![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shallownessThe West Wing 4.21: Life on Mars
Circumstances meant that, again, I watched just the one episode and not a double bill, and then it took forever for me to listen to the podcast. It’s worth noting that this is the first Tim-Matheson-as-John-Hoynes-heavy episode (and it may be the last one) I’ve rewatched since starting to watch Hart of Dixie in which he also appears.
It was a good episode, starting with a dramatic moment at what seemed to be an inordinately early time to be at work, then going back 24 hours to show that the West Wingers had been at work at around the same time then too. Also, whoa, it only took a day for Hoynes to reach the point of resigning. (I didn’t remember why, but I do see what it’s leading to.) I liked the use of the pathetic fallacy here, with the start of the storm to be heard in the background the night before the morning’s deluge that we’d already seen. Granted, they were right in saying on the podcast that rain rarely portends anything good as written by Sorkin.
To go back a mo, the ‘previously’ included Josh and Donna objectifying Joe TO HIS FACE and he’d get more of that from Margaret repeating some of ’the girls’’ views. It was droll, because Margaret was involved, but still.
Apart from that prank she referenced and ribbing by CJ, Joe’s first day was mainly about being an investigator. When he laid it out for CJ with all those things for her to read that I couldn’t be bothered to get up and squint at - although I noted that the intern had got a highlighter for Joe - I mostly worked out what had happened. The podcast usefully emphasised a key line that Joe had heard rumours that had helped him make the connections because it was all rather involved. That line had passed me by but it made more sense of him starting to make connections.
When Hoynes’s fall came, it was brutal. He seemed dazed, and it was an unexpected weakness that had felled him. Bartlet was great, gentle with the messenger, thinking of Mrs Hoynes, while an angrier, more pugnacious Leo was willing to be loyal to him, but I wasn’t minded to agree with his assessment of Hoynes as a great man, because I was less blasé about Hoynes’s cheating than Richard Schiff on the podcast. Anyway Hoynes was allowed to recover dignity in his assessment of the situation in what he owed to his family, the political project and ultimately the nation. He had let classified things slip out of braggadocio. That he could see that made him almost great enough for the office of president, but he never was quite, was he, which makes him a tragic figure.
Great performance from Bradley Whitford, conveying all of Josh’s history with Hoynes, his disappointment in him and unjustified resentent of Joe with very little on the page.
But there was also comedy, from the bird annoying Donna and Josh (and she wouldn’t let him even try to scare it away. Oh, Donna! And heh, apparently the idea had come from an incident in the writers’ room, not for symbolism, according to the podcast.) Also grouchy Toby, who had remembered Andi was giving birth to his kids again and steadfastly refusing to marry him, which everyone knew – the scene with Charlie was a peach. The very modest soul of discretion Charlie was praising in that scene looked ever better in hindsight. Even the whole evidence of life on Mars business, the ridiculous name of the gossip columnist, Josh whining about what Leo knew and wouldn’t tell him, while Joe was unsure of how to get around the place and whether this was all hazing were all comic.
I felt vindicated when Eli Attie said on the podcast that they’d been asked to write CJ and Joe’s scenes as Hepburn-Tracy esque, because I certainly noticed the sizzle, with CJ’s status in the work hierarchy never being in question (although the podcast was right, Joe using ‘Claudia Jean’ was awfully familiar given how brief their acquaintance was.) Joe being the newbie also solidified Will’s position, as did Will being familiar with Toby’s grumpiness and the return of the Laurens. But it was Joe who got to replace Sam, essentially, as part of the quartet visiting Hoynes. I wonder if the network wanted Perry specifically, because it felt like a star proving he was a good dramatic actor too.
Not that this is linked beyond Warner Brothers (or fictional depictions of the possibility of extra-terrestrial life), but I should post this now or it will get too out of date, as to the news about DC dropping Henry Cavill as Superman, I was a bit disappointed – I feel sorry for him as an actor – because I quite liked Man of Steel, but what Zach Snyder then went and did with the character left me cold. Then I realised it would mean no more Amy Adams as Lois, no more Diane Lane as Martha, although I wouldn’t have blamed either actress for passing on a return after what (little) they were given after MoS. Admittedly, I was wondering what the recasting of Batman meant for the rest of the Justice League, and I didn’t realise Cavill cameos in Black Adam because I had zero interest in it after laughing derisorily at the teaser trailer.
BUT Patty Jenkins has been dropped from bringing Wonder Woman 3 to the screen – I don’t know whether it and Gil Gadot as Diana survive. Admittedly, Wonder Woman 1984 had its issues, but that really does dismay me. I think Aquaman 2 will still come out.
I’m willing to wait and see what James Gunn, who is now in charge does (but a teen Superman film – isn’t that going to be Smallville: the movie?) It just says a lot about DC studios that all these shake ups are meant to sort out their movie slate, but are causing as many problems as they are solving as of yet. It would be nice if DC and Warners could make consistently better and more entertaining films.
But then again, I’m not their target quadrant/demographic, or one of ‘the fanboys’ (though I did buy The Batman and may even post my thoughts about that before the end of the year. Short version: my response is more positive than negative, but it was too long and too male. The cast were fine or better, and I quite liked its scuzzy rejig of various familiar elements.)
[Edited for typos 17/2/25.]
Circumstances meant that, again, I watched just the one episode and not a double bill, and then it took forever for me to listen to the podcast. It’s worth noting that this is the first Tim-Matheson-as-John-Hoynes-heavy episode (and it may be the last one) I’ve rewatched since starting to watch Hart of Dixie in which he also appears.
It was a good episode, starting with a dramatic moment at what seemed to be an inordinately early time to be at work, then going back 24 hours to show that the West Wingers had been at work at around the same time then too. Also, whoa, it only took a day for Hoynes to reach the point of resigning. (I didn’t remember why, but I do see what it’s leading to.) I liked the use of the pathetic fallacy here, with the start of the storm to be heard in the background the night before the morning’s deluge that we’d already seen. Granted, they were right in saying on the podcast that rain rarely portends anything good as written by Sorkin.
To go back a mo, the ‘previously’ included Josh and Donna objectifying Joe TO HIS FACE and he’d get more of that from Margaret repeating some of ’the girls’’ views. It was droll, because Margaret was involved, but still.
Apart from that prank she referenced and ribbing by CJ, Joe’s first day was mainly about being an investigator. When he laid it out for CJ with all those things for her to read that I couldn’t be bothered to get up and squint at - although I noted that the intern had got a highlighter for Joe - I mostly worked out what had happened. The podcast usefully emphasised a key line that Joe had heard rumours that had helped him make the connections because it was all rather involved. That line had passed me by but it made more sense of him starting to make connections.
When Hoynes’s fall came, it was brutal. He seemed dazed, and it was an unexpected weakness that had felled him. Bartlet was great, gentle with the messenger, thinking of Mrs Hoynes, while an angrier, more pugnacious Leo was willing to be loyal to him, but I wasn’t minded to agree with his assessment of Hoynes as a great man, because I was less blasé about Hoynes’s cheating than Richard Schiff on the podcast. Anyway Hoynes was allowed to recover dignity in his assessment of the situation in what he owed to his family, the political project and ultimately the nation. He had let classified things slip out of braggadocio. That he could see that made him almost great enough for the office of president, but he never was quite, was he, which makes him a tragic figure.
Great performance from Bradley Whitford, conveying all of Josh’s history with Hoynes, his disappointment in him and unjustified resentent of Joe with very little on the page.
But there was also comedy, from the bird annoying Donna and Josh (and she wouldn’t let him even try to scare it away. Oh, Donna! And heh, apparently the idea had come from an incident in the writers’ room, not for symbolism, according to the podcast.) Also grouchy Toby, who had remembered Andi was giving birth to his kids again and steadfastly refusing to marry him, which everyone knew – the scene with Charlie was a peach. The very modest soul of discretion Charlie was praising in that scene looked ever better in hindsight. Even the whole evidence of life on Mars business, the ridiculous name of the gossip columnist, Josh whining about what Leo knew and wouldn’t tell him, while Joe was unsure of how to get around the place and whether this was all hazing were all comic.
I felt vindicated when Eli Attie said on the podcast that they’d been asked to write CJ and Joe’s scenes as Hepburn-Tracy esque, because I certainly noticed the sizzle, with CJ’s status in the work hierarchy never being in question (although the podcast was right, Joe using ‘Claudia Jean’ was awfully familiar given how brief their acquaintance was.) Joe being the newbie also solidified Will’s position, as did Will being familiar with Toby’s grumpiness and the return of the Laurens. But it was Joe who got to replace Sam, essentially, as part of the quartet visiting Hoynes. I wonder if the network wanted Perry specifically, because it felt like a star proving he was a good dramatic actor too.
Not that this is linked beyond Warner Brothers (or fictional depictions of the possibility of extra-terrestrial life), but I should post this now or it will get too out of date, as to the news about DC dropping Henry Cavill as Superman, I was a bit disappointed – I feel sorry for him as an actor – because I quite liked Man of Steel, but what Zach Snyder then went and did with the character left me cold. Then I realised it would mean no more Amy Adams as Lois, no more Diane Lane as Martha, although I wouldn’t have blamed either actress for passing on a return after what (little) they were given after MoS. Admittedly, I was wondering what the recasting of Batman meant for the rest of the Justice League, and I didn’t realise Cavill cameos in Black Adam because I had zero interest in it after laughing derisorily at the teaser trailer.
BUT Patty Jenkins has been dropped from bringing Wonder Woman 3 to the screen – I don’t know whether it and Gil Gadot as Diana survive. Admittedly, Wonder Woman 1984 had its issues, but that really does dismay me. I think Aquaman 2 will still come out.
I’m willing to wait and see what James Gunn, who is now in charge does (but a teen Superman film – isn’t that going to be Smallville: the movie?) It just says a lot about DC studios that all these shake ups are meant to sort out their movie slate, but are causing as many problems as they are solving as of yet. It would be nice if DC and Warners could make consistently better and more entertaining films.
But then again, I’m not their target quadrant/demographic, or one of ‘the fanboys’ (though I did buy The Batman and may even post my thoughts about that before the end of the year. Short version: my response is more positive than negative, but it was too long and too male. The cast were fine or better, and I quite liked its scuzzy rejig of various familiar elements.)
[Edited for typos 17/2/25.]
