The West Wing And Accuracy

[CM-BlueButterfly]

Comment below to discuss how well you think the show portrayed the complexities of domestic politics, international diplomacy and foreign policy.
Would you have liked if they had sometimes taken more or less poetic license?

[Bastet]

Sorkin sure as shit should have used less poetic license in the abomination that is "Isaac and Ishmael".

[Sarah 103]

On 9/21/2024 at 9:24 PM, CM-BlueButterfly said:

Comment below to discuss how well you think the show portrayed the complexities of domestic politics, international diplomacy and foreign policy.
Would you have liked if they had sometimes taken more or less poetic license?

I'm not trying to be a snarky jerk so apologies if the question comes off that way. What do you mean by poetic license? Do you mean things that would never happen in the real world because there are factual errors in terms of the way Congress works or separation of powers type situations, or do you mean things that would never happen in the real world because of the way people (especially in politics) behave? 

[GHScorpiosRule]

This is more of a pronouncing places and counties accurately  for me as the writers and Show know Better. In “Lord John Marbury” all actors, save Martin Sheen (which wasn’t surprising as he was in Gandhi) and John Spencer (*sniff* still miss him), pronounced Pakistan wrong, and Kashmir as if it’s the sweater made from cashmere. It’s Kush, with a soft ‘s’ not Caz. It just irks.

Edited September 29, 2024 by GHScorpiosRule

[GHScorpiosRule]

ETA: oh Martin!Martin! Martin! And John! They got Pakistan and Pakistanis right, but not Kashmir? And I guess they couldn’t find a non-Muslim actor to play India’s ambassador? Don’t get me wrong-I love Iqbal Theba. Then again, I’m a hypocrite. Because in Bollywood movies, we have Muslim actors playing Hindus and vice versa. I’ll shut up now about the casting of actors. But NOT about not knowing how to pronounce. Of Roger Rees could do it for all, then so should everyone else. 
 

OH! the sun is never up and shining at 5:30 in the morning in DC!!! As was shown in the pilot!

Edited September 29, 2024 by GHScorpiosRule

[meep.meep]

The most unrealistic thing about the whole show is how all the staffers stayed throughout all 8 years of Bartlett's presidency.  The jobs are very high stress and usually people leave after a year or two.  The press secretary who wrote the book that Sorkin mined for the show only worked for a year in the West Wing.

[Skooma]

On 10/4/2024 at 7:55 PM, meep.meep said:

The most unrealistic thing about the whole show is how all the staffers stayed throughout all 8 years of Bartlett's presidency.  The jobs are very high stress and usually people leave after a year or two.  The press secretary who wrote the book that Sorkin mined for the show only worked for a year in the West Wing.

Actually Sam left part way through cause Rob Lowe couldn't handle not being the star of the show I guess. 🤷‍♂️ 

And the annoying woman character who gave women professionals a bad name (political operative/ad agency type? drives car recklessly fast in her intro scene) on Season 1 happily got disappeared without mention again in Season 2.

But no if you have an otherwise content and high quality cast who do good work on a hit show and are under contract, the producers would be idiots to write them out for some sort of minor "realism" issue.  The real realism is the show itself (contracts, great and happy cast, viewers loving same).

[oceanblue]

I agree I'm happy the cast remained constant overall but it is unrealistic in the White House.   My pet peeve is in the finale, when Jed, who lives in NH pronounced the Massachusetts town on the border HaverHILL which is how it's written instead of Haverrill which is how it's pronounced.  AND when Abby asked who thought of having an outdoor ceremony in January in DC and Jed responds with the names of the founders.   In 1789 the new term began in March, the capital was in NY and I am pretty sure the ceremonies were indoors.