The actress is so good I just feel like she said yes to a lot of mediocre movies for the bag and peaced out for a bit. I’m not hating I just her best work is in shows like this or Weeds (annoyed by a lot of the writing for her character later in the series but het acting is never bad)
The thing about Amy and Josh is not that they’re the same character with opposite genders, but rather that each challenges the other so completely. Amy has a lot more in common with Toby, as far as how she pursues her political goals. Like Toby, she is more committed to her ideals than her ambition, but is so brilliant she rises to prominence in spite of being a thorn in the side of her employers as often as her opponents. The same things that make Josh and Toby such good friends are what make Josh and Amy so attractive to one another. Their ultra-competitive drive that exists in all three of them is what pits Josh and Toby against one another and briefly ends their friendship, and also means that Amy and Josh could never work as a couple. I think Amy Gardner is a more polished draft of who Mandy was intended to be, and she is a fascinatingly complex character.
I think it became a purposeful aspect of the writing that Josh and Amy both seemed conventionally hard to like, Josh being neurotic and obsessively driven to an annoying degree and Amy being calculating and bitchy, until you remember that what they work so determinedly for is not just their own personal careers but trying to improve the lives and well-being of others.
@@luqas99 Yeah, I think the great thing about Josh's neuroticism is that he always seems wound so tight that he's about to burst and you spend the whole time thinking "Wow man, you reeeeally need to chill out and not become so personally invested in this," until right at the end of the episode when instead of him finally relaxing he convinces you that the thing actually IS that important, and then he ekes out a victory. Amy's greatest quality is that she's brilliant and shrewd enough to win pretty much any fight; the bigger struggle is whether she SHOULD win the fight, which is why it's a good thing she's so opinionated and ideologically driven.
It makes me think that the whole Josh Donna, Josh Amy thing is missing the point. We should have just had more Amy in the show without having to tie her to a line interest. Which they did better later but still, coulda done with more.
I like to look at the ways they are alike. They are both attack dogs who need little in the way of motivation to savage someone. That trait gets them both into trouble and they spend a lot of the show learning how to manage it and make it an asset, sometimes more successfully than others.
There is a moment when Toby talks about the Two Bartlets: "The absent-minded professor with the “Aw, Dad” sense of humor. Disarming and unthreatening. Good for all time zones. And the Nobel Laureate. Still searching for salvation. Lonely, frustrated. *Lethal*." Bartlet is only like that half the time. These three are not. Toby, Josh and Amy are all lethal, all of the time. They are savage and vicious. Cutthroat and - in the political arena - bloodthirsty and merciless. Because if they aren't people die. People stay stuck in poverty. Injustice persists, and bigotry prevails, children starve. And they know it. They know it and they can't comprehend how the rest of the people around them aren't freaking out every moment of every day like they are. They are - at all times - aware of the stakes of what it is that they do. To them, Politics isn't a popularity contest, it's not about power, or fame. It's about crushing the person who would segrate schools again if they got the chance. Not sitting there thinking "Oh that would never happen", but smashing them so completely that they can reply "Not now it can't." Utterly demolishing the group who would make practicing a religion that wasn't fundamentalist christianity crime if they got so much as a whiff of power. Keeping the keys of the kingdom out of the hands of people whose values and morals are so alien they might as well be extra-terrestrial that society says they have to politely listen to and debate civilly, even though they'd chemically castrate the gays if they were allowed to. They are not kind. They are not polite. They are not especially likable. They are not nice. They are neurotic, and obsessive and above all they are righteous. And righteousness can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Its can weaponised to most the terrible effect. But sometimes, it's the last refuge of the most vulnerable in society. You need the Amy's and the Josh's and Toby's of the world. You can't let "The Bad Guys", be the only ones with weapons. They are calculating, and bitchy, and tightly wound and almost impossible to like in a real world situation. They're idealogues and opinionated, because if they aren't the other guys that are take power: and their ideology and opinions are a lot worse.
This is my favourite scene with Amy. Telling an interested First Lady how a guy makes her want to jump him. They were not opposites in character, but she fell for his looks, combined with his mastery of the process she was still gaining traction on.
God I loved Amy's character, it always bothered me she wasn't the one that ended up with Josh. Although I always loved the chemistry between Donna and Josh, that was more brother and sister in my view. There was always chemistry between Josh and Amy. That would have been one helluva power couple.
Josh and Donna should've been a one-time hookup, an embarrassing indiscretion that they both regretted and luckily did not derail their friendship. He was supposed to end up with a woman who could/would stand up to him and call him out on his BS. That was Amy not Donna.
Neither Amy nor Josh would be able to let go of their political positions enough to make a personal relationship work. As hard as they would try, neither of them could avoid bringing their work home with them, and their work was almost always at odds. It's why they broke up between season 3 and 4. In all honesty, Josh and Donna likely had the same problem, being CoS for the President and First Lady, respectively. Worse, their positions would run the risk that any Santos marital difficulties would directly affect their own relationship. Donna may be able to draw healthy boundaries, but I don't think Josh can.
Seeing all these comments about how "whiny" and stuff Amy is. Had it been Josh, Sam, or Toby saying this, everyone would have been like "fuck yeah tell that SOB off". Check yo privilege, guys.
Amy's character almost always has a stunned look. Either the direction or the acting of the Amy character was tremendously redundant. But this was a funny clip.
Because, sadly, women on television are too often NOT portrayed as intelligent. I love how the female characters on the West Wing are identified by and admired precisely for their minds, and not some superficial quality. I think you're being a little too sensitive my friend.
6 ปีที่แล้ว
Factually in general women on TV are portrayed as intelligent and that definitely doesn't map onto reality. They got the mindless bitchy hen pecking cuntishness that drives women from the workplace in droves fairly accurately.
How can anybody who likes Josh watch this scene and then be happy he wound up with Donna? I mean, I love Donna, but Amy is his equal; Donna is a pet labrador...
Noun? Women. Adjective? Smart. Any questions? Also, why don't anyone comment like this about "guys" - I love how smart these guys are? Double standard. I'm sure the commenter was just using "women" as a noun and "smart" as an adjective. I wish people would quit jumping blindly into class warfare.
6 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Awww, you've never really been the same since the head injury.
***** Actually yes, They all considered themselves the smartest person in the room. That's why they were where they were. Although I don't agree they were all the same.And if you think I'm say critizing her just because she was a women you are wrong. Her character was written that way. I never considered CJ smug or arrogant, or Ainsley Hayes smug or arrogant.Or Mrs. Bartlett for that matter.
pac401 I agree with your sentiment with a slight difference I agree she is smug and arrogant but not because she thinks herself smart. She thinks of herself as the only one in the room who cares about the issues. That her values are just and theirs aren't.
***** How is that question relevant. Why are making this an issue of sex. There were other women in the slow. You could have said every person on the show. If you want to talk sexist having a dinner to praise women because what good they have done is sexist. What would you think if they had a similar function but for men not women.
***** There were other women who were not called out for it. There were reasons Amy would be called that more than the others and those reasons have nothing to to with her being a woman. She was only interested with her own personal convictions. It didn't matter how other people felt. It's her way or no way. To me that's being smug. I liked that she had convictions but disliked that she didn't listen to others at all and saw others as being wrong even if for the most part they agree..
Not me...I'd have to face myself afterwards and I'm sure I would be mad as hell that I traded my dignity for what might end up being just a soo so thing with a gal like Amy who would ONLY entertain her needs......nuff said.
Ugh, I could never stand that Amy character. That whiny voice, that wandering look like she can't be bothered to look at the person she's talking to, that arrogant, snotty, too-good-for-you vibe of hers. Honestly, she's the kind of feminist that gives us all a bad name. Bartlet was right to call her out on the carpet for her arrogance. FEH.
It seemed deliberate that Amy seemed manipulative and selfishly career-driven, until you remember that her job was to improve the lives of women all over her country. Just as Josh seemed like a neurotic boss from hell, until you remember his job was just as altruistically motivated.
And Santos called her out by pushing him for a female VP which would not actually address the real issues and instead gave her a job that might help change the entire work culture surrounding women in politics and their underrepresentation aka director of legislative affairs.... basically pressing Congress to have more women in important roles in Congress committees and Senate committees too.
![fellow fellow - Proud [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9uZF7BlUQPE/mqdefault.jpg)
Amy is so charmingly, disarmingly vicious. I love her.
The actress is so good I just feel like she said yes to a lot of mediocre movies for the bag and peaced out for a bit. I’m not hating I just her best work is in shows like this or Weeds (annoyed by a lot of the writing for her character later in the series but het acting is never bad)
"my problem is I want to jump him when he says stuff like that." Love it.
"Oh, you DIDN'T want me to destroy her will to live...?" 😀😶
And now the First Lady knows exactly how Amy 'lived' with Josh. ..
Best scene for the Amy character. The speed she put that all together. That's a lobbyist to hire.
Like both characters after the fact (they grew on me) and Amy is amazing in this scene and her eyes are TO DIE FOR!!
The thing about Amy and Josh is not that they’re the same character with opposite genders, but rather that each challenges the other so completely. Amy has a lot more in common with Toby, as far as how she pursues her political goals. Like Toby, she is more committed to her ideals than her ambition, but is so brilliant she rises to prominence in spite of being a thorn in the side of her employers as often as her opponents.
The same things that make Josh and Toby such good friends are what make Josh and Amy so attractive to one another. Their ultra-competitive drive that exists in all three of them is what pits Josh and Toby against one another and briefly ends their friendship, and also means that Amy and Josh could never work as a couple.
I think Amy Gardner is a more polished draft of who Mandy was intended to be, and she is a fascinatingly complex character.
I think it became a purposeful aspect of the writing that Josh and Amy both seemed conventionally hard to like, Josh being neurotic and obsessively driven to an annoying degree and Amy being calculating and bitchy, until you remember that what they work so determinedly for is not just their own personal careers but trying to improve the lives and well-being of others.
@@luqas99 Yeah, I think the great thing about Josh's neuroticism is that he always seems wound so tight that he's about to burst and you spend the whole time thinking "Wow man, you reeeeally need to chill out and not become so personally invested in this," until right at the end of the episode when instead of him finally relaxing he convinces you that the thing actually IS that important, and then he ekes out a victory. Amy's greatest quality is that she's brilliant and shrewd enough to win pretty much any fight; the bigger struggle is whether she SHOULD win the fight, which is why it's a good thing she's so opinionated and ideologically driven.
It makes me think that the whole Josh Donna, Josh Amy thing is missing the point. We should have just had more Amy in the show without having to tie her to a line interest. Which they did better later but still, coulda done with more.
I like to look at the ways they are alike. They are both attack dogs who need little in the way of motivation to savage someone. That trait gets them both into trouble and they spend a lot of the show learning how to manage it and make it an asset, sometimes more successfully than others.
There is a moment when Toby talks about the Two Bartlets: "The absent-minded professor with the “Aw, Dad” sense of humor. Disarming and unthreatening. Good for all time zones. And the Nobel Laureate. Still searching for salvation. Lonely, frustrated. *Lethal*."
Bartlet is only like that half the time. These three are not. Toby, Josh and Amy are all lethal, all of the time. They are savage and vicious. Cutthroat and - in the political arena - bloodthirsty and merciless.
Because if they aren't people die. People stay stuck in poverty. Injustice persists, and bigotry prevails, children starve. And they know it. They know it and they can't comprehend how the rest of the people around them aren't freaking out every moment of every day like they are. They are - at all times - aware of the stakes of what it is that they do. To them, Politics isn't a popularity contest, it's not about power, or fame.
It's about crushing the person who would segrate schools again if they got the chance. Not sitting there thinking "Oh that would never happen", but smashing them so completely that they can reply "Not now it can't." Utterly demolishing the group who would make practicing a religion that wasn't fundamentalist christianity crime if they got so much as a whiff of power. Keeping the keys of the kingdom out of the hands of people whose values and morals are so alien they might as well be extra-terrestrial that society says they have to politely listen to and debate civilly, even though they'd chemically castrate the gays if they were allowed to.
They are not kind. They are not polite. They are not especially likable. They are not nice. They are neurotic, and obsessive and above all they are righteous. And righteousness can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Its can weaponised to most the terrible effect. But sometimes, it's the last refuge of the most vulnerable in society. You need the Amy's and the Josh's and Toby's of the world. You can't let "The Bad Guys", be the only ones with weapons.
They are calculating, and bitchy, and tightly wound and almost impossible to like in a real world situation. They're idealogues and opinionated, because if they aren't the other guys that are take power: and their ideology and opinions are a lot worse.
She said "Save me", not "Annihilate her verbally".
Eviscerate is the word your looking for.
But what she did was so much better!
I thought their story lines detracted from the framework of the show, but I would have religiously watched a show with these two characters.
This is my favourite scene with Amy. Telling an interested First Lady how a guy makes her want to jump him. They were not opposites in character, but she fell for his looks, combined with his mastery of the process she was still gaining traction on.
Easily the best Amy scene. lol.
“ and Amy Gardner whose had seven jobs in three years “. !!! Omg. So funny
"courageous". Reminds me of "Yes, Minister".
"you said 'save me'"
"i meant towalk me to the other side of the room, or something"
awsome!!!
Amy killed a fly with a bazooka.
serious shades of sir humphrey - love it!
Yes courageous was his most damming epithet.
Thanks for posting this. It's easily one of my favorite Amy scenes -- possibly my most favorite!
Def. one of my favorite moments! I loved how smart these women are.
That was a great character. Best show ever written.
Always loved this! Amy is a powerhouse
It was revenge for that, "Three jobs in seven years." crack
SHOW MORE haha “seven jobs in three years,” even worse.
Much as I like the Amy character, she set the table on fire. The crack was justified.
Abbey's eyes at 2:29...LOL!
Crying laughing every time. :D
I had such a crush on Amy Gardner :D.
She lit the table on fire 😂
She also lit Alana on fire. Burned her to the ground, I'd say
God I loved Amy's character, it always bothered me she wasn't the one that ended up with Josh. Although I always loved the chemistry between Donna and Josh, that was more brother and sister in my view. There was always chemistry between Josh and Amy. That would have been one helluva power couple.
ITA! Josh never looked at Donna the way he looked at Amy. Josh and Amy were 🔥
Josh and Donna should've been a one-time hookup, an embarrassing indiscretion that they both regretted and luckily did not derail their friendship. He was supposed to end up with a woman who could/would stand up to him and call him out on his BS. That was Amy not Donna.
I was happy for Josh to end with Donna, but interestingly I think Bradley Whitford also thought Josh should have ended up with Amy.
Neither Amy nor Josh would be able to let go of their political positions enough to make a personal relationship work. As hard as they would try, neither of them could avoid bringing their work home with them, and their work was almost always at odds. It's why they broke up between season 3 and 4.
In all honesty, Josh and Donna likely had the same problem, being CoS for the President and First Lady, respectively. Worse, their positions would run the risk that any Santos marital difficulties would directly affect their own relationship. Donna may be able to draw healthy boundaries, but I don't think Josh can.
Josh and Donna had zero romantic chemistry. It was damn so forced.
Seeing all these comments about how "whiny" and stuff Amy is. Had it been Josh, Sam, or Toby saying this, everyone would have been like "fuck yeah tell that SOB off". Check yo privilege, guys.
Paul Wagner definitely. Personally, I really disliked Josh and Sam. I thought Amy was much better than those two, though still not amazing.
wonderful!
hysterical
Could I love Stockard Channing or Mary Louise Parker any more? No. Not really.
LOL Take no prisoners. Now that is how you crush someone. Mary Louise Parker was awesome.
My favorite Amy scene
amy deserved to be a main character
As much as I love this scene, there's no way The Secret service would allow that fire to progress so quickly that close to the 1st lady.
yeah!!!! it did!!!!
Wow.. she don't take any prisoners, does she?
BOOM!
This is so funny. You know I really can't imagine President Bartlet with any Sankey girl.
Smart AF and Funny=Perfection
RIZZO :D
This is the reason they don't have live candles in public spaces!!
An appropriate "rescue"
AHH Abbeys face!!
You can practically hear her thinking "Jesus Amy. Even Daenerys wasn't THAT ruthless." XD
This is Amy's problem. She only has one gear.
This is how you share credit!
@crazedmongoose03 Yes she was
That's the thing about smart people . . . they are so literal.
totally random they bring this lady back to be Tobys lawyer
The woman's meat just slipped off the bone - neatly trimmed.
Amy's character almost always has a stunned look. Either the direction or the acting of the Amy character was tremendously redundant. But this was a funny clip.
Because, sadly, women on television are too often NOT portrayed as intelligent. I love how the female characters on the West Wing are identified by and admired precisely for their minds, and not some superficial quality. I think you're being a little too sensitive my friend.
Factually in general women on TV are portrayed as intelligent and that definitely doesn't map onto reality. They got the mindless bitchy hen pecking cuntishness that drives women from the workplace in droves fairly accurately.
Sean Wow, you've got some pretty bad mommy issues.
How can anybody who likes Josh watch this scene and then be happy he wound up with Donna? I mean, I love Donna, but Amy is his equal; Donna is a pet labrador...
This is why I happy to see him with Donna. However, Bradley Whitford once said he thought it should have been Donna.
Amy and Josh would have divorced within 3 years of marriage. It just wouldn't have worked long term.
Brown and Yale law.
Ofc she went to Brown
Noun? Women. Adjective? Smart. Any questions?
Also, why don't anyone comment like this about "guys" - I love how smart these guys are? Double standard. I'm sure the commenter was just using "women" as a noun and "smart" as an adjective. I wish people would quit jumping blindly into class warfare.
Awww, you've never really been the same since the head injury.
Josh isn't that smart; he even says so. s
...wasn't Alana Toby Ziegler's lawyer?
yes
didn't she say 'skanky'?
"my husbands skanky ex girlfriend"................
She’s a clod - but good at it.
Save me. That and the language of Shakespeare and we lost to Trump and minions?
Amy always seemed smug, arrogant, and thought of herself as the smartest person in the room. I didn't like her but I always wanted to jump her bones.
***** Actually yes, They all considered themselves the smartest person in the room. That's why they were where they were. Although I don't agree they were all the same.And if you think I'm say critizing her just because she was a women you are wrong. Her character was written that way. I never considered CJ smug or arrogant, or Ainsley Hayes smug or arrogant.Or Mrs. Bartlett for that matter.
pac401 I agree with your sentiment with a slight difference
I agree she is smug and arrogant but not because she thinks herself smart.
She thinks of herself as the only one in the room who cares about the issues.
That her values are just and theirs aren't.
***** How is that question relevant.
Why are making this an issue of sex.
There were other women in the slow.
You could have said every person on the show.
If you want to talk sexist having a dinner to praise women because what good they have done is sexist.
What would you think if they had a similar function but for men not women.
***** There were other women who were not called out for it.
There were reasons Amy would be called that more than the others and those reasons have nothing to to with her being a woman.
She was only interested with her own personal convictions.
It didn't matter how other people felt.
It's her way or no way.
To me that's being smug.
I liked that she had convictions but disliked
that she didn't listen to others at all and saw others as being wrong even if for the most part they agree..
Not me...I'd have to face myself afterwards and I'm sure I would be mad as hell that I traded my dignity for what might end up being just a soo so thing with a gal like Amy who would ONLY entertain her needs......nuff said.
two of my least favorite characters amy and the wife
kern39743 It's your loss. I find them pretty captivating, but smart and funny and pissed off kind of works for me.
LOL...Amy could be quite the bully
My two faves..
Ugh, I could never stand that Amy character. That whiny voice, that wandering look like she can't be bothered to look at the person she's talking to, that arrogant, snotty, too-good-for-you vibe of hers. Honestly, she's the kind of feminist that gives us all a bad name. Bartlet was right to call her out on the carpet for her arrogance. FEH.
It seemed deliberate that Amy seemed manipulative and selfishly career-driven, until you remember that her job was to improve the lives of women all over her country. Just as Josh seemed like a neurotic boss from hell, until you remember his job was just as altruistically motivated.
And Santos called her out by pushing him for a female VP which would not actually address the real issues and instead gave her a job that might help change the entire work culture surrounding women in politics and their underrepresentation aka director of legislative affairs.... basically pressing Congress to have more women in important roles in Congress committees and Senate committees too.
I really didn’t like Amy character. This is one of the reasons why.
I wasn't a fan of her either, but I thought this was one of her better moments.
@@Nekulturny She had her moments- I like the candle and glass moment. However I don’t appreciate plain rudeness- even in fiction.