I disagree (unfortunately) the 1st season of newsroom was great !! The other 2 not so much. It's like all characters were designed for the 1st season story line but after that it was kind of in autopilot.
Sam was supposed to be the main character, Martin Sheen, Toby and Josh really stepped up and were awesome, so Sorkin wrote them more into the show. I don't think it was a shot at Rob Lowe, but there is just limited airtime. Then when it came to redo the contracts, the minor characters got raises because of their increased roles, and Rob Lowe did not. He got pissy and started arguments with Sorkin, at one point late in his time, Sorkin wrote an entire episode without Sam in it. And then it exploded. Rob Lowe quit and Sorkin was basically fired. The actual story after Sorkin left was not terrible, but there was a huge drop off in the conversations and feel of the characters.. and in a show without much action, you have to have great dialog.
@@mayankshrivastava3554 he was fired for being arrested trying to fly with crack in his luggage. This wasn’t the first time and he had a zero tolerance policy in his contract.
The time for a reboot has passed, they should have done a miniseries depicting Santos' last days in office after two terms. There's no realistic way to bring the characters together in DC other than that - including Richard's idea above.
Cordelia Noelle In Rob’s first book he talks about all the cast members discussing their new contracts and higher pay. Nobody had said anything to Rob about that. It was his first clue that he was probably on his way out. I loved Sam most of all. I don’t know the reason why Rob was treated the way he was. But WW was never the same without Sam.
I don't think Martin Sheen took over. It is more like the character of Josh, and where he was positioned in the West Wing as Deputy Chief of Staff appeared to be a good heart for most of the story lines. It certainly seemed that way from the episode where he got shot! There is obviously conjecture about what happened behind the scenes production wise, but it is unlikely that any one thing caused it to happen. I agree that it was never the same after Sam left and poor old Will Bailey took the brunt of the frustration afterwards, as did Joshua Molina did in real life, who appeared to be constantly being 'hazed' by the rest of the cast!
It was not that Martin Sheen took over it was that the original show idea was to showcase Sam's character, but the show became an ensemble show and therefore Rob Lowe did not like the new direction of the show and decided to leave. I think he put himself above the art form and the show suffered because of it, and I will never forgive him 🤣
So very true about reboots. The same can be said for redoing the same movie over again when the first one was so good. It's Hollyweird trying to squeeze a dollar out of what was once a great idea. At one time I thought that continuing WW with the new administration would be a good idea as we would see continued character development such as Donna and Josh juggling married life with their huge jobs. Rob Lowe being able to shine again as he was one of my favorite characters. Alas Richard Schiff, what a great actor and wonderful part as Zeigler. But how could you write him back in since he would be carrying political baggage? And then there is the Mary McCormick and Joshua Malina story. Martin Sheen could return for cameo visits, as ex-presidents often do. But The biggest ingredient would be missing - no Aaron Sorkin. What's WW without Sorkin?
It’d be a spinoff. Same characters. Same writer. But maybe not actually called “The West Wing”. You could call it “Downballot” or “City Hall” or something.
In Rob Lowe’s bio he talks about how the 4 main characters (not Sheen obviously) all cut Lowe out and the 4 of them went behind Lowe’s back and strong armed the network to get them all raises and Lowe never got one which is why ultimately he left the show so not much of a shock that Lowe would not be part of his reboot idea
I've heard a lot of things about the cast hating Rob Lowe especially Aaron Sorkin and Bradley Whitford what the hell did he do and do they really hate him?
@Paul Schmick as a lifelong democrat I know There’s a difference between being a conservative and being a Trump supporter. Rob Lowe is not a Trump supporter.
@@robinmendelson5512 and Rob Lowe has said that he is a registered independent the last that I read. If that's true, that certainly doesn't bother me, since I am also an independent. What's wrong with judging each politician upon their merits and their voting record rather than upon which party they belong to, right?
Rob Lowe was always seen as the outsider in the West Wing. He never really gelled with the rest of the cast as there were several reasons. 1. He wasn't a stage actor like many of the cast were originally 2. He was already a semi-star that already did a few movies by this point 3. He as hired by the network that want "prettier" people on the cast 4. And you know, that incident with this underaged babysitter didn't sit well with the rest of the cast
Any new version should have the former administration working as lobbyists but even though that is exactly what their characters would be doing I don't see him going for it because lobbying politicians is dirty work and very corrupt.
I don't see why a new show called something else doesn't do just that? Perhaps with a cast of characters who worked in the White House that now work in the grass roots. Possibly have things like flashbacks from their time working in the White House and moments about local issues that came was impacted from their decisions that they didn't understand.
If they did a West Wing reboot now, most of the old cast would have to be part time supporting players. Given that the showrunners and cast would invariably be Democrats, I'd pitch it as the Dems trying to take back the White House from a long stretch of dominance from the Republicans, like when Clinton ran against Bush Sr. Have the new candidate recruit Charlie, who has his legal degree and has been active in DC Government, as a draw for the minority vote and for his connections to the Bartlett era. If Elizabeth Moss is available, have them be married with kids. You'd have largely a new cast but with Charlie and Zoe, you have a strong link to bring in the old cast for guest appearances. If they wanted too, they could follow up on Bartlett's prediction and have Rob Lowe be that presidential candidate. I am not sure if he's the right choice, Rob Lowe just doesn't own the room in the same way Martin Sheen could as Bartlett. In short, this is just a napkin script I made up in 5 minutes but it's enough to show that the guys with actual talent could make worthy reboot.
They could sort of do that by having it set prior to either when the West Wing got built or before the White House was built. IF they were to do a Reboot of sorts, then I honestly wouldn't mind it if they were to have it be set in the past, possibly even going as far as covering multiple Presidencies like Theo Roosevelt when the West Wing was being built, Taft & Hoover when it was expanded/rebuilt, & FDR when it went its fourth & final major reorganization.
@@Altyrell THe last big restoration was under Truman. They gutted the building down to the outside walls and started over, carefully protecting all the historical fixtures and decorations.
NONE of the rest of the cast have ever all been that super close with Rob Lowe. When the West Wing started, besides Martin Sheen of course, Lowe was back then pretty much the biggest "star name" coming to the show. And it's still argued even to this day kinda of Lowe insists that he was told at the outset that Sam Seaborn was going to more or less be the "lead" character (as much as one can be while it would still obviously be to a degree an ensemble) but that he gradually was knocked down to more just "one of the crew". Though it is absolutely true Sorkin's original idea was to have the President featured sparingly, it was going to be more about his staff (he'd accumulated a huge amount of ideas after having researched and written "The American President" film) and believe it or not Sidney Potier was their first choice for the role, but Sheen came in, and they quickly saw it was just too good to not have the President be a regular cast member. But Lowe always still did as much as he could to "stand apart/above" the ensemble, while the opening credits had always been mostly alphabetical, Lowe comes first. And rightly so, the rest of the cast (who ADORED one another and were all about having things be the "team effort", if you will) came to resent him. He obviously left in season 4, he and Sorkin were clashing pretty bad and often. I don't know how much you may follow the former WW cast on social media, they've very often had sort of little virtual "reunions" with each other over the years, and Lowe has rarely if ever much been a part of that. In fact while most of the cast is in their own personal politics pretty left-leaning, while Lowe was as well back then, over the last decade he's actually become pretty right wing. I'm sorry, I'm sure you weren't expecting an answer nearly this long and rambling, but it's my favorite show of all time lol EDIT: and btw, if you happen to be a big Parks & Recreation fan, as I definitely am, trust me with all that having come since I know this may be a little jarring to hear in regards to Lowe, but it's all totally true. And it's not just all from all backdoor celebrity gossip or anything, pretty much everything I explained has been openly referred to in places over all the years here and there.
@@kevinw712 even tho it was wordy, this was an accurate and oddly succinct accounting of what happened. I would only add that Lowe got buddy buddy with the executive constantly going over Sorkin's head to the point Aaron just stopped writing for the character.
@@kevinw712 Nicely put sir. Chimes with everything I've read on the show as a West Wing obsessive. Only other thing I'd say is that even Lowe as Sam was in doubt for a time, as Sorkin wanted Whitford in (they were also friends and had worked together before, as had Schiff), and the only way to get him in was...in the role of Sam. Whitford turned that down. Im rambling-my point is; Lowe was stunt casting by Producers. He wasnt anyone elses first choice, but the show needed a 'name', a 'star', a 'hot guy'. I dont think the rest of the cast thought he was really much of an actor, or comedy performer, even though producers kept trying to get the bigger scenes and plotlines and love interests his way. But nothing worked, Sheen stole scenes, Whitford did his awesome work, and Lowe got left behind. And I gotta agree. To me he's one of the few weaker links in the show. Just a guess, but I suspect Sorkin originally wrote the part in mind for Josh Charles, from 'Sports Night' days. He's a very similar character. Slightly geeky yet handsome, highly talented yet not so great with people. Also suspect that in the early days, Sorkin wanted a similar 'big brother' dynamic between Sam and Toby just as in Sports Night, and even considered Peter Krause as Toby. I would have LOVED to have seen that version. Though it would have meant no 'Seventeen People' episodes where Schiff showed the magic he could throw down...... Anyway. Due to pay differences, star billing, original aims for Lowe to be the main character, the rest being mostly well blooded in theatre actors and him being a teen throb star? It was always going to lead to a divide between them. Especially when you take into account Lowe's Right wing ish views compared to the rests Left to hard Left politics.....
I always thought rob lowe was initially meant to play josh. Most of the first season Josh is referenced as a lady killer, like when joshs all women fan club is waiting outside to yell we love you josh. No offense to whitford but that part of his character seemed miscast early on the show
Why the hate? They have done a few projects together since TWW. He was Robs show the grinder only a couple of years ago. I know Rob and Bradley have a different of opinion (one is much more liberal that the other) and I heard Bradley and Dule also have a bit of beef but I don't really get what has happened between them.
Laura M I don’t think there is actually any hate. The idea would not have any of the characters from the WW on it as its about the grassroots not the staff of the White House.
@@brontewcat If there isn’t dislike, he handled the question very poorly. He could’ve very easily just said nothing when mentioning Rob, but he went out of his way to specifically say he wasn’t part of his idea, which was unnecessary.
It would have Vinick as President where he tackles a recovering economy after 2 terms of Santos. Caused by a Housing crash and oil spike. His VP is a Democrat.
John Davis the show went off the air 15 years ago and chronologically even if Vinick had become president after Santos served 2 terms he’d be going into HIS 8th year as president.
@John James Not always. Obama, LBJ and Jimmy Carter all had bad economic policies. LBJ war policy. Jimmy Carter's malaise and Obama's bad domestic and foreign policy. All had led to a bad economy.
????. Let's see.....Reagan/Bush recession, deficits and debt skyrocket, the income gap increases, corporate greed and junk bonds become prevalent. Clinton economy eventually thrives. Bush 2 comes in, cuts taxes and doesn't pay for a war, then keeps deregulating, leading to massive deficits and near total collapse of economy. Obama oversees consistent growth. Mr. Davis, it would behoove you to deal with facts and not fantasy.
They actually said that about the West Wing, and lots and lots of other films and tv shows. If the characterisation is good, the dialogue good and they hire good actors, basically anything could work. Season 4 of the wire isn't a million miles away from this and is great.
President Bartlet once told Sam that he will one day run for President, and he will be okay. I'm hoping for a reboot to be about President Seaborn, all other people helping him with that.
I would much prefer it turned out to be President Lyman, or Charlie perhaps. Or given her profile maybe after Handmaids finishes Elisabeth Moss could be President. I'm not sure I like the idea of the Seaborn character being president. And I certainly don't like the idea of Rob Lowe being president.
@@tomekholland2581 Seaborn was a great character on The West Wing. I'm unsure about who else it would be natural to bring in, though. I'd love to see all actors back, obviously, but I'm not sure where the rest of the staff would be in their careers by now. Lyman could be the chief of staff, with Donna still at his side, this time as Deputy Chief of Staff. I could also see Charlie as Chief of Staff, or even the deputy. The rest of the staff would probably be all new characters. The remaining characters could probably have other jobs that would justify bringing them in for guest roles once in a while, though.
well, he kind of did badmouth rob by very clearing stating he's not "part of the idea". saying rob "could handle it" is a way of saying, "we arent paying him his going rate and he didnt want the gig anyway". it was cool that Lowe came back for the end of season 7, but there's more than one reason he left....
@@ariochiv The seasons "post Sorkin" may have been weak by WW standards, but it was still MILES better than anything else on TV at the time. It's like even weak Beatle albums blow away the best of everyone else.
I'd bring it back with Seaborn running for president having eventually done the impossible by winning the once failed seat in California...and Josh as his Chief of Staff, fulfilling the old man's dream. Charlie should figure prominently. Maybe getting the band together for a run at a Trump like character. A battle that transcends party though...could be fun.
I'd like to see a Republican west wing. But with real conservatives who want to do goos for the country, like Alan Alda's character, not the current crop of nuts. There was a time when the difference between the two sides how to get to the goal, not the goal itself.
Thing is, in the past the things we agreed on were usually enough to bring us together. But now for many of us, the things we disagree on are too important for us to compromise on.
You want republicans that roll over for any Democrat demand? Sadly these gopers do this aswell. A GOP that wouldn't be eager to go to war for other people, that would actully listen to its voters and halt immigration and increase deportstions of illegals and visa overstays; now that would be something. I don't think you'll see that on a TV show.
@@christianwestling2019. Thus we see the problem. The modern conservative voter is a product of the decades of spin and lies you have been fed. Now the party is shaped by these misinformed people. I know you won't believe me, i know you'll think I'm just a stupid leftists. It doesn't matter.
Pretty sure he was being honest here, John Wells once vaguely said that Lowe was part of the reason that Sorkin got fired, even stating that the plan after the show went on was to bring Sam back but that the cast wasn't a fan of what occurred, though he did get a two-episode cameo in the final season.
There is a episode of The Good Doctor where Richards character is recovering from a brain tumor operation and hallucinates about his dead daughter (brilliantly played by Holly Taylor). Absolutely heartbreaking work.
Rob Lowe said he felt ‘undervalued and abused’ and did not have a good experience making TWW. From my understanding the rest of the cast love each other so it’s probably just a Rob Lowe thing. Toby Ziegler forever
I didn't pick up a vibe of animosity from Schiff about Lowe, just simply his idea doesn't feature the character of Sam Seaborn in it. I don't believe any of the cast disliked each other. Granted some were closer to others but no feelings of ill will or hatred existed on the show.
@Keynesian Economics LOL. You always know you have won the debate when your opponent calls you stupid, and yet fails to show evidence. The MS doesn;t CAUSE death any more than a broken leg does. I know of two people who developed blood clots after breaking a leg. They COULD have died under the right (or wrong) circumstances, but they didn't.
Rob buddied up to the head of NBC to try and keep his "starring" role in TWW but Sorkin wouldn't write for the character bc he was pissed at Rob for the way he was behaving so Rob left. At the end of the same season Sorkin left bc NBC gave him a few ultimatums he wouldn't agree to bc they were unhappy Rob was pushed out. The rest of the cast/crew were unhappy that Rob had a hand in pushing Sorkin out.
This is not true from what I've read. Lowe was the highest paid actor when the show began and when the others eventually got raises he didn't receive one (presumably because he was still making more than them). He was unhappy about that so he left. I have read that Sorking was unhappy with working with or writing for some unspecified actor, but it certainly wasn't Lowe as they both teamed up in a London West End production of A Few Good Men shortly after leaving TWW. If there was any "bad blood" between them they certainly patched things up quickly. They also did an hour long podcast/talk in 2021. I took Schiff's comment in this interview as a friendly ribbing as he chuckles to himself. It's possible he was sincere in that Lowe's character wasn't part of the show in the last couple of seasons and therefore it wouldn't make sense for him to be in a reboot or not necessary at least.
It would be interesting for Sorkin to go back into the West Wing Universe - maybe with some of the characters during a Republican Administration. I like that there is still a little friendly friction between Richard and Rob Lowe.
The story was that Lowe was supposed to be the main guy. But looking at the show now, there was no way that wouldve worked. Lowe over Janney, Schiff, Sheen, Whitford, Spencer? Nah.
At the start, those other actors were respected but weren't considered bankable stars. TWW is what changed that e.g. Janney has pretty much worked non-stop since then and won an Oscar for "I, Tonya". Schiff has multiple projects including The Good Doctor. I don't believe Lowe has any beef with them becoming successful too.
Candidate: Charles Young The series could start with Josh asking Charlie to run for President in the midst of both R AND D populist demagogue candidates. (I'd watch that.) Season 1 would be about him winning the ballot, then season 2 would be the election campaign. Season 3 - the White House; first 100 days. 3 and done. 12-15 Episodes a season. Dule Hill is just the right age now to do it, and he's a brilliant stage and screen actor and dancer.
Yeah, they keep it on the down low, but apparently Lowe was a real primadonna behind the scenes. He expected to be the star of the show and it turned out to be an ensemble show, and even in the ensemble Josh (Bradley Whitford) ended up having the prominence that Rob expected to have.
Lol....I don't blame ya...it can come across as smug or being a jerk to some extent with how he had said that, but it didn't come across that way to me at all AND made me laugh. I'm not a Russell Crowe fan either, so maybe that's why I don't think he was being a dick lol. With him not remembering/having more of a brain fart is my guess, then not knowing where he's really from, can't make Crowe feel too good. Although, Crowe did move to Australia at a very young age.
Stopher2475 Fair. But with Will’s election, the question for me isn’t “if?”, but “how?”, which I feel fits with the “grassroots” part of it. Remember that the Oregon 4th (I believe) was considered unattainable by the DCCC, so to see him flip an R district makes me wonder how he was able to do it, considering that it was considered an R stronghold. That was my thought process, but you also have a good point.
The problem in THIS system is that the "other guys" keep getting elected against the wishes of the majority of the voting citizens. In the last seven US elections one party has only been able to get the majority of voting citizens behind them once, yet they have held the office 3 of those 7 times. When you can only win the support of the majority of your citizens once in 30 years but keep getting your guy in office 40% of the time, I would say something is off. Playing to win is one thing, playing with a fixed deck is another. The system is broken and many americans are happy with that because it gives their voice power beyond their numbers. And before you start debating the electoral college and the founders intent I will tell you, with all due respect, that you most likely are talking out of your ass. This is from a 20 year republican. Politics aside, this system IS broken.
MrAnthimos112 it’s called a federal republic. So there is the electoral college. Change the system, you change the nature of America. As an Australian, I reckon you’ve bigger issues like the insane attitude towards your guns (cause having your gun to defend against a government that has stealth fighters...) than worrying about the ignorance of how you elect your head of state. The US system is the biggest reason why Aus is still a constitutional monarchy. We don’t get Obama, we don’t get Trump, we don’t get Clinton and we don’t get Nixon.
@@sithlordofoz With all due respect, you are, as I predicted, talking out of your ass. "The nature of America" (vague nonsense right there) has nothing to do with the flawed electoral college and putting the college right or getting rid of it completely will go a long way to righting what has been wrong with my countries federal election system for years. The Electoral college as it currently stands bears no resemblance to how it is framed in the constitution. The reason why that is so is because the drafters of the constitution never anticipated party politics and factional strife to the degree that later developed. Political parties on the state level have made laws which change the entire nature of the college as it was envisioned by the founders. Nowhere in the constitution does it bound the electors to the state popular vote, this was done later by state laws and directly contradicts the intent of the electors being the independent check to populism the founders intended. Also nowhere in the constitution does it proportion the electors votes in a winner take all style. This was passed on the state level to allow the winning party to control the states entire electoral vote. These two provisions, passed years ago by most states, effectively subvert the purpose of the college and turn it into a tool to bypass the will of, and press agendas opposed by, the majority of this countries citizens. Even when I agree with the majority of that agenda, I cannot in good conscience support a system that robs the majority of american voters of their voice. As far as all your other nonsense about Australia and monarchy...who cares. You could have a kangaroo as prime minister and 99% of americans wouldn't care. Wait I take that back. If a kangaroo were running your country I bet most americans could actually name the Prime Minister.
