I'm sorry, but I found the 1st episode to be boring-not at all what I expected from such a great cast of characters. Too heavy-too moody-too intense. Is this show supposed to be a comedy or drama? I won't be tuning in again. It was a waste of my time. I was looking for a hook. I never found one.

It was a great teaser for the show. It did exactly what Matt wanted it to do, apologetic, reverential, re-establishing their territory. Plus, we must not forget, the hopefully endless West Wing (and sports Night) references. Practically an entire episode devoted to G&S. It is a Sorkin trademark.

I had DVRed the show and only got to see it yesterday night. I have to say that I DID LIKE IT A LOT. I think it was the perfect ending the the show. Loved the premise behind the sketch. Much, much better than anything I've seen in SNL since Will Ferrell left.

If you see listen closely to what they are saying it makes a lot of sense. They need a fresh start and they are making fun of themselves by singing this song. Very smart I think.

What you probably didn't like was that the actors are not good singers. That I'll give you. SNL guys are usually very good in my opinion. But the sketch itself was brilliant.

i wasn't that impressed either and i actually spent a good portion of the episode wondering if they were actually going to show the sketches b.c. i didn't think sorkin could carry it off. the song and dance number just made me want to know what the whole "crazy christians" thing was about. the actress who plays harriet (nice name ...) also really annoys me.

Guess what? The cold open did kind of suck. Guess what else? Studio 60 is not a real variety show. Shocked? The fact is that the sketch wasn't funny to us; as would be expected since we are not part of the universe in which the sketch exists. It references a situation to which we were not a party (we did not really watch Judd Hirsch make his speech; we have not watched Studio 60 for years and years; we have no personal connection to the characters, the time period, the context; we weren't privy to media coverage of the event; and finally, we weren't watching a variety shsow.

Ultimately, a show like SNL relies on a wink-wink inside joke illusion, which is a luxury Studio 60 does not have.

Comedy isn't funny in a vaccum; only in context. And not living in the world in which this sketch was shown serves to tear away any credible criticisms we might have. The show exists in a parallel universe we cannot credibly purport to understand.

With that said, "shows within shows" are rarely held to the standard of that which they are emulating, whether its parody or a serious attempt to recreate reality. I didn't see a TV Squad post asserting that the movie "Aqua Man," a clip of which we were able to see on a recent episode of Entourage, doesn't look like a good movie. Nor was there a posting about an episode of Law & Order with a fictitious rapper stating that his music sucked.

I think you are holding this to an unfair standard. I'm pretty sure if Aaron Sorkin's writing staff could make a show as good if not better than SNL than they would have done so by this point.

I really enjoyed the ending but at the same time I think they should have shown the second act "Crap Christains" or whatever they called it. It was still MUCH funnier than SNL which I invision was what the show was like before the primere. Plus "Crap Christains" would have been amazing just because Sorkin always does a tasteful way to make fun of them. :)

The cold open at the end of the show was, to use an affectation championed by the "hip youth of today" demographic that the fictional Studio 60 show is going after, "meh"
I have to agree with an earlier poster, they shouldn't have shown the cold open. The idea sounds okay. A dolled up cast doing a parody of Gilbert & Sullivan, except inserting refrences to cocaine and mutual masturbation or something or other. In practice it wasn't so funny.
What I really hope doesn't happen in this show is that a sketch or a line will be preformed by the ficitonal cast that isn't funny in real life, but we see people laughing at it in the fictional world. You can pull that kind of crap in a political drama no problem, but comedy fans are notorious for their dedication and seriousness for comedic bits. They can't fudge on the funny, too put it in another way.
Saying all that, I don't mind Studio 60. I tuned in first to bash it, thinking it would be a show dissing on SNL. I was suprised and elated to find out that it would be more in the line of Network (which it name dropped a few too many times in the pilot, but that's another rant) and really comment on the behind the scenes action in the world of all television through the microcosmic lens of a skecth show.
No, I don't have a problem with the actor's performances or even the 'holier than though'-cool-back & forth dialogue. To quote a song, "Its not the band I hate, but the fans" The show has barely been on the air for two episodes and people are already dropping bomb shells like "genius", "brilliant", and "best show on network televsion". When will people learn that nothing will kill a good show faster than critical acclaim and weblogger hyperbole.[see Arrested Development]
Not even delving into the fact that when people use terms like "genius" and "brilliant" in their description of every other television show, it makes the terms lose weight. They stop meaning what they are supposed to mean, ironically lessening the number of actual "brilliant" and "genius" to begin with.
Everytime you drop one of the previously mentioned bomb-shell words describing your favorite show, ou are alienating someone. You are pissing someone off. You are actually driving people away from said show. I like Studio 60. I think it has pontential to be great. If you haven't seen it check it out. Matthew Perry is suprisingly not annoying in this show, in fact he kind of comes off as a cool guy. It isn't going to be the best show on TV (THIS YEAR, sorry to much competiton from returning shows).
I would just like to reiterate that the cold open wasn't very funny though, something they'll really need to improve on in the future if they want to continue doing a show about a sketch comedy show.

I continue to be unimpressed with Studio 60. For all the hype, I expect a lot more than is being delivered. I don't find the writing particularly witty or intelligent. My impression of Sorkin is that he thinks he is much wittier and intelligent than the average viewer, and therefore his work will be taken as such. I just don't agree. When I see a gem, on the small or big screen, I take note. The only movie I can think of lately that kept me on my toes, thoroughly entertained and treated me like a thinking adult was the movie Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. I'd like to see similar pacing and characterization on television. To me, Sorkin isn't producing it with this program.

I think that the show was excellent right up to, and including the cold open. Aaron Sorkin is brilliant, and what he gets from his actors is amazing. The thought of this show not catching on depresses me more than I can possibly express. If I have to endure one more stupid episode of CSI or L&O I think that I would loose it. He is the one writer on major a major network that doesn't pander to the viewer. Quite simply he is the only reason I will continue to subscribe to my basic cable package. If this doesn't work out, I think it's time that HBO or SHO step up, and rescue this genius from mediocrity.

I think Sorkin's better off with a 30-minute format. That way he has to keep things sharp and tight and doesn't have time to wander off. Frost said he didn't like free verse because it was like playing tennis with the net down. Sorkin needs the net.