_595_slogo.jpg)
The second season of Aaron Sorkin's HBO drama series "The Newsroom" promises to be every bit as entertaining as its first. If not more so, due to a unifying structural choice that promises an overarching story as opposed that last season's 'news story of the week'.
We open the season with Will McAvoy (played by Jeff Daniels) giving a deposition to ACN's defense attorney Rebecca Halliday (played by Marcia Gay Harden). Rebecca words to us what the central story of this season will be with these words:
“You went on the air with a story that alleged the US used nerve gas during an operation, which is a war crime, and a doctored interview and a producer who says that News Night conspired with the pentagon to cover up Operation Genoa.”
Apparently something went completely wrong and now the news team at ACN has to pay the price for that. Rebecca mentions the consequences if they fail: "no one responsible for Genoa will ever work again." As the episode moves along we learn that Genoa was an exclusive story about a US black op that was "bigger than Watergate" and their coverage almost quadrupled their ratings. With MacKenzie McHale (played by Emily Mortimer) giving the a deposition at the end of the episode, I think the rest of the team will be giving depositions as well every episode. This is a similar structure which Sorkin used in ''The Social Network'' and could give us a few tidbits every episode while the flashbacks catch up to the characters present.
Maggie Jordan's (played by Alison Pill) subplot is also touched upon at the deposition Will gives. Maggie looks distant and is sporting shorter red hair after she went to Africa where it "got real , real fast". To be honest when I heard this I really felt for Maggie, because around that time there were reporters who got attacked/raped while covering protests in Africa and the Middle East. Usually when a woman makes a serious change to her physical appearance, especially to be de-sexualized it may have something do with with a sex crime she witnessed or was a victim of. Rebecca alluding to Maggie as "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo", might have been foreshadowing in that regard.
Two other subplots for the season are introduced in the flashbacks, with one being Occupy Wallstreet and the other being Romney's campaign tour. Both are severely underestimated in their importance, MacKenzie doesn't believe Occupy Wallstreet will lead to anything, but has Neal Sampat (played by Dev Patel) check it out anyway. It's fun to see Neal stretch his reporter legs and I hope to see him do more of this in this season. On the other hand Romney's campaign is also underestimated as at this point he is still trailing a lot of points behind his opponents, but Jim Harper (played by John Gallagher Jr.) takes the job anyway to get away from Maggie.
Relationships are still the shows biggest weakness, all of them. Everyone involved in a significant relationship with another character on this show is a bumbling love fool, they never say exactly how they feel. Instead they make jokes and laugh it off. Poor Don Keefer (played by Thomas Sadoski) has to find out from Maggie's niece via YouTube how Maggie really feels about Jim. And Sloan Sabbith (played by Olivia Munn) fares no better when confronted by Don about her advances towards him.
Overall the premiere of season two of The Newsroom was a return to form and then some, fixing a lot of issues people had with the first season. Unfortunately the obstacles in the relationships still feel contrived, but it is a minor misstep in an otherwise excellent show.
Also what happened to the theme tune?
8.5/10
Main Account - All Shows
I'll be back tonight to further comment, as I just couldn't stay awake for re-airing of the episode, but I'm glad the season will be more serialized and not just the news story of the week!
ReplyDeleteI LOVED the new intro theme. The old one was way too long and frankly extremely slow when watching episodes in marathon. The new one is fancier and I actually took the extra minutes to re-watch it simply because it was awesome.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about the relationships on the show. I actually find it very tiresome, the scenes where you just want them to scream out their emotions and be done with it and they instead keep it locked and sealed.
I want to mention the scene where they had to do the re-recording of the voice-over live, and they used every single inch of their knowledge, professionalism and pure awesomeness and they actually managed to pull it off! I was really feeling that scene, I was literally scared for what was going to happen, and I compulsively clapped in the air when it worked! (I must've looked like an idiot to my roommate, but I have such a passion for TV shows, hahaha!)
Yes! That definitely was a fantastic scene! There were more scenes I wanted to mention, but I didn't want to make my review too long or go all over the place and cover everything. Though I feel a bit guilty now, haha! :)
ReplyDeleteAnd I feel you with the enthusiasm, I'm the same! Don't really care if that makes me look as an idiot. ;)
Looking forward to it! :)
ReplyDeleteGreat Review!
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a very good episode! I like the idea of going back and forth in time from the characters depositions to learning what all went wrong with Operation Genoa. I thought I was loosing my mind because I never heard that before, but watching "inside the episode", clarified that it is fictional, but based on something that happened in 1974!
I actually like the relationships on the show, but I agree it's hard to read the characters, because we're still learning who they are, but this is typical Sorkin IMO. The West Wing was like this too. -You have to pay attention to their actions more than their words to understand them. -But I think having one main story as an arc will give us better insight into who they are, because it allows us to them react to same situation at the same time. -But it is the banteristic nature of Sorkin that is unique, but it does take away from going emotionally deeper. It often feels like you're watching a great play--which actually, this episode title is taken from Shakespeare!
Yes, Sorkin added in a fictional story because of the criticism that replaying the big news stories of 2010/2011 with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight was too easy. I don't really agree with it, but I could see how it could come across too idealistic and preachy for most people. Glad to hear it is at least based in reality!
ReplyDeleteI do like the relationships on the show, but the couples continuously keeping circling each other because they simply don't speak out what they feel inside. I could imagine some people having this, I do too. But all the characters in all the couples? No, it feels contrived to keep them apart. Though, Don actually did speak out in this episode after viewing Maggie on YouTube! But it leads to a lot of great banter which is why I don't mind it as much and I agree there is a lot of subtle mannerisms in the acting on Sorkin shows. It is one his peeves and it tells you a lot more sometimes than the things they actually do say.
So there may be some movement on the couples front. I'm not usually a shipper, but I ship Jim/Maggie on this show and I shipped Josh/Donna on The West Wing. Sorkin certainly has a way with words/dialogue/stories! :D
Yes! Henry the Sixth if I remember correctly?!
I agree. I feel bad Sorkin felt he had tp appease some of his viewers, I didn't have a problem with the way he unveiled last season politically.
ReplyDeleteIt figures you watched the West Wing too! All we can hope for is that they don't keep them apart too long. I do agree it's contrived, but I just always felt that way about West Wing.
I kind of always privately ship (and I too like Jim/Maggie dynamics!)
Yeah, I think it is Henry the Sixth!
Haha, yeah! Though it adds a layer of mystery and suspense to it I suppose! :)
ReplyDeleteBut in the West Wing it felt the same way, so I guess it's just Sorkin's style. DIdn't suprise you I watched TWW? :o
Why do you privately ship? Because of how fans can be? Honestly curious. :)
Ya, I mean I think it's natural to have love interests in shows, because relationships are apart of who we are, but I see a good chunk of the shipping community being highly exploiting/high jacking their need for their social concerns when it comes to interpreting those relationships to point of not respecting the work.
ReplyDeleteI ship privately also, because it's never usually the only reason I watch a show. I'm interested in the whole package--and probably care more about how a love story is used. I think that's another reason I love Bad Robot so much and a lot of these newer cable shows, because of all the genre bending, making it more about people and identity more than anything else.
Wow, it's like you read my mind. That's exactly the same way I feel about it! :)
ReplyDeleteThough I have these guilty pleasures in Castle (because of Nathan Fillion) and Bones (because of David Boreanaz) where I ship more openly, because often there is very little to the story as they are procedurals. And I loathe procedurals. xD