Comedy Central's Life After Stephen Colbert
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Totally agree on Jessica Williams. I would definitely watch her show if she were to take Colbert's place.
But did you seriously just praise Megyn Kelly? The idiot who threw a shitfit last year about Santa and Jesus being white? Don't make me laugh.
But did you seriously just praise Megyn Kelly? The idiot who threw a shitfit last year about Santa and Jesus being white? Don't make me laugh.
I actually really like all these ideas, mainly the 3rd though. As someone who isn't really committed to a single end of the political spectrum, it would be nice to see the Daily Show followed up by something coming from the other side for a nice balance. But I do see the flaws with that one, and Jessica Williams certainly does deserve a show of her own. I wouldn't object to extra Daily show though.
I think there's probably a reason why Jason Jones and Samantha Bee have never "graduated" from The Daily Show. I often enjoy the bits that they do, but I really can't see either of them actually headlining anything. They're both like those characters that are hilarious just as long as they don't get a whole episode. It would be like an entire "Scully and Hitchcock" episode of Brooklyn Nine Nine.
I really think Comedy Central just really lucked out with Stewart and then again with Colbert. Their chances of filling Colbert's time slot with a show that lasts for more than a few seasons is pretty slim.
EDIT: Oh, the third idea was interesting. It would have to be the good natured kind of ribbing since any political show will have to keep a liberal bent to do well. The failure of those other shows doesn't really matter.
I really think Comedy Central just really lucked out with Stewart and then again with Colbert. Their chances of filling Colbert's time slot with a show that lasts for more than a few seasons is pretty slim.
EDIT: Oh, the third idea was interesting. It would have to be the good natured kind of ribbing since any political show will have to keep a liberal bent to do well. The failure of those other shows doesn't really matter.
My idea: Combine ideas 1 (or 2) and 3 and make it a spoof of the sort of "debate" shows that admittedly aren't nearly as popular as they were when nominally-neutral CNN was the only game in town. And I'm not talking about playing the both-sides-are-always-wrong angle (we get enough of that from South Park); I mean that having a character representing each side would give them the opportunity to lampoon whatever bullshit happens to be going on, regardless of its source.
The main reason I don't favor options 1 and 2 is that we're no longer living in a world where one side is always right. In the same way that Colbert's character worked better when O'Reilly was at his peak, it was a lot easier to write a show like his when the country was being run by a president who hadn't done a single defensible thing since the Do Not Call List and whose opposition was more or less powerless to stop him. Fast forward to roughly last year, and we've got a Democratic president who's doing legitimately controversial things. Other satirical shows, like The Daily Show or NPR's Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me, were free to make fun of stuff like the NSA wiretapping scandal, because they didn't profess to any particular viewpoint other than making fun of stupid wherever it may be. Hell, even actual left-wing pundits take shots at Obama when the situation calls for it. But Colbert has to take the Republican side of every single debate in order to stay in character. I haven't watched Colbert since I got out of college and didn't have free cable anymore; how has he been coping with situations like that?
The main reason I don't favor options 1 and 2 is that we're no longer living in a world where one side is always right. In the same way that Colbert's character worked better when O'Reilly was at his peak, it was a lot easier to write a show like his when the country was being run by a president who hadn't done a single defensible thing since the Do Not Call List and whose opposition was more or less powerless to stop him. Fast forward to roughly last year, and we've got a Democratic president who's doing legitimately controversial things. Other satirical shows, like The Daily Show or NPR's Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me, were free to make fun of stuff like the NSA wiretapping scandal, because they didn't profess to any particular viewpoint other than making fun of stupid wherever it may be. Hell, even actual left-wing pundits take shots at Obama when the situation calls for it. But Colbert has to take the Republican side of every single debate in order to stay in character. I haven't watched Colbert since I got out of college and didn't have free cable anymore; how has he been coping with situations like that?
They did that. It was called Crossballs and it went away shortly after Stewart destroyed CNN's Crossfire [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE] (it technically existed for a few weeks shortly after, but almost everyone pegs this moment as when Crossfire was done).Steve the Pocket said:
I think extending the show and reabsorbing the writers who Colbert isn't taking with him would probably be a good option until Jones and Bee can afford to do a nightly show again (they've been tossed around as potential replacements for Colbert the moment they found out he was moving the CBS as co-anchors of a dysfunctional news broadcast) or Jessica Williams can figure out a good pitch (She is by far one of the best talents on the Daily Show, but new shows that aren't already attached to something have a nasty habit of being canceled and I would hate for her show to get the ax just because she wasn't doing as good as Colbert). They already have to cut a good chunk of the sketches in order to cut it down to 22 minutes with the interview, and about a third of the interviews have to be posted in full to the internet. Extending it to a full hour could give them more time to do both.
This. Stewart has good rants that are often cut for time, and being able to hand off segments to up-and-coming comic reporters has done them a lot of good in the past. Let John Stewart continue being, as Bob called it the 'cool professor', and give Jessica Williams the chance to develop full bits under his wing, like Colbert before her.The Gentleman said:
Of the listed ideas, I agree that Jessica Williams would be the strongest just because she is just a really charismatic, talented person. I'd also be interested in bringing back Wyatt Cenac just because of all the correspondents, he just managed to impress me the most consistently.
The only idea I am specifically opposed to is a longer Daily Show. They have to cut a lot of material, but what stays is often much stronger as a result.
The only idea I am specifically opposed to is a longer Daily Show. They have to cut a lot of material, but what stays is often much stronger as a result.
So, "too bad" HBO picked up John Oliver for his "Last Week Tonight" show
I watched the premier last night and they can't deny their origins; not a cookie cut from the Daily Show, but definitely the same format.
With Colbert gone, Oliver might have been a good replacement. For me it is a win as I get my 4 nightsof Daily plus one night Week.
I watched the premier last night and they can't deny their origins; not a cookie cut from the Daily Show, but definitely the same format.
With Colbert gone, Oliver might have been a good replacement. For me it is a win as I get my 4 nightsof Daily plus one night Week.
Personally I think they might use Colbert leaving as an excuse to start to wind down other shows like the Daily Show... I'm not sure what the ratings are or whether they've held strong, but I know I rarely watch it when it premieres, rather watching Adult Swim, and then catch the shows in the afternoon the next day. Comedy Central's decision to make "Trip Tank", a decidedly more [as]-like show makes me think that they could be headed in that direction, rather than trying to keep up their satirical or comedy news shows.
I don't think they will end it soon, but I think it might be moved to earlier in the night, and Colbert won't be replaced. It's sort of a bold prediction on my part and it wouldn't be surprising if any of the things Bob mentioned happened, but after a string of super-cheap Tosh.0-like shows failing rather miserably and the new rash of skit shows only gaining moderate success at the very best (with K&P only getting tepid success with the Kroll Show not doing nearly as well, along with everything else they've tried to do recently), they might be looking to switch gears to more "abstract" stuff like Adult Swim or more "everyone is idiots" type shows like Broad City in the vein of Always Sunny and Arrested Development. I don't know if they want to stake their ground so firmly in the political "real life" stuff.
Also, it's hard to parody liberalism because of the dynamics. Not impossible, as Portlandia points out, just difficult. Conservative ideology on its face tries to project a "tough" image, which is easier for clever people to parody. When people try to parody or poke fun at liberalism, it usually ends up trying to project some image of a super-politically-correct effeminate man, and not only is that much more rare than a Hank Hill, but it also seems meaner to make fun of. Colbert not only poked fun of the O'Reilly persona, but also the ideas. Ed Schultz may look like he's going to pop at any given time and Rachel Maddow and his boy ward might be snarky, but that's not really enough to build a show out of. People like O'Reilly and Hannity already openly mock liberals in both style and substance, so parody almost seems redundant.
I don't think they will end it soon, but I think it might be moved to earlier in the night, and Colbert won't be replaced. It's sort of a bold prediction on my part and it wouldn't be surprising if any of the things Bob mentioned happened, but after a string of super-cheap Tosh.0-like shows failing rather miserably and the new rash of skit shows only gaining moderate success at the very best (with K&P only getting tepid success with the Kroll Show not doing nearly as well, along with everything else they've tried to do recently), they might be looking to switch gears to more "abstract" stuff like Adult Swim or more "everyone is idiots" type shows like Broad City in the vein of Always Sunny and Arrested Development. I don't know if they want to stake their ground so firmly in the political "real life" stuff.
Also, it's hard to parody liberalism because of the dynamics. Not impossible, as Portlandia points out, just difficult. Conservative ideology on its face tries to project a "tough" image, which is easier for clever people to parody. When people try to parody or poke fun at liberalism, it usually ends up trying to project some image of a super-politically-correct effeminate man, and not only is that much more rare than a Hank Hill, but it also seems meaner to make fun of. Colbert not only poked fun of the O'Reilly persona, but also the ideas. Ed Schultz may look like he's going to pop at any given time and Rachel Maddow and his boy ward might be snarky, but that's not really enough to build a show out of. People like O'Reilly and Hannity already openly mock liberals in both style and substance, so parody almost seems redundant.
He wasn't praising Kelly; he was saying that they could do a female version of Colbert's character, and cast Samantha Bee. Sam would be parodying people like Megyn Kelly.DirgeNovak said:
I actually quite like that idea.
They had one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_News_Network didn't make it seo far thoughFlatfrog said:
I could do with any of them but Sam Bee. She's not funny.
But mostly, Jessica Williams would be awesome. And a huge loss for the Daily Show.
I mean, you're right. You don't know the ratings. They've been fairly steadily rising. Their ratings average for 2013 was 2.5 million viewers, which is pretty awesome for cable. I mean, they won't be getting NCIS numbers, but they're still don't strong within their field of play (and outdoing quite a few "real" news shows). I'd be surprised if much of anything on Comedy Central routinely pulled in those numbers.
So why on earth would they phase out or kill that?
But mostly, Jessica Williams would be awesome. And a huge loss for the Daily Show.
"A nice balance" of what? Other side of what? Stewart's never been particularly partisan in his comedy. He made it big going after Clinton, et al back when they were the big thing. How does one balance out someone who simply goes where the low-hanging fruit is?person427 said:
I wish it wasn't on HBO, because I'd love watching Oliver again.Triaed said:
So you think they might wind it down because you don't watch it? I mean, that's literally the only point you make that would remotely support the idea.hentropy said:
I mean, you're right. You don't know the ratings. They've been fairly steadily rising. Their ratings average for 2013 was 2.5 million viewers, which is pretty awesome for cable. I mean, they won't be getting NCIS numbers, but they're still don't strong within their field of play (and outdoing quite a few "real" news shows). I'd be surprised if much of anything on Comedy Central routinely pulled in those numbers.
So why on earth would they phase out or kill that?
Well it was a totally different slot before colbert report. Does not have to be a news type show for the rest of eternity. I would like to see something totally different. Hopefully something good though because Comedy Central has been clearing some garbage shows over the past few years that never get a second season or at least should not have.
BarbaricGoose said:
Saying she has actual news-anchor talent sounds like praise to me.
Anyway, I agree with the Samantha Bee idea as well, but I find Jessica Williams more consistently funny.
I had never heard about that show. Or the IFC channel for that matter.Boris Goodenough said:They had one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_News_Network didn't make it seo far thoughFlatfrog said:
As much as I love Jessica Williams (which is a lot) I wonder if she'd prefer to get some more experience under her belt before heading her own show? She hasn't been doing this TV thing very long. [quick web search] ... or maybe she has. She was apparently in some Nickelodeon soccer show I've never heard of in '06.
I actually found page 4 the most interesting in this article. It's not that I find Stewart particularly partisan. He takes the left to task when they do incredibly stupid shit, too. It's just that the Republican party and its vocal allies are particularly ripe for satire these days. John Stewart didn't call his political rally "the Rally to Restore Progressive Values," he called it "The Rally to Restore Sanity."
The thing that interests me about page 4 is the list of comedy shows ribbing the left that have failed, even on Fox News Channel, a network that seemingly would be perfect for it. This feeds into an observation I've made in watching conservative media react to people like John Stewart and Steven Colbert. It seems like they just don't understand, or even like comedy. Maybe situational or observational comedy, but not satire. I'm not painting all conservatives here; I live in an area with plenty of them and in the "real world" I've known more than a few who could appreciate and even tell a good joke. It just seems like the conservative pundits and their die-hard fans aren't the kind of people who like to laugh, unless they can do it while also stroking their egos.
I could be wrong. Just something that's been percolating in the back of my head for a while.
I actually found page 4 the most interesting in this article. It's not that I find Stewart particularly partisan. He takes the left to task when they do incredibly stupid shit, too. It's just that the Republican party and its vocal allies are particularly ripe for satire these days. John Stewart didn't call his political rally "the Rally to Restore Progressive Values," he called it "The Rally to Restore Sanity."
The thing that interests me about page 4 is the list of comedy shows ribbing the left that have failed, even on Fox News Channel, a network that seemingly would be perfect for it. This feeds into an observation I've made in watching conservative media react to people like John Stewart and Steven Colbert. It seems like they just don't understand, or even like comedy. Maybe situational or observational comedy, but not satire. I'm not painting all conservatives here; I live in an area with plenty of them and in the "real world" I've known more than a few who could appreciate and even tell a good joke. It just seems like the conservative pundits and their die-hard fans aren't the kind of people who like to laugh, unless they can do it while also stroking their egos.
I could be wrong. Just something that's been percolating in the back of my head for a while.
Really? That is a damn shame. Key and Peele is one of the funniest shows on the network. Surprisingly intelligent for such a relentlessly goofy sketch show, too.hentropy said: