Jan8 |
 |
Screw Jay Leno and meh to Conan O’Brien: Watch Craig Ferguson instead
A colleague of mine asked last night: “NBC knows Conan and Leno BOTH suck, right?” I half-agree; I never cared for Jay Leno, but I loved Conan O’Brien once upon a time. His move to The Tonight Show, though, has left him seemingly neutered and bland — that in his attempt to balance “likable” and “funny,” he’s moved too far away from the latter. No matter. Jay and Conan and Kimmel and — to a lesser, more crotchety extent — Letterman all do the exact same act: Monologue, comedy segment, and then a couple of celebrity interviews where they play the straight man to stars pitching their latest products. Too often, these shows amount to hour-long commercials for some other piece of entertainment; a TV show, a movie, an album, whatever. And the result is that they’re not all that entertaining themselves. Cable TV is, generally, the better place for late-night talk: Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert can do the fawning celebrity interview, but they’re also capable of having real discussions with their guests that can make you squirm. It’s interesting. There’s one exception to all this: Craig Ferguson. I’d not watched his show with any regularity until recently, but it’s a fascinating and unpredictable piece of work. His monologue is different — not so much setup-punchline-setup-punchline as it is a meandering storytelling session that can go to remarkable, if unfunny places. I still think this is one of the more amazing pieces of late-night television in the last decade: 
His celebrity interviews are also far more interesting than anything else on the networks. Ferguson lets his guests promote whatever they’re coming around to promote, but you get the sense that he finds that boring. He’s looking to have a fun and entertaining conversation, and he’s willing to go off on tangents that end up in awkward places the other hosts wouldn’t dare. Watch this interview from last year with Larry David; it doesn’t get horrifically awkward, but it does walk right up to the edge of uncomfortable. And yeah, it’s Larry David and that’s what happens with him, but this interview isn’t all that atypical: 
This kind of barely contained patter is pretty typical of Ferguson’s show. He’s so loose and unpredictable you get the feeling, sometimes, that he’ll someday pull a Jack Parr and just walk off the set unexpectedly. With the other shows, you know what you’re going to get. Not so with Ferguson, which is why he’s worth watching. |
|
|
PhillyNow | PW Style | Make Major Moves | The Trouble with Spikol
I completely agree with you regarding Ferguson. I discovered him last year and have been completely hooked ever since. It’s the only talk show that isn’t scripted within an inch of its life. Because of that, I must watch from start to finish.
He’s highly unpredictable, intelligent, well-read, and well-traveled. Where else on late-night do you get a host who quotes Shakespeare and Thomas Aquinas; speaks a bit of French; tells fart jokes and double entendre’s? Even on nights when he isn’t completely clicking, it’s still highly entertaining.
Wow, how’s it feel to kiss Ferguson’s ass and suck his toasty man balls at the same time? I find your view stupid. Not moronic, idiotic, ignorant, or misinformed. Your view is just stupid. Ferguson 100% follows the late-night tv show pattern, but that (hopefully) was not your point. Your point, just so I understand, was that he is (for lack of a better phrase), “More Entertaining.” Correct?
Well my problem is with your logic dear sir. You speak about how you never know what will happen, or if he’ll just walk away. How he converses with guests instead of interviews them. Even going as far to say that he takes it to the edge of uncomfortable.
That’s the stupid part. You can give thousands of reasons to enjoy the guy, but you are nothing more than a fan boy. You listed pros but not a single con. You also said you started “paying attention” recently. Give it time you’ll grow to flat hate the man. His brand and style are better received by the audiences watching them because (you ready for this?) HE’S NOT AMERICAN!!!
Leno, O’Brian, Kimmel, they all follow American comedy standards, hence the show’s are the same. Ferguson is very much Not-American. His comedy style is “British” and he you said, “you get the feeling he finds it boring,” to hear about the products he’s selling? OF COURSE! The entire time he’s speaking to them Ferguson is thinking, “GOD DAMN YOU’RE A POMPOUS AMERICAN CELEBRITY! DICK VAN DYKE HAD A HORRIBLE ACCENT!”
And that Sir, is why you should not laugh/like someone just because they talk funny.
Somewhat typical: I write about politics every day. But it took writing about late night comedy to earn one of the more vitriolic comments I’ve ever received here.
Well, I read Phyllis’s comments in a plain old American accent, and they were funny as hell. De gustibus non est disputandum, my brother. There is no disputing matters of taste.
And Ferguson is American. He even wrote a book about it.
Ben, you’re assuming that Phyllis reads anything, from the news stories about Ferguson’s becoming a U.S. citizen, to the book itself.
That said, I do like Phyllis’s argument that the only reason American audiences find this American late-night host funny is because we all secretly hate American culture.
How’s it feel to be utterly devoid of a sense of humor, Phyllis? It must utterly suck being you.
You’re right, Lisa. That’s what I get for being charitable. (Er, sort of.)
Captcha: Newark Frampton (related to Peter?)
Ben: “Newark Frampton” refers to his little-known “smooth jazz” output during the period when he moved to New Jersey to “find himself.”
” De gustibus non est disputandum, my brother. There is no disputing matters of taste.” Ben: what does that Latin phrase mean? Don’t be so foreign!
I will however admit that if you read “Phyllis’” comments in a broad, Latin accent, they are funnier every time you read them.
Joel: I linked to a Ferguson monologue on drinking and sobriety not long ago as well. I love that he is using his “celebrity” — I am sure he wouldn’t be comfortable with that word — to actually talk about stuff he cares about. Even if (as in the clip above) he softens the blow with a punchline at the end.
That’s the way Leno used to be, if you’ll remember, when he was doing stand-up and still hungry.
Oh my gosh! Phyllis is hilarious!! Joel, this is a great blog. As for the comment, I haven’t laughed this hard at such creative swearing in a long, long time. Beautiful.
Phyllis-
I suppose it is possible to perform both tasks at once, but after some consideration it becomes clear that it is only possible with improper kissing technique. The amount of suction, I’m sure, would be somewhat uncomfortable for the individual being kissed.
It seems as though you have some personal experience with performance of this maneuver however, as a task such as this one is not generally mentioned without witness or participation. Are you one of those mythical humans employed in trailer-hitch chrome removal, or have you been blessed with the ability to move a golf ball through a 30′ garden hose?
I would hope, for the sake of your partners present and future, you would remember that the term “Sucking face” is merely an antiquated slang term for kissing and is not an accurate description of the practice — it is somewhat disconcerting to taste ones lungs.
have a good evening Phyllis – and remember — Try to Suck Less.
I totally agree. We record Craig and then sit back and laugh every morning. I am so sick of the 50 minute commercials that Leno, Letterman & Conan offer – here’s my movie – let’s watch the clip, clap, clap…blah, blah. Craig is fascinating and original. When he talks about his battles with the bottle, you realize that it’s true, heartfelt and damned funny all at the same time. His guests are actually enjoying themselves and so are we!
Well you should be happy Conan got screwed by Leno. Oh and Ferguson is lame.