ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- Parts of The West Wing commentary relating to William Fichtner, who guest starred in the episode, "The Supremes". The commentary panel includes Debora Cahn (writer), Jessica Yu (director), and Alex Graves (co-executive producer).
This was easily the best episode after Sorkin left the show.
In my personal opinion, this is the best episode of the series, even "Two Cathedrals" (as much as I love that episode).
Totally 👍👍
@@Liberator130 agreed - need to haul out the dvd and watch it again
agreed. This was one of the few episodes where you could SEE what the writers were going for and they did such a GOOD job executing it. I wish they'd managed this on every episode after Sorkin left.
Agreed
The commentary is really good, and I think they hit it exactly about how versatile Bill Fichtner is with the limited scene time the character has. His bit of polite contempt for Toby, moving to the playful sparring with Glenn as a legal peer, and then his respectful conversation with Bartlett. He's smarter than Toby and he and Glenn are evenly matched as legal intellects. Bartlett isn't a legal expert but is as brilliant, plus Bill does have respect for the position. Great job of making us respect and even like a character who can still be a nemesis politically.
It helps also when you have a character you can totally disagree with but still respect because fundamentally, you're after the same goal: A more perfect union. He's an American who wants what is best for America, believes in the rule of law, equal protections under the law for all citizens and feels the best way to do that is with a fair transparent system of justice.
Bill Fitchner is one of the most underrated actors of all time. He is tremendous in whatever role he takes.
Bill???
/*_*\ his nickname is bill
@@user-jw5xc4uh9t They said so in the commentary! It's meta-canon.
I love him.
Even “Ultra Violet”???
The sparring between Close and Fichtner bring to mind the real-life relationship between Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia who were diametrically opposed in legal philosophies but personally liked each other
And scalias side now wins every case before the court due to when Scalia and Ginsburg died.
Honestly, sometimes, when Im by myself, I'll find myself just quietly saying "Josh Lyman is gesticulating wildly". I will forever be fascinated by that line and the scene 😂
I still love hearing Bartlett’s reaction to the possible appointment of Chris Mulready.
“Mulready? Are you out of your bloody mind?”
Moretti *
@@FluffyCrimsonBirkenstocks Do.. you actually think the character's name was Moretti? or are you making a complicated joke I dont understand?
This episode was one of the shining moments of this show. William Fichtner was beyond fantastic here. You want to hate this guy, but you also have to admit that he's brilliant and even though you want to spend your whole life disagreeing with everything that he says, at the same time you really like him. It's hard to hate someone when you feel that it's an honor to even speak to him.
I think the point is that even when you disagree with someone, and dislike their beliefs, you can learn to respect them as people and to learn that a difference of opinion is not a reason to hate.
@@JPF941 I wish it worked that way more often.
And that's the thing you can't hate the guy. Like, I don't personally agree with him, but he didn't make up policy based on what he wanted. He didn't decide what he thought was best and make the constitution fit it. He read the constitution. That's a hell of a lot better than what we've got now.
This was exactly Tobys issue with him after meeting him, because he couldn’t easily fit him with a black hat. Toby is uncomfortable because he can’t justifiably hate Mulreedy, he still does, but he knows it’s irrational and he’s fighting with it. Toby however has too much integrity to continue to advocate against him after seeing his brilliance and his ability to have a rapport with jurists across the aisle.
And that's exactly how William Fichtner makes you like his characters, even the antagonists - he squeezes so many layers of their personality into the limited screentime that you can't help it but find at least one aspect of the character that you like.
This is hands down one of my favorite West Wing Episodes, due in no small part to William Fichtner. It's a shame that we didn't get more of him because the layers he gave this character in such a short amount of screen time was brilliant. He's so underrated.
"Do you even know who you are dealing with? You and your friends are DEAD!!!"
"Do not. Ride. The Nuclear Weapon!"
"Please! Just. Answer. The Question!"
West Wing was always at its best when it was arguing from the other side of the isle, whether it was Ainsley Hayes, Matt Skinner, Joe Quincy, or Arnold VInick. It's one of the things that I think helped prevent the show from devolving into a leftwing screed.
Agreed l
Truth - if your position cannot stand up to a foil, you are certainly ill-positioned. Terrifying that those foils don’t seem to exist in the real world as they did in the WW.
I've been hunting for a while myself. No joy.
I love the idea behind this plotline, showing that two intelligent people can argue opposite sides of an issue, with respect, and have the end result be even greater than the sum of their points. (You know, like the opposite of what you typically see in TH-cam comments.)
Fichtner explains in an interview that his acting career was organic, he never really aspire to be a famous actor but a good actor and he takes role one at a time. He definitely was blessed with amazing roles/movies/tv series. He is an absolute boss actor!
And now he is Allison Janney’s husband on Mom.
“I love her mind... I love her shoes...”
And after all this brilliance there's the humour of Donna saying "I can't believe you put my parents' cats on the Supreme Court".
I have always loved William Fichtner. An under used actor of great ability. It's a crying shame.
Fichtner acts so differently with Bartlett as his character, who was indifferent to Toby being his intellectual superior, recognises that Jed Bartlett is at least hus equal, if not superior to him.
It's magnificent to watch
I love it when he says "We like him!"...The exact same thing i got when i saw him for the first time playing Mahone in prison break. XD
Watching this clip is never enough. Always have to go back and watch the entire episode again.
Josh Lyman is gesticulating wildly
Their choices of vocabulary in the show is one of the reasons I loved the series so much. :)
@@DaveTingwaldd no show had a 'stranger' vocabulary in the 321st century.
@@aniruddho_mthat’s a deep joke that 2 years later you deserve credit for
Fitcthner nailed this roll.
I loved how as he and Toby jousted...Toby had finally met a Person who was just as intelligent.
There's *SO* *MUCH* one can say about this scene and Bill Fichtner's brilliant work, for sure, but I think my favorite part of this scene is the fact that Josh is *DRUNK* in the White House. I mean, I know Josh is no prude, but the fact that he allowed himself to get sauced *IN* *THE* *WHITE* *HOUSE* while he's, technically, still working was *hysterical* to me (Charlie's little bit at the end "Hang on... I gotta write this down.", or something to that effect, when he's arguing with Fichtner's character about college admission, is pretty funny, too). 😈
Too ironic that the algorithm should have brought this to me. With Alito, Kavanaugh and Thomas doing their best impression of not being brilliant legal minds, it's only too rich to see the left's effort to craft a conservative jurist worthy of respect. So on the left, we have the fantasy of brilliant, good-faith jurists whose devotion to the truth is what leads them to believe as they do and point out the legitimate flaws in the other side's thinking, respecting the process along the way. And on the right we just have the muck -- the lowest common denominator realpolitik of doing things for the only two reasons that matter: because you want to and because they can't stop you.
I'm not sure why in a country with near universal franchise, so many people have completely abandoned the idea of convincing people that you are right. Or at a minimum, getting people to admit that you aren't totally wrong. Salesmanship. Politics is supposed to be salesmanship. Instead, it seems to be outrage and brinksmanship.
This made me break out the dvds and watch this episode again! Thank you!
I loved the interaction between the two judges.
I have to say that this is one of my all-time favorite roles for Fichtner. He plays it to a T!
I love this and Xander Berkeley's brief appearance on West Wing. Great character actors of a certain type just dropping in and nailing it.
@@jerodast could you please tell me the name of the actor in the thumbnail?
"We all have our roles to play, sir.. Yours is to nominate someone who doesn't _alienate_ _people_"
Emphasis on "alienate" and "people" is mine, Bill Fichtner delivered it as he would talking with an intellectual person who didn't need more than one listen and spoke conversationally reading from a brilliant script in a fantastic bit of acting. It took me many listens to get to the heart of this dialog because I knew I was missing the crux. The setup was when he was recommending to find a way to employ Evy (Evelyn Lang) in any way he can, so you know he recognizes brilliance and also, in further discussion recognizes that what contrasts the tide now may result in language used 20, 40, 100, or more years from now for important work.
The message I eventually extracted from this message in a compelling piece writing is the need for discourse, the expansion of ideas and thought. People, and how we "alienate" them.
fichtner is amazing
steals every scene
hot
I saw him on the subway once in New York. Proceeded to very quietly fangirl.
If only the current discourse were this intelligently argued.
This is so cool! Thanks for putting it up. It is really great hearing how people in his business think of him. It is always good seeing someone get respect from their peers.
@sunnchilde absolutely. season 5 was still good, but it wasn't near 2&3. This episode brought me back to the days where I'd be out of breath due to the rapid little debates and jabs. I would love to meet a conservative as well spoken as him. I feel exactly like Toby after he sees Fictner and Close in action.
And a giggly CJ with a drunk Josh also helped that episode... :)
Well I hope you enjoyed the Kavanaugh testimony.
Mr. Fitchner is so good in the movies he’s been in. He deserves to be recognized in a true break out role.
Great actors with great writing,you can see the actors faces clearly knowing that this is as good as it it gets for monologue.This show brought the best out of everyone.Thankyou .
They key words are when he says to Bartlett, "you can't..." - you can feel Bartlett bristling even though he knows it's true.
Fichtner was great in the West Wing, but he was even better in the Perfect Storm.
To me the truest intelligent don’t get blinded by their own argument. The smartest people see both sides. Completely analyze it to hopefully come to the right decision. If done properly you can hate the outcome but you must respect the results. Too bad this is just fiction....
Are all episodes available with commentary?
my favorite episode... wow
I appreciate the commentary but I would like to see clips of the justices debating without the extra voices
I am binging my way through the show for the first time. Can't wait to get to FIchtner
Reading the comments about west wings has been a joy. So many kind intelligent people sharing my love for this show!
What do you believe in, huh? What do you believe in?!!!
I believe: Whatever doesn't kill you, simply makes you...stranger.
The only guy who, after a couple of years, still attracts me.
They missed on the 3/5ths - 13th-15th amendment lines. That's such an elementary argument she'd never bring it up. There's plenty of plain text errors that haven't been corrected by Amendment. The most common example is that by a plain text reading the US can have an army and navy, but not an air force.
Yeah I agree. But to be fair this kind of writing in of basic political arguments/factoids instead of what they'd REALLY be debating, goes back to the early seasons. I just rewatched the clip from the first Supreme Court pick episode and Sam reads that quote from the Bill of Rights debates where Georgia talks about "some fool" in the future trying to limit the rights that weren't enumerated. It's nearly impossible the judge is hearing that for the first time, but Sorkin still threw it in because it's a fun quote that works well in the argument even if the argument was a little "elementary". Sometimes West Wing talks down so the masses can get a few political history lessons haha.
All he has to say was that only those in bondage were counted as 3/5ths, and obviously she would prefer slave owners getting Representatives on the basis of the full slave population (in a sarcastic tone). Free blacks were counted as full (even in Louisiana).
Charlie, " I'm gunna write this down.. ".
Charlie is clearly the most competent person in the room, held back by a lack of experience. It is very rare for any one person to completely outclasse him. He is outclassed here, recognizes it, and promptly levels up.
You just know he is going to graduate top his class in law school while simultaneously building a charity. From there he goes on to run the ACLU.
more like scalia Ginsberg situation
Exactly. I miss Scalia.
Yeah that's what's missing from modern politics in many ways, politicians don't seem to be able to have reasonable debates even where you disagree wildly but still have a sense of respect and decency and even be friends with the other guy.
@Tad Meissner - You've hit the nail EXACTLY on the head. We've lost the ability (or at least the WILLINGNESS) to RESPECTFULLY disagree with each other. Too many people see a difference of opinion as a negative personal attack. I believe that's largely why we end up with politicians like Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and Barack Obama and John McCain.
I miss Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neil. One was Mr Conservative, and the other was the liberal's liberal. They agreed on absolutely nothing (except, maybe, the weather), but they had a mutual respect and admiration for each other. There is NO WAY you'd see that today, on EITHER side of the aisle, and I don't think we will again any time soon since both sides are so entrenched in their respective ideologies. Sad.
My only gripe is the commenters are not identified. Well, I guess I'll have to break out my complete set and finally listen to the commentary tracks.
I saw him on the NYC Subway once. I was very happy. 😊
Bill is from Buffalo. He’s awesome but I’m biased.
Until now I had never understood how nuanced this portrayal was.
I just watched this episode this week 😅
Incredible casting in this episode
I have my issues with abortion, but what I love about this episode is the respect each character has for the views of others, and is willing to look at the other side of the coin. People talk about how the show jumped the shark after Sorkin left, but I don't buy it. This episode is my favorite of the whole bunch, and that is saying something. The only thing that grates on me is the complete omission of Roberto Mendoza, the liberal justice who was confirmed in Season 1.
I mean, 98% of the people who agree it jumped the shark also agree this episode is fantastic. The problem is it's the ONLY fantastic episode between first episode of season 5 and meeting Arnie Vinick. (I do like "In the Room" 6x08 quite a lot too, but it's not at this level.) WW is a serialized show, and basically none of the long term plotlines really popped after season 4 until the election, and a lot of times the characterization felt way off. The Supremes is wonderful...and happens to focus on 2 characters in a 1-episode story, go figure.
He goes by Bill or Billy with his friends.
best actor . no doubt !
I like the commentary about this video but it got in the way of listening to the actors who were tremendous in this episode.
Sus facciones finas, lo hacen muy atractivo, y su elegancia para vestir, el garbo para caminar. Además de ser excelente actor.
Meh 😑!
I didn't expect the narration.
I'd just play it and get the likes.
Bullshit! Thumbs down! Blocked!!
I love her shoes
the scene was rewritten 14 times!
Why does this actor remind me of the late Alan Colmes, of "Hannity and Colmes"?
Thanks for this! It's lovely to hear the commentary!
This episode, Shutdown, and President Goodman are the absolute gems of season 5.
such boring commentary for a good scene/ i guess thats why they're writers and not actors
I was ready to believe Fichtner and Close were constitutional scholars after this show. Lol.
All this detail and nuance in a fictional white House.... Now we have barely anything coherent in the actual white House.
You walk around and think nobody else enjoys videos like this...
To argue with someone smart have more pleasure, than is in being on the same page with someone stupid.
can someone please tell me what kinda DVD this is from? I havent found any directors commentary tracks on any of my West Wing DVDs. Please respond.
Just let us watch the episode without comment
I wanted to hear the dialog!
Time to watch the full episode then :P
The guy that helped Bruce Willis .
RBG and Scalia…?
Fast forward to 2018. If t'rump nominated Gorsuch instead of Kavanaugh, he would have brought balance to the SC and this would have united independent and moderate Americans more than anything single act he could ever take. But nope.
So you must be a Supreme Court, Scholar? Got it.
Farts and hairy butts
I think it should be a requirement to watch the west wing, especially in this current political discourse.
It should be a requirement if you're President to watch this.
Rosenburg
Such a great episode
It was one of my favorite parts of West Wing.
"The guy hasn't eaten in a couple of days..."
What is this from, and where can I see the rest of it?
West Wing season 5 episode 17 "the supremes"
@@FFF813 No, I know the episode. I want to know where the full length video with the commentary is.
@@lancer525 probably the dvd of that season
What was sad about the last scene is affirmative action applicants actually have lower grades and a higher drop out rate.
That may be true, but once given the opportunity they outperform. That's why that opportunity should be provided earlier, which is why we need to invest in schools and stop the nonsense political games aimed at appeasing someone's political base.
@@michaelmusich809 I mean the worst public schools have some of the most obscene amounts of money spent on them. I think that alone proves that funding has nothing to do with performance. As well as the fact that charter schools outperform public schools for less money per student.
They're talking about two sides having a reasoned argument-- a debate on the facts and merits of an issue... and exchange of view without hostility and where compromise can be found...
And reality is? shout down the opposition. Don't debate, don't compromise. Don't discuss. Just brand your opponent a racist.
And by all means don't vocalize a position. Don't get pinned down later by something you've said now.
Its not bill its William
Wow, and to think this is the sort of debate taking place in the White House right now!
The writers of these characters nailed it. They got lawyers (the sort whose job is to think about law, not tactics) absolutely right. My favourite line is "you want to come back at me with ...". This sort of lawyer wants to deal with the strongest argument the other side can put up. But how did the writers (who are writers, not lawyers) know that?
I hate it when I hear someone say, with authority, "The Constitution values a black man as 3/5ths of a person." It valued them that way for the purpose of representation, so the Southern states couldn't swamp the House and Electoral College with representatives and electors. The fact is, most Southerners, and more than a few Yankees, didn't think blacks were worth even 1/10th of a white, on the basis of personal value, intelligence, and morals. Look how many Yankees fought against the 13th Amendment.. However, the Southerners were trying to count them as whole people for the purpose of deciding how many representatives and electors they got. Allowed to do so, they would've had complete control of both bodies. So, the 3/5ths thing was a compromise.
So much effort to get it right and they failed on the basic concept that Glen Close''s character would never be appointed as Chief Justice. She'd be in the the Supreme Court, but the position of Chief Justice goes to the longest serving judge.
That’s not true only 5/17 chief justices in us history served as associate justices prior to being named/appointed as Chief Justice
Chief Justice John Roberts never even served as an associate justice. He was elevated to be Bush's nominee after Chief Rehnquist passed away.
Wrong. Chief Justice is separately nominated because it is a separate position. There is no "line of succession".
MAGA!! TRUMP 2020!
How do you figure that the US needs four more years of corruption and incompetence?
Your commentary is shallow and banal. Just play the scene and be quiet.
*A most well written, excellently performed episode.*