(S07E22) Was anyone else struck by the differences between the pilot episode of The West Wing (shown tonight before the finale) and the episodes from the past couple of years, including this one? Such a different vibe. So much energy and passion and great writing (not to mention inspirational music and romanticism) in the pilot, compared to the last couple of years of so-so writing, dark camera work, bad changes in characters (although this season was a comeback). I would have rather have seen a retrospective, but it was interesting to see how the show began and how it will end.

The series finale got so many things right and also a few things wrong. Let's talk about them.

That's an odd headline, eh?

A freelance writer at NBC Sports has been fired for lifting dialogue from the fourth season opener of The West Wing ("20 Hours In America") in a story about a horse trainer in the Kentucky Derby that had rescued three children from a fire. The episode had a storyline about a bombing at a college swim meet, and President Bartlet used the words "ran into the fire" in the same way that this writer in the piece used them.

But it doesn't end there. In the same episode, Bartlet said: "The streets of heaven are too crowded with angels, but every time we think we've measured our capacity to meet a challenge, we look up and we're reminded that that capactiy may be limitless." The Derby piece had this:

"... funny thing about life is that every time we think we've measured our capacity to meet its challenges, we're reminded that that capacity may well be limitless."

Wow, I'm not a horse racing fan, but if I had heard that, I would have immediately recognized it, since I've seen that episode 4 million times.

[via TV Tattle]

Well, now, at least we know why there's not going to be a West Wing retrospective this Sunday. And -- surprise, surprise! -- the reason is money. According to Lisa de Moraes of The Washington Post (among other sources), more than one of the primary WW players balked at the low amount of money NBC and Warner Bros. was offering to them to do the clip/reminiscing show, originally scheduled air before Sunday's series finale. So, instead of breaking the bank to create a show that will air at 7 PM on a Sunday, the two parties decided to just air the show's 1999 pilot instead.

Judging by the tone of de Moraes' article, she isn't taking the actors' side. I don't blame her; all they're doing is sitting and talking about the show that paid them handsomely for seven years. If it were me, I'd be so grateful for the opportunity WW gave me (before this, for example, Allison Janney was best known for a New York Lottery commercial and a small role in Private Parts), I'd do the retrospective for scale. But I'm just a lowly blogger, so what do I know?

[Thanks to Karen for the tip.]

As a follow-up to my post earlier today, some West Wing fans are speculating (scroll down past the Prison Break finale info) that the West Wing retrospective that NBC canceled in favor of the pilot ep this Sunday might make it to the last season DVD set, which will be released later this year. Which makes sense, since the special has already been shot.

[via TV Tattle]

Aaron Barnhart over at TV Barn wonders why NBC isn't showing the West Wing retrospective this Sunday (as you've probably heard, they're running the pilot episode instead). Barnhart is trying to find out from someone at NBC what happened to the one hour special, but they haven't called him back yet.

He does, however, think it's one final slap in the face to the show and to the fans that made it a hit.

(S07E21) This was an odd episode. I mean, it's the next to last show, and we're supposed to believe that everyone is getting ready to leave the White House and they're packing up and they're thinking about new job offers. But at the beginning, even though C.J.'s office is filled with boxes and Will goes to see someone about a possible political job, it didn't "feel" right. Focusing on C.J. is fine, but focusing on Will and Kate? I just don't see it.

Then Andy walked into C.J.'s office and asked her to ask the President about pardoning Toby, and that's when the episode kicked into gear for me.

This is interesting: according to this press release, NBC will not be showing a West Wing retrospective before the final episode airs on May 14. Instead, they will rerun the show's 1999 pilot episode. Remember, this was back in those heady days when a) the U.S. still had a Democratic president, b) we were in that odd period after the Cold War and before the War on Terror, so the country wasn't as keen on what was going on politics-wise, and c) Rob Lowe was actually considered the star of The West Wing.

What I remember from that episode is when Lowe's character Sam Seaborn is with a hooker (played by Lisa Edelstein of House!) and his pager goes off. "What's POTUS mean?" she asks. Seaborn juts his jaw and says, semi-proudly, "That's the President of the United States." Ahhhh, memories. What a difference seven years makes, huh?

[via The Futon Critic]

I always cringe a bit when I interview a celebrity whose work I admire. I'm always afraid that they're going to turn out to be a jerk, or they hate me for some reason, or I'll find out they're into terrible things, like torturing puppies or watching Wife Swap. Thankfully, I've only found out once in twenty years that a celebrity I loved on the screen was a really terrible person (and no, I'm not going to tell you who it is). My lucky streak continues with Bradley Whitford, ex-Deputy Chief of Staff Josh Lyman on The West Wing, guest star on one of ER's best episodes ("Love's Labor Lost"), guest star on most TV shows since the mid 80s, and star of Aaron Sorkin"s new fall series, Studio 60. Whitford is an extremely nice, friendly, classy guy, I'm happy to report.

And I found out that Bradley Whitford is a lot like Josh Lyman, except for ... well, I'll let him explain that.

(S07E20) Hmmm...you would think they would leave a title like "The Last Hurrah" for the last episode of the series (it's not, the title of that episode is "Tomorrow"), but it fit this one. This was a very solid episode. I usually don't like the episodes that are almost all Vinick and new administration-oriented, but this one was great. Alan Alda is a flawless actor, and it's terrific to see what Vinick is going through now that he's lost. And another nice touch? Using the older characters of Amy and Ron to sort of bridge the old cast and the new cast.

While Santos is busy as hell (he and the new First Lady have to decide what school their kids should go to, Houston or D.C.), Vinick finds himself with nothing to do.

(S07E19) Can I tell you how much I liked the opening scene with Josh on the airplane, going to see Sam in L.A. to ask him to be Deputy Chief Of Staff? I liked that Josh interrupted him in the middle of a law firm meeting (shades of "In The Shadow Of Two Gunmen"), and the banter outside the building was just like old times. I really think it's odd -- really odd -- that Sam says nothing about Leo or apologize for not being there (they should have at least mention that Sam had called), but I'm not going to quibble with that. In my mind, he did call.

While Josh tries to get Sam back in the White House, the President-Elect runs afoul of the President ...or does he?

This question has been asked a couple of times here, in the comments for my latest West Wing review and in an earlier post I believe. Who was that sixth pallbearer at Leo's funeral? There was the President, Josh, Charlie, Santos, the DNC guy, and in the back a guy with short light hair.

Anyone know who he was? Really odd that they didn't have another regular cast member to be a pallbearer.

(S07E18) Now this was the type of episode longtime West Wing viewers were hoping for. If you had asked me what should happen in the Leo's funeral episode and who should be in the episode, this is what I would have done. The montage at the beginning of the episode showed everyone getting ready for the funeral - President Barlet, Josh, Toby, C.J., Donna, etc - and then showed all of the people at the church. Sure, it was jarring not to have Sam there (Rob Lowe isn't back yet), but you really can't complain when you have Mallory, Nancy McNally, Carol, Margaret, Hoynes, Russell, Joey Lucas, Danny and everyone else. Nice touch having Toby stay in the church til everyone leaves and Charlie offering to walk out with him.

I was a little afraid they'd rush though the Leo memories and shove in the whole Santos plot, but that didn't happen. You had to show what was going on with the Santos plot (life does go on after all), and it was a nice balance of the old and the new.

That's the revelation in The New York Times today, that Arnold Vinick was supposed to win the election last night on The West Wing, but after the death of John Spencer, they decided to have Matt Santos win the election, thinking that fans wouldn't want to see Santos lose both his running mate and the election.

Some other tidbits from the article: the cast filmed their last scenes together on March 31, the last episode will be broadcast on May 14, and Martin Sheen is going back to college (at age 65)!

Let the debate begin, readers. Would you have rather have seen a Vinick win, regardless of how or why that happened, or did The West Wing have to end with a Democratic victory?

(S07E17) This must have been the hardest episode for the cast to film. How do you even go about filming the onscreen death of a beloved character when the equally beloved castmate also died in real life?

NBC is fond of calling their comedies "Must See TV." But this was truly the one must see episode of any NBC show in quite a while. Leo dies, and the election goes down to the wire, all in one episode. Must see, but not handled as well as it could have been. Some good scenes with Josh, and some nice moments in the White House between Bartlett and C.J., but they really should have given Margaret more to do, get more of a reaction from her besides one shot of stoic tears.

And...no Toby?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Yesterday, Slate posted a great article by Kate Arthur about how poorly TV shows treat sexual tension between characters. In the article, Arthur mentions every major TV couple that's teased us with their constant "will they or won't they?" games over the last thrity years, from Sam and Diane to Mulder and Scully.

The jump-off point for the article is the recent West Wing episode where longtime flirts Josh and Donna first kissed, then had sex. Twice. Took 'em long enough, right? I mean, the show's been on for seven years, for Pete's sake. But they're willful teenagers compared to some of the other couples that Arthur examines in the article. She even includes couples that do hook up, like Luke and Lorelai of Gilmore Girls, giving the added twist that they are being kept at arm's length from each other this year because Lauren Graham's and Scott Patterson's physical chemistry with each other is so poor (I've heard that the two don't get along, but I don't see that tension on screen at all).

Of course, she cites the grandaddy of all TV hookups, when Maddie and Dave slept together on Moonlighting, as the big reason why TV flirts never get together anymore.

Damn you, Moonlighting! If it weren't for you, we would have never had to endure the words, "We were on a break!" for eight years.