Friday Night Right

Why is a show called Friday Night lights on Tusday night? Why is there a show on Mondays that gets its inspiration from a program on Saturday nights? Regardless, FNL is better than SNL and Studio 60 combined and here's why: the line, "Are you crazy about me? Or just crazy?", brings the Matt/Harriet relationship to its dizzying height. So dizzyingly high that I can no longer watch this garbage.

Studio 60 could possibly be the 60-minute drama version of Two and a Half Men and According to Jim: bland, predictable and oh-so-popular among people who get 70% of their news from People magazine.

Want some brain food? Give Friday Night Lights a chance -- it just got a full season order from NBC, so you won't risk getting attached and then being let down. Whereas Studio 60 is all about gloss and character who not only are steadfast in their beliefs but can never do wrong, Friday Night Lights is the opposite. Kyle Chandler plays a hardass coach who doesn't always know best. It's refreshing. That, and the wicked hot cheerleaders.


Blogger Elliott complained...

I thought that the first part of the Nevada storyline was very good -- great pacing, some interesting conflict. Probably the best episode since the pilot. And then last night they crapped the bed by starting off with a forced gay marriage debate and ending with a maudlin plot point about a brother in Iraq.

Good to see Fat Guy and Asian Girl get some PT along with the rest of our Not Ready For SNL Players -- Black Guy, Cute Guy, Jewish Guy, Hot Girl.

11/14/2006 3:46 PM
comment permalink  

Post a Comment


Vote, for a change

"I don't care" and "I don't know enough about the candidates/issues" are two of the poorest excuses for not heading to the polls. By not voting, you are forfeiting your right to complain about pretty much everything.

Take 20 minutes, catch up and then stop by your polling station.

Massachusetts Gubenatorial Candidate Comparison
Massachusetts Ballot Questions Information
Where to vote


Post a Comment


Just Have to...

My coworkers have seen me for most of the day trying to hold in deep laughter while I wear my headphones because of this:

I don't know if it it originally was released as an XBox commercial or if someone just added the still at the end. After some online searching, I'm guessing that the above video is an audition tape for the below video (recognize gunman #4?).


Blogger Elliott complained...

I give up. Who's gunman #4?

11/07/2006 3:55 PM
comment permalink  
Blogger Carl complained...

I'm pretty sure it's the guy from the 'audition' tape.

11/07/2006 4:37 PM
comment permalink  

Post a Comment


Studio Whatever Whatever Whatever

Studio 60 on Sunset Strip was supposed to be the it show of the 2006-2007 season -- Aaron "Cocaine is my creative juice" Sorkin producing a behind-the-scenes type show featuring some pretty heavy TV talent in the form of Bradley Cooper, Matthew Perry, Steven Weber, DL Hughley and Timothy Busfield -- too bad it's been sucking.

The focus of nearly every show has been the failed relationship between Matthew Perry's character, Matt -- a brilliant, yet abrasive comedy writer -- and Sarah Paulsen's character, Harriet -- a comedically talented, devout Southern Baptist. This might have worked had there been any glimmer of chemistry between the two or a reason for the audience to believe that they would have gotten along together during their relationship. This isn't the case and the show suffers immensely for it -- similar to the debacle that was The O.C.'s third season.

I can see it now:

  • Episode 13: Matt and Harriet end up sleeping with each other after a wild wrap party
  • Episode 14: An entire episode of "things [getting] weird"
  • Episode 20: Matt and Harriet are officially an item again
  • Sometime in season two: Matt and Harriet are off again
  • Repeat every 18-22 episodes

I should be the show runner.

Studio 60 would be a much better show if they simple changed the focus. So far, the subplots have been much more interesting: Bradley Whitfords's character's drug problem, Amanda Peet's character's ex-husband writing a tell-all book about her, one of the staff writers plagiarizing, a 90-year-old blacklisted writer sneaking onto the set, D.L. Hughley's attempts to find a "real" black writer for the show, just to give an example.

Many of the critics who want to perform sexual acts on Aaron Sorkin fear the reason the show is doing poorly in the ratings is that it's too high-brow -- that people in Nebraska don't care about the behind-the-scene action at a fictional sketch show. I find it hard to believe that Nebraskans would be more interested in people discovering they have superpowers or a group of people stranded on an island, but they apparently do, according to the ratings. If Aaron Sorkin wants to show an audience a love/hate relationship, why do it against the backdrop of a behind-the-scenes look at a sketch comedy show? Why not just do it in a vacuum? Why not the vacuum of space where no one has to listen to it? It's the content that stinks, not the context.

The last episode of Studio 60 was actually decent: the Matt/Harriet story was kept to a minimum and most of the actors other than Matthew Perry and Sarah Paulsen had significant things to do. Too bad that was two weeks ago and the show as off the schedule this week.

Studio 60 probably won't make it past March and will go down in history as Aaron Sorkin's failed bid to skewer the television industry. Too bad, because I do enjoy pooping on it.


Anonymous Anonymous complained...

While Studio 60 gets the press, the best new show on Monday nights is "Justice" on Fox. It is well-written and entertaining- basically the legal version of House without being a ripoff of House (If that makes any sense). Victor Garber and Kerr Smith's performances remind us why we should have sent Sam Waterston to the glue factory years ago. If you're going to bore youself with Aaron Sorkin's unwhimsically inane psychobabble at 10, you might as well entertain yourself beforehand at 9.

11/08/2006 11:21 PM
comment permalink  

Post a Comment


Whoopitedoo summed it up better than I could have, but I just wanted to throw my two cents in as well: Red Auerbach was the most important non-player in NBA history. In this modern day of triangle offenses and designer suits and whoring for ESPN and TNT, there will never be someone like him again.

The Celtics did right by his memory yesterday both with the City Hall Plaza rally in his honor and the opening night pre-game ceremonies. Paul Pierce added a nice touch by dedicating not just the '06-'07 season to Red (which we knew about through ESPN and the Globe for the past few days), but the rest of his career as a Celtic (a nice surprise).

It's damn shame that the Celtics have been consistently terrible for the last 4 years -- Pierce's popularity level in this town could easily match that of David Ortiz or Tom Brady if only the team could make the headlines. What's doubly depressing about the Celtics competitive situation is that for the most part, this is a team without egos -- the only thing bringing it down is lack of experience and poor coaching decisions. Doc Rivers's inability to settle on a set starting lineup will get him booted by the end of the year. We can also say adios to Danny Ainge at the end of the season if Rivers' theoretical replacement can't show some improvement. This year has "Pitino-in-01" written all over it.

Despite it all, I'm sure Red would be happy about the direction of the franchise as of this season. Here's hoping they eventually win a championship in his memory.

Addendum -- have you seen Kendrick Perkins??? That dude is huge!


Post a Comment