Craig Ferguson (just) Talks
http://www.cbs.com/late_night/late_late_show/
Our friend Carol got us watching the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson about five months ago. And it's been fun. I like Craig and I think he does very well with humor, particularly the off-the-cuff variety. He's good at pointing out that the show isn't very important, just a piece of temporary pop culture fluff - which is true. Any good comedian has a style and Ferguson's is kind of interesting to me because it harkens back to Johnny Carson. Johnny's monologues weren't as notable for their jokes as for his reactions to them. When a joke failed - that's when Carson shown, with a wry comment or two. He was great.
Ferguson does the same thing, but on a wider canvas, criticising his whole show. It works and it's funny. But, like Carson, he's not a one-play performer. He's very good at ad libbing, and his facial expressions and the sly "naughty boy" look he shoots the camera are all first-rate entertainment for a late night show. The only thing I can fault the show for is something it acknowledges - that it is existing in a Hollywood culture that has grown increasingly uninteresting, (unless you're part of the mob who breathlessly awaits soap-opera news of who is fucking whom, and who went into rehab this morning). Now, there have always been entertainers who were ONLY entertaining when on a stage or in a film, etc. Get them on a show and they were as boring, inarticulate, and shallow as the most brainless bimbos of today. But there also seemed to be a greater number of true raconteurs and people that could "wing it" in a talk show environment. And the shows often booked these people - even if they didn't have a movie to shill for at the time, etc. Joe Flynn, Orson Beane and Jim Backus were, let's face it, not A List celebrities. But they were all great conversationalists and were regulars on shows like Merv Griffin in the 60's and 70's - and it worked. And there were A-List folks out there who were also great for some stories and interesting viewpoints - Judy Garland, Orson Welles, Woody Allen, and more - and they were allowed to talk. And that gets me back to Craig Ferguson and others (like Conan O'Brien). THEY are now expected to carry the show single-handedly. When a guest is on, the assumption seems to be that they have nothing interesting to say, (which is frequently true), and so the host simply continues the monologue, only now with a temporary celebrity sidekick/punching bag along for the ride. It bothers me a little, and in the long run just isn't my cup of tea.
Like I said, in some cases, this is absolutely necessary. God knows how some of these stoned drones found their way to their chair. But in other cases, it's a shame. Carl Reiner is a giant in American pop culture, and there's a whole bunch of questions I'd like answered and stories I'd like to hear from him on his life and career. But when he came on the Late Late Show, he sat there for a few short minutes, with Craig gagging away, and nothing was said. What a shame and what a pity. Apparently, Craig may have come to this conclusion himself. He's a smart guy and from little hints dropped, something of an autodidact. He may be looking for substance too. The show on Tuesday was done with no audience or comedic monologue, and was just him chatting with Stephen Fry. I loved it, even though Fry is of limited interest to me. It was nice that someone could get a story or an idea across without all the distractions and unnecessary hoopla. It was fun because you could see that Craig took it seriously. I think twice he almost fell prey to instinct and was about to go off on a little comedy tangent, but you could see in his eyes that he'd catch himself immediately and "turn it off" and continue with the conversation. The guys' s a pro and he wanted this to work.
I've no idea what this show meant in the long run, if anything. I'm not even going to try to pretend to understand ratings, network management, etc. But it worked for me, and if the show can ignore whoever is out there just because they've got a movie out that they need to flog, and concentrate on people who really are interesting, I think this would be great. And it doesn't have to be sombre. I like Craig's monologue and sense of humor, and his bouncing off of the audience. I'd miss them, but I think he's capable of adding onto that, and I think he demonstrated that the other night.
Our friend Carol got us watching the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson about five months ago. And it's been fun. I like Craig and I think he does very well with humor, particularly the off-the-cuff variety. He's good at pointing out that the show isn't very important, just a piece of temporary pop culture fluff - which is true. Any good comedian has a style and Ferguson's is kind of interesting to me because it harkens back to Johnny Carson. Johnny's monologues weren't as notable for their jokes as for his reactions to them. When a joke failed - that's when Carson shown, with a wry comment or two. He was great.
Ferguson does the same thing, but on a wider canvas, criticising his whole show. It works and it's funny. But, like Carson, he's not a one-play performer. He's very good at ad libbing, and his facial expressions and the sly "naughty boy" look he shoots the camera are all first-rate entertainment for a late night show. The only thing I can fault the show for is something it acknowledges - that it is existing in a Hollywood culture that has grown increasingly uninteresting, (unless you're part of the mob who breathlessly awaits soap-opera news of who is fucking whom, and who went into rehab this morning). Now, there have always been entertainers who were ONLY entertaining when on a stage or in a film, etc. Get them on a show and they were as boring, inarticulate, and shallow as the most brainless bimbos of today. But there also seemed to be a greater number of true raconteurs and people that could "wing it" in a talk show environment. And the shows often booked these people - even if they didn't have a movie to shill for at the time, etc. Joe Flynn, Orson Beane and Jim Backus were, let's face it, not A List celebrities. But they were all great conversationalists and were regulars on shows like Merv Griffin in the 60's and 70's - and it worked. And there were A-List folks out there who were also great for some stories and interesting viewpoints - Judy Garland, Orson Welles, Woody Allen, and more - and they were allowed to talk. And that gets me back to Craig Ferguson and others (like Conan O'Brien). THEY are now expected to carry the show single-handedly. When a guest is on, the assumption seems to be that they have nothing interesting to say, (which is frequently true), and so the host simply continues the monologue, only now with a temporary celebrity sidekick/punching bag along for the ride. It bothers me a little, and in the long run just isn't my cup of tea.
Like I said, in some cases, this is absolutely necessary. God knows how some of these stoned drones found their way to their chair. But in other cases, it's a shame. Carl Reiner is a giant in American pop culture, and there's a whole bunch of questions I'd like answered and stories I'd like to hear from him on his life and career. But when he came on the Late Late Show, he sat there for a few short minutes, with Craig gagging away, and nothing was said. What a shame and what a pity. Apparently, Craig may have come to this conclusion himself. He's a smart guy and from little hints dropped, something of an autodidact. He may be looking for substance too. The show on Tuesday was done with no audience or comedic monologue, and was just him chatting with Stephen Fry. I loved it, even though Fry is of limited interest to me. It was nice that someone could get a story or an idea across without all the distractions and unnecessary hoopla. It was fun because you could see that Craig took it seriously. I think twice he almost fell prey to instinct and was about to go off on a little comedy tangent, but you could see in his eyes that he'd catch himself immediately and "turn it off" and continue with the conversation. The guys' s a pro and he wanted this to work.
I've no idea what this show meant in the long run, if anything. I'm not even going to try to pretend to understand ratings, network management, etc. But it worked for me, and if the show can ignore whoever is out there just because they've got a movie out that they need to flog, and concentrate on people who really are interesting, I think this would be great. And it doesn't have to be sombre. I like Craig's monologue and sense of humor, and his bouncing off of the audience. I'd miss them, but I think he's capable of adding onto that, and I think he demonstrated that the other night.
posted by mendip at
8:58 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home