TVSquad

I was a Letterman fan since the late 70s. He used to be cutting edge and still had Carsons' ability to appeal to people across the political spectrum by adhering to Johnnies principle that you keep you political opinions to yourself. You're entitled to them, but you keep them to yourself. Over the past year or two, Letterman has completely alienated me with his obvious pandering to one side and downright libelous comments about the other. I used to watch religiously; now I've stopped altogether. And, I can't watch Leno. He used to be OK doing stand-up, but the Tonight show is painfully lowbrow since he took over.

Reply

I don't like either of these guys. Jay's not funny but his show has higher production value and doesn't annoy you. Dave on the other hand is absolutely annoying and grating. Sometimes he interviews really well, but not all the time. I can't stand his show and it's obvious he doesn't take it seriously anymore either. In short Jay is a hard worker and Dave isn't.

I don't think he should step down though. It's his call and CBS'. His ratings are still good in general. But Dave isn't going out on top, that's for sure though.

I think the ultimate late night show would be Ferguson doing the monologue and Conan doing the sketches and interviews.

Reply

Mass America will grab the bland at every turn. It's much less challenging, involving very little assessment.

Leno's show is an efficient assembly line of mediocre jokes and flat interviews, pumped up to give the appearance of substance.

Letterman is a thoughtful and consummate broadcaster with a razor-sharp wit and better interview skills than for which he's given credit. He's just not a poser, a quality that seems to be embraced by the throngs.

More eyes means bigger ratings, which is the point of it all. However, that doesn't always equate to relative artistic substance.

Letterman is head-over-heels more talented. Still.

Reply

Letterman has been extremely weak since the show returned from the strike. The repetition of 'bits' is particularly awful. That gag where someone kept phoning up and pretending to be the California Highway Patrol (or something) was amusing only in a 'what on earth was that' way and was worth about 2 or 3 of them, in ONE episode. Instead they did it about 5 times every episode for about 2 weeks. They then took that 'joke' (if you can call it that) and transposed it into other people's shows to make it look like the CHP had called that show. Again, cute idea, worth about 2 or 3 goes in one or two episodes, but they stretched it out way beyond being funny. How many times are we meant to laugh at the same joke? Especially when it's weak to start with.

We also get subjected to the audience member who stands up and is overly shocked that someone dropped out of the presidential race and runs out of the studio (punching people on the way out). That was funny once. Four times is just tedious. It feels like you're watching repeats.

Every single episode of Letterman that I watch now is just a series of repeat jokes with different people or different names. It wasn't always like this was it ? I don't think it was.

Compare this to the Daily Show and Colbert and you'd be convinced that it's Dave that didn't have any writers for the last month.

Reply

Someone should tell James Wolcott that Johnny Carson's opinion matters more than his. So does Les Moonves'. And mine. And Bob Sassone's.

Should I go on?

Reply

Please tell us, Ric, who Dave will vote for in November. He treats every political guest with equal respect, be it McCain, Obama, Huckabee or Clinton.

If you disapprove of him making fun of Bush, you are in the very small minority.

Reply

Jimmy...you are very wrong about Letterman treating both sides with respect. And I'm not talking about the repetitive Bush jokes. I can't tell if you've watched as faithfully as I have over the years, but his bitter bias towards the left has been increasingly evident.

Reply

This topic is silly and pointless. Is there not room for both late night hosts? Seems to have worked pretty well so far.

Reply

I love Letterman for all those reasons named by Wolcott. Is he so inane as to think that there is only sense of humor out there...his? I love the drawn out reactions to jokes by Letterman and Conan...they make me laugh more than the jokes. Its precisely why I DON'T enjoy Leno: Leno tells jokes but is not a funny person. Letterman and Conan don't tell many jokes but are just funny people. I'd rather watch a person who is naturally funny for an hour than someone who has to script everything to be funny.

Reply

Ric, if you truly meant Letterman has a bias *toward* the left, as you wrote, instead of *against* the left, I will respectfully disagree. I have watched Letterman for 15 years, and I can't say with any certainty which way he leans. Maybe you are referencing Bill O'Reilley's appearances; in that case, I would argue that Letterman has a bias *against* assholes, not Republicans or conservatives.

If I had to, I would guess Letterman would vote for John McCain. He clearly has a lot of respect for his service in the Navy and in the Senate.

It's too bad Tom Brokaw has no presidential aspiration.

Reply

By his logic Vanity Fair magazine should stop production.

Reply

I won't go into the whys and wherefores, there is no accounting for taste! LOL I personally prefer Letterman and Ferguson to all the other nighttime tv hosts! From my observation, they seem to poke fun at our politicians and other public figures with equal time. Long live Letterman! Very smart man!

Reply

What makes Leno unwatchable to me is his use of interviews just to set up his own lame punchlines. He never listens to the guests or asks perceptive questions. Letterman might not be as familiar with the guests as he should be, but he doesn't use them to try to get laughs for himself.

And while I agree that Letterman is a Democrat, I think he asks both parties thoughtful questions and saves his biased questions and comments for newsmen and satirists such as Tom Brokaw and Al Franken.

I think the best comparison of the show probably lies with the guests. Sharp, witty actors such as Tom Hanks, Steve Martin, Bill Murray, Paul Newman, and Bruce Willis will stop by Letterman without projects to hawk, just to chat or take part in some skit inanity, while those who need a host to pander to them and not ask any question that wasn't part of a pre-interview stop by only while on a junket. If Paris Hilton prefers Leno, give me Letterman as long as he can sling a blue card.

Reply

Who is James Woolcott and why should I give a good goddamn about what he thinks?

I'm serious here guys. Presumably Woolcott also thinks that there should only be one late night show - so Charlie Rose and Jimmy Kimmel should also retire, because they aren't drawing the sort of raitings that Leno is. By extension he must also thinks that NBC, ABC, and FOX should all shut down operations because CBS wins the annual ratings. Or maybe all the cable channels should shut down because more people still watch the highest rated broadcast shows than watch the highest rated cable series. In other words, it sounds as though James Woolcott has never heard of the expression "different strokes for different folks."

I haven't been able to watch Jay Leno in years, not since he did such a horrible job with the tribute to Carson after Johnny's death. By contrast, while I'm nowhere near to being a regular Letterman watcher, I do catch the show when he has a guest who interests me and I never cease to be amazed and pleased at just how good an interviewer Dave can be when he has a guest who is interesting and engaging. In that he reminds me far more of Johnny than Leno ever has. Woolcott may not like that and may ridicule those of us who do, but what he proposes would be to homogenize the late night audience to a degree that no one should find acceptable.

Reply

So, I'm not middle-America. I have a Master's in writing and have studied literature, comedy, poetry, etc. for most of my adult life. I count myself as someone who's at least above average as far as intelligence and I love Jay Leno. I think his jokes are far better constructed and socially relevant.

I have yet, when I ask the question of why David Letterman is more intelligent, to be given an answer other than someone just insulting me. I'd gladly read an intelligent response but rarely get one. I don't think Letterman is hip. I think he's bitter and a sell-out (if you don't enjoy what you're doing and don't believe in the product you're selling, such as your own jokes, you are a sell-out). I'm just tired of being told that because I have different tastes than someone else that I must be dumber than they are. What an excellent argument /sarcasm/.

My tone wouldn't be angry at all if I didn't feel like I was being patted on the head like a simple child for enjoying something others don't. If someone wants to say they don't enjoy Leno, that's fine, but putting others down because their opinions differ shows little intelligence itself.

Reply

Jay Leno's success is proof that the average American is a moron.

Reply

Tammy,

My biggest issue with Leno - every joke is obvious. Unlike Conan or Letterman, especially Letterman of old: they can say or do something surprising. Leno's so obvious that absolutely nothing he says or does comes from a position of genuine intelligence or wit. Leno seems to have cribbed all of his style from 1970s and 80s sitcoms...set up and ba-da-bump here's the lame, witless zinger. Does he have the former staff of Barney Miller and Friends living in his skull?

Leno simply doesn't come out of an unusual sense of humor. Ever. He's warm, he's safe, he takes the pitch and always hits a safe grounder to third. He's the Chris Columbus (director of the Home Alone series and first two Harry Potter movies) of stand-ups. Sort of Dane Cook and Bob Newhart but with worse features...

Reply