This was also an Aaron Sorkin show highlighting what went on behind the scenes of a TV show. And the characters always talked about their work as though it were extremely important. Because to them, it was.

I think that Sports Night was funny and interesting and enjoyable, so I'm willing to give Sorkin the benefit of the doubt on this one.

And why does Heather sound so pissed in this review? Is it just because the characters are rich and the audience isn't being invited to mock them for it?

I was fairly entertained by the first episode of Studio 60 though I was hoping for more of a return to what Sorkin and Schlamme did on Sportsnight. Both of Sorkin's previous TV shows (and his movies, for that matter) seem to center around ideas of personal responsiblity...it doesn't matter whether it was backstage at a sports highlight show, the White House, or the Marine Corps. Sportsnight, as a half-hour show, moved at a serious breakneck pace. I loved it. I still think it was probably the best written show I've ever seen. Not always perfectly executed, but the dialogue, the characters and the scripts were outstanding. The West Wing always seemed to me to be a slower version of what happened on Sportsnight. With Studio 60 I was hoping for the faster, wittier writing that Sorkin gave us on Sportsnight. Of course, since he's the most lyrical writer on television, I'll be tuning in to hear any new dialogue he bothers to write.

Yes indeed, I loved the West Wing. Because the stakes were high. Studio 60 breaks the first rule - we have to give a shit. The worst that could happen to any of the characters in Studio 60 is they get fired, go to Cabo for a week or two and get another overpaid job. And the very best? Oooh, another job, maybe with - get this - a bigger office! No stakes, no drama - no drama, no nuffink...

The West Wing was okay, but it got old real fast for me. Sports Night, however, was brilliant (even with its annoyingly retro laugh track). I never understood why more people didn't like it.

Oh, Heather, I love you but you're wrong. What shows up on the TV does matter and is important. Isn't, for example, the subversion and the satire of The Daily Show a pretty integral part of living in this fracked up America? If the suits showed up on set and told Jon Stewart, again for example, he had to reel it in, don't you think that would be worth some grandiose speechifying? I don't know what I'd do if that show, again this is just an example, got turned into the sort of milquetoast, inoffensive crap you see on the networks, but it would, in fact, make me mad as hell.

I think Studio 60 will get better once the characters are settled into their roles -- then we can actually see the banter in the context of producing a show, which is what worked so well on Sports Night. Hopefully, the show will not just focus on the plight of the TV comedy writer, but on personal drama between character and dramatic events that aren't directly about the show.

I'm also hoping that Studio 60 will be FUNNY. After all, it's about a comedy show. Underneath the self-absorbed drama, Sorkin has a great sense of humor and a wise sense of timing. I hope we see humor in the skits, on the set, and in that brilliant dialogue.

Sorkin might be hesitant to repeat the format of Sports Night because that show got bad ratings, but right now, Sorkin has the attention of far more viewers. I'm convinced that Sports Night did badly because viewers didn't give it a chance. They heard the title and thought it was about sports (and ABC didn't promote it well enough to educate viewers to how great it was.) But right now, Sorkin has a huge audience of West Wing fans. He can show them what he can do, what those of us who loved Sports Night already know he can do.

Personally, I don't think Jordan told them to run the sketch that was cut because she is good and ethical and all that. I think she told them to run the sketch (and, of course, leaking the news in advance) because doing so would guarantee great ratings for the next week's show. Sorkin's written a ton of characters who want to do the right thing but also really, really want to win. (Toby Ziegler comes to mind, but so does Dana Whitaker.)

By the way, for those of us who have watched Sorkin shows for years, the real joy in the first episode was counting the number of actors who have appeared in his shows before. You have to believe the Felicity Huffman appearance was a thank-you for Sports Night. I figure we'll be seeing Richard Schiff,, Josh Molina and Sabrina Lloyd before too long.

Studio 60's pilot was entertaining, but incredibly phoney.

If you thought Sorkin's brand of clever, hyped-up sanctimony was insufferable in The White House, just wait until you see it backstage on A SKETCH-COMEDY SHOW! (And a lame and tired one (SNL) at that!)

The show is a bad idea, completely out of touch with fly-over country. Unless it gets funny and about 98% less self-important fast, it's going to bomb.

(Smith is the only good new drama I've seen this season -- and it's so dark, it's probably fated for a short life.)

Anyone catch the short promo for '30 Rock' during the re-run of SNL? It managed to capture the absurdity of NBC's greenlighting two behind-the-scenes-of-comedy shows in one season, while allowing Alex Baldwin -- Alex Baldwin! -- to poke at Sorkin's hauteur.

'Studio 60' is slick and smart and shallow as a puddle of pee. Even when Amanda Peet's character is caring, she's not caring, and we don't really care. Why not just turn it into The Matthew Perry Wisecrack Hour and be done with it?

As for the worst of the worst? Well, it didn't surprise me to find out that Warren Bell, writer/co-exec for 'According to Jim', is a regular at National Review's 'The Corner'. Hell, that is one bad sitcom.