Dish gets back their troubled heroes (AMC)

Which begs the question: Why now?

The new deal, according to The New York Post, has Dish paying AMC Networks and Cablevision $700 million in cash (to be stored in Walter White-styled locker), and in return, AMC will let Dish show their programming.

When the threat of Dish cutting off service first came to our attention, they were getting awful close to the 11th hour mark for the premiere of the season of Mad Men.

"Don't worry, this has happened before," a colleague said, referring to Dish's continuing war-time negotiations with Cablevision. But this one was different: the premiere came and went, and Dish refused to play ball, despite the fact that in the past year, AMC Network had split from Cablevision and was now a privately owned company run by Josh Sapan.

But Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead (along with Mad Men) are the three major staples of AMC's brand network. So why fold for the zombie show instead of the one getting all the Emmys?

It's pretty simple: while Breaking Bad is critically acclaimed, its ratings high for the series premiere brought them 2.9 million viewers. For The Walking Dead season three premiere, the record for the network was shattered with an astonishing 10 million tuning into the opening. Once Dish saw how many potential eyes they could be losing, reaching a deal with AMC was a no-BRAINS!-er.

She's now a deputy editor at xoJane. Even more, her big debut for the site is about how she supposedly inspired a character on Aaron Sorkin's The Newsroom. But less exciting than the fact that she inspired a character on The Newsroom—which, really, what can be less exciting? A character on Studio 60?—is the way she characterized the Post to Aaron Sorkin on a date, and now, blogged about it.

So here's the setup: Aaron Sorkin is gonna take her on a date. He picks her up at the post after sending her flowers with a moderately flattering note attached to them. They start talking about their days. And then:

At dinner, he asked me what I had done for the day. At the time, I was writing a story about one of the "Real Housewives" on Bravo. And not only that, it was a "takedown piece" as we call them at The Post. Meaning, an almost faux-populist, folksy "we're not gonna take it anymore," very tabloid-y STFU rant for whatever winged creature of the moment has flown too close to the sun.

Today it was Bethenny Frankel.

Poor Bethenny. She had done three recent things that were not so good. And maybe another reporter had an anecdote or something. And you know how journalism works don't you. Three things make a trend. A trend -- or a takedown piece.

Sorkin asks her what a Takedown Piece. She replies (gleeful emphasis ours):

"You know, a takedown piece. That's what we call them at The Post. That's what we do. It's The Post. It's a formula where you talk about all the things the public is pissed off about. It sucks. I hate it. It's depressing. It's pure negativity. It's just toxic. But it's my job. In fact, I even tried to get out of this one because it's about Bethenny Frankel, one of 'The Real Housewives of New York,' and I like Bethenny and have used her as a source before. But I just can't get out of it."

"So...it's just bitchiness?" he asked, horrified. "What if you suggested five different alternative stories?"

"It's The Post," I said. "Have you ever read The Post?"

Now this goes without saying that not everyone who works at the Post is likely as craven in their work or as self-aware of it as Ms. Stadtmiller is/was. But this is also the appropriate response to people who read over your shoulder on the subway, and find themselves horrified at any random day's Post piece. Either way, you can imagine how this ended, because it's Aaron Sorkin: No, not with crack cocaine and potted plants, but with Ms. Stadtmiller getting a preachy monologue for dinner, and later, a Sorkin character based on her.

How does she know it's explicitly based on her? Because Sorkin emailed her last November to ask her about that very dinner. And we know this because it is presented, in the form of an email, which is screengrabbed to xoJane's site. Rather than ruin Aaron Sorkin's email contents for you, you should go read it (in all fairness, Ms. Stadtmiller's xoJane tenure has started on a high note). If anything, it is an englightened guide to what Post reporters think of their jobs, a DIY guide to inspiring (or not inspiring) your very own Aaron Sorkin character, and a very, very good way to ensure you will never work for The New York Post ever again.

I INSPIRED A "BAD" VERSION OF MYSELF ON AARON SORKIN'S "THE NEWSROOM" [xoJane]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

The Soup Nazi at the Seinfeld Food Truck (Pix11)

In case you missed it, the Seinfeld Food Truck--part of the Jerry Seinfeld Nostalgic Brand Experience™--was in New York today as part of its regional tour across the country. Parked outside of the PIX11 Studio (and baring the local station's logo on the truck) in Midtown from 12-2 p.m.

The mobile food station served real Seinfeld-inspired food, like muffin tops (Episode: The Muffin Tops), junior mints (Episode: The Junior Mint), black and white cookies (Episode: The Dinner Party), Twix (Episode: The Dealership), Snapple (Episode: The Visa), and bottled water (not from any episode.) Of course, the pièce de résistance was mulligatawny soup Soup (Episode: The Soup Nazi), served by Larry Thomas, the actor who played the iconic chef on the show.

Here is one excited fan's video experience of the event:

http://youtu.be/W3Y2xd7h5w8

You'd think that people wouldn't stand in line to receive food that the show advertised as vomit-inducing (the cookie), accidentally dropped inside an exposed body cavity during surgery (Junior Mint), or served by a fascist, but you know how fans are.

They are insane.

Unsurprisingly, schadenfreude spread quickly through Twitter. Did former MTV VJ  Gideon Yago delete his account over the ordeal? Would a lack of writers make the show better or worse? Why is Will McAvoy tweeting about the Colorado shootings when he lives in a pre-2012 world? Let's find out! (Hashtag SNARKROOM.)

Take, for instance, a recent Blouin ArtInfo interview with the daughter of the drummer from Bad Company, granddaughter to an absurdly wealthy British financier, and a star of HBO's groundbreaking anthropological document Girls, Jemima Kirke. Besides act, did you know she paints? And her subjects may ring a bell:

While poking around your Web site, I came across a nude portrait of your friend and costar Lena Dunham. What was it like to paint her?

During one of our sittings she was on vocal rest so we sat in silence… which was really nice. For another, she had a UTI so she was bitching and whining the whole time which touched me because she sat through it anyway for the sake of the painting. It felt very right that I paint her. We’re both artists. We use each other for inspiration. We help each other out.

Want to see it?

[Ed. KINDA NSFW? I GUESS?]

Behold.

And thus, the countdown for the next season of Girls gets a little longer as sociologists and liberal arts underclassmen chomp harder at the bit for the relatively quirky and universally accessible life lesson for Hannah and The Girls that this moment with inevitably provide. Or as one keen-eyed and likely prescient reader put it: "Guaranteed GIRLS S2 B-plot." Collectors, have at it.

[Previously: HBO’s ‘Girls’ Second Season Casting Notices Getting Progressively Funnier]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Last night, he gave us an hour's worth of answers. This morning, some editors of the Observer gathered to talk about how he managed the task.

Let's talk about 'The Newsroom.' As our fearless leader, Spiers, please tell us how you're going to save us all and revolutionize everything.

Elizabeth Spiers, Editor-in-Chief: Oh, I have A PLAN.

Do you, now?

ES: Had to miss 'Newsroom' for a wedding last night. But from what I've heard it doesn't sound like I missed much. Surprisingly to me, [The New Yorker's] Emily Nussbaum HATED it.

Brian Gallagher, Deputy Editor: Not enough Brooklyn for her.

ES: Apparently. Not enough vampires either.

BG: Aside from the cable news talking heads sucking the lifeblood from our great republic.

Jim Hanas, Social Media Editor: I had to watch the finale of Sister Wives. Turns out Meri and Janelle HATE each other.

So, let me guess: You all loved it.

Aaron Gell, Executive Editor: I'm going to just come out and admit that as manipulative and cheesy as it was, I found it unexpectedly moving. I actually teared up at one point. And I can't figure out why.

BG: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH (about the 4th estate and the situation regarding American democracy)! I found it exciting and charming, but also completely full of shit. And the fact that Jeff Daniels is a combination of Little Man Tate, Will Hunting, and Adlai Stevenson is also a little hard to swallow. I mean, the guy seems to know everything.

Right, well, that's Sorkin for you. But wait, Aaron: I kind of want to have a breakthrough here, because the fact that you found it moving is legitimately shocking to me.

AG: Me too. I have a thing for plucky blondes.

BG: Yeah, that was really big of him to remember [the assistant's] name at the end.
I mean, "Your name is Margaret Jordan" is like the equivalent of a raise, it seems.

To take it from the top, for a moment: Can we first say that nobody's ever been to a media panel that engaged, ever? More than anything, this made me think greater media panels were possible.

BG: Yeah, and also the professor moderating it looked nothing like any professor I've ever seen, but beside the point. I would like to have known what the title/conceit of the panel was.

AG: But seriously, why IS America the greatest country in the world?

BG: I mean, the substance of his formulation is probably why most intelligent people would tell you that it is the greatest in the world. The possibility, the premise of America is as Burroughs said, "the last and greatest of human dreams" (though he did say it had been betrayed). But yes, what she had on her magic note cards, that it's what it can be.

Did anyone notice that this is the closest thing to 'The West Wing' that Aaron Sorkin has done since then? Will McEvoy is basically the perfect news anchor in the same way Bartlett was the perfect president. But why does this feel so wrong when that felt so right?

BG: That is a good question.

I tried finding the answer in the idea that people in D.C. loved West Wing, and everyone in media seemingly hates The Newsroom. Is it because media folks are inherently skeptical and self-loathing and distrustful of their own image, and politicos are narcissists (and D.C. is America's Ugly Hollywood)? Or is it because one show's good and the other one isn't? Also of note: Sorkin had actual politicos working on The West Wing. And as insane as they were (Paul Begala, Peggy Noonan), they seemed to get a lot right.

AG: I don't agree that 'The West Wing' felt right. It felt good, for a minute, until I realized we still had Bush in the White House and he was the real president and watching a show wouldn't change that. I suspect the same will happen with 'Newsroom.'

BG: There's no question that Sorkin can push those buttons, but it's sentimental to the point of being cynical.

And yet, it made Gell go emo!

AG: True, I did start to think that Sorkin's ability to pluck those strings has not been all that well understood. The politics and the stylistic tics are maybe beside the point. It's Spielberg style manipuation, and it's really fun while it lasts.

BG: Also, I think it's amusing that the cynosure of journalistic integrity is being rendered as a TELEVISION newsroom. It's like we totally forgot that only one generation ago, television news was already considered a far degraded form of the craft. And that Jeff Daniels is basically answering a situation that television news basically caused to begin with.

Right, Brian, that's the other thing. Not to be 'like that' but I think television news is irrelevant. And boring. And people still don't see what happens at newspapers, which would've made for a better show, despite all conventional wisdom to the contrary. To wit, I present the fifth season of The Wire as evidence for possibility.

AG: I don't think the show is about television or journalism at all but about being stressed at work and having those sad little victories. That's what all compelling TV is about I think.

BG: Right, but I think that for it's imagery, the show had to be about TV.

But there is an interesting question and challenge there, which is: What would cable news look like done well? If it even possible? And I actually did find that compelling.

BG: Brian Lamb does cable news well, but most people find that quite boring.

I can't remember the last time a television show was armed with actual journalists who could break news on air that isn't breaking in to, like, Balloon Boy coverage. Do you think that's even possible?

BG: Speaking of which, it just occurred to me that this show is thus far setting up network news as the antidote to cable news, which is almost hilarious.

Again, I admire the show for trying to come up with what it would look like. Not Sorkin, but the show. Because one guy attempting to answer this is just insanely egotistical, which Aaron Sorkin most certainly is.

BG: My first thought was that 'Newsroom' is to a newsroom as 'General Hospital' is to an actual hospital. It's dramatized to the point of incredulity, but it's still somewhat fun to watch.

Did anybody notice when they invoked Erin Andrews—who was the victim of very real-life sexual harassment and predatory behavior—as the lady who Aaron Sorkin’s very fake character is dating? That was odd.

BG: The first thing I thought was that Sorkin at one point asked her out and she said no, and he was settling that score.

Wouldn't surprise me.

BG: But okay, that is an interesting point. That same issue is sort of in play in the fact that they are seemingly going to cover things retroactively. Like the BP spill. We all know how that played out, but they are going to go back and do the ideal version of the coverage.

Right. I was really skeptical about this when I heard it - and in no way was the BP spill that exciting, nor did news break on it that quickly - but I enjoyed the way it played out. And again, I ask: Could news ever look like that?

AG: Maybe if we all get our news from Newsroom and vote for fake presidents we can pretend that the world is awesome.

BG: And then once that fake world is well-established, we can secede from the real world.

With the vampires from True Blood.

ES: Sorkin's ability to get away with preachy exposition by coating with wit is sort of amazing. Anybody else and I'd want to punch the writer.

BG: I feel the same, except for the "anybody else" part. Can you imagine how annoying Sorkin must've been in college?

Insufferable. Especially at Syracuse.

BG: He's like a hidebound version of Diablo Cody. All the dialogue is impossibly witty, and I think that in the end it's at the expense of any depth. After a while, it all seems implausible, precisely because of how "good" the dialogue is.

AG: Maybe we should support this... the media hasn't had a particularly good rep lately. An hour of propaganda on premium cable every week could do wonders for our careers.

BG: [That wit] is fine in something like 'In The Loop,' because it's not aiming for profundity. But Sorkin most certainly is.

But again, 'The West Wing' managed to have witty characters, and it did at moments achieve great moments of profundity. I don't see this show winning a Peabody.

BG: Are you kidding? The media loves nothing more than to give itself awards. And a show about the slipping standards of news? I'll eat my hat if it doesn't win a Peabody.

JH: "Why does everyone in media hate the show so much?" Um. Because we hate everything, especially if it involves anyone we might run into.

Yeah, but everyone in media loved the fifth season of 'The Wire.' And David Simon was actually a reporter at The Baltimore Sun.

AG: Well, Sorkin DATED MODO. Hello?

BG: To be fair, everyone in the New York media demographic loved the entire run of The Wire. But point taken.

ES: I think that's the rare instance of media loving something because it's actually good.

BG: Back to the content for a second. It really annoys me that they seem to be setting up some sort of sexual/romantic past with Jeff Daniels and Emily Mortimer, and from the allusions in the dialogue that somehow precipitated his stopping caring about journalistic standards...

Right? Not to flash a feminist card, but why are all the women on the show so patently nerve-wracked and emotional?

BG: Also, it was very funny that they had to explain away her seemingly discordant speech about American democracy delivered in Oxbridge's finest elocution. "She was born in America!"

The Power of the Studio Note (also see: Dev Patel's entire role on the show).

JH: I'm still stuck on this thing about what the New York media will embrace and reject. What do 'Mad Men' and and 'The Wire' have in common that 'Girls' and 'The Newsroom' lack? Or maybe it's the other way around.

BG: [But] the New York media certainly seems to have embraced 'Girls,' no?

ES: I think 'Girls' lacks sophistication, vis a vis the other shows. But people don't measure them against each other because everyone knows it's Lena Dunham's debut. And there's a bit of condescending head patting that she could do her very own TV show.

FINAL QUESTION TIME. Why did Gell get weepy? Everyone, GO!

AG: That's easy: male menopause.

I think it's because you were coming to terms with enjoying it. The show, not male menopause.

BG: I mean, the show I think is good television. I just don't think it should be read as legitimate media criticism, or even having much bearing on reality. Like most television.

AG: I think it's because putting out a weekly paper is hard and stressful and requires a certain amount of self-delusion that what we're doing matters, or could matter. And editing a bunch of starry-eyed 24-year-olds is a bitch, and like Will I actually can't remember half their names, and yet it's inspiring when they succeed and Chartbeat lights up and the lawyers start calling... In that sense, on a psychological level, 'Newsroom' taps into a certain wish I think I'm harboring about what we're doing having some kind of meaning. Because it certainly doesn't pay that much.

BG: Yeah, but Gell, don't forget the time you gave up $1 million dollars a year of your salary for the ability to fire [Observer managing editor Michael] Woodsmall at the end of every week.

AG: A good investment, I think.

Last thoughts, anyone?

JH: "[Keels Over]"

ES: I was looking at galleys and I just had the sudden realization that the U.S. is not the best country in the world. I'm going to go rethink my entire career.

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Everyone from Jay McInerny to New York Times theater critic Charles Isherwood to this paper's owner to—but of course—New York magazine's Approval Matrix (which, of course, made a recent Approval Matrix in the magazine).

But what is it like to be plucked, as though by the cloud-like hand of the Gossip Girl casting gods, and immortalized for fifteen seconds of television, mostly to an audience of teenagers who probably don't know who you are?

Isherwood himself once attempted an explanation of this in the pages of the Times. It began with a quote by Gore Vidal. Needless to say, it was not sufficient.

At least, not compared to essayist Sloane Crosley's entry in this month's issue of The Believer, in which no less than 4,625 words are dedicated to the experience, which—in toto—is apparently akin to living through the last thirty minutes of Adaptation, with disappointingly less drug use, and Susan Orlean having been replaced by the guy who plays Chuck Bass.

For example, this is what it's like to experience the pressure of having to dress one's self on Gossip Girl:

She pulled the last dress from my bag and called for her assistant.

"This will work," she said. "But tell you what—why don’t you borrow a pair of these?"

We were flanked by walls of overpriced designer fabrics and tailoring that glimmered at every turn. I peered over her shoulder, anticipating a tray of designer earrings or, say, some very expensive shoes.

She handed me a pair or Spanx.

And this is what it's like to share a scene with Chuck Bass:

Leighton wasn’t in my scene. Nor was Blake Lively (who plays Dan’s ex, Serena) or Jessica Szohr (Dan’s childhood friend, the bi-racial daughter of Vermont hippies, whose mom is a dead ringer for Maya Angelou) or Chace Crawford. But Ed Westwick, the stylish Brit who plays Chuck, was. During the long breaks between takes, in which the women lay on the master bed like mummies, lest they ruin their makeup, Ed chatted with concern about riots in London that had been dominating the news. Then he showed me a perversely hilarious video of a horse being hit by a truck on a country road.

Emphasis ours. Needless to say, not that we've watched in a few years, but this has ruined Gossip Girl forever for us, in that it will in no way be as hysterically funny or as remotely interesting as Ms. Crosley's on-scene exploits (especially of note: the piece of dialogue given to her, a surprise not at all worth spoiling).

Do enjoy:

A DOG NAMED HUMPHREY [The Believer]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Now that all the discussions have been had about how diverse (or not) or authentic (or not) the show is (or is not) have been had, we can get on to the pressing matter of portraying the lives of Young Hip Brooklynites with more authenticity and diversity (and authentic diversity) than ever! Or so a casting notice for the second season would have us believe.

From an official Girls casting notice posted to Backstage.com, we now know what "hipster" typecasting looks like:

Seeking—Hipster Types: male and female, 18-30s, all ethnicities, all types, specifically seeking people with tattoos, piercings, colored hair, and unique looks. Young Adult (ages 18-29), Thirties (ages 30-39). Caucasian/White, African-American/Black, Latin/Hispanic/South American, Asian, Native American, European, Middle Eastern, Indian/South Asian, Other.

And no, there's no nudity. So you can't do that. But hey, they're trying to cast diverse..ly. Is this what they call "progress"? That said, we can still fairly accuse the show of slighting Aborigines.

Regardless: Tatted-up "unique looking" Billyburg stage players, your time has come. This is basically Hipster Idol, and your best nonchalance face is about to be put to the test. Only the strong will survive long enough to pretend to have a conversation at some backlit table in a distant corner of Bar Matchless so you may call Mom and Dad in Council Bluffs, and breathlessly let them know: It's not just you that made it.

We all made it. All of us.

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek

Just chatting about 'Girls' (HBO)

In which the voices of their generations (or two voices…of two generations) discuss The World’s Most Important Show, seeking common ground on the series’ hot-button issues. Like that stuff that comes up around the sides, etc.

Back to Races; Meditations on Creepy Father Figures

Generation Y:  I'm so glad we didn't jump the gun with accusing the show of racism before Lena Dunham got herself some Mexican eyebrows.
Generation X: We also had a black nanny. And maybe a Tibetan nanny.
Generation Y: And a gay redhead nanny...
Generation X: And Jessa very eagerly taking up their cause.
Generation Y: We're learning a lot more about Jessa, I think. Because how creepy is that dad that she's always digging? And why do really beautiful, confident women always end up with daddy issues?
Generation X: Jessa's confidence has always seemed a little thin.
Generation Y: Though it does round out her character. She's now more than just "snobby Brit."
Generation X: And if I may speak for the creepy dads out there. We're people too.
Generation Y: Aaron, I see you as more of the best friend of the creepy dad. So: what is with your "ass like Rihanna" comment? Do old people know about Rihanna's ass? Is it great?  I feel like Shakira would be a better, more outdated reference.
Generation X: I think Rihanna is a beautiful woman. but yes, I'm a devotee of Shaki. I interviewed her once and remain wholeheartedly in love. Partly because she was wearing a Psychedelic Furs t-shirt and, well, they were this band that like, in the 80s... Drew, I imagine you've done some babysitting. How creepy are these dads?

Generation Y: I've actually never babysat. I'm pretty sure no one will let me hold a child, let alone watch one.
Generation X: Now you never will.
Generation Y: I've had a lot more of Hannah's boss than I've had Jessa's.
Generation X: Yes, another creepy older man. This seems to be a recurring motif. I have to say I'm beginning to feel as if my demographic is really being insulted by this series.  I'm your boss... I don't believe I've ever been that handsy. Have I?
Generation Y: nope
Generation X: I mean nominally your boss...Your editor.
Generation Y: I do think there's definitely a thing, a "trend" you can say, of bosses being able to turn the sexual harassment thing around. By addressing it and making sure you're down.
Generation X: Really?
Generation Y: Like I've had bosses say "You're okay with this, right?" implying that of course I had to be, and that to say "no" would involve a lot more weirdness.
Generation X: I'm taking notes... HAHA. Just kidding!
Generation Y:  ...
Generation Y: Anyway,  I worked once with this guy, a former MTV exec, and he'd listen to Howard Stern ALL DAY and just make comments about my weight.
Generation X: Right. Well as I noted before I was trained back in the 90s to be terrified of harassing people. It's really held me back in my career I suspect. And personal life. What comments did your boss make about your weight?
Generation Y: I had a cold once and I had the sniffles. My boss looked at me and said, "I thought cocaine was supposed to make you thinner.”
Generation X: Wow. I'm sure you have a claim.
Generation Y: As a temp (which was what I was) you don't really have a claim, because you don't really work there. I think the two coworkers of Hannah's had the same attitude I did. Which was like "Whatever, he lets me come in late." It's the #1 most important quality in a job for me...
Generation X : Right. Which got me thinking maybe I'm playing it too safe?
Generation Y: Yes Aaron, I think if there's anything holding you back from being a Raiki-loving dental hygienist, or whatever, it's that you don't grab your employees' asses enough. Also why was that office circa The Tracey Ullman Show?
Generation X: Well I believe reiki is actually done without touching. For all you know I'm doing it to you right now. I might be reiki-harassing all the girls in the office.  The boys too.
Generation Y: I've actually had experience with reiki, my ex-boyfriend's mom did it to my face. You have to be kind of close to the person, but not touching. It's not a Jedi mind trick (it's kind of a Jedi mind trick).
Generation X: Well fortunately the rules at the Observer are clear. Nobody here would ever date anyone else who worked here, under any circumstances, so...
Generation Y: I just Google image searched "reiki face" and everyone is getting touched in it.
Generation X : Hmmmm....Perhaps I'm doing it all wrong.
Generation Y: Haha. Once again, your problems stem from a LACK of touching.

Sextism and Body Image

Generation X: So about this dick pic. Need a quick lesson here. Is that the same as sexting?
Generation Y: Yes. Kind of. Sexting is like, God....everyone has their ideas on it. It can get a little vague and all-encompassing. But dick pics are like, the definition of sexting. That is what you should be worried your kids are doing in school with their post-9/11 cell phones.
Generation X: So this is a common thing? Have you ever actually received one of these photographs?
Generation Y: Not of dicks. Dicks are gross-looking.
Generation X: I...um...
Generation Y: I mean to get as a photo. Who is looking for that?
Generation X: That's what I would think... But it seems to be a common thing among people of your age.
Generation Y: Maybe on Grindr.  Boob photos are always thumbs up.
Generation X: No doubt.
Generation Y: Though for some reason I've always used email to send those kind of pictures on my phone. Higher resolution, i think.
Generation X: But less immediate.
Generation Y: Life is full of trade offs. I did kind of love how that's Hannah's response to finding out Adam sexted the wrong person. Like, you know she's going to text him back. But then: BLAM! Boobs!
Generation X: Yeah, was that the first time she really went full on?
Generation Y: In this program, yes. Though I feel like Lena Dunham, as an actress, has taken off her shirt so many times that it's making me uncomfortable. Like I don't see my friends or sister naked as much as I see Lena Dunham.
Generation X: I would not be surprised if overweight people start getting a bit more action because of Lena Dunham's amazing courage.
Generation Y: Woof. Want to unpack that one? First: it's not "courageous" to show boobs on HBO, just because you aren't a size 4. They're still boobs. She's not obese or disfigured.
Generation X: Well at first I was like, "How brave of her to show her average body." But by the fifth time she got naked I was like, "Man....she's hot!"
Generation Y: Right?
Generation X: She is desensitizing our whole culture to fatness.
Generation Y: I don't think she's fat! But maybe I'm just a lot more body-conscious than you.
Generation X: I can't really afford to be body conscious. I'm old.
Generation Y: Well on another level, I totally agree with you. Because I remember years ago, I told Lena that she was going to be the female Seth Rogen and get guys to be into the chubby girl thing....and then i felt bad about it, even though it ended up being exactly true.
Generation X:  Did she seem offended?
Generation Y:  No...but then again, I probably went into her journal that night.

Boning with Siblings

Generation Y: I was surprised she went so analog with the journal thing. I think that realistically, Hannah would just have a Twitter feed called @Charlie'sMangina or like, a LiveJournal.
Generation X: Right. Well that journal is where she works on being the voice of her generation.
Generation Y: So a Tumblr, then. Or a Thought Catalog entry.
Generation X:  What I don't believe is that exchange between Charlie and Ray.
Generation Y: What didn't you believe about it?
Generation X: Well this sex talk. I don't really see guys doing that. Ray saying he'd like to tie Hannah to a post or whatever?
Generation Y: I mean, first of all, doesn't charlie NOT live with them? So what the hell was he doing, letting his friend snoop around? His reaction was also totally whack and not in-character. Like, everything we know about Charlie says that a) he'd respect boundaries and b) he'd never do something confrontational in public.
Generation X: It felt very contrived. Most interesting element of that for me was Ray saying "For once I want to have sex with someone who looks like me."
Generation Y: That's a thing.
Generation X: I couldn't help thinking it made for a sort of veiled retort to Jenna Wortham and the race issue.
Generation Y: Nah, this was written way before that.  But I think wanting to have sex with an attractive version of yourself is reasonable. I was oddly proud of this guy in college that I dated, because everyone confused us for siblings.
Generation X: But it is an interesting counterpoint. He cites his family members as potential hookups. I guess I would prefer to date someone hotter than myself.
Generation Y:  Right, well, there's a difference between looking like someone and being related...
Generation Y: I guess.

'Jewish Camp'

Generation X: On to Shoshanna's hookup. Did you go to a Jewish camp?
Generation Y: I went to a Catholic camp, but my boyfriend cracked up at every single line in that bit about the girl who gets stuck between two kayaks, so I assume he did. But for some reason, Delaware didn't have a Jewish camp, so we went to the Catholic camp instead.
Generation X: A catholic camp? What the hell?
Generation Y: Yeah. They had mini-communions, and we made Eyes of God with string and Popsicle sticks.
Generation X: You could always have gone to Maryland...
Generation Y: Well you take a time machine and tell that to my parents 20 years ago.
Generation X: I don't know what to say about Shoshanna's encounter. I feel creepy even talking about it.
Generation Y:  It was AMAZING. I love how the dude is like "You can touch it." You think he's talking about his leg in the brace, and then it pulls back to reveal his massive boner. And Shoshanna says "Not without kissing."
Generation X: She's right. Good for her.
Generation Y: Do you feel creepy because they sexualized the virgin? Or because Zosia Mamet might actually be a good enough actress that we buy the whole virgin act?
Generation X: Yeah. She's young and she seems even younger. Even thinking about her sex life feels wrong. I buy every minute of her performance.
Generation Y: I cannot reconcile Shoshana with (Mamet's) character on Mad Men, where she's the fast-talking, hard-drinking lesbian.
Generation X: Indeed. She's a really amazing actress.
Generation Y: I think that Shoshanna might just be a one-note character because she's not developed then, and not because of Ms. Mamet's performance. I kind of hate her dialogue, but that's not her fault. The way she kept saying "I'm not a bleeder, I totally won't get attached," when the guy wouldn't have sex with her.
Generation X: "I'm like the most unvirginy virgin ever." I think she has some layers. But the character’s also fairly consistent. Whereas some of the others don't seem to quite know what they're becoming.
Generation Y: Hey, kind of like 24-year-olds all over!

The Voice of Occupy Wall Street's Generation?

Generation X: I did think the scene, like a lot of this episode, was undeveloped and a little cheap.
Generation Y: I mean, that's what the show has going for it: no one can be "a Samantha" or "a Carrie" because these characters keep trying on different roles, as confused new grown-ups tend to do.
Generation X: For me the show is already in a slump. Feels by-the-numbers.
Generation Y: How so?
Generation X: Another example: Jessa's losing of those kids played very flat to me. I have lost my children so I can tell you it's a bit more dramatic than that.
Generation Y: Well, she found them right away. Or that other nanny did...wait, you've lost your kids before?
Generation X: Why lose them if you're going to find them in 30 seconds? I mean, from a writing standpoint.
Generation Y: To show that side of Jessa: that she's all this bluster about union-forming when she's too flaky to actually do her job. She IS the Occupy Wall Street generation, Aaron.
Generation X: Yeah, I get it. Maybe that's the problem.  The mechanism of the show is starting to creak a bit.
Generation Y: Maybe you just hate my generation?
Generation X: I think you guys are awesome. You're just not as awesome as you think. Or maybe you are. I don't give a shit. Fuck you all.
Generation Y: Look: obviously we do not care about you guys, why should you care about us?
Generation X: Um, because you are trying to kill us?
Generation Y: Lena doesn't write older characters very well, as we've already established, and this show is very navel-gazing. So i would get it completely if it doesn't ring true for you oldies, because watching a generation of self-absorbed 20-somethings must be as realistic as like... me trying to relate to Friends, pre-Fat Chandler.

Cheers and Jeers

Generation X: Okay, so I know you are dying to talk about Hannah's speech to Adam.
Generation Y: SO GOOD...and moving! Fake eyebrows and all.
Generation X:  I agree. Beautifully done.
Generation Y: No one can write Lena like Lena.
Generation X: Funny how that works.
Generation Y: Also, i know it's kind of cliched in comedies to give that kind of speech, and then immediately act counter-intuitively. But like I said, I think it does show growth in the character.
Generation X: Yeah. I have seen that before. On Cheers.
Generation Y:  God you love Cheers.
Generation X: I hate Cheers.
Generation Y: You mention Cheers like, twice a recap.
Generation X: I hated almost everything we had to watch back then. But there was nothing else on.
Generation Y: Is Girls our generation's Cheers? No one has asked that question.
Generation X:  We hate-watched a whole two decades go by.
Generation Y:  you guys had hate-watching back then?
Generation X:  We didn't have a name for it because it was just what we did. It was like breathing.
Generation Y: Fascinating! I thought Gabe Delahaye created hate-watching to write True Blood recaps for Videogum.
Generation X:  Reagan was president.
Generation Y: Max Headroom was king.
Generation X: If I said 'Shazbot" would you even know what I was talking about????
Generation Y: Is that something Gary Shandler said? or called himself?

Questionable Taste

Generation X:  So. What did you think of Questionable Goods? Charlie's band.
Generation Y: I definitely know bands like that. that was all of college, summed up in a band. Except for our campus' ONE heavy-metal band, which did Mountain Goats covers,  and practiced at my house.
Generation X: It made me feel a lot better about not getting to Williamsburg more often.
Generation Y: I will say: I feel like if I ever saw a show's like Charlie's in Williamsburg, complete with a journal reading, I just might burn down everything from Kent Ave. till I hit the Marcy projects.
Generation Y: In conclusion, fuck williamsburg and music.

The End...?

Generation X: I feel like we should say something about this incredible invasion of privacy. But frankly, I didn't buy it. I thought the thing about your generation, as you noted, is that you have no private lives.
Generation Y: yeah
Generation X: Which is it? Secret journals or dick pics. You can't have both.
Generation Y: I think that this would have worked better as a conceit in general, to have Charlie find out Marlie's feelings via Facebook, or Tumblr. Because in reality, that's how most of us find out our relationships are over.
Generation Y:  "Oh, they clicked that we are no longer in a relationship. better call and see what's up."
Generation X: I do think Charlie proved he doesn't have a vagina after all by doing that performance. It was fairly ballsy.
Generation Y:  it was kind of a bitch move, though, because he's getting this from a third-hand source. Like his girlfriend's friend's diary is the barometer for his relationship? That might be WORSE than Facebook.
Generation X: Yeah... I thought storming off the stage sort of ruined the effect. And Marnie's reaction was a little silly.
Generation Y: Jessa's reaction was nonsensical. "Awesome"? Was seeing your friends completely humiliated really "awesome," Jessa?
Generation X: This is where I think the show is beginning to teeter a bit. It's cheapening itself for those easy dramatic moments or yuks.
Generation Y: Well, only one way to find out! If there was a cooler, more 2.0-way to say "tune in next week" that'd be what I'd say here.

The Newsroom. Yes, via Deadline Hollywood MediaBistro's TVNewser (earlier this month)*: The Newsroom.

The show was tentatively/previously titled More As This Story Develops, an name that lends itself to slightly less hubris than The Newsroom in the way The West Wing could've just been called The Oval Office or The White House or simply The President. Of all the films made about media, none of them quite match up to Network, and those with more self-important titles, like:

The Paper
Broadcast News
Interview
Celebrity

And so forth have paid a price for their boldness up front: falling short of Network.

Let's face it: Even Keith Olbermann—who Sorkin's new leading character, Will McCallister (to be played by Jeff Daniels), is loosely based on—isn't pompous enough to call his own show The Newsroom. It's not the title of something Sorkin ruined for everyone; it's the title of something Sorkin should've never used. Also, Sorkin hasn't done well with TV title switcharoos: the last time it happened, Studio 7 on the Sunset Strip became Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. Etymological semantics? Maybe.

Enough to give us premonitions of what's in store,** especially in the wake of the fact that HBO has yet again shut down more beloved shows just this week? Absolutely.

HBO dropped the title in a new promo spot, seen here:

[*Apparently, Deadline Hollywood claimed this story as news tonight when in fact, as it was noted to us, MediaBistro's TVNewser blog broke it almost three weeks ago. But we'll keep this up because we've got a nice timely peg with HBO's destructive act of subscriber sadism in canceling Bored to Death. **That said, we've read two drafts of the script and loved it. And to that end? We said the same thing about Studio 7.]

fkamer@observer.com | @weareyourfek