David Letterman to retire in 2015

[ns8401 941]

 

From February of 1999. Tell me he had developed his character by then? Hell, Stewart wasn't even on 'The Daily Show' yet.

 

[yt]gMnGG2CnefU[/yt]

 

Ummmm... That's not what anybody means... we mean Stephen Colbert, no comedy routine, no character, just as himself, like you would see him normally. Can you find an example of him outside of his character and not doing comedy?

[MidwestTV 1232]

 

Moonves is not only paranoid, he's an a**hole.

 

how?

[24994J 5585]

 

Ummmm... That's not what anybody means... we mean Stephen Colbert, no comedy routine, no character, just as himself, like you would see him normally. Can you find an example of him outside of his character and not doing comedy?

 

Yeah, I know. I'm just saying that what he's doing now isn't the only thing he knows, which a lot of people forget. I know the full episode of 'Whose Line' used to be on YouTube, but has since been removed, and I do recall that Drew spoke with him at the beginning of the show. He was, to my memory, not in any character, but was still amusing when delivering a few one-liners.

 

Now, this isn't really comedy, but I completely forgot this existed...and it is so bad.

 

[yt]DFlSNzanPXM[/yt]

[Rusty Muck 4378]

Now, this isn't really comedy, but I completely forgot this existed...and it is so bad.

 

[yt]DFlSNzanPXM[/yt]

I guess it can finally be revealed as to where his "Special Correspondent" tag on "The Daily Show" came from.

 

Was GMA in the middle of a 'goofy guy doing fluff feature reports' phase back in 1997?

[24994J 5585]

I found a 2007 interview of Colbert on Larry King where he explained that he only appeared once on GMA before they unceremoniously didn't call him back.

[ns8401 941]

I found a 2007 interview of Colbert on Larry King where he explained that he only appeared once on GMA before they unceremoniously didn't call him back.

I hope that isn't a bad sign. I just wish I could really read the guy, it's so hard to really do that at the moment.

[DirtyHarry 727]

I seriously doubt Colbert would even be considered as it would be to jarring for his fans to see him out of parody - I can't remember a time when I've seen him out of character.

Well looks like they went with Mr Goodwrench. I don't see him as having enough of the "it" factor to carry a show, but I guess we'll see.

 

I don't agree with you guys about Conan either. He's just so goofy looking and I don't find him funny at all. I'll take Letterman (in his prime, that is) over Conan or any of these clowns each and every day of the week.

 

Wow, Les Moonves IS crazy. I'll never watch. Colbert is very condescending and unfunny.

Name one comedian who is. Is Ellen funny? Wry observations are not funny and if the audience has to clap after one of your punch lines, that means your joke wasn't funny either. You have to be willing to make fun of people to be funny and nobody has the guts to do that in this politically correct era we live in.

 

Ummmm... That's not what anybody means... we mean Stephen Colbert, no comedy routine, no character, just as himself, like you would see him normally. Can you find an example of him outside of his character and not doing comedy?

Does this count?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWmIayoGrF8

 

I know, he's in character but it was an excuse to sneak it in. He's one short dude.

[DirtyHarry 727]

Seriously, with the price of HD cameras these days, I honestly cannot figure out why CBS had cheaped out on upgrading Big Brother and Let's Make a Deal to HD. BB I can understand because of the amount of camera CBS would have tobuy, but LMAD?!? This is like the time when Family Guy went HD AFTER Seth McFarlane's other shows went HD on Fox.

Its not the cameras so much as all the rest of the infrastructure they have to replace. They have to rewire, buy a bunch of servers, software, editing, new cooling equipment perhaps, new sets that look good in HD ... and then the studio probably looks like crap and needs to be reurbished so it looks good in HD ... It isn't just a local TV studio, its Television City, Studio City, the New York studio complex and the Ed Sullivan Theater, not to mention all the local stations. CBS has a crap load of studios they have to deal with, not to mention a bunch of equipment that still has use.

 

I noticed with my multiplex movie channels. SD in digital isn't too bad when the original medium is 35mm film, especially when they letterbox it. Zoom in to get the proper aspect ratio and it looks good to me.

[DirtyHarry 727]

CBS Television City may host both "Late Show" and "Late Late" when all is said and done.

I don't know about that. They have to pay ttemp service people to fill up the audiences out there these days. TV ain't as glamorous as it used to be.

[Thundershock MN 169]

First, I saw late yesterday that Mashable posted an article/blog entry kind of confirming some of the theory I went into in my post yesterday. Mashable stated in part "Individuals close to the succession plans tell Mashable that Colbert and CBS began talking as early as December 2012 about him taking over The Late Show upon Letterman’s retirement. [...] Though Colbert and the network never entered into any formal discussions until after Letterman's announcement, a handshake deal was made: CBS wanted Colbert, Colbert was stoked to succeed Letterman, and the rest would be worked out later."

 

 

I bet you we'll be hearing of a big raise coming his way very soon if he stays at 12:30. A straight job swap could also be intriguing (Colbert to CBS, Ferguson to Comedy Central)

Craig Ferguson is going to get a "raise." He will receive a payout for being passed over due the "Prince of Wales" clause in his contract. Gawker citing NY Daily News and the NY Post puts the payout at least 5 Million dollars.

 

I'm wondering, though, if Colbert will take his persona to CBS -- or perhaps transform it into an occasional act? Or maybe drop it altogether and attempt a fresh start?

Colbert has stated he will not be taking his persona to the Late Show.

 

 

I don't think Colbert will overtake Fallon, but I do think he will overtake Kimmel who IMO sucks. I would watch anybody except Kimmel. It only made good sense for either Colbert or Stewart to takeover. Let face it when it all done and said the networks wants those young demos and I still think Letterman is still good, but with those other networks wanting a younger audience. Colbert seems to have con-conquered that a comedy central. Yes CBS is different from the second cousin at Comedy Central, but one things for sure the last decade and half Les Moonves has literally taken CBS from the gutter to #1 while all the other nets are trying to follow suite. CBS has done well in this different broadcast climate.

I agree. I don't see Colbert overtaking Fallon. Colbert's persona is polarizing to some and they likely won't give him the time of day...even if the Late Show is done sans persona. Plus, I went into this yesterday in my post. But, Colbert has to re-make himself without alienating his current fan base while at the same time appealing to people willing to give him a shot but don't like (or, get) the shtick. It's kinda the same box Conan found himself in...while trying to appeal to everyone you end up really appealing to none. But, Fallon never had to change his "bit" for the Tonight Show. The kids know what they are getting and like that he didn't "change." And, the masses will likely start to gravitate towards him due to his "good, clean fun" brand of comedy. Colbert will still likely have some "edge" to his new show. Therefore, when the dusts settles I see Fallon #1, Colbert #2 & Kimmel #3 (with an occasional place switch here and there.)

 

Seriously, with the price of HD cameras these days, I honestly cannot figure out why CBS had cheaped out on upgrading Big Brother and Let's Make a Deal to HD. BB I can understand because of the amount of camera CBS would have tobuy, but LMAD?!? This is like the time when Family Guy went HD AFTER Seth McFarlane's other shows went HD on Fox.

This is OT but, a couple things here. First, ALL of Seth McFarlane's shows went HD at the same time. However, due to being at different stages of production they debuted at different times. The Cleveland Show debuted in HD due to it being a new show. But, Both Family Guy & American Dad had episodes "in the can" from prior production runs. This was exacerbated somewhat due to the WGA strike in 07-08. FG had a ton of episodes at some stage of production before worked stopped. The whole 7th season was "holdovers" from the prior production run. That's partially why FG was a full season behind their animated brethren. AD only had a couple handful of episodes "in the can" that's why their HD debut came mid-season. In any case all three started HD production with their '09 production runs/codes.

 

And, LMAD films at Sunset Bronson not, CBS Television City. Judge Judy also films at Sunset Bronson and was slow to upgrade to HD only doing so a couple years ago. Not that it's an excuse but, it does add another layer.

[TVIntheDesert 183]

 

I agree. I don't see Colbert overtaking Fallon. Colbert's persona is polarizing to some and they likely won't give him the time of day...even if the Late Show is done sans persona. Plus, I went into this yesterday in my post. But, Colbert has to re-make himself without alienating his current fan base while at the same time appealing to people willing to give him a shot but don't like (or, get) the shtick. It's kinda the same box Conan found himself in...while trying to appeal to everyone you end up really appealing to none. But, Fallon never had to change his "bit" for the Tonight Show. The kids know what they are getting and like that he didn't "change." And, the masses will likely start to gravitate towards him due to his "good, clean fun" brand of comedy. Colbert will still likely have some "edge" to his new show. Therefore, when the dusts settles I see Fallon #1, Colbert #2 & Kimmel #3 (with an occasional place switch here and there.)

 

 

I see it a little differently. A year from now, Fallon's ratings will level off and not be as high as Leno's were. To some (including myself), he comes off as a phony. To others, he's too "urban-hip." CBS could have seen the middle-America audience as being underserved on broadcast late night TV since Leno's departure and hire someone who has wide appeal, but they went with their first choice.

 

This is an opportunity for Fox News to "counterprogram" the broadcast networks and grab that alienated conservative audience. But, who would they ask to host?

[MorningNews 1455]

When should we expect to see Jimmy Fallon's number come back down to reality? Seems like he's the guy right now. To me Stephen Colbert is the most logical choice, he has exactly what CBS needs. I think this will work out great for the network.

[TVIntheDesert 183]

 

When should we expect to see Jimmy Fallon's number come back down to reality? Seems like he's the guy right now. To me Stephen Colbert is the most logical choice, he has exactly what CBS needs. I think this will work out great for the network.

 

I'd say around the time Colbert starts on the "Late Show." NBC is still spending a ton to promote Fallon, and once NBC decides to put that promotion money elsewhere, his ratings will fall. Remember, the first year Letterman was with CBS, he was tops. Then, Leno found his audience and didn't look back. Fallon doesn't have the chops to make it without the $$$ NBC is spending to promote him, and that includes social media.

[News 9 Viewer 100]

 

I see it a little differently. A year from now, Fallon's ratings will level off and not be as high as Leno's were. To some (including myself), he comes off as a phony. To others, he's too "urban-hip." CBS could have seen the middle-America audience as being underserved on broadcast late night TV since Leno's departure and hire someone who has wide appeal, but they went with their first choice.

 

This is an opportunity for Fox News to "counterprogram" the broadcast networks and grab that alienated conservative audience. But, who would they ask to host?

 

Maybe they'll bring back The Half Hour Newshour (I kid, I kid).

[BehindNYNews 147]

 

When should we expect to see Jimmy Fallon's number come back down to reality? Seems like he's the guy right now. To me Stephen Colbert is the most logical choice, he has exactly what CBS needs. I think this will work out great for the network.

 

It's already happening. Nightline beat Late Night with Seth Myers last week and Dave and Kimmel continue to close the gap to Fallon every week.

[Rusty Muck 4378]

I see it a little differently. A year from now, Fallon's ratings will level off and not be as high as Leno's were. To some (including myself), he comes off as a phony. To others, he's too "urban-hip." CBS could have seen the middle-America audience as being underserved on broadcast late night TV since Leno's departure and hire someone who has wide appeal, but they went with their first choice.

 

This is an opportunity for Fox News to "counterprogram" the broadcast networks and grab that alienated conservative audience. But, who would they ask to host?

Greg Gutfeld's "Red Eye" would be the logical choice. That show has been buried at 3am since 2006 and repeatedly outdraws CNN's primetime offerings. Gutfeld is pretty much the anti-Fox News primetime host, much as CraigyFerg is the anti-late night host.

 

The problem, though, is that Fox News doesn't time shift for East Coast/West Coast time, because... they can't. What would play well at 11pm on the East Coast... simply cannot at 8pm on the West Coast. Thus, by default, it will never move beyond that graveyard timeslot on Fox News.

 

As for Colbert, if he can successfully pull off reinventing himself and ditch the "Stephen Colbert" character, it presents a golden opportunity for him. Most conservatives that are upset or dismissive of the hire are confusing the character with himself, which actually is to Colbert's credit that he executed the O'Reilly parody so well. But the few hints he's given about who he really is intrigue me more than anything else.

[TVIntheDesert 183]

 

 

The problem, though, is that Fox News doesn't time shift for East Coast/West Coast time, because... they can't. What would play well at 11pm on the East Coast... simply cannot at 8pm on the West Coast. Thus, by default, it will never move beyond that graveyard timeslot on Fox News.

 

 

That didn't stop Conan from going to TBS, where the satellite companies only carry the east-coast feeds, and his show comes on at 8pm Pacific Time. It could also be one of the reasons he's struggling over there.

[sanewsguy 511]

 

As for Colbert, if he can successfully pull off reinventing himself and ditch the "Stephen Colbert" character, it presents a golden opportunity for him. Most conservatives that are upset or dismissive of the hire are confusing the character with himself, which actually is to Colbert's credit that he executed the O'Reilly parody so well. But the few hints he's given about who he really is intrigue me more than anything else.

 

See, this is why I don't like Colbert, because he "plays a character" (even I don't quite understand how it works; then again I don't watch Comedy Channel). Jon Stewart would've been better because at least he is himself. Colbert is not, nobody knows who he truly is.

[Thundershock MN 169]

It's already happening. Nightline beat Late Night with Seth Myers last week and Dave and Kimmel continue to close the gap to Fallon every week.

Huh? I hope you aren't relying on this puff piece of a press release WRT Nightline. Anyone can spin anything. Total viewers really doesn't mean squat...you sell demos to advertisers, more specifically A18-49. The funny thing is even at the bottom of their press release it shows that Nightline got killed in both demos (A18-49 & A25-54) by Late Night that week. And, Nightline only trumped Late Night in the basically irrelavent category of total viewers by 2,000. The Late, Late Shows numbers on the other hand...ugh*.

 

In the all important A18-49 category Fallon's numbers have for the most part leveled off and held steady over the last month or so. Seth Meyers' has also seemingly settled in and started to plateau with his numbers. Letterman and Kimmel have both effectively maintained status quo neither gaining or shedding much in the demo. Ferguson's numbers can be at best described as rough. And, some people actually watch Carson Daly...sometimes even besting CraigyFerg*.

 

I will give you that Letterman & Kimmel have picked up in total viewers. But, the issue is all those viewers clearly fall outside of the demo(s). That basically means they are irrelevant to advertisers. Both Fallon/Meyers are almost doubling their counterparts in A18-19 right now. So, All that does right now is prove NBC made the right move in going to Fallon/Meyers. And, shows why other broadcasters are in a rush to place people in chairs that can attract the A18-49 crowd.

 

Here are all the weekly numbers since Fallon's debut: 3/31-4/4, 3/24-3/28, 3/17-3/21, 3/10-3/14, 3/3-3/7, 2/24-2/28, 2/17-2/21. And, just for kicks and giggles here are a few random weeks 1/6/14-1/10/14, 2/18/13-2/22/13 & 2/6/12-2/10/12. I point these out to use as somewhat of a baseline. You will notice that Fallon even with his current leveled off numbers has bested Leno in the A18-49 category. And, Meyers has at least maintained or slightly bested Fallon's old Late Night A18-49 numbers. It also shows Letterman has shed around a third of his A18-49 numbers in two years. And, Worse yet Ferguson has roughly halved his A18-49 numbers in the same time frame*.

 

*More on Craig Ferguson below.

 

I see it a little differently. A year from now, Fallon's ratings will level off and not be as high as Leno's were. To some (including myself), he comes off as a phony. To others, he's too "urban-hip." CBS could have seen the middle-America audience as being underserved on broadcast late night TV since Leno's departure and hire someone who has wide appeal, but they went with their first choice.

 

This is an opportunity for Fox News to "counterprogram" the broadcast networks and grab that alienated conservative audience. But, who would they ask to host?

Working under the premise that Colbert's show is "edgy" and, Kimmel doesn't tweak his act. The point I was making was that of the three (Fallon, Colbert, Kimmel) the masses will gravitate towards Fallon as his act is the least offensive. It's the same thing that helped Leno all those years...a vanilla, clean comedy act. Of course there will be exceptions to that and some won't care for all three. But, it stands to reason that Fallon's act will have the broadest appeal thereby equating to the highest numbers in most instances.

 

 

That didn't stop Conan from going to TBS, where the satellite companies only carry the east-coast feeds, and his show comes on at 8pm Pacific Time. It could also be one of the reasons he's struggling over there.

I know what you are saying. But, TBS does have a west coast feed. And, also re-runs Conan @ 12:30am EST. So, west coast viewers can watch "closer" to the regular time @ 9:30pm PST via the east coast feed. Or, watch at 11:00pm PST on the west coast feed.

 

 

One last thing. I stumbled across this Bloomberg article that I think confirms the other part of my theory and dovetails into the Late, Late Show numbers above. It looks like to me Craig's days might numbered. Les Moonves is quoted in the article stating "12:30 is up in the air." "Obviously, we’re considering all sorts of candidates and women are among them. A woman would be great in late night.", He continued. Reading that I think it's only a matter of time before we have a new CBS late night consisting of Colbert & Handler.

[TVIntheDesert 183]

 

 

 

Working under the premise that Colbert's show is "edgy" and, Kimmel doesn't tweak his act. The point I was making was that of the three (Fallon, Colbert, Kimmel) the masses will gravitate towards Fallon as his act is the least offensive. It's the same thing that helped Leno all those years...a vanilla, clean comedy act. Of course there will be exceptions to that and some won't care for all three. But, it stands to reason that Fallon's act will have the broadest appeal thereby equating to the highest numbers in most instances.

 

 

Having an underground hip-hop collective as the band, and doing bits like "Slow Jammin' The News" may be the edgiest things "The Tonight Show" has ever done in its history. Stephen Colbert is going to shave Fallon's ratings in half, since he does connect with the younger big-city demos the same way Fallon does. This is only going to boost Jimmy Kimmel's ratings, and he seems to be the one who will be in tune with Leno's older, more conservative audience in the long run.

[sanewsguy 511]

 

Having an underground hip-hop collective as the band, and doing bits like "Slow Jammin' The News" may be the edgiest things "The Tonight Show" has ever done in its history. Stephen Colbert is going to shave Fallon's ratings in half, since he does connect with the younger big-city demos the same way Fallon does. This is only going to boost Jimmy Kimmel's ratings, and he seems to be the one who will be in tune with Leno's older, more conservative audience in the long run.

 

Doubt it. With the hires being made lately, networks are now basically telling rural America, "we don't really care about you, we're more interested in the big city demos"...

 

Kimmel also seems to be more appealing to the younger demos. It's all gravitating towards the younger demos now.

 

Craig Ferguson seems to be a tad too edgy for my tastes. Yes, I would be categorized as a "conservative" viewer by everyone else's definitions.

 

Don't get me started on Handler. She makes Ferguson look innocent in comparison.

 

I wish someone would pick up Leno, I miss him.

[24994J 5585]

I know this is going to sound terrible, because there is kind of a sexist double standard in our society, but...

 

Craig, however dirty, seems like a nice, likable guy; so much so that my 59 year-old mother (also with conservative viewing habits) finds him to be hilarious.

 

Chelsea, on the other hand, seems like a bitch. Not likable, not respectful, just complete low/no class trash.

 

:rant:

[sanewsguy 511]

 

I know this is going to sound terrible, because there is kind of a sexist double standard in our society, but...

 

Craig, however dirty, seems like a nice, likable guy; so much so that my 59 year-old mother (also with conservative viewing habits) finds him to be hilarious.

 

Chelsea, on the other hand, seems like a bitch. Not likable, not respectful, just complete low/no class trash.

:rant:

 

Couldn't have said it better. That's the reason I detest her, she comes across as a stuck-up bitch, not somebody you'd want to hang out with. On the other hand, Craig, he seems like the kind of guy, he could be your drinking buddy.

 

Back on topic, does anyone think that, if Craig's spot comes up, Les will give it to some new undiscovered talent, or is it going to be somebody with familiarity? I wouldn't necessarily say either Craig was "familiar" before taking the 12:35 slot...

[BehindNYNews 147]

CBS: "Craig Ferguson announced today that he has decided to step down as host of 'The Late Late Show' in December 2014."

 

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/craig-ferguson-exit-late-late-show-699470

 

 

I really hope Chelsea Handler does NOT get the spot, I hate her. I'd like to see Seth MacFarlane.... we'll see!

[MorningNews 1455]

So I guess he did want the Late Show spot then?