Friday, January 22, 2010

No Problemo, Coco

This week I saw the hilariously amazing Pee Wee Herman Show in Los Angeles for my mom's birthday, and tonight one of my favorite comedians gets wrongfully bumped from his amazingly hilarious Tonight Show by a loser hack who has never, ever been as funny as David Letterman. Way to stuff your public image down the shitter, Jay. We always knew you sucked.


Shawn said...

That's pretty unfair isn't it. I mean you make it sound really simple, when I don't think it is. I think it was a matter of typical entertainment politics happening on a national stage, and so now everyone gets to cry and moan about it and feel like the defenders of a cause. There's no cause here. Leno is a marionette, an unfunny marionette, but he's not doing anything wrong. It's not his plan. He's not making the decisions.

Conan's people received a shitload of money and were released from their contracts. I wish people had cared when Amy Pascal pulled the plug on Soderbergh's Moneyball three days before shooting. I wish the Internet had cried when Romanek was pushed out of The Wolfman.

I'm not going to get more upset about this one because I can see it happening, because O'Brien is being loud about it. It's his right to be loud and it's endearing to me that so many people are upset for him, but I think it's pure crankiness to give Leno shit for what's happening.

And plus it was just your mom's birthday! Please sing to her, as if from my lips.

joe said...

I don't think I'm defending a cause, and I am somewhat cranky over the whole fiasco, but two important things:

1. Obviously Conan's public letter and the 40 million $ buy out makes it clear: don't feel sorry for him. And I don't. I feel sorry for comedy enjoyers.

2. It may not be Leno's plan exactly, but he's never said "no," which he is in the position to do. That's what pisses me off. He could have pulled the plug on this thing, but he goes with it and makes NBC out to be the sole, tactless culprit. In my eyes, compliance with the change = culpability. And that's exactly what Conan wouldn't have. He said explicitly in his letter that he wouldn't be a part of the change because, among other reasons, that it wouldn't be fair to Fallon. Leno could have done the same, and didn't.

Shawn said...

Yes but whose perspective should be altered by those important considerations? They're both based on personal feelings which rationalize the continued maligning of Leno. They're both admissible only if this bizarre, distorted view of loyalty and ownership continues to be perpetuated.

It's obviously devastating for O'Brien, for understandable reasons, but this whole debate of culpability (culpability? are you sure you're not attempting to defend a cause?) overlooks the intrinsic mechanics of the entertainment business, upon which O'Brien and Leno both exercise limited control. It's a debate of personalities. As a viewer I prefer to really not watch Leno ever, if possible, but I'm certainly not going to drag him through the mud because of this.