S02.E06: Chartwinkerie

[Pallas]

While WGBH prepares for their annual fundraiser, Julia receives an offer from a network with the funds to take The French Chef to the next level.

[Words]

I'd bet that CBS *did* pursue Julia Child, who really DID elevate WGBH and public television.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Words

[BingeyKohan]

Is Rachel Bloom really done? Weird extended cameo if so.

[peeayebee]

I couldn't remember which station Mr Rogers' Neighborhood had aired on, so when I saw those cat and dog puppets, I thought of him and wondered if he would be coming up soon. Yes, I was wrong.

I liked Rachel Bloom on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, but I never warmed to her here. I don't know if it was her character, the writing, or her performance, but she didn't seem a good fit. Still, it was weird to cast such a fairly prominent actor when she really didn't have much point in the show. 

I'm glad Avis and Julia made up.

I know it was meant to be cute, but I didn't enjoy all the little note pushing back and forth at the beginning. It felt too designed to be cute, like its humor was being forced on us.

[Juneau Gal]

2 minutes ago, peeayebee said:

 

I know it was meant to be cute, but I didn't enjoy all the little note pushing back and forth at the beginning. It felt too designed to be cute, like its humor was being forced on us.

There seems to be a lot of that this season, attempts at being wacky that come off as forced or out of place. The first three episodes in particular read as lots of wackiness to me and it was jarring because I never got that feeling season one. 
I’m starting to find Julia insufferable and I don’t like that. 

[EtheltoTillie]

The fund raiser was also too wacky.

[peeayebee]

2 minutes ago, Juneau Gal said:

There seems to be a lot of that this season, attempts at being wacky that come off as forced or out of place. The first three episodes in particular read as lots of wackiness to me and it was jarring because I never got that feeling season one. 

Yes. There was another scene where Alice is running down the halls, and it reminded me so strongly of the scene from Broadcast News where Joan Cusack is running down the hall, sliding under open file cabinet drawers to get the news copy to the anchor (or something like that). Anyway, I too have thought this season has inserted a bunch of wackiness for some reason.

[BingeyKohan]

13 hours ago, peeayebee said:

I couldn't remember which station Mr Rogers' Neighborhood had aired on, so when I saw those cat and dog puppets, I thought of him and wondered if he would be coming up soon. Yes, I was wrong.

I liked Rachel Bloom on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, but I never warmed to her here. I don't know if it was her character, the writing, or her performance, but she didn't seem a good fit. Still, it was weird to cast such a fairly prominent actor when she really didn't have much point in the show. 

I'm glad Avis and Julia made up.

I know it was meant to be cute, but I didn't enjoy all the little note pushing back and forth at the beginning. It felt too designed to be cute, like its humor was being forced on us.

Mr. Rogers has made an appearance though! He came and sat with Julia (identifying himself only as "Fred") at the end of that awards ceremony last season.

Totally agree with your points, though.

I think Avis' new man is actually in her life to inform on Paul, sadly. (Hence the weird reference to his fascination with Paul's ring.)

Off topic but I think the junky ads that pile up on this site is really fouling up the UX.

[MaryMitch]

I'm glad Julia decided to stay. I'm not very familiar with her real-life show, so I was actually surprised at her decision.

I was thinking how, in "Moneyball", Brad Pitt's character said that after bypassing a college scholarship and then crashing and burning in the majors, he promised himself he would never make a major decision based on money.

[peeayebee]

1 hour ago, BingeyKohan said:

Mr. Rogers has made an appearance though! He came and sat with Julia (identifying himself only as "Fred") at the end of that awards ceremony last season.

Gosh, I don't remember that. 

Quote

I think Avis' new man is actually in her life to inform on Paul, sadly. (Hence the weird reference to his fascination with Paul's ring.)

I hadn't noticed Paul's ring until that note-passing sequence. (I suppose we were meant to notice it.) Has he always worn it in this show? Anyway, I hope Stanley doesn't have ulterior motives. :(

 

[buckboard]

1) Mr. Roger's show was produced by the PBS station in Pittsburgh, WQED.

2) As for Rachel Bloom being wasted, I think it was important for a known actress to play that part.  It gave the viewer an extra sense that the character was a good producer and that WGBH was lucky to get her.  It also showed that she did a good job, but that Julia, in truth, did not want to work for an experienced woman. Avis understood that even if Julia didn't.

[txhorns79]

On 12/8/2023 at 8:50 PM, peeayebee said:

I liked Rachel Bloom on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, but I never warmed to her here. I don't know if it was her character, the writing, or her performance, but she didn't seem a good fit. Still, it was weird to cast such a fairly prominent actor when she really didn't have much point in the show. 

I agree.  Maybe, I'm just forgetting things, but did we really see her clashing with Julia in prior episodes?  I felt like I was missing something with her speech to Julia in this episode.  Perhaps her character was there more to serve as a professional helpmate for Alice. 

[Yeah No]

On 12/8/2023 at 8:57 PM, Juneau Gal said:

There seems to be a lot of that this season, attempts at being wacky that come off as forced or out of place. The first three episodes in particular read as lots of wackiness to me and it was jarring because I never got that feeling season one. 
I’m starting to find Julia insufferable and I don’t like that. 

I found this version of Julia insufferable in season 1, so you can just imagine how I feel now....I feel it does a disservice to the real Julia, who in her own way was very level-headed and "salt of the earth"-like.  I have said before that I think this depiction of her is more like a cartoon caricature than an affectionate take on the real person.  This is making her look self absorbed, flighty and almost Pythonesque!  

And yes to the attempts at wackiness in general coming off as forced or out of place.

I am embarrassed to admit, though, that neither my husband nor I recognized Rachel Bloom here.  We loved her in "Crazy ex-Girlfriend", so you'd think we wouldn't have missed that!

Edited December 10, 2023 by Yeah No

[peeayebee]

12 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I agree.  Maybe, I'm just forgetting things, but did we really see her clashing with Julia in prior episodes?  I felt like I was missing something with her speech to Julia in this episode.  Perhaps her character was there more to serve as a professional helpmate for Alice. 

I have no idea if a woman director was hired IRL for Julia's show and if Julia didn't want that, but I agree with you that the character was mainly there for Alice to see that a woman could succeed in the business as a director or producer.

I'm still enjoying Julia and the performance. I could be mistaken of course, but I didn't see Julia as not wanting to have a woman direct her, but that she wanted Russ. Julia liked the way things worked before, so she didn't like the directorial changes Elaine made.

[Yeah No]

1 hour ago, peeayebee said:

I have no idea if a woman director was hired IRL for Julia's show and if Julia didn't want that, but I agree with you that the character was mainly there for Alice to see that a woman could succeed in the business as a director or producer.

This show has only confused the reality of Julia's life with fiction and I have a problem with the way it's doing that, as does the real Russ Morash who famously went on record with his complaints in an interview on PBS entitled "Separating Fact vs. Fiction in the Life of Julia Child".  I get it that the show wants to empower young women by inserting fictional female producers and directors, but that only gives young people the misperception that things were more advanced in the early '60s than they really were.  And I'm not sure that's a good idea.  This show goes to great lengths to get some things historically correct which only makes the deviations from that feel like chalk screeching on a blackboard for those of us that remember the real history.  And no, there were no female directors on Julia's shows.

[iMonrey]

I didn't see the point of Rachel Bloom's character either, especially since she was apparently not based on anyone in real life. If we were meant to think Julia simply did not want to be directed by a woman that was never made clear. It was said once or twice by others, but not by her. And when confronted by Elaine she replied that she had misinterpreted her. So I have no idea what she was really thinking. 

If the show was trying to add a subplot about women empowerment it failed on that level as well given how quickly the character came and went and how little she impacted the story overall. 

Anyone old enough to remember phones in the early 60s would know they wouldn't start ringing the instant Julia promised to cook dinner for someone. You would have actually had to get up, go to where the phone was, and dial.

Edited December 10, 2023 by iMonrey

[pasdetrois]

4 hours ago, Yeah No said:

misperception that things were more advanced in the early '60s than they really were.

I worked in TV news in the 80s, and things were still very bad for women. My female colleagues and I were ordered to go to charm school at the local Sears; we refused. The hostility and sexual harassment from our male colleagues was persistent and scary.

WGBH is being presented as fairly precious, when in fact local public television is/was often drab, full of disappointed folks who couldn't get into the major networks, and very DIY. Their budgets were indeed impossible to execute well. (But, I'm a fan.) My good friend still has his tapes from his public television days and he plays them for our (loving) amusement.

Anyway, I do think the show tried to show how everyone reacted to a smart, female director - a mixed bag - and it didn't work. The character needed more time to tell that story; severe hair and frumpy clothes aren't enough. I guess they were afraid to show how nasty it might have been.

I noticed Paul's big honkin' turquoise ring throughout the series because I wear a lot of turquoise.

The scene with the professor and John Updike was priceless and the highlight of the episode.

I'm a fan of Julia if for no other reason than she made it and was apparently a kind person who held onto her dignity and common sense while being wildly successful.

Edited December 10, 2023 by pasdetrois

[peeayebee]

12 minutes ago, pasdetrois said:

The scene with the professor and John Updike was priceless and the highlight of the episode.

I forgot to mention that. It was a lot of fun. Plus I love Gilbert & Sullivan.

[Yeah No]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Anyone old enough to remember phones in the early 60s would know they wouldn't start ringing the instant Julia promised to cook dinner for someone. You would have actually had to get up, go to where the phone was, and dial.

Oooohhh, I thought the same thing!  Plus when whoever asked for their call to be transferred, the phones did not have multiple line buttons on them - In the early 60s those would have probably been multi-line phones with buttons on the bottom for each line even though they were still rotary dial phones.  Everyone on the system would have pick up and dial access to all the lines but when one was occupied by someone else they couldn't join in on it.  And when someone wanted to be transferred who was on line 4 you'd press the "hold" button, then dial the person they want to be transferred to and tell them they had a call on line 4.   Otherwise if they still had a switchboard operator and no multi-line phones it may have involved dipping the cradle button which might have conferenced in the operator who would take the call, then they could hang up.

[txhorns79]

5 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Plus when whoever asked for their call to be transferred, the phones did not have multiple line buttons on them - In the early 60s those would have probably been multi-line phones with buttons on the bottom for each line even though they were still rotary dial phones.

I did think it was weird that people calling for Alice were being connected to the hotline phones to speak with her. 

 

9 hours ago, iMonrey said:

I didn't see the point of Rachel Bloom's character either, especially since she was apparently not based on anyone in real life. If we were meant to think Julia simply did not want to be directed by a woman that was never made clear. It was said once or twice by others, but not by her. And when confronted by Elaine she replied that she had misinterpreted her. So I have no idea what she was really thinking. 

Yes, the whole thing was left too vague.  I didn't know if Elaine had a point or like Julia said, she was just misinterpreting Julia's actions.  I know Avis seemed to think there was something to what Elaine had said, but it's hard to know what was actually the case. 

[Yeah No]

7 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I did think it was weird that people calling for Alice were being connected to the hotline phones to speak with her. 

Yeah it was completely weird.  Back then even if you could be patched through to an individual hotline phone it just wouldn't have been done.  If the person called on the general hotline phone number any of the hotline workers could have picked it up and if someone else did they would have had to consult a live operator to transfer them to that specific phone since none of those phones had separate line buttons.  But even if they did have line buttons how would one hotline worker know the extension of the other hotline worker?  And if they consulted an operator to transfer the call I don't think any live operator would have done that even if they could.  They probably would have just taken a message.  Especially in those days people working a hotline were seen as unavailable for anything else and personal calls would not have been seen as a priority to put through to them.  It's not like today where everyone has their cell phone on them and can get personal calls at any time.

ETA:  Here's an example of a 1960s rotary dial multi-line phone with the little line buttons.  The red one was for putting a line on hold.  The "buzz" was an intercom presumably to a boss or someone you were answering the phone for.  To transfer a call you'd hit the hold button while you were on the line with the person.  Their line button would start to blink and you were no longer able to talk to them.  Then you'd pick another free line button, call the person you wanted to transfer them to, and tell them they had a call on the line number that was blinking.  By the early '70s these phones became all push button so that dates this phone as earlier than that.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Yeah No

[chaifan]

I also never really got the sense that Julia's problem with Elaine was because she didn't want to take direction from a woman.  After all, she took direction (not in the tv parlance term, but in regular layperson terms) from Alice.  My first impression was that she didn't like Elaine being brought in because a) she was comfortable with Russ, and b) because if it couldn't be Russ she wanted it to be Paul.  She thought Elaine took the job away from Paul's shot at being a director.  And then it was never really explained why she never really warmed up to Elaine.

I agree with the above comments that I'm not a fan of the character of Elaine being created.  I understand Alice - she's a composite character.  That makes sense for shows based on real life.  But if there really weren't any female directors on the show in real life, so Elaine doesn't make sense in any way. 

Sometimes, I feel shows would be better off just forgetting about real life and make a wholly fictional show that was "inspired by" a real life person.  Then they can take all the liberties they want and not have to worry about historical accuracy, or pissing off people who are still alive and are screaming at the TV "that's not how that happened!" 

And mods, please, tell the site tech gurus to please do something about the lag time on these pages.  It's horrible.  I'd rather have you guys down for another 4 days and return to a site where I can actually scroll and where I don't have to wait 10 seconds for words I'm typing to appear. 

 

 

[EtheltoTillie]

On 1/1/2024 at 12:53 PM, chaifan said:

I also never really got the sense that Julia's problem with Elaine was because she didn't want to take direction from a woman.  After all, she took direction (not in the tv parlance term, but in regular layperson terms) from Alice.  My first impression was that she didn't like Elaine being brought in because a) she was comfortable with Russ, and b) because if it couldn't be Russ she wanted it to be Paul.  She thought Elaine took the job away from Paul's shot at being a director.  And then it was never really explained why she never really warmed up to Elaine.

I agree with the above comments that I'm not a fan of the character of Elaine being created.  I understand Alice - she's a composite character.  That makes sense for shows based on real life.  But if there really weren't any female directors on the show in real life, so Elaine doesn't make sense in any way. 

Sometimes, I feel shows would be better off just forgetting about real life and make a wholly fictional show that was "inspired by" a real life person.  Then they can take all the liberties they want and not have to worry about historical accuracy, or pissing off people who are still alive and are screaming at the TV "that's not how that happened!" 

And mods, please, tell the site tech gurus to please do something about the lag time on these pages.  It's horrible.  I'd rather have you guys down for another 4 days and return to a site where I can actually scroll and where I don't have to wait 10 seconds for words I'm typing to appear. 

 

 

Try using Duck Duck Go. It eliminates the problem. This has been discussed on the everything else threads.

[rejnel]

On 12/10/2023 at 10:21 AM, pasdetrois said:

The scene with the professor and John Updike was priceless and the highlight of the episode.

Theatre-goers will also recognize it as a sly Broadway reunion; Jefferson Mays and Bryce Pinkham starred together in (the very Gilbert-and-Sullivan-esque) A GENTLEMAN’S GUIDE TO LOVE AND MURDER.

[J-Man]

The two public TV stations I'm most familar with (KQED in SF and KVIE in Sacramento) had auctions (for goods and services donated by local businesses) instead of telethons/pledge drives to raise money. At least by the late '60s, which is when I became familiar with them. I wonder why this wasn't tried out in Boston. Or maybe they did so later on.