TWW: Last season finale but one
May. 31st, 2024 08:37 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shallownessThe West Wing - 6.22: 2162 Votes
Gripping enough story even if I felt that it never got all that deep, perhaps because there were too many characters to serve. I thought the direction of the convention, particularly the public parts, was flashy.
So, the Democratic convention was a deciding convention and Russell, Santos, Hoynes and teams were fighting for delegates’ votes. Hoynes seemed very optimistic at a distant third, and Josh went to ask him to give his votes to Santos, although it never seemed likely that that would work. (Hoynes’s refusal to face that he was sunk because of all the scandals seemed absurd, although Laurence O’Donnell argued cogently for the politician always being the last to know in these scenarios.)
And suddenly Baker was not too committed to the deal to run as Russell’s VP. Turned out it was because he was planning a last-minute run himself, which caused panicked consternation as he took votes off everyone. (Santos and Josh had noticeably been very quiet about who they’d like to be Veep.) Suddenly the rounds of voting became more exciting for the TV networks, but, as Leo bitterly said, watching their party car crash might be entertaining tv but wasn’t so good for the party, or for democracy and the country by extension. Josh was promising jobs, the teaching unions were trying to get Santos to drop one of his education policies, and lots of shouty, coercive phone calls were being made by everyone.
And then came the fax (A FAX! How quaint!) about Mrs Baker’s depression. I got the blackmail point and I got the non-disclosure looking bad after Bartlet’s MS and it being because he hadn’t gone through the primaries as the others had. Indeed, he’d chosen to avoid that process, and in hindsight or because of retconning, it looked as though that was why he’d avoided it. I did think all the campaigns should have asked who’d sent it, but the moral dilemma was to use it or not. Josh argued ‘yay’ (and he had some valid political points.) Santos said ‘nay’. In the Russell camp, Donna was also against being the ones to release it, making me yell, ‘You’re backing the wrong candidate for you.’ But it looked as though Will and Russell didn’t have a problem breaking the story. Apparently this was based on something that had happened a few years before the show came out. Would a candidate’s spouse having mental ill health play differently now?
Apart from ethics, Santos’s other plus was that he seemed more likely to fight Vinick. Russell raised how he’d go about it, kinda, but never sounded very convincing. He was part of the establishment, though more in name than substance. And he definitely didn’t have Vinick’s substance.
Leo finally talked to Santos after so much liaising with an increasingly tired Josh.
Santos’s big speech (Obama!) was rousing about democracy, but really, while it was nice and powerful that he won over the audience, never mind the episode's title, it was Bartlet’s vote that he needed to win, because it was clear that he had to step in and decide. And he won it. However, Helen’s proud, ‘That’s my husband that the crowd are cheering’ face at Josh as Santos delivered was ace.
I think I am less excited about Leo as candidate than first time around, because it felt like a sop to the show’s audience and to Josh, (especially after the Leo-Santos scene, and yes, Santos calling his behaviour out in his speech.) However, it backed up what Santos had said about ‘imperfect lives’. On the podcast, Hrishi pushed O’Donnell about this choice, and about it all being delivered as a hurried fait accompli. The thinking seems to have been that he’d offer the ballast of experience, but my argument was that he hadn’t been elected like all these governors and senators and whatnot. And, of course, that it worked dramatically, which it did.
I was delighted that Josh quietly went to celebrate his candidate’s win with Donna over bottles of beer (in Russell’s campaign territory.) Like Hrishi said, Donna had been a winner in terms of character journeys in this season, having left Josh and got an independent job, where she’d flourished.
It struck me that Kate had very much an outsider’s view of politics, even as she walked along the corridors of the West Wing. The leak about the ‘secret’ military shuttle had come out, and so there had to be an investigation, while the President worried about what to do. Toby wasn’t happy with the feds all around, although as Kate quite reasonably said, it was a federal crime and the President had ordered them to find the leak. He was still bitter and unimpressed by Santos. And I was sad because I knew what was coming; the verdict on the podcast was equivocal as to whether Richard Schiff was right to be so upset or if the writers had done enough. I certainly was rewatching it knowing the truth, but I don’t remember what I thought or felt when I first watched it, e.g. if I worried about CJ being the leaker.
A very neat ending with Vinick and setting us up for the battle of the next season, anyway.
Gripping enough story even if I felt that it never got all that deep, perhaps because there were too many characters to serve. I thought the direction of the convention, particularly the public parts, was flashy.
So, the Democratic convention was a deciding convention and Russell, Santos, Hoynes and teams were fighting for delegates’ votes. Hoynes seemed very optimistic at a distant third, and Josh went to ask him to give his votes to Santos, although it never seemed likely that that would work. (Hoynes’s refusal to face that he was sunk because of all the scandals seemed absurd, although Laurence O’Donnell argued cogently for the politician always being the last to know in these scenarios.)
And suddenly Baker was not too committed to the deal to run as Russell’s VP. Turned out it was because he was planning a last-minute run himself, which caused panicked consternation as he took votes off everyone. (Santos and Josh had noticeably been very quiet about who they’d like to be Veep.) Suddenly the rounds of voting became more exciting for the TV networks, but, as Leo bitterly said, watching their party car crash might be entertaining tv but wasn’t so good for the party, or for democracy and the country by extension. Josh was promising jobs, the teaching unions were trying to get Santos to drop one of his education policies, and lots of shouty, coercive phone calls were being made by everyone.
And then came the fax (A FAX! How quaint!) about Mrs Baker’s depression. I got the blackmail point and I got the non-disclosure looking bad after Bartlet’s MS and it being because he hadn’t gone through the primaries as the others had. Indeed, he’d chosen to avoid that process, and in hindsight or because of retconning, it looked as though that was why he’d avoided it. I did think all the campaigns should have asked who’d sent it, but the moral dilemma was to use it or not. Josh argued ‘yay’ (and he had some valid political points.) Santos said ‘nay’. In the Russell camp, Donna was also against being the ones to release it, making me yell, ‘You’re backing the wrong candidate for you.’ But it looked as though Will and Russell didn’t have a problem breaking the story. Apparently this was based on something that had happened a few years before the show came out. Would a candidate’s spouse having mental ill health play differently now?
Apart from ethics, Santos’s other plus was that he seemed more likely to fight Vinick. Russell raised how he’d go about it, kinda, but never sounded very convincing. He was part of the establishment, though more in name than substance. And he definitely didn’t have Vinick’s substance.
Leo finally talked to Santos after so much liaising with an increasingly tired Josh.
Santos’s big speech (Obama!) was rousing about democracy, but really, while it was nice and powerful that he won over the audience, never mind the episode's title, it was Bartlet’s vote that he needed to win, because it was clear that he had to step in and decide. And he won it. However, Helen’s proud, ‘That’s my husband that the crowd are cheering’ face at Josh as Santos delivered was ace.
I think I am less excited about Leo as candidate than first time around, because it felt like a sop to the show’s audience and to Josh, (especially after the Leo-Santos scene, and yes, Santos calling his behaviour out in his speech.) However, it backed up what Santos had said about ‘imperfect lives’. On the podcast, Hrishi pushed O’Donnell about this choice, and about it all being delivered as a hurried fait accompli. The thinking seems to have been that he’d offer the ballast of experience, but my argument was that he hadn’t been elected like all these governors and senators and whatnot. And, of course, that it worked dramatically, which it did.
I was delighted that Josh quietly went to celebrate his candidate’s win with Donna over bottles of beer (in Russell’s campaign territory.) Like Hrishi said, Donna had been a winner in terms of character journeys in this season, having left Josh and got an independent job, where she’d flourished.
It struck me that Kate had very much an outsider’s view of politics, even as she walked along the corridors of the West Wing. The leak about the ‘secret’ military shuttle had come out, and so there had to be an investigation, while the President worried about what to do. Toby wasn’t happy with the feds all around, although as Kate quite reasonably said, it was a federal crime and the President had ordered them to find the leak. He was still bitter and unimpressed by Santos. And I was sad because I knew what was coming; the verdict on the podcast was equivocal as to whether Richard Schiff was right to be so upset or if the writers had done enough. I certainly was rewatching it knowing the truth, but I don’t remember what I thought or felt when I first watched it, e.g. if I worried about CJ being the leaker.
A very neat ending with Vinick and setting us up for the battle of the next season, anyway.
