It's probably hard to distance yourself from your most famous role, but I think this hurts the show. It's possible that an idiot could end up heading a branch of a paper company, but Mark R. Naird is way too dumb to have ever been a fighter pilot and an air force general. Considering the first astronauts were all fighter pilots, there is no way that one could be so clueless about space and physics.
sharegood point,
he also talks in a weird, forced macho tone for the most of the show that's a bit offputting
I might be wrong but I think it's done on purpose.
shareInteresting, I watched both shows concurrently and didn't find much of Michael Scott in Mark Naird, although Michael Scott does vary a lot. One episodes he's socially unware and dumb as a brick; the next he's suave, intuitive, and charismatic. But I agree 100% that Naird is unrealistic, he's nothing like the Air Force guys I've known. And even though AF tend to be more laid back, Naird didn't have the bearing of command. When a general walks into the room you don't need to see his stars to know he's a general, they enter a room like they own it and everyone in it. Frankly I think Steve Carrell was bad casting but it's just a tv show.
shareI don't know, I think it's OK. He acts about like my cousin in law that's a retired Airforce Major. He's also very similar to my friends dad that retired as a Colonel who was in charge of an Air National Guard wing.
Unassuming, but to the point on everything and fussy.
I mean, it's satire, so I feel an obligation to give them some leeway with the characters. That said, I found the show too unfunny to go beyond about episode 2. It wasn't exactly Steve Carrell, and it wasn't exactly John Malkovitch. Maybe it was the combination of the two. Is there any point in watching farther?
share