TV critic doesn't "get" Jon Stewart
Hey, I'll be the first to admit that I'm not quite sure that I like seeing Jon Stewart as host of The Oscars, but that has nothing to do with whether or not he's "right" for the job. I just don't want to see Stewart be perceived as a bad host because I like the guy so much (like Letterman - Letterman was a fine Oscar host but history is twisted and says otherwise).
But Richard Huff over at the NYDN says that not only does he not understand why Stewart was picked to host the awards show, he doesn't "get" Stewart at all. He's tried to watch The Daily Show and doesn't find Stewart funny, and doesn't understand why he's gotten all the accolades from critics.
We all have our opinions, but...how can you not "get" Stewart? Huff makes it seem like all that Stewart has ever done is The Daily Show, the political/current events humor for the past several years, when he's actually been a fairly famous standup comic for the past 10-12 years. Is he including all that in his "I find Stewart unfunny" talk?
He also doesn't understand why The Daily Show gets praise when, according to Nielsen, it doesn't get good ratings. Um, yeah, I wonder why Comedy Central can't compete with ABC, NBC, and CBS? Besides, since when does quality/critical acclaim equal great Nielsen ratings? He also says that means "there are a lot of people not getting Stewart's comedy." Well, doesn't someone have to actually watch something to get it? (Oh, a side note: I don't believe that many viewers get all their news from TDS; for one thing, you have to actually watch the news and know what's going on to get the jokes, right?).
I don't buy that Stewart's appeal is "limited at best." He has hosted the Grammys, Tom Snyder's old show on CBS, filled in for Larry King, has done his own talk shows on MTV and in syndication, has appeared in movies, been in every magazine the past five years, and is now going to host the Academy Awards. I don't know if that could be considered "limited" in any way.