contain spoilers about that show. So you are forewarned.

What killed "Studio 60"? There were a number of contributing causes, but here are the Big Five, in order.

1. Too much time spent on a "romance" that couldn't carry the show.

Matt and Harriet were splitsville before the pilot, yet nearly every one of the episodes that followed played the same song: "will Matt and Harriet get back together" without ever hitting any different notes. It was always Matt digs Harriet, she's not that into him. You'd think there'd be some variety after 12, 13, 14 episodes, but it wasn't there. It was the same drumbeat, week after week.

2. The show that was too smart for everyone thought that everyone was stupid.

For a show constantly trumpeted as smart, it made some awfully stupid assumptions about the level of intelligence of its audience. Anyone remotely connected with television or knowledgeable about television history (and that might be more people than the producers think) knows that a single writer can't write a 90-minute sketch comedy show all by himself week after week. Yet, for the first 6 or 7 weeks, we were asked to suspend disbelief and buy into the fact that Matt Albie could do what no other writer in history could do.

In "Nevada Day", the show had a character arrested and extradited to another state on the same day, without an attorney, and without being searched before the extradition. Instead of creating a realistic scenario where Tom Jeter ends up in police custody in Nevada on a state holiday wearing Simon Stiles' leather jacket, the producers apparently assumed that their viewers were stupid enough to believe anything. While there were many other instances of the producers taking their audience's intelligence for granted, this one may be the most blatant.

The irony is that the pilot began with a rant about the "dumbing down of television", yet "Studio 60" seemed to be just fine with ignoring logic or reality in favor of convenience, as long as it served a storyline.

3. Miscasting of the two key female roles.

Sarah Paulson is not believable as a woman with a genius gift for either comedy or song, and she had zero chemistry with Matthew Perry, staring at him in their scenes together as if he were a grocery store clerk who had just inquired "paper or plastic?" Looking at Harriet, you never saw any conflict in her eyes over her "lost love". She could not deliver the goods.

Amanda Peet was so dreadful as a network president that you have to wonder if there was any casting process at all, or if she was simply handed the role without having to audition. Her performance got better later, when the Jordan/Danny romance heated up. Personal interaction with a man seems to be her strong suit. But witty banter and corporate politics with the big boys (and girls)? She doesn't have the timing for the banter or the gravitas for the politics.

4. Too much Christian-bashing in the early episodes, for no apparent reason.

If the right wing were currently boycotting late night TV shows, getting people fired, and generally having a tizzy about all the immoral programming coming out of Hollywood, then the early episodes, which very heavily relied on bashing the Christian Right as a plot device, would be understandable. But the Christian Right is fairly quiet right now. These stories seem better set in the mid-80s than in 2006.

The Right versus the Media is an outdated, non-topical subject, and far too much time was spent on it. Yawn. In a recent episode Matt Albie marveled that a survey shows that nearly two-thirds of Americans actually believe in angels. If that is true, maybe Albie's creator shouldn't have spent so much time bashing that segment of the population in the earlier episodes. Why alienate two-thirds of your potential audience if there's no reason to do so?

5. A show about late night comedy with no late night comedy.

During the series run, a scant three sketches were shown mostly in their entirety, only one of which was funny. We saw premises, we saw gags on the fake news segment, but it didn't seem to be in the producers' power to actually do what late night shows do: make us laugh for 4 or 5 minutes with a comedy sketch. If you can't do that, why set the series behind the scenes at a late night comedy show? You could have told the same exact stories in any corporate setting, with the same audience results.

We also didn't see many guest hosts, and anyone slightly familiar with late night comedy shows knows that the show revolves around the host, who is there for pitch meetings, writing sessions, rehearsals, and so on. Again, a case of a supposedly smart show thinking that their audience knows less about the workings of a late night comedy show than they actually do.

"We don't need comedy or guest hosts," the producers seemed to be saying. "We have the thrilling Matt/Harriet romance to hold us up again, for the 8th week in a row." Sadly for the producers, that was not the case.

Why is the show off the air?

[kevinalvarezp · 10/10 · 3 April 2007]

I just don't understand this executives at NBC! They renew formulaic, boring shows like Deal or Not deal with that annoying bald headed host, but cant give the time to a well crafted, original marvel like Sunset Strip. Sometimes it takes a while for a good show to find its audience and establish itself, take Sainfeld for example! For a guy who gave us The west Wing, The Americam President, among many jewels, Aaron Sorkin I think has not been treated the right way here, he should be given the benefit of doubt!Jeff Zucker should probably know better than that, he is probbably too concern with the numbers he forgot to be a producer! It was probably an expensive show to make sure, but, sometimes you just have to take a risk, especially when that risk involves a genius like Sorkin. Go elsewhere Aaron! Go make some wonderful movies, or go make history at HBO were they think been crazy and writing about your own life (David Chase) is genius! I love the show, it is the only one good thing worth watching at NBC.

Full of Potential, Unlike The Idoits Who Cancelled It.

[johnmatthewforan · 10/10 · 6 February 2008]

The best written show since the West Wing was taken off the air was the highlight of last years TV. Although Heroes is fantastic this show made me sit up and take notice.

With some fantastic actors both new and familiar to us in the UK not sure about the US, and some great story lines this show could have gone from strength to strength. It took the West Wing 7 seasons to make me cry and even that was based around an actual death of a cast member but the Studio 60 finale is a thing of beauty. It is all you'd want in a programme heart felt, funny and good actors turning in great performances.

This is the perfect starting point for anyone wanting to start looking at the works of Mr. Sorkin it's not as heavy as the West Wing but every bit as brilliant. I already have the DVDs and the finale again got the best of me.

You'll laugh, you'll cheer and you should cry unless you're made out of stone or something.

The Wrap Party

[davidm2-1 · 10/10 · 24 October 2006]

As usual the "Sorkonian rhythm" is just amazing to me and yes I am claiming that name. I'll keep this short, but looking back to Sports Night, Aaron has always made me think. The first time I saw that kind of dialogue,it reminded me of a little show back in the mid 80's called moonlighting. That sit up and pay attention attitude of writing, and delivery of dialogue I just fell in love with.

I get to enjoy that in a whole new way with the Rhythm that only Aaron can write. Forget anyone else When you get Aaron and Tommy on a project it's like a bus that comes down the road that you can either get on and enjoy a ride like you will never ever have again in a lifetime, or stand in the way and let it just run you over! I found myself this evening after watching this episode getting online and looking up and reading about "The Hollywood 10" and reading the stories of each and every one of them and the hundreds of others that were blacklisted as well.

I very rarely get emotional over TV shows, but the shows that Aaron writes touch me in ways that I never knew were possible from a box that will display things like "Date my Mom" and "Pimp My Trike" I bow to the enlightening wit, drama, and even when it takes a slap to the face to see all sides of a story. Never ever stop what you are doing! But in closing I really have to ask myself what it must be like around the Shoe Money offices with people running around all day long telling each other "Hey don't forget I need to meet with the guy about the thing..." A personal thanks to Aaron and Tommy for Years of entertainment and for many more to come!

Another lightening in a bottle.

[Krys78 · 10/10 · 18 August 2006]

Studio 60 is the coming out party for Aaron Sorkin since he left NBC (during; The West Wing). He's brilliant again. This series is going to be as big if not bigger than Sports Night and The West Wing. OK, maybe not as big as TWW because you can't be better than 96 Emmy nods. But no joke S60 will blow people away and remind them why they loved and still love AS since he walked into the lives of millions back in the late 90s. I had the fortune to see a sneak peak (hey all you can if you are a netflixian) of S60 and I have already seen it three times. I love the chemistry between Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford, it's like they have worked together for years. Being a regular Sorkinite, I have followed all his hits. This is just going to be a great addition to an already amazing resume. Many of the greats (staff and cast) are back from either TWW, American President or SN. It's good to have you home, Aaron!

great show

[aseanacha · 10/10 · 26 October 2006]

Studio 60 is a fast-paced, well-written series which challenges the viewer to keep up with the action. The characters have full dimension and the portrayals make the viewer care what happens to each character.

The network has invested not only time and money into this show, it has gathered a plethora of skilled actors who've proved their skills in other venues as well as presenting talented people in secondary roles with the strong hint of more presence to come. I look forward to seeing the development of these currently secondary players and their various impacts on the varied underlying themes.

This show is a keeper and so should be kept running.

Brilliant TV Show, a shame it was cancelled

[freemantle_uk · 10/10 · 26 January 2010]

Aaron Sorkin has had a tough time with television, his first show Sports Night never gained out a mass audience and was cancelled after 2 short series, he left the great show The West Wing under hostile circumstances, and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip was cancelled after one season because of low rating. This was a shame because this show had a lot of potential that could have lasted 3 or 4 seasons.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip is set about the events of the running of Studio 60, a Saturday Night Live type show, with the wider events of the National Broadcast Service (NBS). When Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet) takes over as the President of Entertainment programming she is thrown into crisis when the show runner of Studio 60 has a angry rant live on TV over the declaring quality of the state of Television and the nation. Her solution, hire Matt Albie (Matt Perry) and Danny Tripp (Bradley Whitford), two former producers/writers to run the show, who left after showing a controversial sketch after 9/11. Within the show Jordan wants to improve the quality of NBS' programming, making more scripted shows, hiring more talented writers and avoiding low-quality reality shows that rely on the humiliation of people. The quality of Studio 60 also quickly rises. But there are problems on the way, facing the FCC, the religious right and conservatives who are always critical of Hollywood, studio executives who care more about profit then quality and want to avoid offending anyone, infighting in the show and their own personal lives. Matt is in the middle of a on-off relationship Harriet Hayes (Sarah Paulson), a committed Christian, with a strong following the Christain community, compared to Matt who is a East Coast Atheist Jew. Danny is a recovering drug addict and has affections for Jordan.

If you were an fan of the West Wing then you should like Studio 60. It is a witty dramedy, with a lot of substance. If you are interested in TV and Hollywood then the show would give you a good insight, and should appeal to an audience who long to see this version of Hollywood. The style of the show is very much like the West Wing, following a similar writing, dialogue driven style, with occasional flashbacks, and shot in a similar style. There are also returning West Wing cast members, like Matt Perry, Bradley Whitford and Timothy Busfield. This is a brilliant cast. Sorkin brings in his politics, criticising conservative Christians and the neo-Con who are too quick to criticise, judge and use fear to fulfil their agenda, the FCC for it's dogmatic view on moral and standards. There are criticisms about the Bush presidency and the wars in Iraq and Afghanstan. This was the West Wing mark II.

This was a great show and it was shame it never got a second series.

Studio 60 has potential

[Dissidentfan · 7/10 · 19 September 2006]

Studio 60 has nothing but promise. Matthew Perry is perfectly cast, whereas Amanda Peet is poorly cast. For a women who is supposed to show style and grace she comes off as a ice cold super computer delivering dialogue. For a women who throws her weight, wit, and knowledge around Peet displays the exact opposite of that. Great pilot but not what I was expecting. The feel is closer to West Wing when its comedic setting should bring its temperature to more of an hour long sitcom. Had Studio 60 been on HBO there would be no problem but there is only so much you can get away with when the FCC and advertisers hold your hand (funny that's what a great majority of the first episodes content had to deal with) Overall, wonderfully shot and casted, but if Peet's performance doesn't pick up the believe-abilitity; ie, emotion and swagger, this show will be hitting the NBC cut floor.

Edgy, quick and dark

[Becky-61 · 9/10 · 11 August 2006]

There are (delightful) shades of Sports Night's Dan & Casey combo in this very well written series. Matthew Perry was right to wait for the perfect project to come along. From the looks of it, Studio 60 will let him do what he has seldom been afforded the opportunity to do, and that is subtle comedy with an edge. West Wing fans will have no problem accepting Bradley Whitford in this decidedly un-Josh Lyman role. Rounding out the core cast are some of Hollywood's most interesting and under-cast actors, including D.L. Hughley, Sarah Pauley (perhaps this will finally be the break out that she deserves) and Steven Webber. And Amanda Peete is magnetic in her return to both the small screen and to center stage, as a driven and enigmatic young television exec. Aaron Sorkin & Tommy Schlamme deliver once again.

Not the big hit it was hoped to be

[John_Truby · 8 January 2010]

Studio 60 has not been the big hit everyone at NBC hoped it would be. And it's taken more than a few shots, mostly from insiders who say that it's not an authentic view of a sketch comedy show. Why? Because it's not funny. And they're right; it's not funny. That could be because creator and writer Aaron Sorkin can't write funny. Or more likely it's because the show's not a comedy. It's a drama about working in a corporation, a corporation that just happens to be in the business of making culture.

Sometimes Sorkin gets too cute in his writing, typically from updating a classic story beat. He always does the beat well, but it's still a recognizable beat. And I get the feeling that he is writing so much so fast that for long stretches he just puts it on automatic and lets his considerable knowledge of story carry him along.

To see one of the reasons why Studio 60 may be having trouble with audiences, let's look at a technique that is crucial to a TV drama: the episodic desire line. In other words, what is accomplished in each episode? In a classic cop show, it's solving the crime. In a courtroom drama, it's winning the case. In a doctor show, it's saving the patient. On Studio 60 it's … Well, we know what it isn't. It's not putting on a 90-minute comedy show. So what is it? The desire line in each episode is what gives the story its shape, and is one of the key elements of a show's DNA. You can create a show in which the desire line extends over many episodes, but you will have more difficulty holding a mass audience. So many shows provide at least one desire line that is accomplished by the end of the episode, and extend the others. Aaron Sorkin doesn't do that on Studio 60. It's not a bad thing. It's just not popular. Regardless of Studio 60's essential structure, there is a lot to like and learn from by watching it.

For example, we see a great technique in the second part of a two-part episode in which Harriet gets an award. It's the technique I call the "dialogue of equals." Good conflict dialogue should be a heavyweight fight. Punch/counter-punch. One throws a hammer blow. The other comes right back with a hammer blow of his own. Not only does each line have dramatic power, the scene builds in the sequence of the blows (lines), ending in a knockout punch.

To create a building punch/counter-punch, you have to have two equals, by which I mean two characters with an equal ability to verbally attack. If one is too strong, he or she will get in the most blows and the scene will not build. In the concluding episode of the two-parter, Matt and Harriet go at each other with ferocity. Matt is the obviously more aggressive and nastier of the two. But Harriet does not shrink back and ends up having the more powerful blows, including the lethal knockout punch.

FOR MORE REVIEWS please visit www.truby.com

Almost perfect cast

[[e-mail] · 7/10 · 21 August 2006]

Amanda Peet is not right for this part. She looks overwhelmed and is without weight. Sorkin's women are strong, even when they're neurotic. There is something to them that has to read 'been there, done that'. That is sadly missing and her acting in this is most difficult to enjoy. Hopefully she will improve with time. The show is otherwise very well cast and I am excited to see Matthew Perry in a role that has some gravitas and wounded humanity. It must feel great as an actor to get out from under the shadow of such a long-lived sitcom role. Steven Weber is managing his arsehole role really well too. And once again Brad Whitford knocks it out of the park with his subtlety and grace.

Not Up to Sorkin's Standard

[pgboger · 3/10 · 25 January 2007]

Let's face it -- this show simply isn't up to the gold standard that Aaron Sorkin set for himself with 'Sports Night' and 'The West Wing.' Now normally even something of Sorkin's that is sub-par would still be far superior to most of the drivel on network television. But in this case, since the series is itself a commentary on the sorry state of the current television industry it needs to provide a compelling vision of what television COULD or SHOULD be. It does not. Instead, we get a mediocre show about people putting on a "comedy show" where NONE of the sketches we've yet to see from this show-within-a-show are REMOTELY funny.

The show feels too much like Sorkin and producer Thomas Schlamme trying to rub NBC's noses in its decision to kick the two off of the West Wing crew after its fourth season (which was a travesty) and consequently feels too much like a personal, in-joke filled therapy session of Sorkin trying to show the world how things SHOULD have happened. The show also has too much of a preachy quality to it (something that many viewers have complained about 'The West Wing' - but there it seemed more appropriate since the topic matter was something as lofty and morally relevant as politics and the future of American policy).

In the end, the show simply isn't funny (even though it's supposed to be about funny people) nor is the focus of its drama at all compelling or interesting - you ultimately could care less about any of the characters or what happens to them. This is the result of a few things - first of all, the show's plots have largely focused television insider jargon (which we saw on Sports Night but there the behind-the-scenes look at TV was always done as interesting window- dressing around plots focused on the characters' personal lives, not as the focus of the plots themselves). Secondly, the lack of interest in the characters comes from the show's dark, drab set of undistinguished locations that makes the whole production feel dark and cramped without any feeling of zest or life in it.

But most fundamentally, our lack of interest in the characters results from both underwritten and miscast roles. Bradley Whitford and Matthew Perry are solid as the two leads, but they only really come alive in scenes between their two characters, which so far have been few and far between. Similarly, Timothy Busfield is always a solid actor but so far he has been given nothing to do; similarly, Nathan Corddry.

On the miscast side, D.L. Hughley, while usually good in other films and shows, just doesn't quite click with Sorkin's rapid-fire dialogue here. Sarah Paulson's casting as Harriet Harris, Matthew Perry's love interest, is seriously off-kilter. For one thing, her character's Christianity is written far too buffonishly, which isn't her fault of course and once again demonstrates Hollywood's outlandish misconceptions of most Americans' sense of religion. But beyond that flaw in how the character is written, Paulson as an actress provides NO spark that would give viewers any reason to care about her. And finally, Amanda Peet is woefully miscast, turning the character into too one-dimensional and perky a type to ever convincingly have become a major network executive. Sorkin clearly was aiming for another strong female lead character like Dana on 'Sports Night,' but he needed an actress with much better dramatic chops (like Felicity Huffman) to fully realize the role in a three-dimensional way.

In short, this is a show filled with talented people in front of and behind the camera and all their efforts have misfired into an unappealing, unappetizing mess. Better to let this show fade after one season so that all this talent can be released to try their luck on other projects. If you want to see the best of what this show's writer and producer (and some of these actors) can do, rent or buy 'Sports Night' or 'The West Wing.'