Sports Night was ahead of its time, and remains a clinic in the excellence of the symphony of dialogue, camera work and acting. This is early TV work from Aaron Sorkin, and it set the bar high for TV dialogue and overall sitcom development. All the moving parts - and it's incredibly complex - work beautifully.
All that being said, Sports Night is dated, not only because of the references of its time, which is to be expected, but also because the incredibly - stunningly - skillful writing is, almost 25 years later, dated, too.
Now, in 2023, it rings as contrived and forced, though no less incredibly symphonic. The stories are great, and virtually everything about bringing them to the screen for about a half-hour is a clinic in precision.
Upon watching again now, in addition to the slightly contrived dialogue, a couple other things stand out for reconsideration. Actually, at the time, too, Peter Krause was never especially good in his role, compared especially to Josh Charles. But, Krause is basically always has the same smirky delivery; he and Felicity Huffman both are 'actorly'. You see them acting just about every second they're on screen. Krause seems particularly conscious of being a cute 'little boy' kind of brand, and Huffman seems to bring every bit of stage acting (hyper-acting) to every twitchy delivery, which gets worse as the episodes proceed.
Unfortunately, the direction of the series goes into soap opera crap, and characters behave in their work environment in ways that would get them terminated within minutes in any real-world scenario. It's too bad; part of the appeal of Sports Night is/ was the depiction of the characters in their professional capacities. Entire episodes sink into elementary school playground tripe. This seems to be where Felicity Huffman feels most comfortable, but it's a disservice to the show's potential and to viewers.
Again, these are criticisms related to the place in history, so to speak, of Sports Night and Sorkin as writer and creator of TV programming, and probably of pressures exerted by network executives. I suspect some of the back-story of that pressure on Sorkin shows up in the second season story arc. (The criticisms of Krause and Huffman do, however, extend forward up to and including 2023.) I highly recommend Sports Night: it's great entertainment, it's a fantastic resource for learning and understanding the arc of US TV sitcom (and drama) development. It's a little tough to consume on a binge diet, but it's worth your time over a few separate sessions.
All that being said, Sports Night is dated, not only because of the references of its time, which is to be expected, but also because the incredibly - stunningly - skillful writing is, almost 25 years later, dated, too.
Now, in 2023, it rings as contrived and forced, though no less incredibly symphonic. The stories are great, and virtually everything about bringing them to the screen for about a half-hour is a clinic in precision.
Upon watching again now, in addition to the slightly contrived dialogue, a couple other things stand out for reconsideration. Actually, at the time, too, Peter Krause was never especially good in his role, compared especially to Josh Charles. But, Krause is basically always has the same smirky delivery; he and Felicity Huffman both are 'actorly'. You see them acting just about every second they're on screen. Krause seems particularly conscious of being a cute 'little boy' kind of brand, and Huffman seems to bring every bit of stage acting (hyper-acting) to every twitchy delivery, which gets worse as the episodes proceed.
Unfortunately, the direction of the series goes into soap opera crap, and characters behave in their work environment in ways that would get them terminated within minutes in any real-world scenario. It's too bad; part of the appeal of Sports Night is/ was the depiction of the characters in their professional capacities. Entire episodes sink into elementary school playground tripe. This seems to be where Felicity Huffman feels most comfortable, but it's a disservice to the show's potential and to viewers.
Again, these are criticisms related to the place in history, so to speak, of Sports Night and Sorkin as writer and creator of TV programming, and probably of pressures exerted by network executives. I suspect some of the back-story of that pressure on Sorkin shows up in the second season story arc. (The criticisms of Krause and Huffman do, however, extend forward up to and including 2023.) I highly recommend Sports Night: it's great entertainment, it's a fantastic resource for learning and understanding the arc of US TV sitcom (and drama) development. It's a little tough to consume on a binge diet, but it's worth your time over a few separate sessions.