Viewers might have seen the last episode of “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip,” Aaron Sorkin’s much-anticipated, then much-derided drama for NBC. The series, about the behind-the-scenes machinations of a television sketch show not unlike “Saturday Night Live,” is being pulled a week earlier than expected after its season-worst ratings performance. It’s unlikely to be renewed for a second season.
And if “Studio 60” comes back to finish its six remaining episodes, it will have everything to do with the respect accorded Sorkin and nothing to do with a last-ditch effort to save it.
The Courier Press goes on to give reasons why the show failed:
The premise wasn’t so much flawed as doomed. It turns out that most Americans didn’t care at all about the career woes and personal crises of pampered Hollywood writers.
It’s hard to argue this point. It’s impossible to know how America wants to spend its time when “Dancing with the Stars” and “Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?” are huge hits. It’s just unfortunate that a show about “the career woes and personal crises of pampered Hollywood writers” can’t find its niche and survive for more than a season. Of course, there was really only one writer who had a big part on the show – Matt Albie (played by Matthew Perry).
It was a drama about a comedy show, but the skits weren’t funny. In fact, much of the show was decidedly unfunny.
This I don’t buy. As far as the skits go, there weren’t very many of them, but Sarah Paulson’s impersonation of Juliette Lewis and The Nic Cage Show were both pretty good. If the folks on SNL can’t come up with consistently funny material, I don’t know why we have such high expectations for Sorkin. I thought the rest of the show was decidedly funny. Especially the relationships between the four main characters – Albie, Harriet Hayes (Paulson), Danny Tripp (Bradley Whitford) and Jordan McDeere (Amanda Peet).
The cast was a bad fit. Aside from Matthew Perry (who was a wonderful surprise) and Timothy Busfield (who was underused), not much else worked.
Paulson and Peet were both terrific, and Whitford fit the Lorne Michaels-mold well. I also thought Steven Weber was hilarious as network president Jack Rudolph, and I wasn’t a fan of “Wings.”
The article goes on to point out all the perceived problems with the show. In the end, it’s hard to argue that America hasn’t grown tired of Sorkin’s writing and creative style. “The West Wing” was still going strong creatively, but saw a dip in ratings over the last few seasons. Even the writer’s fans weren’t sticking with “Studio 60” throughout the season.
But that makes me wonder – when there’s a deathwatch attitude surrounding a show from the get go, are there a certain of number of viewers who bail early because they don’t want to become invested in the show only to have it cancelled? Would the show have done better in the ratings if viewers could watch it in a vacuum?
Of course, this is just a paper in Evansville writing about the demise of the show. It hasn’t officially been cancelled. Maybe there’s still hope.
