David Letterman to retire in 2015. Stephen Colbert to take over.

He has a successful show, he's popular with the younger crowd and probably makes a damn good living. Yeah, he should just pack it in.

 

Not to mention almost complete creative control over his show and very loose content restrictions. Network would never give him that.

 

If only!

 

Though unfortunately it seems he doesn't tend to do a whole lot with that freedom anymore. His TBS show is better than it was when it started, and more of an old Late Night feel has crept into it gradually, but something's still just not the same. I can't figure out if it's Conan himself or if they need a writing-team shake-up.

 

They should bring back the old bits.

 

Wait, Conan is still on TV? Who knew?

 

I consider him in a fight for a battle of the bottom of the ratings, but others seem to disagree.

 

The last time I intentionally watched Letterman was to see if he would
actually apologize to Bristol Palin. The last time I watched Colbert was
when he was still doing "Mr. Goodwrench" commercials.

 

You enjoy his current show, but you've already decided that his new show won't be worth tuning into? That's a very odd stance to take.

Myself, I'm looking forward the freshness that he can bring back to the Late Show. If anyone can re-invent the late night talk show format, it's Colbert. At the very least, I think it's worth tuning into just to find out how good it is. I can't think of any other talk show host who can be as wickedly funny as Stephen Colbert can be.

 

I think it's because it's in LA. His humor was rooted in east coast.

 

We tried him out the other night. Laughed a lot. Does he do the "In the Year..." bit anymore?

 

No. I haven't seen it since he's been on TBS.

 

I think most of Conan's old bits are technically owned by NBC. They've done a few old bits (Masturbating Bear, etc.) since then, but always under different names. I think MB may have became "Self-Pleasuring Bear" or such. Conan has also said that he purposefully wanted to make a break from the old standby sketches, but how much of that is truth versus "We just can't really do 'em anymore," who knows.

 

Is that what people are looking for right before they go to bed?

It seems to me that after a long day of work, taking care of the kids, etc, that light-hearted entertainment would be what most people want. Dismissing these people as LCD or stupid is insulting.

 

He should have taken a, "You know where to find me" approach with NBC's lawyers like Letterman did.

 

I almost wonder if it's not more TBS's doing than Conan's. CBS had deep enough pockets to take the gamble and call NBC's bluff, but I'm not sure if a network like TBS could afford to go up against NBC-Universal if they actually did decide to take action (not that I think they'd bother). Still, could be enough to spook TBS execs into telling Conan not to get too close to the old bits.

 

I like Conan and hes better now than ever , but Colbert is a bigger talent and better choice ,the fact he works for Viacom where Conan is TBS(Warner)

 

There's the big CBS Broadcast Center in NYC of course. That's actually a pretty interesting place with a lot going on, but it doesn't have the special appeal of either 30 Rock or the Ed Sullivan Theater.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS_Broadcast_Center
But Colbert is used to working in basic studio situations (nothing special about the Daily Show and the Report locations either).

I remember Letterman actually lamenting that he missed 30 Rock and that bit TV institution. Years ago he did a series of shows in LA at CBS Television City and he got some of that special energy back. As cool as the theater is, there is a kind of magic that happens at a broadcast institution like 30 Rock...especially with someone like Letterman. IMHO that place was an essential ingredient to the feel of his old Late Night show.

dan c

 

Colbert not using the Ed Sullivan Theater would be a misstep. The media would have headlines like, "Theater that was good enough for the Beatles is not good enough for Colbert" running minutes after the announcement.

 

Oh please... Not everything is about the Beatles. And why would anyone think for one second that he thought it "wasn't good enough for him"?

I think Colbert will probably use the Sullivan theatre -- it's a great venue for a show, and it's so visible -- but I wouldn't be shocked if he wanted to do his show in a location that wasn't so identified with his predecessor. Jimmy Fallon has demonstrated that you can take your show wherever you want.

 

Dave was always a broadcaster at heart. He seems to be right at home when he's in touch with that old school TV studio feel.

 

I'm not trying to turn this into a Beatles thread, just illustrating how some people in the media will spin whatever because they apparently have an axe to grind.

In regards to Fallon, he was bringing the Tonight Show back to where it began and within Lorne Michaels reach.

Kids, please don't chew on lead painted furniture!

 

Personally, I really don't think any of this matters as much as the media would like you to think it does. Back in the day of three channels and stations signing off at midnight, a show like The Tonight Show meant something. Now with 24/7 broadcasting and a thousand channels to choose from, its become meaningless.

Doesn't help either that almost all of today's celebrities are vapid non-entities looking for nothing more than to plug their latest movie, or pontificate as to their "enlightened" views about the state of the universe. Definitely a far cry from the material Carson had to work with back in his glory days.

 

I think Colbert was the best choice.

 

Yeah..Charo, Don Rickles and Burt Reynolds were oh, so amazing. Granted Carson had authors and such but I'd blame the modern audience's expectations. Still Johnny was never a Cavett or Frost.
Who is to predict that the intelligent Colbert won't bring on various scientists and "cool" visionaries of the day? He seems the type. Both Stewart and Colbert had fairly esoteric guests over the years.