« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »
November 14, 2005
'Real' debate on 'West Wing' spurs wishes
By Beverly Kelley
Ventura County Star
So who do you think won the debate? Or to put it another way, will Alda's Ahhhnold or Smits' Mr. Santos go to Washington?
The somewhat scripted/somewhat ad-libbed performance by Alan Alda as Republican Arnold Vinick and Jimmy Smits as Democrat Matt Santos during the live Nov. 6 "West Wing" debate drew an estimated 9.6 million viewers.
A Zogby poll taken three days prior predicted that viewers were inclined to back Santos over Vinick (59 percent to 29 percent). The post-debate NBC Web site poll reported Santos clobbering Vinick (71 percent to 29 percent).
Yet, Vinick proponents can still cling to hope. After watching the fictional face-off, viewers under 30 told Zogby International that they preferred Vinick over Santos (56 percent to 42 percent). In the vernacular of network executive-speak, "Smits is skewing older than Alda" re: the most desirable demographic. Since Madison Avenue suits chase youth, this new wrinkle has NBC movers-and-shakers quaking in their Gucci loafers.
Although Alda and Smits claim to be clueless as to who will answer to "Mr. President" next fall, during the 2004 season, "West Wing" clearly stacked the deck for Santos. The writers featured Smits in 18 out of 22 episodes, and if a picture is worth a thousand words, Alda's visage is conspicuously absent from the group mug shot on the NBC Web site.
Furthermore, if you are one of the 30,000 souls who reside in Santa Paula, Vinick (despite his greasy stance on oil) is definitely your man. As a result of pushy and persistent lobbying by Mayor Mary Ann Krause (never underestimate the pungently persuasive appeal of a Santa Paula orange), Vinick, according to the "West Wing" Web site, officially hails from her fair city.
"In Santa Paula," we read, "Arnold learned the value of hard work and responsibility, laboring during the summers alongside his friends in the citrus groves. He volunteered at the public library, entrenching himself in the history of his home state." Vinick's bio boasts that he "gained an appreciation for family and community, which he carries with him to this day" during his fictional formative years in the Heritage Valley.
Last April, city leaders located Vinick's campaign headquarters at the historic Santa Paula train depot. There, supporters can procure buttons, T-shirts and bumper stickers, the proceeds from which are earmarked for Santa Paula's Independence Day fireworks display.
Nov. 6, a crowd of 50 showed up at the community center -- not only to chow down on cheesecake, chocolate eclairs and connoisseur coffees, but also to cheer on their "favorite son." According to Mistress of Ceremonies Peggy Kelly and her fellow Santa Paulans, the venerable Vinick beat the pants off Santos.
The real winner, however, just might be "West Wing's" rabid-to-the-max fans. Faithful since 1999, these viewers prove that you don't have to be a policy wonk, a C-SPAN junkie or even a high school civics instructor to relish a television character waxing poetic about congressional committee reports or tracking polls. For the hard-core aficionados, the Nov. 6 episode proved orgiastic -- at least political fantasy-wise.
"Let's make this a real debate," insisted Executive Producer Laurence O'Donnell Jr. -- "real" being the operative word. So instead of what Dan Rather used to call "joint appearances by presidential candidates," the fictional debaters were freed from handlers and truth-suppressing format restrictions. The result showed the American public that not only could Oval Office aspirants think for themselves but could also clash without resorting to cant.
Instead of condensed versions of stump speeches, "West Wing" viewers were treated to a lively exchange of ideas, frequently punctuated by fiery confrontation, as the contenders responded to Forrest Sawyer's probes (illegal immigration, tax cuts, education reform, prescription drugs and oil drilling) -- and each other.
Did I actually hear one politico admit, "To tell you the truth, I'm not crazy about my healthcare plan, either"?
In a bon mot "home run" reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's "I will not, for political purposes, exploit my opponent's (Walter Mondale) youth and inexperience," Vinick delivered the line, "Clap if you've ever been to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge" to rip-roaring guffaws.
If ratings-winner "Commander in Chief" allows audiences to imagine women in the Oval Office, then the "West Wing" debate likewise allows audiences to imagine a campaign moment without mudslinging, media spinning or megamoney spending.
Think about the recent California initiative race. Nasty negative political spots clogging up the airwaves. A glut of mendacious remarks disseminated by both sides. Three hundred million dollars disappearing down the "mother's-milk-of-politics" rabbit hole.
Wouldn't it be nice -- if only on a single occasion -- to observe a political consultant-free discussion of the issues?
But, then, I don't really expect to win that debate.
Posted by Jo at 07:41 PM
November 09, 2005
SoCal city claims 'West Wing' candidate as favorite son
Associated Press
SANTA PAULA, Calif. - Blurring the lines between fact and fiction, "The West Wing" has won real-life supporters here for one of its presidential candidates.
Local leaders have flooded this small agricultural community with banners and bumper stickers backing make-believe GOP candidate and favorite son Arnold Vinick as part of a city promotional campaign.
The NBC political drama made Santa Paula Vinick's hometown at the urging of local officials.
"We just really wanted him to have that small-town upbringing," said story editor Lauren Schmidt. "I personally love the fact that this town is so into it. That's exactly the effect we want to have on our viewers."
Local officials began lobbying the show after watching a January episode in which Vinick, played by Alan Alda, mentioned that he hailed from a citrus-growing community in California.
The City Council declared Vinick a Santa Paula resident and ordered City Manager Wally Bobkiewicz to help his election. Bobkiewicz later promoted the Ventura County community of 30,000 to the series' writers and producers.
"I'm probably the only city manager in America who has ever been directed by a City Council to get someone elected president," Bobkiewicz said. "We're not going to let up until we get Sen. Vinick into the White House."
According to his pretend bio on the show's Web site, Vinick grew up in Santa Paula, served on the City Council and even volunteered at a local library.
"The West Wing" and NBC have not helped directly with the city's campaign, which is not featured in commercials or on the Web site.
Even though Vinick has not mentioned Santa Paula on air, locals have opened a Vinick official presidential campaign headquarters at the city's historic train depot. The Chamber of Commerce has sold Vinick buttons, T-shirts and bumper stickers.
"We're just trying to promote the city," said chamber manager Ken Brookes. "We're actually amazed that Hollywood has gone along with our idea."
Posted by Jo at 08:47 AM
'West Wing' actors cast their ballots
By Valerie Kuklenski
LA Daily News
The big televised debate is behind them, and now the campaigning can begin in earnest.
There's the scripted campaigning that will take place in upcoming episodes of NBC's "The West Wing," in which Republican Sen. Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) and Democratic Rep. Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits) are looking to succeed President Josiah Bartlet (Martin Sheen).
Then there's the jockeying among the series regulars to curry favor with executive producer and head writer John Wells, in whose hands their future rests. Many of the show's stars were lobbying as intently as any K Street pro Monday night in Beverly Hills at the Museum of Television & Radio gala, which honored Wells and Peter Chernin, president of News Corp. and chairman of the Fox Group.
"We're all whispering (on the set) because we don't know who's going to win, and we don't know who's going to have a job," said Kristin Chenoweth, who joined the series last year as media consultant Annabeth Schott, originally a Bartlet staffer now working on the Santos campaign. John Spencer, Allison Janney and others playing roles in a Democratic administration would need Santos in office to stay on as regulars.
For his part, Wells said he has not yet decided who will win his faux race.
"I have to write the election episode sometime before Christmas," he said.
Bradley Whitford, who plays Bartlet staffer-turned-Santos campaign manager Josh Lyman, made no secret of his allegiance.
"Santos is going to win _ and I say that not as an actor but as his campaign manager," he said before the dinner began.
Whoever wins, it appears he will not finish one term, let alone two. The once-popular series, winner of four outstanding drama series Emmys, has lost a large chunk of its audience in its seventh season, in part because of its move to Sunday night against ABC's formidable lineup and in part because of NBC's overall ratings slump. Asked whether New Yorker Alda, who turns 70 in January, would be up for a long-term commitment to a series filmed in Burbank, Wells said, "We're lucky if we have another year, so I don't think that'll be an issue."
---
Posted by Jo at 08:44 AM
November 08, 2005
'West Wing' debate a victory for NBC
By Barry Garron
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - So who really won the live debate on Sunday night's "The West Wing," the one between fictional candidates Matt Santos, the Democrat played by Jimmy Smits, and Arnold Vinick, the Republican played by Alan Alda?
Regardless of the spin, it was clearly a victory for NBC, which enjoyed a ratings bump during the sweep-inspired contest. In other respects, the victor was less clear cut.
The live episode, performed for the East and Central zones and then again for the West, represented a milepost in a revival season but also a speed bump. Although the scripted debate was filled with issues and substance, it sacrificed the drama and storytelling of traditional episodes. It tried to simulate reality and succeeded, which resulted in a show that begged the indulgence of viewers and asked them to think rationally and intelligently about things that transcend television. That's risky business for TV any time, and especially primetime.
In terms of which candidate did better, my vote is with Santos the Democrat. His positions seemed more thoughtful and his solutions more promising. Vinick, on the other hand, was more inclined to provide fast and easy answers, though his comments on the failures of the Head Start educational program indicated that the character could also marshal his facts.
In some ways, though, the biggest winner was the viewer, particularly those who have seen real presidential debates where rules are negotiated and statements are carefully crafted to stay on point, get out the message and drive home emotions through words that have been carefully tested in focus groups. This episode, though scripted, seemed more real than the actual debates. It showed what a real debate might be if candidates ever decided to risk being themselves and confronting the issues and each other. Odd as it may seem, it gives viewers a basis for comparing actual presidential debates and what is possible.
The episode, with its use of the NBC News logo and the appearance of real-life newsman Forrest Sawyer as moderator, also raised the question of the propriety of blending elements of network news with entertainment. In general, it's not a good idea to blur the two. The lines already are far more blurred than they should be, and this sort of arrangement only makes the two divisions look more interchangeable. Julie Chen's long-standing role as host on "Big Brother" has done nothing to enhance her stature with CBS News, and Sawyer's appearance here is similarly out of place. The episode would have been every bit as convincing with an actor cast in the role of moderator and a make-believe news logo or, at the very least, a redesigned NBC News logo.
Posted by Jo at 03:09 PM
''West Wing'' shows how to hold debates
The Virginian-Pilot
It took a scripted, rehearsed, audacious TV drama to put some spontaneity back in American presidential politics. Sunday night’s live installment of “The West Wing” matched two fictional candidates in a debate stripped of the stupid rules that govern the real ones.
The result was the sort of high-minded hurly-burly that Americans have been demanding since the first televised debate, in 1960, ensured John Kennedy’s election. Modern presidential debates — the real ones — are so devoid of substance that they result in nattering about the bizarre bump between the president’s shoulder blades.
On “The West Wing” this season, Democratic U.S. Rep. Matt Santos, played by Jimmy Smits, and Republican Arnold Vinick, played by Alan Alda, are vying to succeed President Josiah Bartlet , played by Martin Sheen.
Sunday night, the two ersatz candidates talked about tax cuts, debt relief, health insurance, illegal immigration, the death penalty — the latter producing an exchange consisting entirely of two words: Yes, and no.
Vinick made the kind of compelling case for tax cuts, including ones for Africa, entirely missing from Republican rhetoric in the real world. Santos, in a moment that had many Democrats slapping their foreheads, found a way to rehabilitate the adjective “liberal” in a fashion that has eluded the party for decades:
“Republicans have tried to turn 'liberal’ into a bad word,” he said. “Well, liberals ended slavery in this country.”
“A Republican president ended slavery,” Vinick retorted.
“Yes, a liberal Republican, Senator. What happened to them?”
Sunday night’s sweeps stunt — which is what it was — brought an energy to network television that has been long gone. Strangely, though, in showing once again the purity of live TV, with its mayhem and mistakes and truth, “The West Wing” also showed the poverty of the modern presidential process, which is supposed to have all those things, and never does.
Posted by Jo at 08:46 AM
Lines blurring between entertainment and news
By DAVID BAUDER
Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — An on-screen NBC News identifier for a fictional debate on “The West Wing” and a “news conference” by a fake Boston Red Sox executive on ESPN show how fuzzy the lines between news and entertainment have become.
An NBC News “bug” was kept on the screen Sunday night during the live debate between presidential candidates portrayed by Alan Alda and Jimmy Smits on “The West Wing.”
Meanwhile, ESPN’s “SportsCenter,” in an effort to juice up a segment on baseball gossip, had analyst Steve Phillips pose as Red Sox general manager answering questions about the team’s offseason priorities.
The news insignia was requested by “The West Wing” episode’s producer, former real-life Washington insider Lawrence O’Donnell, to help make the presidential debate seem more realistic. Jeff Zucker, the NBC Universal executive who has run NBC’s entertainment division and produced “Today” for NBC News, gave the OK.
NBC News programming like “Hardball” has been depicted on “The West Wing” in the past, news division spokeswoman Allison Gollust said.
Even with all the trappings — including real-life TV newsman Forrest Sawyer as the debate’s moderator — no one at NBC believed that viewers would mistake Alda’s Arnold Vinick or Smits’ Matt Santos for real-life politicians
Yet Jack Myers, a media business analyst, questioned whether NBC News diminished itself by allowing its name to be used in this way.
“Is this an appropriate use of the NBC News and MSNBC News brand equity, or does it do more damage to these news brands than the positive branding it brings to NBC’s entertainment series?” Myers asked on his Mediavillage.com Web site.
The MSNBC.com site went so far as to commission a poll with Zogby International, asking 1,208 viewers of “The West Wing” who won the debate. Fifty-four percent favored Santos, the Democratic candidate, which would have been more impressive if 59 percent of the viewers hadn’t favored him before the episode started.
By 2-to-1, Sunday’s viewers told Zogby that they preferred watching a fictional presidential debate to the real thing.
As a ratings sweeps month stunt, the live debate was a modest success: the audience of 9.6 million viewers beat the show’s season average of 8.2 million, according to Nielsen Media Research. The show was a distant third in the ratings to ABC’s “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” and CBS’ “Cold Case.”
Over on ESPN, fans who watched “SportsCenter” Sunday and Monday may have done a double-take: There was Phillips, a former New York Mets general manager, sitting behind a bank of microphones and before a background with the Red Sox insignia, answering questions from ESPN reporters.
Was he the replacement for Theo Epstein, who quit last week?
No, Phillips was just playing one on television.
A text “crawl” on the screen identified it as a “simulated Red Sox news conference.” Yet at a time news and sports networks constantly have a barrage of text information on their screens, it might not have immediately caught viewers’ eyes.
Vince Doria, ESPN’s news director, said it was done to enliven what is often a dull segment: analysts like Phillips sitting behind a desk and speculating about what teams will do.
“We were certainly aware that we needed to provide some kind of constant disclaimer,” Doria said. “I would hope that we haven’t gone too far. If we thought we had gone too far, we obviously wouldn’t have done it.”
Phillips will continue these fake news conferences for other teams, he said.
Next up: the New York Yankees, who, unlike the Red Sox, have a real general manager in place.
Posted by Jo at 08:42 AM
Vinick Sways Voters, er, Viewers on 'West Wing'
By Lisa de Moraes
Washington Post
After watching the live debate between Jimmy Smits's Rep. Matt Santos (D-Tex.) and Alan Alda's Sen. Arnold Vinick (R-Calif.) on "The West Wing," young viewers have changed their minds about the two faux candidates and want Alda in the White House.
Viewers 65 and older, however, came out strong for Santos, according to a survey by pollster Zogby International conducted right after Sunday's broadcast on NBC.
Yes, Jimmy Smits now skews older than Alan Alda.
For a network that chases young viewers exclusively but has seen its median age spring forward by nearly three years in one season -- from 46.4 to 49.2 years -- this ought to stop the suits in their tracks. Particularly since the network made it fairly clear it intend to put Smits in the Oval Office (his face, but not Alda's, is featured in the group mug shot on the home page of NBC's "West Wing" Web site, for instance.)
Despite a boatload of pre-broadcast hype, the debate episode did little to move the ratings needle -- the show averaged about 9.6 million viewers in the 8 p.m. hour, according to stats. That's its biggest audience this season -- which isn't saying much, since it's averaging only 8.2 million viewers. And the broadcast still finished third in its time period, pounded by ABC's "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" (18 million viewers) and CBS's "Cold Case" (16 million). More important to NBC's sales department, "West Wing" finished a distant fourth in its time period among 18-to-49-year-olds, which the network says is the only age bracket it sells to advertisers.
But those numbers aren't half so interesting as the ones spit out by pollster Zogby yesterday, showing how much ground Smits's Santos lost to Alda's Vinick in the debate, despite obvious efforts to make Santos look heroic.
Before the episode, viewers between 18 and 29 preferred Santos over Vinick, 54 percent to 37 percent. But after the debate, in which veteran Alda gutted pretty-boy Smits without him even knowing it, Vinick now leads among viewers under age 30, 56 percent to 42 percent.
(Among viewers 65 and older -- or, as TV execs like to call them, the Irrelevantest Generation -- Santos has a lead of 68 percent to 27 percent.)
Also switching camps were men, whom the networks have a harder time attracting than women and therefore chase harder. (The TV industry is a lot like dating: If you hang around a lot, the suits ignore you; play hard to get, they chase you with a passion.)
Among men, Vinick now leads with 55 percent to Santos's 39 percent.
Women were the only ones who did not change their minds after watching Alda fillet his opponent. Before the debate, women came out very strong for ever-so-handsome Smits/Santos; post-debate, they were just as pro-Santos, 68 percent to 23 percent. Really, why did they give women the vote?
Let's review, shall we?
"West Wing" producers and NBC look for a way to create "West Wing" event programming during the November sweeps to help goose ratings on the show, which has struggled mightily since being shipped to Sunday. How about a live debate? Great idea, they say, though Smits hasn't done much live performing and doesn't do well with improv, as he himself noted during a pre-debate phone news conference. How hard can it be, execs ask? Sure, it's live, but it'll be scripted and we'll give Smits lots of heroic lines such as: "What did liberals do that was so offensive to the Republican Party? I'll tell you what they did. Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. . . . So when you try to hurl that label at my feet, 'liberal,' as if it's something dirty, something to be ashamed of, something to run away from, it won't work, senator, because I will pick it up, and I will wear that label as a badge of honor."
Debate: Alda debones Smits.
Morning after: Numbers not so great and young viewers now strong for Alda to get presidential role next season. Great sweeps stunt turns into NBC headache.
Zogby rep Fritz Wenzel told The TV Column yesterday that the poll results show Smits "is a better scripted actor" and that Alda's Vinick "has a relatability" that Santos lacks.
Vinick "did much better than Santos" in the debate, Wenzel said, but even he was surprised that "there was so much movement in the numbers" in Vinick's favor.
"The other example we've had of an actor in the White House was right along the same lines as Vinick last night. Ronald Reagan was called the Great Communicator for a good reason. He was able to relate to people and not so much issue-to-issue but person-to-person."
* * *
Posted by Jo at 08:38 AM
November 07, 2005
West Wing's' live show was more than a stunt
by Mike Brantley
Mobile Register
Forgive me for devoting Tuesday's television column to a Sunday program that used to air on Wednesdays. But it is my first opportunity to comment on Sunday's impressive live episode of "The West Wing" on NBC.
Current "West Wing" executive producer John Wells in 1997 gave us a live episode of hospital drama "ER" that was so impressive partly because it managed to be so similar to every other "ER" episode that is prepared in advance of airing. His production of "The West Wing" on Sunday night, meanwhile, delivered something different than the typical White House or campaign trail story the series has specialized in over six previous seasons.
The show is in the midst of the campaign to replace Martin Sheen's character, President Bartlet. The live episode gave us a debate, no holds barred, between Jimmy Smits as Democratic candidate Matt Santos and Alan Alda as Republican candidate Arnold Vinick.
The subject matter -- the debate -- was perfectly suited for a live episode. It helped these characters and their campaigns seem all the more real to viewers who have followed the show to Sunday, as well as those who sampled the live episode just because of the novelty of the stunt. Airing scripted shows live is a rarity these days, although it was the norm in TV's earliest days and NBC tried the attention-getting device earlier this season with the season premiere of comedy "Will & Grace."
Sunday's "West Wing" seemed real, but it was the kind of real debate on real issues that doesn't really happen anymore. At the start of the episode, Vinick startled his rival, his handlers and the debate moderator (newsman Forrest Sawyer, playing himself) by suggesting their carefully negotiated rules be thrown out. He saw them as a substance-squeezing straitjacket, as they have proven to be in real-life debates.
Said Vinick, as played by Alda, "When the greatest hero in the history of my party, Abraham Lincoln, debated, he didn't need any rules."
He suggested they "junk the rules."
"OK, let's have a real debate," responded Smits as Santos.
And so they did. It seemed so realistic, but who can recall a presidential debate that has been more about substance and less about the choreography?
Through seven seasons on "The West Wing," Sheen's President Bartlet has been a card-carrying liberal, but a tough one that most of the country could get behind if he wasn't merely fiction. This season and particularly in Sunday's episode, Santos and Vinick have shown they, too, are both men and leaders of conviction.
Either one would make a fine television president -- or a real one.
I wish we could all feel as good about our real elected leaders and the challengers who aspire to their offices.
In the meantime, I'm feeling good about "The West Wing" again. Once more, it's a series worth watching.
Posted by Jo at 07:49 PM
'West Wing' rivals come off badly
by Doug Elfman
Chicago Sun-Times
Sunday night's live episode of "The West Wing" stunk so bad, the stench may have polluted everything it touched, including my ability to write about it. It was P.U. stinky, like a baby's diaper or a dog's breath.
It wasn't even an episode as much as it was an "event"; that's the word NBC employed in commercials. The show's two candidates for president, Sen. Arnold Vinick (R-Alan Alda) and Rep. Matt Santos (D-Jimmy Smits) debated live for an hour, answering questions from an actual newsie, Forrest Sawyer.
Making matters worse, the NBC News logo was pasted on the bottom of the TV screen, a slip of NBC's separation of fact and fantasy. Then again, before the show, NBC News aired a laughable undercover-camera investigation on "Dateline" about how people can buy more than two beers at sporting events. So I'm not sure the logo debacle is worse.
Sunday's event may have seemed like a good idea to someone at the network, because NBC moved "The West Wing" to Sundays this season and lost confused viewers. Unfortunately, "The Debate" was an artistic shot to both feet of a fairly intriguing **1/2 season.
The actors looked like anything but well-rehearsed candidates. They moved awkwardly. They stumbled over dialogue. Camera operators were seen walking around. And a camera view from behind the studio audience made it look as though this were a set and not a town hall.
Even the strongest thing about "The West Wing" normally -- its fanciful version of politics -- seemed unbelievable. This season, Alda has done a great job of selling a fairy tale, that his Republican Vinick is an abortion-rights supporter who privately refers to anti-abortion-rights forces as "religious nuts" that want to "enact their version of Leviticus into law."
But in this debate, the issue wasn't even raised. Say what?
There was one good speech liberals everywhere have been waiting decades for a real presidential candidate to make. After Vinick sneered about liberals, Santos responded that liberals ended segregation, won for women and African-Americans the right to vote, created Social Security, Medicare, the Voting Rights Act and the Clean Water Act.
"What did conservatives do? They opposed every single one of those things," Santos said.
Conservatives complain "The West Wing" is liberal, yet Alda and the script writers have turned Vinick into a mostly sensible, likable and presidential wannabe. But on Sunday, Vinick seemed like a crotchety Bob Dole, high on several pots of coffee and frothing to drill for oil in Alaska: "I'm sure it's a beautiful place. ... Clap if you've been to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge." Uh, it's called a refuge because it's reserved for non-people.
And Santos came across like Bill Clinton on two pots of coffee, openly eager to raise some taxes.
Before this episode, both men seemed to be viable candidates in a fictional world. On Friday, a real Zogby poll showed "West Wing" viewers were inclined to vote for Santos over Vinick, 59 percent to 29 percent.
Now, though, it's easier to imagine swing viewers voting for someone not on the "West Wing" ticket: the woman president played by Geena Davis on ABC's new "Commander in Chief."
Posted by Jo at 07:44 PM
Candidates clash in lively 'West Wing' debate
by David Kronke
LA Daily News
Sunday night's live episode of NBC's "The West Wing," featuring a Presidential debate between California Republican Senator Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) and Texas Democratic Congressman Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits), didn't, curiously enough, cover such hot-button topics as abortion or terrorism. Still, viewers may have learned more about governance and issues that serve as land mines for politicians than they did from all the empty posturing in last year's actual Presidential debates.
And certainly, voters throughout the political spectrum would probably have preferred the fantasy candidates of last night's spectacle to the ones who actually ran for office in 2004.
Moderated by Forrest Sawyer, who really does work for NBC News, the debate was, at Vinick's request, a no-rules/no-holds-barred affair, with the men frequently and passionately squabbling and speaking over each other. While one got the sense that Vinick's guileless pragmatism won the day over Santos' impassioned idealism, it's hard to imagine that any real politician would have been as straightforward and, well, unplugged as Vinick.
Even before the episode aired, Boston University College Professor of History Tom Whalen issued a statement lauding the series for offering something "our current political process fails to provide: a serious, honest and no holds barred discussion of the issues that most affect our society. Unfortunately, the show is an exercise in wishful thinking. Major kudos to the makers of 'West Wing' for offering us a vision of a better and more civil political process."
Well, it may not have been "more civil" at one point, Sawyer scolded the candidates for their bickering. But, as written by Lawrence O'Donnell, Jr. (who also serves as an MSNBC political analyst and whose father worked in the Kennedy White House), it was more honest, with viewers getting a sense of the complex difficulties concerning such issues as education, health care and saving Africa from itself.
In the show's narrative, Santos needed the debate more than Vinick, and Santos' big moment came with a stirring if familiar defense of the word "liberal." Vinick, who single-mindedly preaches tax cuts in his campaign, was an old-school provocateur, declaring that the Head Start program "doesn't work," vowing to create no new jobs ("Entrepreneurs create jobs," he explained) and declaring that the only way Africa can be saved was through, yes, tax cuts. He then convincingly sold that notion.
At times, the debate truly appealed to policy wonks more than drama fans, though the ferocity of Smits' and, particularly, Alda's performances kept it riveting.
The debate format, which largely took place on one set, wasn't as technically tricky or ambitious as "ER's" live episode a few years ago, so there wasn't much difference between the live performances for East Coast and West Coast audiences.
I detected but one noteworthy difference, due to a minor gaffe. On the East Coast, Vinick delivered a line about liberals "trying to alarm us with global warming theories," which Santos promptly attacked. On the West Coast, Alda delivered the line as, "trying to alarm us with global warming," to which Smits barked, "Theories?" even though Vinnick had not yet dismissed global warming as a theory. There was a little stumbling, and Smits laughed at the mistake, but was able to make it appear to be Santos' incredulity at Vinick's statement.
Posted by Jo at 07:39 PM
Who won the 'West Wing' live debate?
By FRAZIER MOORE
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
NEW YORK -- Who won the debate? That was up to each viewer of "The West Wing" to decide. No pundits came on afterward to spin the results.
But this fictional faceoff Sunday night had everything else, including a wishful vision of what a presidential debate might look like if its participants were willing to take off the gloves.
The ratings sweeps month stunt pulled in an estimated 9.6 million viewers, up from the 8.2 million "The West Wing" had been averaging this season, according to preliminary Nielsen Media Research figures. The NBC drama has lost about a third of its viewers this season with the move to Sunday nights.
In this live episode, make-believe Republican candidate Arnold Vinick startled his pretend Democratic rival, Matt Santos, by suggesting at the outset that their carefully negotiated rules of engagement be thrown out.
"When the greatest hero in the history of my party, Abraham Lincoln, debated, he didn't need any rules," declared Vinick (played by Alan Alda). "We could junk the rules."
"OK, let's have a real debate," said Santos (Jimmy Smits).
However unlikely it might be that political opponents would agree to such a high-risk, no-holds-barred format, the trappings of the debate sure looked real enough: In their dark business suits, both candidates were stationed at lecterns in front of the customary blue background (that is, until midway through the hour, when both men called for hand microphones so they could roam the stage).
To add to the realistic feel, real-life TV news veteran Forrest Sawyer was on hand to moderate.
His first question went to Vinick: "What would you do to seal the Mexican border (to illegal immigration)?"
"Enforcement first, that's my policy," said the California senator. "I would double the border patrol."
"I don't know how you're going to find room in the budget to double the border patrol with the tax cut you're proposing," fired back Santos, a Texas congressman.
A bit later, Santos promised a million jobs would be created in his first term.
"How many jobs will you create?" Sawyer asked Vinick.
"None," he replied. "Entrepreneurs create jobs. Business creates jobs. The president's job is to get out of the way."
Inevitably, the term "liberal" was contested, as well.
"Republicans have tried to turn `liberal' into a bad word," said Santos. "Well, liberals ended slavery in this country."
"A Republican president ended slavery," Vinick retorted.
"Yes, a LIBERAL Republican, senator. What happened to THEM?"
But there was much more to their give-and-take, which fell into a pattern of lively exchange, even heated confrontation - the sort of telling clash that actual presidential debates never permit. It was substantial, at times downright wonkish, and a remarkable contrast to the choreographed, antiseptic real thing.
The performance - a blend of scripted dialogue and improvisation - was repeated three hours later in another live airing for West Coast viewers. The actors and Sawyer pulled off the latter half of the double-header smoothly and without major glitches.
This special episode was hyped as a signal event in the ongoing campaign to determine which candidate will inherit the White House from Democratic incumbent Jeb Bartlet (Martin Sheen), whose administration has been the centerpiece of "The West Wing" since the drama's premiere six years ago.
Exactly when Election Day will take place has not been announced, although it is expected sometime this season. And who will be the victor? Both Alda and Smits claim not to know their characters' fate, while the series' producers hint the outcome may not have been decided.
As for viewers, they won't be able to cast their ballots. Even so, the Vinick-Santos presidential debate supplied a lot to think about for would-be voters in the audience, who, among other things, might have been left wondering: Why won't real candidates debate this way?
---
Posted by Jo at 07:35 PM
November 06, 2005
What you need to know before the 'West Wing' live debate
BY VERNE GAY
Newsday
As voters... ummm, viewers gird themselves for tonight's live debate on "The West Wing" (NBC) they almost certainly need and deserve a quick primer on where things stand. But, heaven help them, where to begin?
There's an impenetrable thicket of complexities to this season, compounded by the fact that just when you think you've got things neatly figured out, the show turns around and slaps you upside the head, as if to say: "No you don't... ."
Up is down, and white is black, while right is left, and left is right. The political middle ground most often is a no-man's land, with party positions staked out one week only to be shaded or rejected the next.
Former network newsman Forrest Sawyer will "moderate" Sunday's debate between the Republican nominee, California Sen. Arnie Vinick (Alan Alda), and his Democratic challenger, former Houston mayor Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits), but maybe someone should have reached out to see if Franz Kafka was available.
Let's start with the conclusion of the last episode, with Vinick and Santos making their way through the bowels of the Waldorf-Astoria en route to a joint speech that both rue because it will force them to retreat from their pro-choice stances, thus forsaking one vitally important political ally or two. (The speeches are before the very Catholic, very anti-abortion Al Smith Dinner). Vinick is threatening to denounce his own party's TV ad that has smeared Santos' abortion-rights advocacy because it would expose his own quasi-abortion-rights flank, which would then alienate the far right. Santos, meanwhile, figures he's been boxed into a corner as the candidate of "the abortion-without-limits party." That's a no-win place to be, too.
Then, the showstopper: Santos turns to his running mate, Leo McGarry (John Spencer) in a hallway to tell him that he has been, in fact, anti-abortion all along. "Well," quoth Leo, "ain't that a kick in the pulpit."
How this all plays out in tonight's debate may now officially enter the realm of conjecture, but consider this additional piece of shading. The producers will allow both actors to ad-lib some of their answers — a long rope that would ostensibly hang lesser luminaries than Alda or Smits.
This means both have to practice their answers like any real candidate, and as any reporter who has ever interviewed Alda well knows, he's an especially bright and eloquent fellow, while Smits uses words with all the parsimony of a miser with his stash of gold. That's why some fevered imaginations in the press have already compared this episode to the Bush-Kerry matchup: Vinick wins the debate, but Santos ultimately wins the election. (A good bet, by the way.)
"Reinvention" is a great American pursuit, but who would have guessed this great American show would have transformed itself into something like this: Long after show founder and visionary Aaron Sorkin departed following the 2002-03 season, "West Wing" is now written by a coterie of professional TV writers such as Peter Noah, Eli Attie, Alex Graves and Lawrence O'Donnell, who have managed to make it even more intricate, intelligent and exhilarating. Sadly, the campaign trail has creatively revived "The West Wing" just as ratings have crumbled. Its seventh season (averaging around 8 million viewers, down more than 4 million from last year) may well be its last.
Posted by Jo at 10:29 AM
November 04, 2005
Life Not Quite Imitating Art
What the prez could learn from his West Wing addiction
by NIKKI FINKE
LA Weekly
It's an intriguing image: a brooding President Bush — beset with his multiple woes of more than 2,000 dead GIs in Iraq, the Harriet Miers debacle, Plamegate, gas prices, polls and inflation — self-medicating his anxieties du jour by watching past seasons’ reruns of West Wing.
So claims gossip gadfly with Republican connections Cindy Adams. And this was before Scooter Libby was indicted, or Karl Rove and Dick Cheney implicated, or the White House humiliated by Democrats forcing a rare closed Senate session demanding that the GOP-led body kick into high gear its investigation into the veracity of intelligence leading up to the Iraq war. (Come to think of it, doesn’t that sound like it came straight from West Wing?)
As for Bush’s new TV-viewing habit, which used to be baseball 24/7, “I choose to believe it. We all here choose to believe it,” one of the series’ producers, Lawrence O’Donnell, tells me. “But he’s making a mistake in watching reruns when what he should be doing is watching this season’s shows.”
Leave it to Dubya to screen not only the wrong series (Fear Factor seems more his style), but the wrong year, since art is imitating life now that President Bartlet’s top staffers are suspected of leaking a national-security secret to a New York Times reporter. Still, it’s cool that we’re treated to something straight out of the third act of Nixon: presumably, a flickering TV screen in a darkened room where a swaggerless Bush slumps on the sofa in the White House private quarters, morosely munching pretzels (and trying not to trip and fall while choking on them).
The question is, What could, and should, Bush learn from West Wing?
Well, aside from the obvious (that being a crackhead paid off handsomely for West Wing creator Aaron Sorkin), the real Leader of the Free World could take away valuable lessons about dealing with terrorism effectively at home and abroad, stopping a brutal Middle East dictator without engaging the U.S. in an ill-defined and protracted war, eschewing politics to compromise with congressional opponents when it’s for the country’s good. In other words, artful solutions to Bush’s surfeit of problems.
West Wing executive producer John Wells tells me he and his writers can present to Bush “a different way that the presidency can be run.” Such as?
“We have the alternative of letting it work out well for us in dramatic terms,” Wells explains. “There was a great deal of hopeful optimism when Bush went on that aircraft carrier after the Iraq invasion and declared mission accomplished. He just wished it so, but in our world, we could have made it so. Unfortunately, in the real world, the presidency has to deal with incontrollable circumstances.”
For instance, if only W had watched a week ago, he’d have seen how a White House should treat a national-security leaker. Begun 18 months ago, the storyline wrapped up just four days before Libby’s indictment came down. “We thought Plamegate was going to go away, and we didn’t think it should,” Wells tells me. “We did time it to the real grand-jury ending. But we didn’t know it would so conveniently line up.”
In this episode, written by Peter Noah, senior adviser Toby Ziegler confesses to the crime and then offers his letter of resignation. Instead of accepting it as Bush/Cheney did Libby’s, Bartlet says: “Rip it up.”
Toby: “Sir?”
Bartlet: “I can’t accept your resignation. I have to fire you. For cause.”
With that, Toby reaches for the door. Says Bartlet: “Toby, when you walk out of here, there’ll be people out there, perhaps a great many, who’ll think of you as a hero. I just don’t for a moment want you thinking I’ll be one of them.”
And, if he were watching the series this Sunday night, he’d get a tutorial in giving real responses on the issues, and not just repetitive slogans, when West Wing goes live.
That’s right, NBC is so desperate to register on the ratings’ Richter scale that it’s resorting once again to stunts. The network that finished fourth last year is going into November sweeps brimming with buzz kill, its schedule saturated with Law and Orders, its reality shows bottom-feeding (and Donald bitch-slapping Martha in public). Things are so bad that a stinker sitcom like My Name Is Earl may be moved to Thursday night to prop up Joey because the latter can’t even reliably beat Chris Rock’s lame sitcom, Everybody Hates Chris, on UPN, the official network of Attention Deficit Disorder. So that’s why West Wing will feature a live debate between the presidential candidates duking it out to succeed Bartlet in the Oval Office: hunky Texas Democratic Representative Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits) versus whorey California Republican Governor Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda).
After a week of lengthy conversations and rehearsals, two live versions will be telecast, one for the East Coast and another for the West Coast. But Wells expects many unscripted moments. “The guys are pretty playful. There’s quite a bit of back-and-forth.” Moderating will be TV newsman Forrest Sawyer.
And, yes, the show’s writers talked about sticking a box-shaped bulge on a candidate’s back. “Jimmy wanted to be the one having the receiver,” Wells says.
Oh, if only Bush were as articulate as Alda; most recently, our George keeps flubbing pandemic flu as “foo,” as in egg yong. If only he were as centrist. How slick of the producers to have hired Alda, the liberal in real life and onscreen (The Seduction of Joe Tynan, famously), to portray that rarity: a likable Republican. But the very idea of the GOP nominating a fiscal conservative who’s also pro-choice like Vinick is laughable. To counter Alda’s McCain, Smits is Cisneros with the sex but without the scandal.
Topics to be covered during the debate include tax cuts, drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, health care, nuclear power, immigration policy and budget deficits. O’Donnell believes Dubya could learn from it. “What would become interesting for him is that there actually is an effective form of political speech once you get your spin shields ripped from you. Unlike Bush, who deals with at best half-truths and partial prescriptions, this debate will pierce the language that these people normally use.”
Will any of this make a difference for West Wing’s Nielsens? Probably not, and it’s a shame because this season the show is not just better than it’s been, but better even than it has to be. Sure, I stopped watching because of those jejune post-9/11 rants, but I came back now that Smits is a regular. “Everyone keeps saying to me, ‘It’s great this year. Everybody’s watching,’ ” sighs Wells, “but we need about twice as many everybodys.”
The show may have added one VIP viewer, but it’s limping into its seventh season, and the last year of Bartlet’s second term, having lost an audience of millions. Worse, NBC moved West Wing into the time-slot equivalent of dead air for an adult drama — 8 p.m. Sunday — when football overruns on the East Coast put the show in direct competition with ratings heavyweight 60 Minutes. Once NBC’s most reliable winner of Emmys and critical raves, West Wing now not only can’t attract viewers, but it can’t even earn kudos. Both migrated to dumbed-down Commander-in-Chief, which is ABC’s bona fide hit, even though it’s a PSA warning against bad plastic surgery and furrowed-brow overacting.
Hard to imagine Bush getting pointers on governing from a gal. On the other hand, it’s just as unbelievable for Bush to be getting pointers from the second worst-case scenario: a liberal drama that has long been beat up by whining Republicans as a big wet kiss to the Clinton White House. Ain’t life a bitch, George?
It’s too easy imagining him fast-forwarding through the episodes where everyone derides his doppelganger, Governor Robert Ritchie, who’s portrayed as Bartlet’s dumb-as-dirt GOP foe in that second-term presidential campaign and played by none other than Babs’ real-life husband, Jim Brolin. It’s more amusing to fantasize Bush savoring that snarky slam that Ritchie delivers to Bartlet in a private moment between the two very public men: “You’re what my friends call a superior sumbitch. You’re an academic elitist and a snob. You’re Hollywood, you’re weak, you’re a liberal, and you can’t be trusted, and if it appears from time to time as if I don’t like you, well, those are just a few of the many reasons why.” Wait a sec, wasn’t that W’s exact campaign stump speech in 2004?
Finally, no one can fantasize what Bush must feel when Bartlet goes up against a fictional terrorist-sponsoring Middle Eastern state, Qumar. The West Wing prez orders the assassination of that country’s defense minister for orchestrating a botched attempt to blow up the Golden Gate Bridge. After the First Family’s daughter is kidnapped in retaliation, Bartlet relinquishes his office to the Republican speaker of the House, who then orders the bombing of terrorist camps inside Qumar. But those hostilities end without escalation as soon as Bartlet takes charge of the Oval Office again.
Seems even a fictional U.S. president isn’t stupid enough to lead his country into an avoidable war.
Posted by Jo at 08:06 PM
Who will win the 'West Wing' debate?
Show goes live for candidate showdown
CNN.com
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- The powers behind "The West Wing" are making this campaign promise: Sunday's live debate between presidential candidates Arnold Vinick and Matt Santos will be far from politics -- or television -- as usual.
Laurence O'Donnell, who balances work as a political analyst and a "West Wing" executive producer, said the hourlong episode (8 p.m. EDT on NBC) represents "my wish-fulfillment debate."
"We are using the accepted liturgy of presidential debates. It will look the same, it will be moderated by Forrest Sawyer, a real news person, it will have all that real feel to it," O'Donnell said.
"But I think it will be more satisfying in that the candidates end up really going into the issues in a way that they normally would not," he said. "They end up each forcing the other to get more honest as the debate wears on."
In other words, Republican Vinick, played by Alan Alda, and Democrat Santos, portrayed by Jimmy Smits, will listen and respond to each other -- as opposed to real-world debates that tend to excise substance or spontaneity.
The fictional encounter starts with the usual rules, the kind that "are set up by the candidates and are there to protect the candidates and not promote an informed debate," said executive producer Alex Graves, who is directing O'Donnell's script.
But one of the politicians -- Graves won't say who -- quickly proposes tossing the book aside.
"And that's the starting point and everybody, including the moderator, underestimates what that's going to mean," Graves said. "It ends up ... with the candidates doing and saying things you would never expect to see in a debate, never."
The actors may also do something rarely seen. Although they have a script, Alda and Smits also received a crash course in debate strategy and issues that will allow them to veer off the page.
"It's loose enough that it will be exciting to the audience," Smits told The Associated Press.
Asked if that approach puts unusual pressure on the actors, he replied: "Pressure? I'm totally sweating this."
Battling back
The episode, with separate live versions for Eastern and Western time zones and with just two commercial breaks, could be the highlight of a resurgent year for "The West Wing," which is drawing lavish critical praise after being dinged in recent seasons for a creative slump.
Ratings for the series need a jolt. In the first few weeks of the season, and with a move from Wednesday to Sunday, it lost more than 30 percent of its audience (while ABC's new Oval Office drama "Commander in Chief" jumped into the top 10).
Whether "The West Wing" can regroup and return for an eighth year, it's making this season count. There's the immediacy of a story line with echoes of the CIA leak case, with the TV version involving communications director Toby Ziegler and space program secrets.
That's intercut with the lively presidential campaign that could end up with the White House remaining in the hands of the Democratic Party or with a moderate Republican senator from California gaining control early next year.
The producers are claiming they have yet to decide whether Vinick or Santos prevails; maybe Sunday's show will offer clues.
"The West Wing" featured a debate before, between President Bartlet (Martin Sheen) and Republican opponent Robert Ritchie (James Brolin). But that fourth-season show switched between behind-the-scene machinations and the debate itself.
This time, the producers decided to really stretch TV's boundaries. Scenes typically last scant moments; the debate episode will offer two 25-minute blocks of uninterrupted drama, most of it focused on the candidates.
"We're letting two great actors really go at each other and try to defeat each other for basically an hour, nonstop," O'Donnell said, with the chance to go "deeper and deeper and slug each other harder and harder."
Issues include taxes, health care and U.S. border security. (The topic of abortion was explored in the previous week's episode.)
'More exciting than daunting'
The challenges are "more exciting than daunting," said Alda, who, like Smits, has worked on the stage. The "M*A*S*H" star also can claim live on-air experience: In the early days of TV and his career, Alda appeared on shows including "The U.S. Steel Hour."
He likes his character -- Vinick "seems unusual in that the positions he takes have some connection to the values he holds," Alda notes dryly -- and is rooting for him.
"It makes it fun. When an actor plays a character, you want what that character wants. Otherwise it doesn't look authentic. So I really want to defeat Jimmy -- I mean Jimmy as the character," Alda said.
"No, he wants to win," is the retort from Smits when told of Alda's remark.
The actors and producers agree there's significant room for error on a live episode, especially given how infrequently it's done (an "ER" episode and the recent "Will & Grace" episode among the few examples).
Ever the strategist, O'Donnell suggests that missteps could prove as rewarding for viewers as a flawless hour.
"We could get it completely wrong. You might be able to only hear Alan Alda and not hear Jimmy because the mikes don't work (or) the camera goes out; some crazy thing happens with the equipment. Certainly, the actors can lose their way."
"There's just nothing more fun to watch than that kind of train wreck. If I wasn't involved with the show I'd be turning it on just to see: OK, how do they screw up," he said.
Posted by Jo at 08:00 PM
For ‘West Wing’ fans, Santos is their man
Smits' Democratic ‘candidate’ favored over Alda's Vinick in Zogby poll
By Denise Hazlick
MSNBC
Rep. Matthew Santos (D-Texas) should be the next President of the United States, according to the latest Zogby International poll.
Say what? Representative who?
If you are a regular watcher of NBC's “The West Wing,” you know that Santos (played by Jimmy Smits) is the Democratic candidate running against Republican Senator Arnold Vinick of California (Alan Alda) for the fictional presidency. The two “candidates” will engage in a live debate Sunday night at 8 p.m. ET (NBC also will broadcast a live West Coast version of the debate).
In advance of Sunday's debate, Zogby International, the national polling company, conducted a pre-debate poll. The poll, which surveyed 4,492 viewers, evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, asked questions ranging from specifics about the show and outgoing President Josiah Bartlet (Martin Sheen) to the respondents’ beliefs about liberal bias in the media and on TV.
“Presidential races, fact or fiction, captivate millions of Americans. This one, though fictional, is the story of two ideal-type candidates, representing two distinct world views and parties, and two compelling personas. I wouldn’t miss this one for the world,” said Zogby CEO and founder John Zogby.
According the poll, most “West Wing” watchers favor Rep. Santos' world view. If the “election” were held today, 59 percent of respondents said they would vote for the Democrat, and 72 percent believe Santos will win the election on the show. Thirty-two percent of viewers believe Santos' election will make for better ratings and 27 percent believe the political biases of the writers will affect the outcome.
In terms of overall impression, Alda's Vinick received a highly favorable rating from 18.9 percent of respondents and is viewed as somewhat favorable with 55.6 percent of fans. Meanwhile, 42 percent of fans rated Santos as highly favorable and almost 46 percent said he was somewhat favorable.
Slightly more than 66 percent of respondents believe Santos would be more likely to pull over and help them if they were stranded on the side of the road (only 10 percent though Vinick would) and 52 percent would like to have dinner with the Texas Democrat (35 percent would prefer the California Republican).
Santos and Vinick are campaigning to replace Bartlet, the two-term Democratic president played by Sheen. Though Bartlet has faced numerous troubles during his administration, he is well-liked by viewers, earning a stratospheric 75 percent job approval rating in the poll.
Zogby also asked respondents about politics in general, and specifically whether or not they believe the media and Hollywood has a liberal bias.
When asked if they thought the storylines on “The West Wing” were purely entertainment or relate to the political agenda of the producers, almost 58 percent thought the show's creators were trying to promote their own political beliefs, while 28 percent thought it was just entertainment. However, 57 percent don't believe the storylines on the show have influenced real politics in America. Forty-one percent say they prefer watching the real political process to the fictitious one on the show.
Close to 77 percent believe a liberal political bias is reflected on the show, and 51 percent think the national media leans toward the left in its coverage.
Posted by Jo at 07:55 PM
November 02, 2005
'West Wing' goes live for debate episode
Scripted Alda-Smits debate will focus on issues
by Mike Duffy
Detroit Free Press
It's not politics as usual on "The West Wing" this Sunday.
With the presidential race between Democratic U.S. Rep. Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits) and Republican Sen. Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) heating up, the White House political drama adds a bit of unpredictable zing to the campaign thing with a live debate between the two candidates at 8 p.m. on NBC.
The live telecast -- a showdown over the issues featuring two Emmy Award-winning actors -- is one of the most intriguing entertainment treats of the November sweeps ratings period that kicks off a month of new series episodes, movies, miniseries, awards shows and other specials.
The ratings achieved during a sweeps month -- February and May are others -- are used to help set future ad rates.
"Even to call our current presidential debates 'debates' is stretching the term," says John Wells, "The West Wing" executive producer. "They're so pre-negotiated: the questions, the way in which they're going to be done, the way they're going to be answered, the lack of spontaneity."
Throughout its six-year run, "The West Wing" has specialized in a more hopeful, idealistic portrait of the American political process.
"The show as a whole has always tried to say, 'What do we wish our politics was?' " notes Wells. "And so the whole idea of trying to do a debate is to do one in which there's actually a debate."
NBC has experimented with special live episodes of its series, including a live edition of "ER" and the live season premiere of "Will & Grace" this fall.
Both Smits and Alda, who have strong backgrounds in live stage productions, are excited about the opportunity to square off in a live debate between their political alter egos.
"I hope we arrive at something that's not a version of business as usual in terms of debates," says Alda, "but something that's more stimulating, something that says, 'It would be fun if a debate could be like this.' Where there's a real exchange of ideas."
Yes, there's a script. It's not improv. And there have been extensive rehearsals and briefings on the issues for the debate, which will be moderated by MSNBC anchor Forrest Sawyer.
But viewers have also been encouraged to submit questions for the debate at www.nbc.com. So there is the potential for some extra spontaneity.
"We're going to try to go out with a little bit of a net and riff a little bit too. Keep it topical and make sure ... that both points of view are strong," says Smits, who joined Alda and Wells in a recent conference call with reporters.
With limited commercial interruptions planned, the debate episode, which also features other characters from "The West Wing" political world, will have about 10 additional minutes of actual show than the typical 42-minute episode.
And they'll do it twice, once for the eastern half of the country and then for the West Coast.
"Jimmy and I are going head-to-head," says Alda. "There's something that can catch fire when two actors are connecting. This, I hope, will give us a chance to connect so that fire will happen. So then it won't just be fun for us."
Posted by Jo at 07:40 AM
November 01, 2005
Fireworks promised on ‘West Wing’ live debate
‘I’m totally sweating this,’ says actor Jimmy Smits
Associated Press
LOS ANGELES - The powers behind “The West Wing” are making this campaign promise: Sunday’s live debate between presidential candidates Arnold Vinick and Matt Santos will be far from politics — or television — as usual.
Laurence O’Donnell, who balances work as a political analyst and a “West Wing” executive producer, said the hourlong episode (8 p.m. ET on NBC) represents “my wish-fulfillment debate.”
“We are using the accepted liturgy of presidential debates. It will look the same, it will be moderated by Forrest Sawyer, a real news person, it will have all that real feel to it,” O’Donnell said.
“But I think it will be more satisfying in that the candidates end up really going into the issues in a way that they normally would not,” he said. “They end up each forcing the other to get more honest as the debate wears on.”
In other words, Republican Vinick, played by Alan Alda, and Democrat Santos, portrayed by Jimmy Smits, will listen and respond to each other — as opposed to real-world debates that tend to excise substance or spontaneity.
By the book? Not so much
The fictional encounter starts with the usual rules, the kind that “are set up by the candidates and are there to protect the candidates and not promote an informed debate,” said executive producer Alex Graves, who is directing O’Donnell’s script.
But one of the politicians — Graves won’t say who — quickly proposes tossing the book aside.
“And that’s the starting point and everybody, including the moderator, underestimates what that’s going to mean,” Graves said. “It ends up ... with the candidates doing and saying things you would never expect to see in a debate, never.”
The actors may also do something rarely seen. Although they have a script, Alda and Smits also received a crash course in debate strategy and issues that will allow them to veer off the page.
“It’s loose enough that it will be exciting to the audience,” Smits told The Associated Press.
Asked if that approach puts unusual pressure on the actors, he replied: “Pressure? I’m totally sweating this.”
The episode, with separate live versions for Eastern and Western time zones and with just two commercial breaks, could be the highlight of a resurgent year for “The West Wing,” which is drawing lavish critical praise after being dinged in recent seasons for a creative slump.
Ratings for the series need a jolt. In the first few weeks of the season, and with a move from Wednesday to Sunday, it lost more than 30 percent of its audience (while ABC’s new Oval Office drama “Commander in Chief” jumped into the top 10).
Whether “The West Wing” can regroup and return for an eighth year, it’s making this season count. There’s the immediacy of a story line with echoes of the CIA leak case, with the TV version involving communications director Toby Ziegler and space program secrets.
That’s intercut with the lively presidential campaign that could end up with the White House remaining in the hands of the Democratic Party or with a moderate Republican senator from California gaining control early next year.
The producers are claiming they have yet to decide whether Vinick or Santos prevails; maybe Sunday’s show will offer clues.
“The West Wing” featured a debate before, between President Bartlet (Martin Sheen) and Republican opponent Robert Ritchie (James Brolin). But that fourth-season show switched between behind-the-scene machinations and the debate itself.
This time, the producers decided to really stretch TV’s boundaries. Scenes typically last scant moments; the debate episode will offer two 25-minute blocks of uninterrupted drama, most of it focused on the candidates.
“We’re letting two great actors really go at each other and try to defeat each other for basically an hour, nonstop,” O’Donnell said, with the chance to go “deeper and deeper and slug each other harder and harder.”
Issues include taxes, health care and U.S. border security. (The topic of abortion was explored in the previous week’s episode.)
The challenges are “more exciting than daunting,” said Alda, who, like Smits, has worked on the stage. The “M*A*S*H” star also can claim live on-air experience: In the early days of TV and his career, Alda appeared on shows including “The U.S. Steel Hour.”
He likes his character — Vinick “seems unusual in that the positions he takes have some connection to the values he holds,” Alda notes dryly — and is rooting for him.
“It makes it fun. When an actor plays a character, you want what that character wants. Otherwise it doesn’t look authentic. So I really want to defeat Jimmy — I mean Jimmy as the character,” Alda said.
“No, he wants to win,” is the retort from Smits when told of Alda’s remark.
The actors and producers agree there’s significant room for error on a live episode, especially given how infrequently it’s done (an “ER” episode and the recent “Will & Grace” episode among the few examples).
Ever the strategist, O’Donnell suggests that missteps could prove as rewarding for viewers as a flawless hour.
“We could get it completely wrong. You might be able to only hear Alan Alda and not hear Jimmy because the mikes don’t work (or) the camera goes out; some crazy thing happens with the equipment. Certainly, the actors can lose their way.”
“There’s just nothing more fun to watch than that kind of train wreck. If I wasn’t involved with the show I’d be turning it on just to see: OK, how do they screw up,” he said.
Posted by Jo at 10:39 PM
‘West Wing’ hopes live debate will boost ratin
But is enticing gimmick too little, too late?
By Stuart Levine
msnbc.msn.com
These aren’t heady days for the president.
His administration is a mess with scandals aplenty. A major security leak has emerged from a high-ranking official at the White House, and with an upcoming election that could easily shift the political power structure in Washington, he’s doing his best to appease his own party while trying to stand firm on choices made from his gut, not based on popular opinion.
Oh, you’re talking about the Bushes? That’s old news. It’s President Bartlet whose legacy hangs in the balance.
And it’s not just how Bartlet will be remembered by fans of “The West Wing,” the whole series — in what might be its final season — is getting a thorough inspection.
With ratings sinking faster than W’s poll numbers, NBC’s “West Wing” will be pulling out the big guns Nov. 6 in nothing less than a fight for its own survival. The show is staging a political debate, broadcast live, between Democratic nominee Matthew Santos (Jimmy Smits) and Republican candidate Arnold Vinick. It’s an enticing gimmick but seemingly too little, too late.
Alda as Nixon, Smits as JFK?
In our televised age of style and not so much substance, this showdown has all the makings of another Nixon-Kennedy rout. For 18-34 demos with no sense of history, in 1960, the two candidates for the nation’s top job participated in the first presidential TV debate.
Those who heard the exchange on radio believed Nixon — who was vice-president and had far more political experience — was the clear winner. But while he might’ve had a grasp on foreign affairs, Nixon was clueless about the importance of image. Standing at the podium with a 5 o’clock shadow and sweating profusely, he went directly in the tank.
The reason this is relevant in Sunday’s tussle is that Smits is boyish, good-looking and a natural charmer. Alda is a bit haggard-looking, creasing around the face, and has all the sex appeal of Kansas Senator Sam Brownback.
It’s not the first live broadcast in recent times, and — with ratings in jeopardy — certainly won’t be the last. Actually, NBC did this just a few weeks ago in the season opener of “Will & Grace,” another series teetering on extinction.
And while more viewers will most likely tune in than on a typical Sunday night, it won’t be enough to derail the runaway ABC locomotive. “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” the 8 p.m. foe of "The West Wing," is too feel-good for regular “EM” watchers to miss. People, it seems, need a good cry before heading back to work Monday morning.
The only non-“Wing” watchers who might check out this episode are the same who watch NASCAR for the possibilities of a crash. Maybe someone will flub a line? Miss a cue? Fat chance. Smits and Alda are pros, too polished for a major miscue.
It’s actually quite sad that “Wing” has to succumb to this kind of cheap stunt. The show won the Emmy for best drama four times in a row. We’re not talking “Cop Rock” or “Manimal” here.
The first few years of “Wing” were brilliant — even on its off days, it was still head and shoulders better than most everything else. It was an HBO-type show not on HBO.
Aaron Sorkin wasn’t above a few soap opera storylines — Rob Lowe’s affair with a D.C. hooker in the first few episodes, Bartlet's daughter’s kidnapping — but the camaraderie between Martin Sheen, Richard Schiff and Brad Whitford was Sorkin at his best, writing that was Mamet-like; better suited for Broadway than TV.
Of course, producing that high level of quality takes time — too much time, it turned out — and, eventually, the wear and tear of personally scripting 22 episodes a year exhausted Sorkin, put him behind deadline and costing producer Warner Bros. a ton of money. Sorkin parted ways with the show and the next chapter of “Wing” was born.
Executive producer John Wells took the reins, and a few scenes after the transition must’ve made hardcore “Wing” fans cringe. The show, it seemed, was seemingly slipping away into mediocrity. If you look closely, during one particular moment when Josh is shoving his closed fist at the Capitol and exclaiming, “You want a piece of me?” you can actually see the shark jumping over the Rotunda.
But, to his credit, Wells bounced back last season. The focus was smartly placed on the political primaries and some of the magic of those early years returned.
Smits a favorite to win?
Which brings us back to the upcoming debate and who should be the next leader of the free world.
Logic says Smits will win, as he’s certainly the bigger star these days, and would certainly draw younger, and advertiser-friendly, demos.
That being said, Wells would be both courageous and smart to put Alda in the Oval, thereby giving the series a right-wing bent it's never had before.
One benefit would be taking all the leading characters out of their element and giving them a fresh spin — maybe positioning them in the private sector. C.J., who for so many years had to spin stories as press secretary, could return as a reporter on the White House beat. Josh runs for and wins a congressional seat, where the machinations of Capitol Hill would be new terrain for dissection and discussion. Charlie could clerk for a Supreme Court justice (though that seems like a fascinating thesis for an entirely different show).
NBC’s decision to move “West Wing” from Wednesday to Sunday has proved disastrous. If it stays in its current Sunday slot, it’s a goner. A move back to Wednesday is a distinct possibility, even though that may not make a difference either.
Whether "West Wing" says goodbye in May, or miraculously reappears in September is yet to be determined, but viewers of smart and sophisticated television will always have a place in their heart for the Bartlet administration. There’s no debating that.
Posted by Jo at 10:33 PM
Can 'West Wing' Live Debate Recapture Viewers?
By Marilyn Beck and Stacy Jenel
National Ledger
"They claim not to know. They're actually telling their close friends they don't know. Either they don't know, or they're so good at disinformation they should be running a country." That's Alan Alda, talking about John Wells and the other "The West Wing" producers on the matter of whether Alda's Arnold Vinick character or Jimmy Smits' Matthew Santos will win the series' election -- which will be the question at the center of their special, live debate episode Sunday (11/06).
Of course, the bigger issue is whether audiences will elect to return to the Emmy-winning show, which lost millions of viewers with its move to Sunday nights -- a source of frustration to the team, which has been alight with fresh creative fire as the Vinick-Santos showdown draws nearer.
"They're really tackling stories that are fascinating, raising questions you don't even see documentaries about," stresses Alda, whose Republican senator character is, among other things, coping with a crisis of faith in the wake of his wife's death.
As for the debates -- one for the Eastern/Central time audience, a second for the West Coast -- Alda says, "It's scripted, but it's live -- so are the presidential debates scripted. You just don't know when the other guy is going to say what you know he's going to say. There's an element of danger because it's live. It will be improvised in minor ways -- I think. But I don't know."
With his "West Wing" Emmy nomination, his "The Aviator" Oscar nomination, his "Glengarry Glen Ross" Tony nomination and his "Never Have Your Dog Stuffed -- and Other Things I've Learned" memoir in its fourth week on the New York Times Best Seller List, this is already a landmark year in Alda's landmark career. Wouldn't it be something if his recording of the book got a Grammy nomination Dec. 8? And then, there's this running for president on TV thing. "To have a fourth nomination I could lose in one year would be a lot of fun," he says.
Posted by Jo at 07:32 AM