Sometimes We Make it Too Easy
I'm one of those people. You know, the guy who's not content to just say, "I like this TV show," or "I don't like that TV show." I have to have a reason that transcends normal taste. I follow the business of media as much as I follow media. I'm riveted by Dan Patrick's departure from ESPN to "do something a little different," only to watch him do...The Dan Patrick Show (granted, he thought long and hard about doing the Price is Right) with his incessant need to lightly bag on what he dubs "The Mothership."
So with the Conan/Jay debate, I'm pretty interested in the business end of things. My take on Jay has always been that I dig his monologues but his interviews suck. Simple solution: watch Jay's monologue and then see who's on Letterman. I never could make heads or tails of why NBC did what it did to Conan this year. I get that Jay's a narcissist who agreed to leave and then didn't want to, and I get that the impression around town is that nobody really likes him in the biz. I think Conan's pretty funny, but think the relentless bagging he's done to NBC is, while funny, a little silly.
But that's neither here nor there, though if it sparks some comments, give me a why you like one or the other that's a little more than, "Jay's just not that funny."
What I really wanted to point out was the ludicrousness of a clause in Conan's exit contract with NBC forbidding him from disparaging the network as part of his $45 million settlement. So Conan of course brings up that there's nothing in the contract to forbid him from singing disparaging commentary, which he's done and will do.
Here's the funny part and here's what my title means. The Journal, in covering this particular angle to the divorce, brings in a lawyer from super-firm Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld to give the following expert commentary regarding Conan's singing:
"I would think that it would still be disparaging."
Thanks. Glad you were able to help us with that.
Sometimes I'm proud to be entering the profession.
Posts
5 comments:
He had Pee Wee Herman on last night to do the disparaging. I was actually laughing quite a bit.
Oh, and this is a nice read on that fiasco.
"I was actually laughing quite a bit"? What does that mean? Are you surprised? You shouldn't be. To answer your question Chris, I pick Conan because not only is he funny, he has an accessibility, a self-deprecating humor that makes a lot of people think he's canadian (I don't need to tell you what a HUGE comedic complient that is). He continually brings on Norm McDonald - always hilarious (another funny-man nixed by NBC - a real Canadian) for no other reason I can see other than he really thinks he's funny and likes the guy. He is what made Simpsons funny, before it was just trying to be how funny it used to be and he just seems like he'd be your friend. I've watched pretty much every night since it aired in June and I just can't believe this is happening. Are you watching the last show? He's almost making me cry.
Yes I was surprised that I still found Pee Wee Herman funny.
Oh right. yes pee wee was funny. And also looked like he hadn't aged at all - it was kind of creepy.
I am just mesmerized from the business end of this whole debacle. An exec makes a very expensive programming decision 7 years out. Then acts surprised when said decision doesn't pan out. Then trashes the act THAT HE signed. Then pays $45 million to make the decision go away. Then claims that either Act 1 or Act 2 was the real problem. In today's economy, how does that guy still have a job? I have to think there are some unemployed execs somewhere that NBC could pick up to do a better job than that.
FWIW, I always liked Jay, and never thought Conan had broad enough appeal. But what do I know. In CA, they don't come on until 11:30, and there is no way I am staying up that late. One of the best things about Utah, is being able to watch the monologues before 11.
Post a Comment