What's on my mind:
+ If your political beliefs lean to the left (or even from somewhere in the center) last week's Republican presidential debate was low-hanging fruit. It was a special kind of train wreck, the kind that was both scary and unintentionally hilarious at the same time. At the center ring of the circus was Donald Trump, whose toxic presence dominated the proceedings. Between Mike Huckabee over-simplifying the purpose of our armed forces and Jeb Bush's awful "Veto Corleone" pun, the alleged debate was more attention grab than exchange on pressing issues. Ohio Governor John Kasich might have been the secret winner for hardly saying anything at all (random gay friend aside). Maybe these children can explain what was going on.
+ Jimmy Kimmel is "mean," Jay? Have you ever wondered if you're the shitheel?
+ Now that I'm between jobs again, I'm attempting to write a novella. I tried the snowflake method (Google it) but now I'm just writing particular passages and sequences, then piecing it together. Any advice is welcome.
+ Family Update: if it's not one thing, it's the other. My father spent two nights in the hospital in late July with what could best be described as stroke-like symptoms, but not a full-fledged stroke. Earlier this week, my mother had a severe case of nausea, the possible result of food poisoning, which ended up being a urinary tract infection.
Next Week: my 2015 NFL preview.
(489)
Showing posts with label Jay Leno. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jay Leno. Show all posts
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Monday, April 7, 2014
Late and Lamented
Most people at TV.com know me as "the late night guy." If I wasn't editing a particular show, I had contributed at some point. Though editing the SNL episode guide earned me most of my notoriety, I put more time and energy into the Late Night and Late Show with David Letterman. Where SNL merited more discussion, Letterman had the greater workload. With twenty-odd shows a year, SNL didn't need the near-constant cultivation that LNDL and LSDL needed. Where one show was churning out 190 to 200 new broadcasts a year the older, defunct series was a neverending work in progress. Sometime next year, that aspect of my TV.com career might draw to a close.
I was surprised by David Letterman's announcement that he will retire in mid-2015, but I wasn't necessarily shocked. Rumors of Dave retiring has been floating around for well over a decade. His trademark sarcasm and occasional grumpiness was morphing into crusty old age. The tone of the Late Show had grown both claustrophobic and agoraphobic; Letterman could barely feign interest in his guests half the time, and he was reluctant to participate in remotes or anything outside the cocoon of the Ed Sullivan Theater, walking distance from the hustle and bustle of Times Square.
To call Letterman influential is almost redundant. During his 14 years at NBC --six months as a daytime talk show host, 11 1/2 years hosting Late Night, and occasionally filling in for Johnny Carson in between-- he began a miniature comedy revolution. It wasn't funny in the winking, set-up/punchline sort of way; it could be eclectic, abstract, uncomfortable or all three. The franchise that is now Late Night was a risk of sorts; Letterman was given the thankless task of replacing Tom Snyder, following an awkward fallout with the Peacock. (Sound familiar?) What was initially a low-rent, straight-ahead chatfest quickly became the strangest hour on network television.
When Dave bolted for CBS in 1993, the experimentation of Late Night gave way to Dave's most under-appreciated talent, his ability to interview (and sometimes interrogate) a guest. Case in point: if Jay Leno was inclined to ask Paris Hilton about her perfume, Dave felt more compelled to ask the socialite about her stint in prison. And that actually happened. And maybe 20% of the time, Dave apologized for taking things too far. If Leno often conceded his spotlight to an A-list movie star, Letterman's show was unquestionably about Letterman. He was seldom interested in pandering or kissing ass.
Then there's the records. When all is said and done, Letterman will retire as the longest-serving late night talk show host ever (33 years and change) and most episodes (nearly 6,000 between NBC and CBS). Where Ed Sullivan hosted his show from his eponymous theater for 18 years, Letterman called "The Ed" home for 22. Just about every current late night talk show host has tipped their hat to Dave in the past few days, and the accolades spanned from "The Simpsons" to frequent Late Show guest Keith Olbermann. Even though the Letterman-Leno feud is over, the Ali to Dave's Frazier has kept mum.
After all these years, I will admit that maintaining the Late Night and Late Show episode guides has been a losing, almost Sisyphean battle. With the new restrictions to TV.com editor guidelines, I would have to get special clearance to finish both guides the way I and my predecessor Alan Brewster set out to build over a decade ago. Don Giller and David Yoder, arguably Letterman's biggest fans as well as the comedian's unofficial historians, are both racing to finish an encyclopedia of all things Dave. Letterman's fans formed an online community not unlike a cult sci-fi show, and with the end anywhere between a year and 18 months away, we could be on the verge of a schism or just quietly going our seperate ways. I'm not leaving TV.com --not now, though I've been tempted-- but pretty soon my incentive to socialize and submit information there could dwindle significantly.
I'll miss you, Dave.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Night Flight
Last week, my parents went to Las Vegas for a four-night breather from the bitter Chicago cold. Upon returning Friday night, one of the first things my dad asked me was, "so, did you hear the latest about Jay Leno?" I knew about he was talking about, and I knew right where the conversation was going. He watched Leno's monologue almost religiously when he hosted "The Tonight Show," and he knew I'd been a Conan fan for years. He's as baffled by my taste in late night comedy and I am of his viewing choices. Obviously, I responded by defending O'Brien and stating that NBC made a mistake in backing Leno. "You only say that because you hate him," he declared. He walked out of the room before I could elaborate on what I said.
If Jay Leno is returning to 11:35/10:35c, than NBC has followed one big mistake with an even more consequential misfire. By giving "The Chin" five hours of prime time a week, NBC inadvertantly overshadowed Conan O'Brien's move to to the old Leno slot and minimized his role in the network's lineup. To move Leno's show back to its old time slot is more than rectifying a wrong, it's a concession of defeat, and above all it's a slap in the face to a tremendously funny and distinctive comedian that has been loyal to The Peacock for almost 17 years. If I were running NBC, I would simply cut bait on Leno; I wouldn't care if he jumped to another network, Letterman and Conan would soundly beat him ratings-wise night after night. Leno was a cash cow for the network, but now he's just hamburger.
Of course, I can't rant about NBC's future without acknowledging the man behind the curtain, Jeff Zucker. In the nine years since he ascended to the network's upper throes, Zucker has proven to be an ineffectual, nearsighted syncophant, and the Leno/Conan situation merely reinforces his status as an idiot in a suit. On his watch, NBC went from #1 to fourth place, from torchbearer to punchline, from record profits to being bought out by Comcast. The number of bona fide hit shows that he developed during his "reign" can be counted on one hand. In moving Leno back to 11:35/10:35c, Zucker and his peons have five hours of prime time real estate that they don't know how to fill. They may as well concede 10/9c to Shamwow and the newest Jack Lalanne juicer.
In 2005, New York magazine slammed Zucker (and rightfully so) as the embodiment of bloated self-confidence, a Hollywood outsider that tried too hard to one-up his rivals, the captain of a great ship slowly sinking in an ocean of hubris and complacency. Five years later nothing has changed, and inexplicably Zucker is almost unscathed, still large and in charge. As it stands now, the collateral damage is staggering and somebody has to clean up the mess; NBC hemorraged ad revenue with Leno in prime time, the shows that once thrived at 10/9c are barely registering in earlier time slots, and local newscasts keep losing viewers. The Peacock might be molting its feathers, but I doubt that this incomparable debacle will curb Zucker's yen for experimenting. What he'll do next is anyone's guess, though for many Hollywood insiders the reason of a doubt is long gone.
If Jay Leno is returning to 11:35/10:35c, than NBC has followed one big mistake with an even more consequential misfire. By giving "The Chin" five hours of prime time a week, NBC inadvertantly overshadowed Conan O'Brien's move to to the old Leno slot and minimized his role in the network's lineup. To move Leno's show back to its old time slot is more than rectifying a wrong, it's a concession of defeat, and above all it's a slap in the face to a tremendously funny and distinctive comedian that has been loyal to The Peacock for almost 17 years. If I were running NBC, I would simply cut bait on Leno; I wouldn't care if he jumped to another network, Letterman and Conan would soundly beat him ratings-wise night after night. Leno was a cash cow for the network, but now he's just hamburger.
Of course, I can't rant about NBC's future without acknowledging the man behind the curtain, Jeff Zucker. In the nine years since he ascended to the network's upper throes, Zucker has proven to be an ineffectual, nearsighted syncophant, and the Leno/Conan situation merely reinforces his status as an idiot in a suit. On his watch, NBC went from #1 to fourth place, from torchbearer to punchline, from record profits to being bought out by Comcast. The number of bona fide hit shows that he developed during his "reign" can be counted on one hand. In moving Leno back to 11:35/10:35c, Zucker and his peons have five hours of prime time real estate that they don't know how to fill. They may as well concede 10/9c to Shamwow and the newest Jack Lalanne juicer.
In 2005, New York magazine slammed Zucker (and rightfully so) as the embodiment of bloated self-confidence, a Hollywood outsider that tried too hard to one-up his rivals, the captain of a great ship slowly sinking in an ocean of hubris and complacency. Five years later nothing has changed, and inexplicably Zucker is almost unscathed, still large and in charge. As it stands now, the collateral damage is staggering and somebody has to clean up the mess; NBC hemorraged ad revenue with Leno in prime time, the shows that once thrived at 10/9c are barely registering in earlier time slots, and local newscasts keep losing viewers. The Peacock might be molting its feathers, but I doubt that this incomparable debacle will curb Zucker's yen for experimenting. What he'll do next is anyone's guess, though for many Hollywood insiders the reason of a doubt is long gone.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Here Come De Judge, Here Come De Judge
Has any woman polarized the political spectrum in recent memory quite like Judge Sonia Sotomayor... I mean, besides Sarah Palin? If media coverage of her nomination is any indicator, the woman that could be the first Latina justice on the U.S. Supreme Court means many things to many people. Either she's an all-American rags-to-riches story or an elitist who's lost touch of her upbringing. She's a champion of equal rights or she hates white folk, take your pick. Affirmative action seems to be her cause celebre, though her stance on more hot-button issues like abortion and torture is a bit more ambiguous. I see Sotomayor as a woman split between two worlds, and if the White House can avoid branding such a complex person in an overly simplified way, that court vacancy is hers.
Liberal reactionary or not, her ascension won't change the dynamic of the court, at least not in the short term. Sotomayor is a moderate-left judge replacing the equally left-of-center David Souter, and last time I checked the conservatives still have a 5-4 edge. Justice Stevens has been rumored to retire for years now, and he's also in the liberal minority. So why exactly are Republicans up in arms about Sotomayor? Is it just partisan posturing?
Other notes:
+ Last weekend I had my first class at Second City. I can't say much has happened so far; we introduced ourselves, went over the syllabus, than did some simple exercises. I'm in a class of about 18 students, ranging in age from 20 to 40, though it seems that we all have the same goal and we're keeping an open mind.
+ Two months into the fantasy season, and both of my teams are still middling. My TV.com team was in second place at one point and has since slipped to sixth out of eight. My "other" team (consisting mostly of old ISU classmates) was once one game out of first and is gradually slipping away. I can't blame this entirely on injuries, in spite of having Joey Votto, Joakim Soria, Eric Stults, and Grady Sizemore on my rosters, but erratic pitching has dogged me as of late.
+ To read my eulogy (kind of) for The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, click here.
+ Finally, I suppose some of you would like me to share my thoughts on the murder of Dr. George Tiller earlier this week. His brutal death has reopened the wounds of the long-gestating abortion debate (pun not intended); while I tilt towards pro-choice, I'm convinced that the murderer acted on his own, unlike what some clusters of the media would suggest. While most of my pro-life friends and colleagues are vehement in their views, they would certainly never do anything that drastic. Dr. Tiller was both a martyr and a pariah, and that's how he should be best remembered.
Liberal reactionary or not, her ascension won't change the dynamic of the court, at least not in the short term. Sotomayor is a moderate-left judge replacing the equally left-of-center David Souter, and last time I checked the conservatives still have a 5-4 edge. Justice Stevens has been rumored to retire for years now, and he's also in the liberal minority. So why exactly are Republicans up in arms about Sotomayor? Is it just partisan posturing?
Other notes:
+ Last weekend I had my first class at Second City. I can't say much has happened so far; we introduced ourselves, went over the syllabus, than did some simple exercises. I'm in a class of about 18 students, ranging in age from 20 to 40, though it seems that we all have the same goal and we're keeping an open mind.
+ Two months into the fantasy season, and both of my teams are still middling. My TV.com team was in second place at one point and has since slipped to sixth out of eight. My "other" team (consisting mostly of old ISU classmates) was once one game out of first and is gradually slipping away. I can't blame this entirely on injuries, in spite of having Joey Votto, Joakim Soria, Eric Stults, and Grady Sizemore on my rosters, but erratic pitching has dogged me as of late.
+ To read my eulogy (kind of) for The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, click here.
+ Finally, I suppose some of you would like me to share my thoughts on the murder of Dr. George Tiller earlier this week. His brutal death has reopened the wounds of the long-gestating abortion debate (pun not intended); while I tilt towards pro-choice, I'm convinced that the murderer acted on his own, unlike what some clusters of the media would suggest. While most of my pro-life friends and colleagues are vehement in their views, they would certainly never do anything that drastic. Dr. Tiller was both a martyr and a pariah, and that's how he should be best remembered.
Labels:
fantasy baseball,
Jay Leno,
Second City,
Sonia Sotomayor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

