CBS put a swift end to speculation and announced Thursday that Stephen Colbert will take over as host of the network’s “Late Show” sometime next year when longtime host David Letterman retires. It’s a five-year contract. It’s also a welcome and possibly daring choice in the late-night genre, which could use the inventive, concertina-wire wit and mastery of tone that Colbert possesses.
Nation, I can tell you’re mildly alarmed. Don’t be.
In announcing the deal, Colbert and CBS felt the need to make it clear that “Stephen Colbert,” the conservative firebrand cable-news pundit he has played to great effect on Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report” for nine years, is not coming along for the ride.
Instead, Colbert will host “Late Show” as himself. “I won’t be doing the new show in character, so we’ll all get to find out how much of him was me,” he said in a statement.
All along, there has been the perception that viewers struggle to understand that Colbert plays a character. This doesn’t have to be as confusing at it might seem. We should eagerly look forward to seeing Colbert ditch “Colbert.”
It’s not like we’re talking about Pee-wee Herman or the Easter Bunny here. It should be clear to anyone who has enjoyed “The Colbert Report” that there is a whole lot more to the man behind that show’s essential shtick. Colbert’s background is in theater and improv comedy. He’s a gifted singer and dancer. He’s a married father and devout Catholic. He keeps his personal politics and beliefs low-key, probably to enhance the character he plays on TV, or maybe because, like Letterman, he can easily coast above the fray.
Great choice, NBC. Colbert is talented, complex, and funny. I did not realize he was devout. Perhaps “devout” means different things to different people.
The problem with Colbert, to me, at least, is that he can go so deadpan that you really can’t get grounded in his point of view. Example: When Colbert testified before congress a few years ago, some of his attempt at humor fell flat. The members of the committee just sat there almost drooling on themselves. They didn’t grasp what he was telling them.
Colbert has a year to practice stepping out of character. He should leave his current character back at Comedy Central. He should rely on his talent to replace Letterman. I hope Bill O’Reilly is squirming and twisting with rage since he just attempted to excoriate Stephen Colbert. His rant was simply dismissive. He mocked Colbert’s “only a million viewers” for example Now we will get to see who the real giant is.
What do you think? Are you crying over Colbert Nation coming to an obvious close or cheering the thought of seeing Colbert in an even larger, more influential role, reaching a far greater audience? Some colleges have a course on Stephen Colbert. Says one author, Penn State Prof. Sophia A. McClennen regarding her new book, “Colbert’s America: Satire and Democracy:” (foxnews.com)
SM: What Colbert is doing for our democracy is unparalleled. He reaches out to young people, he encourages critical thinking, and he’s teaching young people that you can be critical of your government, and vote, and care and be cool. And that’s fun! It’s really refreshing. Colbert’s is a different kind of political activism and it’s like nothing we’ve ever seen. He’s mobilized his audience to do things. That’s really powerful. We’ve never really seen a comedian have that kind of impact. Sometimes he mobilizes them to do really stupid things like changing Wikipedia entries on the extinction of elephants (laughs.) But a big example is getting people to contribute to his Super PAC and having fans start their own Super PACs…. Colbert is very responsible for driving the public awareness of how Super PACs work. If you think about the role of campaign finance in our democracy and that many politicians and journalists have tried for years to get the public aware of how this works, its Colbert’s process — the fact that he did it publicly — that basically gave us a lesson in civics.
I’m sad about this. The Colbert Report is hit-or-miss, sometimes very funny and sometimes very corny. But if you watch it you do get some exposure to real issues and trains of thought.
There’ll be one less show with meaningful/intellectual content on TV. I hope Comedy Central opts for a replacement in the same style, not a Daniel Tosh-type of thing.
I like Jon Stewart better. Not the person but the humor. but you are right. One less thinking person’s show.
As to Colbert’s future, I assume his show will be much like Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon’s, capable of occasionally making people chuckle but on the whole a big bowl of nothing.
Colbert’s hidden talent is that he a good performer. If he hadn’t gotten the Daily Show job years ago, I imagine he would have been a significant comedic actor in TV or films.
Kimmel and Fallon have that same talent though. All 3 will be doing more or less the same thing I assume – interviewing celebrities and pretending to be hip and happening.
This should be interesting.
Btw, Moon…the comments for the open thread have closed.
Thanks, Cargo. Time to change the guard, I guess. I count on you to send me the high alert.
“But if you watch it you do get some exposure to real issues and trains of thought.”
Issues are the last thing I want when I tune in to late-night TV. We’re bombard with issues all day. I want entertainment.
Whoever stays awake that late at night?
OK, when I was younger. Really liked Jack Paar; especially his expression:
“I kid you not.”
Just remembered, Dave Garroway came before Paar (I think).
His closing word was “Peace”.
It works for me Emma. I only pay attention to many of the world’s issues between 11 and 12 each night. I couldn’t bear to if the issues were presented dryly.
It also helps that Stewart’s staff in particular sometimes do an amazing job of putting stories into context. They are a legitimate news source, I believe. Their best work is better than anything that CNN, FOX News, NPR, or PBS even aspire to.
The guests are particularly well-chosen. Real issues get discussed and put into context, not examined in depth. The shows are breezy yet informative.
O’Reilly and Rush are mad about Colbert being chosen. They’re afraid he will make fun of them. I say good choice.
Glad I don’t watch these shows–no angst.
George, you would be laughing harder than anyone else.
I hope he keeps his “word of the day”, I love that segment, VERY smart and witty.
Meh.
What does meh mean?
I’m with George. Total lack of interest in those yackety-yack shows no matter whom they have.
Are you speaking of the comedy shows that are on late night or the late night talk shows like Leno or Letterman?
The usual late night talk shows. Never had cable TV.
No wonder you hate TV.
I almost agree with you about Leno and Letterman. I rarely watch them. Not saying it isn’t good for its genre, I just usually have other things to do at that hour. (sometimes Colbert and Stewart)
HOw do you watch the history channel, Nat Geo, etc?
Besides books, surfing and researching on the web seems to bring whatever we need or want for entertainment or education these days. We also like the surprises. Not long ago, I ran across a video of a rehearsal (in Prague, I think) of The Barcarolle from Jacque Offenbach’s “The Tales of Hoffman.” A duet sung by two of the emergant divas of the 21st Century: Russian-born operatic soprano Anna Netrebko of the Met and Elina Garanca, Latvian-born operatic lyric mezzo-soprano. Two beautiful women and two beautiful voices in a blend that was fascinating and even entrancing. Much better than watching late night TV talk shows. In 2007, Netrebko sang “O Mio Bambino Caro” at the JFK Center honors for Martin Scorsese. At the end of the aria, Scorsese looked like he was about to break into tears. Powerful voices. Great talent.
“No wonder you hate TV.” Heard that – lots of great art on HBO and AMC (“Mad Men” is back tonight!), but nothing especially good on network television as far as I can tell.
There’s some value in someone curating the information of the world, and calling attention to particular threads or trains of thought, if only for a 7-minute segment to bring it to your attention, Daily Show and Colbert do a great job of this I think. There is some liberal bias there but they are more issue-oriented than partisan.
I would agree with Rick’s assessment of Daily Show and Colbert Nation. No one is immune.
I get in such a foul mood every time I watch Mad Men. It takes me back to not such a good time.
Network shows that I enjoy: Nashville –the music is great. Lots of smut though. Believe –enjoyable Resurrection –the same
I have to confess to liking the cable shows though. CW if you are in to young people stuff. Star crossed is excellent. PBS – Mr. Selfridge
I think some people like to use the New York Times or Wall Street Journal for this type of curation. I prefer to flip the TV on.
I haven’t cared about “late night” TV since Carson left.
I kind of liked Leno…but not enough to follow the show.
Letterman? Didn’t care.
Colbert? Really? Okay. Still don’t care.
None of them can replace Carson.
Actually, since you mention Carson, Stewart seems heavily indebted to Carson. Emulates those prolonged deadpan reactions and other things.