Open Forum Friday: Is There Anything Wrong with an Artist Plagiarizing Himself?

Posted by on June 29th, 2012   Filed under: Open Forum Friday

Like a lot of people over the past week, I tuned in to watch the first episode of Aaron Sorkin’s new HBO series The Newsroom. Unlike a lot of people, I actually enjoyed it. A lot. There have been a ton of negative reactions to the show thus far, and while I hear the next few episodes get significantly more preachy, I can’t help but wonder if the recently circulated supercut of re-used Sorkinisms also had something to do with it. It seems that everyone is ganging up on Aaron Sorkin for doing what Aaron Sorkin does best. But if you like Aaron Sorkin’s previous work, is there really anything wrong with that?

Granted, I never watched The West Wing, so maybe I will eventually grow tired of his rapid-fire dialogue, but this topic has come up on the Film Junk Podcast quite a bit lately, both with regards to Wes Anderson’s filmography and also certain composers who re-use pieces of their own scores in other films. In the age of the mash-up where people steal bits and pieces of everything and call it original, you’d think that this would be a little more acceptable. Obviously I still think writers, directors and musicians should push themselves to evolve and try new things, but are we all being a little too harsh on artists who keep on doing what made them popular in the first place? What do you think? Is it okay for an artist to re-use his own work and pass it off as a new creation? Why are certain artists held to higher standards than others? Why does everyone hate The Newsroom so much? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.



  • I watched most of it and really did not like it. I thought the dialogue fa more annoying than clever. The stakes were laughably low in the grand scheme of life and melodramatized to the extreme. And, it seemed like a direct remake of the Studio 60 pilot. Oh, well, in the middle of a full season GAME OF THRONES marathon, and at least THAT is awesome! Cheers!

  • Maopheus

    I think maybe because Sorkin imprints his dialogue style onto every project he does perhaps at the expense of whether or not the film or series really deserves it or not. It gets to the point where you notice the Sorkinisms more so than the story itself.
    Of course there’s going to be a backlash to him. How many screenwriters get the amount of publicity that he does? Most average consumers of entertainment can’t name 5 screenwriters, but they know who Sorkin is. So naturally, he gets put out, and it makes him a target. He sets the bar higher and higher. Plus, he certainly has a particular political alignment as well to his films, so anyone who doesn’t agree with that will use any weak point in his output to criticize him.
    I guess you have to take each work on its own to really be fair. But with Sorkin, you certainly come into it kind of knowing what to expect.

  • patrik

    I thought it was amazing, fucking loved it. Don’t see the problem.. Obviously, it’s his writing style, this is how he writes. I don’t mind as long as it’s not the same subject over and over. I think pretty much the same can be said of Tarantino and not that many people hate on him.

  • bullet3

    I think the problem with the show isn’t the Sorkiny writing style though, I think there’s fundamental problems in it’s approach, and some really lazy choices (and this is coming from a Sorkin fan).

    The biggest issue ultimately is that he’s using real-world news events from 2 years ago. He has his characters miraculously get the ENTIRE story behind the disaster literally hours after it happens with basically no journalistic effort on their part, then proceeds to criticize the other news networks for doing “bad” reporting by not running with all the facts the very first night. Well it’s really fucking easy to do that after you have 2 years worth of hindsight and tough reporting work to pull from, but getting this kind of information in the moment is really tough, and takes weeks of tracking down leads and doing intensive research.

    I think it’s an extremely lazy writing choice frankly, and you can easily see him falling back to this in future episodes. Need more information? No problem, I’ll have my characters get a miraculous call from a source that has all the information I’ve spent months researching on Wikipedia. It both deflates tension because we already know what all the story’s ended up being, and devalues real journalism by making it seem really easy and take no effort.

    It doesn’t help that I recently finished The Wire, season 5 of which deals with media and the decline of journalism. That handles this same topic with a realism and sincerity that you can tell comes from people who’ve actually worked as journalists. The Newsroom comes off as comically silly by comparison.

  • patrik

    Is it meant to be as realistic as The Wire though? Because I don’t think his dialogue is realistic at all, but it is entertaining. Not that season 5 of The Wire is all that super realistic.. Also, I felt that the media theme in that season wasn’t that strong. Certainly not in comparison with season 3 & 4.

  • patrik

    The way they get the scoop is kinda convenient, yeah, but how exciting would it be if everything happened as fast or slow as in reality? Also, it’s one episode. We don’t know yet how it will continue.

  • Brendan

    I watched it before I heard anything about the backlash, and I don’t see what the problem is. I liked it, and though I was a fan of The West Wing, I also know some of the issues that can occur with Sorkin’s dialogue. But I didn’t see anything in the first episode that should cause any big problems.
    As far as the “scoop” and it having the benefit of hindsight, I thought the initial issue wasn’t that they got some miraculous scoop, but that the new guy wanted them to investigate the disaster, but the old EP ignored it, just going on with business as usual, which is what Sorkin was taking to task.

  • Kamen Liew

    I think a lot of directors imbue their personal tastes and interests into their filmmaking style. So we tend to see familiar sensibilities crop up every now and then in a particular artist’s work. Not sure if u can call that plagiarizing.

    Sean, I’m still waiting for that Can Kristen Stewart Act: Open Forum Friday hot topic suggested by Frank :) I’m sure there are a few Twi-haters on this site.

  • patrik

    I would be game for that Kamen Liew. I didn’t exactly like the two Twilight movies that I’ve seen but it’s clear to me the problems are more with the script than the acting talent.

  • mitch

    in sorkin’s case, i don’t think it’s an issue. he clearly isn’t lacking ideas; he’s written a billion things. it’s more of an issue with wes anderson for me.

  • Flo

    I’m not considering myself a fan of Sorkins work, being one of the guys who thought The Social Network was ‘okay’ but pointless. Haven’t seen The West Wing though. But I really enjoyed The Newsroom, for me it could have gone on for another hour or two.
    Being a journalist myself (although an European one) I don’t think the show wants to be ultra realistic. Or maybe it does, yet I didn’t really care. I watched the pilot to be entertained and I got what I wanted. Those 72 minutes gave me more than any 2 minutes on Game of Thrones. Jeff Daniels was the bomb!

    Looking forward to episode 2 -

  • mushroomyakuza

    Personally I loved it, but I acknowledge the flaws. It certainly has echoes of his other work in it…and I don’t mind that one bit. I love Sorkin’s style.

    The “hindsight” factor on the other hand, is a much bigger issue that could lead to the show just looking like the smug Hollywood lefty writer shaking his finger and saying you should have known better to just about everybody. The only way to counteract this is if Sorkin shows his characters failing as often as they succeed, hindsight be damned. After all, this was only ONE episode.

    Cant’ wait for the next one.