T1B

poptart wrote:Yeah, I don't see that Letterman shattered the bar at all.
He came along and was young and fresh.
He had appeal with a younger crowd - but he never had the overall appeal that Carson had.

I would agree with that. Letterman was obviously more brash & cutting edge than Carson (though not by much), but I wouldn't go so far as to say he shattered any bar. Carson is still the gold standard.

Hell, Leno regularly beat Letterman's ass.

At the risk of violating the "what happens in chat stays in chat" rule, this kind of goes along with a conversation that took place in chat recently during which an unnamed individual tried to draw a correlation between popularity and quality when it comes to music. Recognizing comedic and musical tastes are wholly subjective, I still had a hard time understanding why more people would regularly tune into Leno than Letterman when it was glaringly obvious to me that Letterman's show was far superior. The fact that more people watched Leno does not mean that he's funnier than Dave. Superior ratings do not translate to superior quality. Take a look at the Nielsen ratings & see how many shitty programs rank high.

I haven't watched much of Fallon since he took over for Jay, but I was not impressed with what I saw of his earlier show. Maybe he actually is funny now, or has better writers.

Right now, the best late night host is Jimmy Kimmel, imo.

Sudden Sam wrote:Colbert is extremely bright. He's an excellent interviewer. He should do well in his new spot.

Rack that. Colbert could interview a phone book and get laughs.

schmick wrote:Jim Jefferies is infinitely funnier than colbert and Adam Carolla would be a billion times better as the late shows host

Being funny does not necessarily mean one would make a great host. There are many great stand-ups who probably wouldn't be worth a shit as a host. I'll admit it would be fun to watch Jim Jeffries try his hand at it, though I'm not sure how long he'd last on network TV. Adam Carolla would be great.

Because when I think solid judge of comedy I think of schmick - the dullest, most humorless fucktard on this site ...which says a lot since TiC still posts here.

Quite a few points of contention here, so I'll address a couple and be done with it. First, let me go back to the phrase about Letterman "shattering the bar". Granted, this a an overstatement, but what I really wanted to imply was simply, Johnny Carson was great as the host of "The Tonight Show," and many would argue that he is the best ever. Carson elevated the form of talk show host, but he didn't invent it.

Neither, of course, did Letterman. He turned it inside out until he had reinvented it, to the extent that for the first couple of years he was on the air on NBC, after Carson, it seemed almost like a parody of a talk show. He wasn't taking the game too seriously; in fact, whether diving into a giant tank of water while wearing a suit adorned with Alka-Seltzer or dropping objects off the roof of a tall building or letting Andy Kaufman fight professional wrestlers, he seemed to having fun with the game at its own expense. Think of the additions Letterman added to the social lexicon, from Stupid Human Tricks to the Top 10 List.

The most-obvious successor, though he won't be coming to CBS, is Jimmy Kimmel. While he is on ABC, he has long talked of his love for Letterman, and he, of all the current late-night hosts, embodies the spirit Letterman brought to those early NBC shows most. He's updated the game again, using video brilliantly, realizing that the small screen is no longer large enough to contain all the entertainment he can provide.

But Kimmel would be the first to tell you that he's no Letterman. Neither is anyone else.

That said, there is nothing about Colbert that merits the venom I've seen expressed here. Remember, he is employing a persona which is an extension of his political views, but not a direct reflection of who he is as a comic or a person. If you find him funny, great. If not, move on. He's not my choice to take over Late Night, but he's far from the worst either.

Sudden Sam wrote:I don't know why I'm participating in this discussion.

Same reason you post in the CBB forum, I reckon.

As for Colbert, what little I've watched of him, he's hilarious. But no, I won't be staying up late just to watch his show. I haven't purposely done that for any late night show since Carson and besides, us old fucks need our sleep.

War Wagon wrote:But no, I won't be staying up late just to watch his show. I haven't purposely done that for any late night show since Carson and besides, us old fucks need our sleep.

You could DVR them, but why waste time watching awkward Justin Bieber interviews when this is the golden age of television drama? So much good stuff, so little time. If my TV is on it's usually because of sports, or catching up on any number of fantastic shows on AMC, HBO, Showtime, etc.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:You could DVR them

You know, I've always wondered this: Why can't you buy DVRs as stand-alone devices?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: You could DVR them, but why waste time watching Justin Bieber interviews when this is the golden age of television drama? So much good stuff, so little time. If my TV is on it's usually because of sports, or catching up on any number of fantastic shows on AMC, HBO, Showtime, etc.

Name one. And I mean that sincerely. I have not been able to find a decent drama in years and I am thinking of getting a premium channel or two if there is a currently running show or shows that is/are worth it.

I shouldn't limit it to "drama" -- I'll just say tv in general. It has surpassed film imo as the superior entertainment medium. Over the last decade or so, stuff like Breaking Bad, The Wire, Deadwood, Dexter, Mad Men, Walking Dead, among others. More currently, I am enjoying True Detective, Vikings and Turn.

If you don't like any of these shows, I'd say there's no pleasing you.

Use this streaming site to sample shows: http://www.solarmovie.tl/tv/

Make sure to use Firefox with ad-block enabled.

True Detective sounds the best of those. Do I need to catch up on anything or can I just start watching and episode and catch myself up as I go along?

Smackie wrote:At the risk of violating the "what happens in chat stays in chat" rule, this kind of goes along with a conversation that took place in chat recently during which an unnamed individual tried to draw a correlation between popularity and quality when it comes to music. Recognizing comedic and musical tastes are wholly subjective, I still had a hard time understanding why more people would regularly tune into Leno than Letterman when it was glaringly obvious to me that Letterman's show was far superior. The fact that more people watched Leno does not mean that he's funnier than Dave. Superior ratings do not translate to superior quality. Take a look at the Nielsen ratings & see how many shitty programs rank high.

I haven't watched much of Fallon since he took over for Jay, but I was not impressed with what I saw of his earlier show. Maybe he actually is funny now, or has better writers.

Right now, the best late night host is Jimmy Kimmel, imo.

I agree with this.


Jay, you are right that Letterman was able to take late night talk in a different and fresh direction.
He made his mark, to be sure.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:You could DVR them

You know, I've always wondered this: Why can't you buy DVRs as stand-alone devices?

I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out how I always lose a sock when I do laundry.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:So much good stuff, so little time. If my TV is on it's usually because of sports, or catching up on any number of fantastic shows on AMC, HBO, Showtime, etc.

Exactly.

I watched a movie on HBO last night I had never heard of, can't remember the name, but it was about some Vietnam POW's who escaped from a living hell. Based on a true story and starring Scott Bale, it was fantastic.

Moving Sale wrote:True Detective sounds the best of those. Do I need to catch up on anything or can I just start watching and episode and catch myself up as I go along?

Season 1 was good. I guess the ensuing seasons will all have new actors and story lines. It's crime drama, but not a conventional homicide show. Very dark and character driven.

First season ended in March. You can watch all eight episodes on that site.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:You could DVR them

You know, I've always wondered this: Why can't you buy DVRs as stand-alone devices?

I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out how I always lose a sock when I do laundry.

Do you have your own washer and dryer? A "friend" wants to know.

Letterman was great when he was at NBC. He tried to become more like Johnny when he went to the CBS. He was OK, but, his show suffered as a result. Johnny is still the standard by which all are judged. no one has matched him, IMO. Adam Carolla would be nails. Jim Jefferies would be great for us sick twisted fukks, but, not likely ready for prime time.

George Will on the Colbert Report.

What in fuck's name are the brain-dead audience members giggling and laffing about??

It's like an unconscious reflex action.
A sleeping dog -- kicking his leg, acting as if he's running.

Pathetic fuckwit opens his mouth -----> tool bags laff and giggle, giving no thought to what he said, but just operating on the assumption that it must be something great.


That's the best you can do with a George Will interview?
LOL

Dude is twice as sharp as Colbert on his worst day.


Some seriously lame shit here.







"I was trying to lead you into a field, where old people would shoot you in the head."


ummm...

I am fairly certain that there are paid human laugh tracks in the Colbert audience. It actually was an entertaining interview, if you can ignore the belly laughing retards.

George Will is a seriously sharp dude. He should take over Letterman's gig.

smackaholic wrote:He should take over Letterman's gig.

No thanks.
He would suck as badly in that slot as Colbert will, but for different reasons.

smackaholic wrote:George Will is a seriously sharp dude. He should take over Letterman's gig.

He's also one of the most boring human beings alive today.

smackaholic wrote:I am fairly certain that there are paid human laugh tracks in the Colbert audience. It actually was an entertaining interview, if you can ignore the belly laughing retards.

George Will is a seriously sharp dude. He should take over Letterman's gig.

Will was pretty sharp at one time but at this point is a senile old man with one foot in the grave.

poptart wrote:I have looked at him in amazement, wondering how anyone finds him even remotely entertaining.

You might like him better after seeing this.

Or maybe not.

Smackie Chan wrote:

poptart wrote:I have looked at him in amazement, wondering how anyone finds him even remotely entertaining.

You might like him better after seeing this.

Or maybe not.

He made a couple of good points in that discussion, but no, I don't find him entertaining.

I would pick Colbert as a good choice to replace Letterman. There could be some other choices but I think he will be fine. A lot of people crticised Fallon for taking over Leno but that is working out nice. He's more popular and funny. It's just a new generation. Leno and letterman had their time. Nothing wrong with moving on.