CBS Cancels 'CSI: Miami,' 'Rob' & 'NYC 22,' Renews 'CSI:NY'
Is Chevy Chase Quitting 'Community'?
James Wolcott says Letterman should retire
At first I thought this was a joke, because James Wolcott seems to be using what people are saying about this year's election (the Clinton/Obama fight, whether or not Clinton should step down, the fight hurting the Democratic party, etc) to take some satirical jabs at the late night talk show scene. But then I remembered this piece that Wolcott wrote in 2004 that infuriated me and realized that while he's obviously having fun, he's also serious.
The bottom line? David Letterman should retire as host of The Late Show with David Letterman since Jay Leno is the clear late night victor.
Let's take Wolcott's points one by one (read the two Wolcott columns above before going to the next page.)
Did you read them? Well, go back then!
OK, here we go.
Let's face it, history has made its decision. The audience has spoken. It is futile for Letterman to persist in his folly. He hasn't been able to overtake Leno and at this point never will.
I really doubt that at this point, Letterman is even trying to "beat" Leno in the ratings.
Consider Letterman's demo, his core constituencies:
Aging baby boomers, Brooklyn Dodger fans, part-time watercolorists, inmates of upstate facilities granted television privileges, unrisen souls staring at the world through still, glazed eyes, and the hard of hearing.
Now ponder the lumpy composition of Leno's audience.
Sappy young people vibrant with booze and Obama excitement high-fiving the host after he hits the stage; a sprinkling of comedy pros who appreciate fine joke construction; suburban swingers and motorcycle enthusiasts who've come to fondly accept their midriff bulges; hi-fi enthusiasts.
Hey, I'd rather hang out with Letterman's group, even the "part-time watercolorists." And Wolcott forgot the other core members of Leno's audience: people who don't ask for much from their talk shows hosts and don't have a sense of humor. Hi-Fi enthusiasts? Yes, and I'm sure they're talking on their rotary phones and putting on some Brylcream.
First of all, Leno has a work ethic so phenomenal it's almost perverse. He almost never takes hiatus weeks, hates doing them when he does (he's probably do fifty two weeks a year of new shows if it weren't for the burnout it do to his writers and production staff), and when he's not doing the Tonight show he's doing standup in Vegas and other laugh palaces. In fact, the show last night was a new show; he didn't take Labor Day off.
Well, Leno obviously has other things he should be doing. Maybe he'll be doing them next year.
The Tonight Show is a superior broadcast to The Late Show. It's better-written, more imaginatively produced, faster paced, more energetic in every aspect. Leno packs a wealth of topical material into each monologue while Letterman lets drop three or four jokes dragged out with a battery of annoying mannerisms. Where Leno's delivery is clean, quick, and efficient, Letterman is forever buttoning and unbuttoning his jacket, taking that underhand golf stroke after the punchline or making a "pow" fist. At the desk he's even worse, fussing like an old man with his glasses and fidgeting with those damned blue cards before twirling them into the miniature Manhattan backdrop to the recorded sound of shattering glass.
That sound you hear is Wolcott's brain stem snapping. Can anyone possibly believe this?
And you Conan O'Brien fans take note: he gets in a swipe at him too, calling him "irrefutably unfunny."
So what does everyone here think? Does Letterman have to step aside since Leno is obviously the ratings winner?
29 Comments