The West Wing (TV Series) What Kind of Day Has It Been (2000) User Reviews

What Kind of Day Has It Been

[lassegalsgaard · 9/10 · 14 June 2022]

There's an argument to be made that Aaron Sorkin is dangerous when he's under his own umbrella. Whenever he's working with a skilled director, he gets subdued and that's the reason why most of his scripts work. However, in a longform format, he has the creative power and therefore, it gets out of hand sometimes. In "What Kind of Day Has It Been," he manipulates the audience by giving us bookends that set up the episode and then the next episode, which can be alienating. It's a decision that has a lot of good will for the most of this finale, but not all throughout.

First off, the one big gripe I have with this episode is the setup that is the whole episode that leads to even more setup. The bookends of the episode work to create tension for the first part of the episode, but it pretty much ends there as well, giving us nothing from the setup that we didn't expect. The payoff is a little cheap, and I think it was a mistake to do it like that. With that said, the rest of the episode is another well-crafted hour of "The West Wing" and a good season finale that deals with the themes that we've come to appreciate the most about this show. A lot of tension between the characters happen throughout, and I feel like this was done to give us a more emotional connection to the big end of the episode, but it mostly worked to set the character in position for their interactions in the coming season. The personal relationships of these people have been tested multiple times, but here, it felt like they were all on the same page, and took it easy on each other, because we were building up to something that could potentially cause a big rift. It's smart storytelling and had they stuck the landing; it would have worked perfectly. Unfortunately, the lack of a real payoff does smear an episode that had nice character development and moments for everyone to shine. If anything, this episode set the stage for the second season, which I'm excited for.

"What Kind of Day Has It Been" excels at setting up the big finale but fails at delivering an emotional impact to end the season. However, the episode as a whole does deliver, continuing to develop the characters in a beautiful way and giving them all moments that make me excited for the second season.

THE WEST WING: SEASON 1, EPISODE 22: What Kind of Day Has It Been

[dalydj-918-255175 · 8/10 · 18 July 2023]

THE WEST WING: SEASON 1, EPISODE 22: What Kind of Day Has It Been Directed by: Thomas Schlamme Written by: Aaron Sorkin

My only complaint with this episode is that while the opening set up is tense it sort've takes any tension out of the rest of the episode until we revisit the President and his town hall appearance. I do maybe wish the show hadn't began with it's opening because the rest of the episode suffers. It doesn't suffer extremely but it does take some surprise out of what will happen later.

The missions to save a pilot stuck in Iraq & men in space are nice moments but the episode really excels once it reaches its conclusion. The ending is an obvious cliffhanger that was meant to bring audiences back & while expected I do think it was done in a captivating way.

Anyway now that I've said that I have to say that this was a good ender for a great season. There were moments throughout that I questioned but the potential is there and knowing how great the immediate follow up season will be I will say this entire season was necessary.

I never grew tired of the walking and talking throughout because I couldn't help but be impressed by the actors commitment and great delivery of many of these moments.

Season 1: The flow, humor and content don't totally offset the constant sense of smug wish-fulfilment

[bob the moo · 13 October 2012]

When this show arrived in the UK originally, Channel 4 picked it up and, just like they did with Oz, Homicide: LOTS and other shows, they managed to mess it up for anyone trying to watch it. This was in the days before I had multi-platform viewing, catch-up TV and of course the internet to turn to in order to never miss an episode; Channel 4, keen to support their digital channel, moved The West Wing over to that for its second or third season (I forget which) and suddenly it was a lot harder for me to see it, to the point that I never did keep up and didn't get back into it later when I did have more access. Anyway, I did like the show so I had it on a list of things I would like to catch up again, hence me watching the first season recently.

There is a common complaint about the West Wing and there is a reason it is common, because it is immediately evident – and that's the heavy liberal leaning of the show. Glancing at the message board for the show it is hard not to see the many, many comments either attacking it or defending it for this quality. Speaking as someone quite liberal, I have to say that the politics of the show didn't bother me at all – which is perhaps part of me agreeing with a lot of it but also part of me recognising that good drama is good drama regardless of what the writers believe. However, what my memory of the show had shielded from me was just how heavy handed it can be at times. The politics are not written around, they are delivered practically to camera as a lecture – all the time while the music and the soft cinematography assists in presenting it in a rather smug manner. I was surprised by just how clumsy it felt at times; there isn't always much intelligence behind it and there often isn't debate or clever presentation, it just clunks across the screen and it does it at least once in every single episode.

This hurt this first season for me because I remember it smarter and better than that but obviously I remember incorrectly. The silver lining of these very cloying smug moments is that it does rather concentrate it into these specific moments and the rest feels less smug as a result. This means we can have what I remember the show being good at – fast moving plots, snappy dialogue, humor and high energy. These qualities make the show work and they are complimented by some great camera work which matches the pace of the dialogue by moving so well around the corridors and offices; at one point in one episode I rewound to watch a tracking shot again just because of how technically impressive it was. The cast are a part of this energy too and they deal well with the wit and the dialogue even if none of them can do much with the sentimental mush they frequently get handed – most of them adopting either "steely determination" or "doe-eyed admiration" poses during them. When they have the material they can just about sell it as reality but otherwise it must be said they succumb to the mush.

The first season of this show has potential and I will return for the second on the basis of this, but it is hard to be blind to the weaknesses here. The liberal politics are fine for me, but it is their smug delivery without intelligence or context that is the issue. The pace, energy, wit and flow of the season all help but none of it can totally overcome these moments, which is a shame. Hopefully the next seasons sees more conflict in ideas, more complexity, more intelligence and less smug self-satisfaction in the writing.

Season One

[zkonedog · 5/10 · 3 July 2019]

As a fan of political fare in general, I gave "The West Wing" a try because it was so highly ranked. I am a huge fan of "24" and "Homeland" and was looking for something else politically-minded to dive into. What I found, however, is that even though this is a decent show, it isn't "must see" television by any means.

For a basic plot summary, "The West Wing" (at least in this first season) is the story of a new presidential administration in the White House under President Jed Bartlet (Martin Sheen). The main cast of characters includes...

-Leo McGarry (John Spencer), Chief of Staff -C.J. Cregg (Allison Janney), Press Secretary -Charlie Young (Dule Hill), Personal Aid To The President -Josh Lyman (Bradley Whitford), Deputy Chief of Staff -Toby Ziegler (Richard Schiff), Communications Director -Sam Seaborn (Rob Lowe), Deputy Communications Director -Mandy Hampton (Moira Kelly), political consultant

The basic format of each episode consists of a problem (or number of problems) that must be solved in the hour time-frame. The show is probably best known for its frenetic, "walk-and-talk" format as the key players pound the White House carpet back and forth. There is also always a bit of character development in each episode, with some cast members featuring more heavily into the plot during some weeks than others (classic ensemble cast).

The main positive about "The West Wing"? Each week, the show presents a scenario that could indeed happen in the real world. It then portrays the way a fictional administrative (loosely Democratic in nature during this season) would handle such a situation. This is very different from the Jack Bauer or Homeland-esque style of political drama that current viewers are a bit more accustomed to. These are stories (at least so far) about "the world before terrorism", which of course makes sense considering it premiered in 1999.

Why the three-star rating then? Well, unfortunately I don't consider that formula to be "must see TV", or at least not enough for me to get excited about watching it. I really got into the first 7-10 episodes, but after that my interest really started to wane (by the end of the season it had become a chore to watch). I want to say this is because the episodes "got worse", but I don't think that was the case. I actually think it was because the format didn't change enough to keep me interested. It was "the same thing" over and over again. Simply put, it is a "case of the week" procedural that just happens to take place in the White House.

Maybe I'm just spoiled by the more serial aspect of TV programs in recent years, but the fact is that I lost interest in "The West Wing" very quickly. I know that it is a well-made show created with lots of care by Aaron Sorkin, but I wonder if perhaps it is more a show for its times. I could see myself coming back for the Second Season at some point, but for now I will be moving on to other fare.

I would be very interested to hear the thoughts of others about how this First Season fits into the overall context of the show. Does it stay pretty much the same all the way throughout, or do they go to more plot/character arcs in subsequent campaigns?