MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Proven Wrong Again…

I was quoted in a USA Today story today that went up in the afternoon. By 3:20, I was getting e-mails like this (6 so far).
“Dear Mr. Poland, quoted you today as follows:

Be Sociable, Share!

92 Responses to “Proven Wrong Again…”

  1. Angelus21 says:

    That’s hilarious.
    If you’re writing emails like that to people you are OBSESSED.
    Saying you don’t have a working tv and yet you write an email like this? Comedy.

  2. Sanchez says:

    This GB character is certainly not a straight man. As Chris Rock stated we don’t watch. Certainly not!

  3. DanYuma says:

    The Internet magnifies something that Evelyn Waugh wrote about decades ago in his (yes, his) estimable novel SCOOP, about British tabloid journalism

  4. DanYuma says:

    Scuse me, I just remembered the word I needed for the Waugh quote: “writers of letters to the editor are CHRONICALLY disaffected.”

  5. Rob says:

    Did that guy seriously call TV “the new opiate of the masses?” Is this 1958?

  6. PetalumaFilms says:

    I KNOW people who are just like GB…no cable and are pissed about it because now they can’t see Jon Stewart host the Oscars. People simply love Jon Stweart….including me. I think he’s a great choice, but he doesn’t have the “pizazz” to host. I hope he does great though. I also hope he plans on doing some new The Daily Shows in 2006…sometime. If Comedy Central was smart, they’d find a way to sell The Daily Show via the web….they’d cash in on the liberal “I hate TV” crowd.
    And for the record, people who “disconnect” from TV because they feel it’s overbloated and stupid and a waste of time IMMEDIATELY start taking all that “saved time” reading stuff on the internet…and obsessing about all of us with cable.

  7. MattM says:

    I think Martin probably would have been asked, and said “yes,” were it not for two factors:
    1. He’s a plausible nominee for adapted screenplay for “Shopgirl,” which, IMHO, had a better screenplay than the muddled “Syriana” and the generally bland “Walk The Line.”
    2. He’d look like he’s selling “Pink Panther,” which just looks awful.

  8. Wrecktum says:

    Jon Stewart will probably be a good host, but, in a weak Oscar season with no popular films up for Best Pic, he isn’t a big enough star to excite viewers. He’ll play well on the coasts, no doubt, but fly-over country will yawn.
    Look for this ceremony to accelerate the downward spiral of Oscar ratings.

  9. RP says:

    PetalumaFilms wrote: also hope he plans on doing some new The Daily Shows in 2006…sometime. >>>
    Not sure if you’re just not watching the show this week, but he’s been up in originals since at least Tuesday. FWIW, he talked about hosting the Oscars in tonight’s show.

  10. Scooba Steve says:

    Stewart as host:
    – Great for the liberal-minded films this year. Let’s hope he knows how to feed off their blue energy. My advice: Bash the hell out of Left Hollywood instead of pandering to it. Who can forget Chris Rock at the VMAs tearing into Spice Girls, NSYNC and Ricky Martin. “Here today… gone TODAY.”
    – The Daily Show machine is what makes Jon Stewart glow. The headlines pitch em and he knocks em out. Standing alone is a different story, where he’s about as funny as Bill Maher (which isn’t much).
    – Nice the academy is experimenting with young hip hosts. Chris Rock last year. Ellen Degeneres next year perhaps. It shows movement. Eventually they’ll find their next Crystal.
    – I’m with Poland on one thing: If Rock didn’t spike the Oscars in a lame year… Stewart certainly won’t in an even lamer one.

  11. Nicol D says:

    Stewart is a very obvious choice. He will give Hollywood what they want.
    More and more it does seem with the Oscars, Hollywood is acting just like a poltician who has realized that they cannot win a certain state so just ceases to go there during an election.
    They know the average ‘Red Stater’ won’t be seeing their ‘award winners’ so this year they’ll have Jon Stewart say ‘Efff ’em’ for 3 hours.
    As for Stewart being the ‘Mark Twain’ of his generation as he is called…
    Is this the same Mark Twain of such guile and wit that when faced with Tucker Carlson all he could muster up was a red faced “You’re a dick,”?
    Many of us have quit watching the Oscars because they traded art for politics. This decision seems to make the transformation complete.

  12. jeffmcm says:

    “Many of us have quit watching the Oscars because they traded art for politics.”
    When did that happen? Or rather, when was it about art?

  13. jeffmcm says:

    Oh, and is that the same erudite Tucker Carlson who said that Stewart was John Kerry’s ‘butt boy’?

  14. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    If by “traded art for politics” you mean the best studio campaigners winning instead of worthier effords then, er, sorry to break it to ya, but they’ve been doing that pretty much ever since their inception. How many times over history has the “popular” person won? etc.
    I think I would’ve prefered Ellen DeGeneres, I suppose they’re waiting to utilise her when so many of the nominees aren’t LGBT related. BBM, Capote, TransAmerica, Producers, etc. Plus, let her have another year as Emmy host to tighten the wheels and then she’ll be good to go.

  15. Nicol D says:

    Nobody calls Carlson the Mark Freakin’ Twain of his generation! And Stewart genuinly seems like he believes it.
    All I’m saying is the man is no good outside his turf and without a flank of writers.
    The Mark Twain of his generation should be able to come up with better than a whiny ‘You’re a dick’, response to someone calling him a ‘butt boy’.
    If I was Tucker, that night I would have went home feeling like I possessed the wit of Oscar Wilde. He proved the Emperor had no clothes.
    No matter, with the Oscars he will be on safe turf and no matter how poorly scripted or how bad the joke as long as it has the word ‘Bush’ and ‘stupid’ in it, his audience will eat it up.

  16. jeffmcm says:

    Nicol, your opinion of Stewart seems to be colored by a lot of preconceptions. To me, he has always seemed the epitome of a humble, self-effacing guy who doesn’t go for cheap “Bush stupid” jokes. (full disclosure: I have a friend who is one of those flanks of writers). The transcript (never saw the video) of the Carlson encounter certainly read as if Stewart got the better of the exchange.
    I thought that Carlson went home every night feeling like he possesed the wit, as well as the fashion sense, of Oscar Wilde.

  17. Joe Straat says:

    “Many of us have quit watching the Oscars because they traded art for politics. This decision seems to make the transformation complete.”
    Because awarding art is what they used to be about. Way back when, they awarded Citizen Kane a boatload of Oscars for its greatness…. Oh wait, they didn’t. There was booing whenever its name is announced, and the only reason they gave the Oscar to the screenwriter was because they liked him. Anyone who has more than a casual interest in film that doesn’t treat the Oscars like some kind of game has the wrong mindset. Granted, like the Super Bowl, it’s a BIG game a lot of people will pull out all stops to win and has players with fans that truly cheer for them, but still a game.

  18. brack says:

    Nicol D,
    Stewart said more than “you’re a dick” to Tucker Carlson on that sorry excuse of a political discussion show (now cancelled I might add). Did you even watch the interview? When Stewart wasn’t Mr. Funny for Carlson, Carlson was like “Be funny, you’re not being funny?” with that Stewart said “I’m not you’re little monkey.” But if that was the case, Tucker Carlson is the a dick, with that stupid bowtie he always wears. When’s it’s two against one (there were two hosts on Crossfire), it’s kind of easy to gain up on a guest. But search for the video on the internet, it’s everywhere, and it’s clear Stewart stood his ground.

  19. Terence D says:

    Because Stewart was an absolute jerk to a conservative on a talk show he became a Liberal star. Liberals have taken him as their comedian all for his being a jerk. Which if you saw the show, he was. If someone acted like that on his show he wouldn’t put up with it.
    “You’re a dick”. That’s “witty” these days?

  20. Bruce says:

    Carlson and Stewart probably got together and did it on purpose. Who knew who they were before this incident? They could have at least been a little funnier. Isn’t one of them a comedian?

  21. bicycle bob says:

    they obviously cant find anyone that wants to host this. we all know who jon stewart is but not many people know who he is around the country. hes not billy crystal or steve martin here. hes the host of a show on comedy central thats ratings are so far down they’re hard to see. not that the show isn’t good but cable is a tough outlet for ratings. why can’t they just have a rotation of crystal, martin, and some other funny comedian. maybe tom hanks.

  22. CleanSteve says:

    Oscar show ratings? Meh. Art?? Hasn’t been about art in…er….ever. When it has been about art it was simply by accident. Politics?? Again, there has always been a political lean to every Oscar show that I can remember. Those worried about Stewart making it a 7 hour Lefty shindig have been living under a rock.
    The whole thing is just entertainment to me. When it’s good, bad, stupid, wrong, garish, pompous…it’s all entertaining. All I want from a host is for them to bring the funny. Stewart is capable of that. And he can do it to both sides. I hope he does. I expect that he will. But unless he’s 100% either/or it won’t satisfy a lot of people.
    Those of us who dig it will watch it regardless, and as far as I’m concerned the only thing I expect from the show is to be entertaining. It can be very good at times but even when it’s bad it’s entertaining. Like SHOWGIRLS or something.
    And I’m sure we all have moments when there is a genuine sensation when somebody deserving wins. I know that if Hoffman wins I’ll be smiling. As much as awards don’t matter it’ll still be satisfying to see a fine deserving actor who isn’t your typical garish image concious moron. It’ll give hope the John C Reilly’s of the world. Plus they were both in BOOGIE NIGHTS.

  23. Josh says:

    If it was about art it wouldn’t be on national tv. Do you see any other movie award show on national tv? The Globes ain’t about art either.

  24. Krazy Eyes says:

    I think Stewart could be a great choice but there’s also the chance his “uncomfortable” comedy style might be a little to similar to Letterman’s and we know how that was received.
    Any word on whether he’ll bring the Daily Show stable of correspondents to help out with star interviews and man-on-the-street segments? Rob Cordry working the floor would be great fun but it would probably be seen as too big a shill for the D.S.

  25. montrealkid says:

    You’re all missing the biggest point – Oscar has a way of neuteuring even the funniest of potential hosts (Chris Rock was awkward and David Letterman was terrible). I’m sure the script editors will weaken whatever barbs Stewart has in store and though I’m sure he’ll write some of his own material for the monologue, the rest of it I’m sure will be handed to him by the Academy. What the Oscars don’t want is another Michael Moore-esque fiasco and I’ll be surprised if Stewart goes anywhere near mentioning the B-word.
    The Oscars have always done best with middle-of-the-road, harmless hosts (ie. Billy Crystal). The Academy’s attempt to get edgy hosts to cater to a younger audience fail because they never really give them the room to shine or make some daring moves.
    If they can cut the show to three hours or less, that will impress me far more.

  26. Nicol D says:

    I am quite knowlegeable about Jon Stewart and his style. Most people on the left who deify him now only started watching BECAUSE of his politics. His show became popular and media friendly when it became a liberal altar. When he first started it was not. Much more balanced. Now, it’s just a circle jerk.
    I remember Stewart when he was the intermidiate host between Joan Rivers show turning into Arsenio Hall’s show during the late 80’s. He always came off as a smug, arrogant jerk.
    I say that not because of his politics. Rob Reiner is a huge Democrat but does seem to be self effacing and humble.
    Stewart to me has always been the epitomy of arrogant.
    I have seen the CNN exchange. The point Tucker was making was that Stewart, and people like Maher are really just comedians who are so deified by thier fans that they think they are serious pundits. By goading Stewart into being ‘funny’, Carlson was making the point that Stewart is a comedian and to not think success in one genre gave him an instant cred to be taken seriously on CNN whether you like Crossfire or not.
    He played Stewart perfectly and got the pompous ass to explode in a fit of vulgarity.
    Carlson won that exchange hands down. Only people that think Stewart IS Mark Twain believe he got the best of the two.

  27. Krazy Eyes says:

    Although I would admit Stewart’s personal politics appear left-leaning, the Daily Show makes fun of both sides pretty regularly. The only difference is that the left laughs it off and the right seems to get all huffy about it.
    He’s usually very cordial to all the guests on his show, whether they’re conservative or liberal, and gives them the platform to make their points. He mostly seems to have a bug up his ass about the current administration and the war.

  28. Terence D says:

    For a supposed witty and funny guy, Stewart really went in the tank on Crossfire. That was the best he could do to a bow tie wearing guy like Carlson? “You’re a dick”?? And he’s hosting the Oscars. And they wonder why the ratings are in the toilet.

  29. Martin S says:

    How big is the Daily Show audience? 2 million. What were the Oscar numbers last year? 41 milion. Do we see the odds of Stewart bringing, at best, .2% new audience?
    But…Audience size doesn’t matter for the Oscars because the shrinkage is relative to the rest of the industry. And the celebrities are the real draw, not the host. What other mantra am I also supposed to believe?
    Stewart is another case of death-by-a-thousand-cuts. Gratifying to the people in attendance first, and a bow to same demographic that Rock was supposed to bring in, and didn’t.
    They would have been better off taking Jeff Foxworthy, (a guy I do not find funny at all) because of the cultural paradox, especially with BBM as a lead contender. His audience is not the DS audience, is not the Oscar audience. Carrell would have been a better choice, also.
    I really don’t see the point of the telecast, or the award for that matter, outside of appeasement.

  30. BluStealer says:

    I like when they have the harmless middle of the road hosts. All these edgy, hip guys seem to bomb out bad. Like Letterman. I watch for the red carpet anyway.

  31. Rufus Masters says:

    Who is making the Oscar hosts hires because it has been dreadful. Whos’ the pick next year? Graham Norton? Anyone with a show on Comedy Central?

  32. brack says:

    Crossfire is gone, while The Daily Show lives. Stewart won. And in that video, Stewart didn’t say “You’re a dick” with defiance or attitude, he was flabbergasted. He wasn’t trying to be witty.

  33. bicycle bob says:

    crossfire was on for about twenty years and was one of the first successful political debate shows. when the daily show is on that long they can say they “won”. not the real issue though. no one knows who jon stewart is. hes more famous for his scene in half baked than the daily show.

  34. Nicol D says:

    I remember someone suggesting a Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson tag team.
    I would have watched that show even if Michael Moore won every award.
    A Vaughn/Wilson pairing would have been truly original and would have crossed many demos.
    Like I said, with Stewart they are like a Republican politician who just writes off New York or a Democrat who writes off Texas.
    With Stewart…they aren’t even trying to get the votes.

  35. Terence D says:

    Let’s hope he’s not flabbergasted on Oscar night. A skilled comedian should always be witty. It’s the best way to deal with tough and obnoxious questions. Bill O’Reilly did a better job than Jon Stewart when he was on Letterman the other night of dealing with terrible questions. Maybe he should host the Oscars.

  36. CleanSteve says:

    I still don’t get why Billy Crystal doesn’t just make it his gig. Unless, of course they don’t want him. But if it’s just Crystal opting out…why?? As someone else said he’s a perfect bipartisan, vanilla host. He’s funny yet safe. There’s nothing wrong with that, nor is there anything wrong with being identified as “the Oscar host.” That doesn’t mean change isn’t good but with the lack of a real solid replacement it does make one long for the comfort food choice. Steve Martin was the perfect fill-in; dignified, restrained, warm, funny, and had a clear sense of how silly it all is.
    As much I like JS and expect to enjoy him, there will be a lot of awkward moments. And he’ll probably get neutered, as previously mentioned. Ben Stiller would have fit the bill. Love him or hate, him he does have an across-the-board appeal. And when’s he’s on, he’s great. “Cram it up your cram-hole, LaFleur!!” Maybe I’m the only one who loves that.

  37. Krazy Eyes says:

    I agree that a Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson tag-team would be fantastic. As long as Wilson stays away from screenplay writing the chance of a conflict-of-interest nimination doesn’t seem likely.
    Has the show ever been hosted by a successful actor/actress with the potential to earn a nomination? And please, no Billy Crystals…

  38. mysteryperfecta says:

    Nicol D- “All I’m saying is the man is no good outside his turf and without a flank of writers.”
    But, as you’ve argued, the Oscars have become a viable venue for his commentary, and I’m sure he’ll have some prepared material from his flank of writers.
    jeffmcm- “To me, he has always seemed the epitome of a humble, self-effacing guy who doesn’t go for cheap “Bush stupid” jokes.”
    Self-deprecating is his shtick. As for not going for the cheap “Bush stupid” jokes, I heartily disagree. There’s numerous examples of Bush gaff footage followed by a Stewart’s signature nonplussed look.

  39. Crow T Robot says:

    The more I think about it, Oscar night doesn’t need edgy comedy as much as it needs ‘agreeably funny.’ And you know who would have been the perfect host this year? And I hate to say it. But to get the ratings up they should get… gulp… Jay Leno. As toothless as the man normally is, he’s a polished standup who knows how to poke fun at this rotten little town.
    That’s right: Leno.
    Search your feelings you know it to be true.

  40. Nicol D says:

    Leno…yeah, you are so right. Leno would have been great great. I don’t see him as toothless though. He can be biting when he wants to.
    I think he is perceived as toothless because he knows how to be a gentlemen. Which is why more people watch him then any other late night comic.
    But then again, Leno doen’t fit in with Hollywood’s current MO.
    Y’know, people would like, actually watch if he hosted.

  41. bicycle bob says:

    leno has only the highest rated talk show in the world but yea no one wants to see him or anything. so lets get the guy with much less audience and much less name value. and they wonder why the ratings stink?

  42. Bruce says:

    Stewarts whole show is based on him bashing the war and Bush. Mostly with that nonplussed face. He’s become an icon to liberals over it. But it hasn’t helped his ratings much.

  43. Melquiades says:

    Stewart could well crash and burn at the Oscars, like Letterman before him. But I’ll be cheering for him.
    Anybody who says Carlson “won” that debate is delusional. Stewart pointed out what a ridiculous sham that show, and most present-day media coverage, is and neither host could come up with a response other than “Be funny!”
    As for making fun of the right more than the left… what would you expect him to do? Republicans control the presidency and both houses of Congress. And they’re doing a horrible job of it, in case you’ve just emerged from a 5-year hibernation.
    Remember when comedians got to laugh at the president for lying about sex rather than illegal wiretaps and a war that’s cost 2,000 American lives?

  44. Wrecktum says:

    Wow, I can’t believe that the freeper meme from that Carlson/Stewart showdown is that Stewart “lost” because he called Carlson a dick. That’s funny stuff. Is that all you guys can take from that incident?
    Stewart is not merely a comedian. No more than Maher or Dennis Miller. They’re all guys who’ve hosted politically minded shows who happen to be funny.
    If anyone thinks that the Oscars will be some sort of leftist wankfest now that Stewart’s the host, they are obviously delusional.

  45. Martin S says:

    Melquiades – nice attempt at baiting. This is a movie-related board.
    Stewart’s leftist slant isn’t about the war, it’s about Bush/Gore 2000. *Everything* from Hollywood-left is about that.

  46. PetalumaFilms says:

    That whole Jon Stewart/Tucker Carlson thing was much more than “you’re a dick.” Stewart took Carlson to task for being a part of the “media” and not being fair and not talking about real news. Carlson, like any good conservative TV host, takes his cues from the fax machine that’s linked to the white house press corps. Carlson also got on Stewarts case about the way he presents things and Stewart smartly reminded him, he’s on COMEDY CENTRAL and Carlson was on FOX NEWS.
    And the exchange (that resulted in Stewart calling him a dick) was more aong the lines of:
    Carlson: “You know, you seem much more funny on your show…”
    Stewart: “Really? You’re just as big a dick on your show.”
    THAT’S funny and he did it right off the cuff too. Granted, the whole exchange was suspiciously close to the release of Stewarts book, but still. Classic. I’m shocked at you, Nicol D…I usually side with you.
    Stewart may be arrogant and/or smug…but at least he’s taking the other side in an insightful way. I’d much rather watch Jon Stewart on the state of affairs than a FOX news person, George Clooney or Russel Crowe.

  47. tfresca says:

    This guy is a liar. He doesn’t have cable but has a highspeed net connection? Unless he’s stealing wifi the cable companies MAKE YOU have some sort of a cable plan to get other services. Bastards. Stewart is cool in my book but he was an awful guest on Crossfire. In fact he’s cool to the media in general, he doesn’t like talking about his own life or his own personal affairs but jokes others for theirs. He’ll be as bad as Letterman. They should get Jerry Seinfeld to do it every year. He’s perfect for whitebread America and has nothing else to do.

  48. sky_capitan says:

    I think Stewart makes fun of or bashes everyone of every political stripe. Can’t choose an Oscar host without it becoming a political debate?
    I thought I’d be reading a few stories somewhere about the Cinea encoded Chronicles Of Narnia DVD screener that has (from what I’ve read in ‘reviews’ on that one site)been ripped and is probably flooding markets around the world with bootleg dvd’s. I’m sure Disney didn’t expect that with Cinea. What’s this say about the future of Cinea? As I think I said last year about dvdscreeners… how do you stop piracy of DVD screeners? STOP SENDING THEM OUT!

  49. James Leer says:

    But shouldn’t we celebrate hosts that aren’t panderers like Jay Leno and Billy Crystal? This reminds me of the recurring talk here that “Such-and-such good actor can’t open a movie” and should have been replaced. Aren’t we discerning film fans? Do we really want to live in a world where Jay Leno hosts the Oscars and awards everything to Ron Howard films starring Tom Hanks? Not that I don’t like Ron & Tom (Jay, on the other hand…) but there are different flavors, and that’s part of loving film.

  50. James Leer says:

    As far as The Daily Show bashing the current administration…what else are they supposed to cover? I’ve seen the same complaints leveled at SNL lately (“oh, all they do is bash Bush!”) but that’s who’s in power now! Has everyone forgotten when the Clinton/Lewinsky affair was the grist for every satire on the planet?

  51. Hopscotch says:

    Yeah if your shows bashes something stupid Bush did you’re left wing liberal. But in the mid-90’s if you bashed something stupid Clinton did…you’re just doing your job.
    I’m curious how Stewart does. And this is what he said on the Daily Show last night:
    “Hosting the Oscars is like winning the Heisman for comedians. It doesn’t mean you’ll win the championship game, it doesn’t mean you’re destined for a great career afterwards. It’s a distinction that few people have and that no one can take from you.”

  52. Spacesheik says:

    Thank goodness no Billy Crystal and his silly “Oscar! Oscar!” them tunes antics and lame showbiz jokes.
    Thank goodness no Whoopie Goldberg and her lame political or ethnic jokes. And horrid outfits…Remember her “Shakespeare in Love” outfit?
    Thank goodness no Chris Rock and his “Magic Johnson Theatres” lame skit lampooning black moviegoers who loved “Aliens vs Predator”.
    Jon Stewart is the best choice. Smart, humorous, dignified, has done his share of movies, and is also a political pundit. A most inspiring and classy choice, our Johnny Carson.

  53. Melquiades says:

    I don’t know if the e-mailer is lying or not, but you can have a DSL connection through your phone line without having cable TV.
    However, if this guy is willing to get a TV to watch the Oscars because he loves Stewart so much, why wouldn’t he have kept his TV and watched him every night?

  54. Wrecktum says:

    …And Stewart has hosted awards ceremonies in the past, so it’s not like he’s a neophyte.
    (BTW, that was a Queen Elizabeth costume that honored both Shakespeare in Love and Elizabeth, and it was an amazing gown. A horrible spectacle, but an amazing gown.)

  55. LesterFreed says:

    There is just something that makes me doubt the emailer. Was emailing and writing David yet doesn’t have tv? So how does he even know who Stewart is and why does he care? Seems he can’t even watch this Daily Show? So why take time out of your busy day to write some website about it? Strange to me.

  56. Melquiades says:

    In the spirit of We Report, You Decide, here’s the transcript of that Stewart/Carlson showdown:

  57. LesterFreed says:

    They had Chris Rock host this and they couldn’t even get ratings. No one cares. Especially this year. You think anyone is tuning in to see Brokeback Mountain? Jon Stewart could be Johnny Carson and no one is going for it.

  58. Josh says:

    Who wouldn’t bash Clinton? The guy cheated on his cold wife with a fat, young intern on numerous occasions, in the oval office mind you, and sexually harrassed a bunch of other women. I kinda get the feeling she wasn’t the only one he took liberties with while in the oval office. For his sake I hope not. No one on SNL bashed his policies or his being southern. They bashed the fact that he is and was a degenerate dirtbag who took advantage of being in power.

  59. Rufus Masters says:

    As much as Jon Stewart doesn’t want to admit it, he’s now part of the media too. He has gone beyond comedian. When you fawn over political types and present a point of view you are in the media range. His softball interview with John Kerry really rankled me. He couldn’t think to ask him one important question? He practically gushed for ten minutes.

  60. Melquiades says:

    Thank God Bush showed up and “restored intergrity” to the White House…

  61. Melquiades says:

    That might have been pithier if I could spell.

  62. Rufus Masters says:

    How has Bush been anything less than credible? You may not like him for whatever reason but the man has restored the pride and integrity of the office that became a joke with the previous administration. Just because you dislike his policies doesn’t make him anything less than a good person. Your blind hatred is leading you down a bad path.

  63. bicycle bob says:

    we’re losing ratings and most of middle america. so heres what we do. we find a host who is hot in la and ny, not known throughout the country, hes liberally biased, and his claim to fame is being in half baked/big daddy. great call oscar producers!

  64. Melquiades says:

    Rufus… I don’t want this to devolve (further) into a political debate rather than an Oscars discussion, but if you can’t see that this administration is more rancid with corruption than any in decades, you’re just not paying attention.

  65. jeffmcm says:

    Rufus, that was hilarious. In the best spirit of Jon Stewart, I thank you.

  66. Hopscotch says:

    I only made that Bush/Clinton comparison to show that times have changed and people who are basically doing the same thing as their predecessors are now flag-burning liberals because they make fun of Bush.
    If you watch The Daily Show you know that their main target is the Media and their lack of standards and quality. There just as many jokes about Wolf Blitzer and Bill O’Reilly as there were about Bush this past year.
    And I’ve lived in a red state and blue state and Stewart is popular in both. If he’s so irrelevant how come John McCain’s been on his program about five times? How come Sen. Biden has been on there three times? How come his book was on the best seller’s list for a year? He’s very well known…
    and will do a heckuva job.

  67. jeffmcm says:

    Yes, Stewart is well-known and should do fine. It seems that many have chosen to attack him based on the predictable political stuff. I have never, ever heard him referred to as smug or arrogant before this blog thread and I think people are trying to invent points.
    Thank god they didn’t pick Jay Leno. He would have made me consider watching with the sound off.

  68. Hopscotch says:

    I’ve always wanted to see Conan take on the role. I think he’d be great.
    and Jeff Wells mentioned Kevin Spacey once, I think he’d knock it out of the park.

  69. joefitz84 says:

    Stewart, Crystal, Martin, Bozo the Clown. Does it really matter?

  70. David Poland says:

    A couple of things…
    Yes, the small audience on Comedy Central was kind of my slightly hyperbolic point. And I would guess that the Daily Show audience is 95% Oscar show watchers already.
    Next, I don’t think that one not-so-clever Tucker Carlson response should hang the guy. At least he didn’t spend two weeks last November thinking that Phantom of The Opera could win the Oscar.
    Three… Mr. Spacey can’t do anything that isn’t about Mr. Spacey for more than 20 minutes at a time.
    Four… Conan is too Letterman influenced. The thing about Stewart is that he should be able to read the room and have his writers write to the tempurature. He could, indeed, destroy himself with the opening monologue if he gets too strident… and he might. (See: Whoopi) But I don’t think he’ll do that. And unlike Letterman, I don’t think he’ll try to superimpose his style on the show.
    Five… regardless of his deification, he is still just a short comic with a sharp mind and a chip on his shoulder. But in this case, it works to his favor. I don’t think he’ll want to – as he has many times in his career – be “the next TV comic not to be asked back.”

  71. jeffmcm says:

    Now I’m curious. What are these many times in his career that you speak of?

  72. Hopscotch says:

    DP is probably right about Spacey, as well as most other actors. I’m sure Jim Carrey could kill the room for one bit. But he can’t shoulder an entire show.
    The nightmare scenario for me is if ABC when with its own Jimmy Kimmel. Yee gods that would suck.

  73. Martin S says:

    Melquiades – not to delve any further into a political debate – but generalized statements like…
    “if you can’t see that this administration is more rancid with corruption than any in decades, you’re just not paying attention”.
    …proves you know nothing about history. There is nothing this administration has done that’s new. The difference, is the level of communication has become instantaneous and multplied tenfold, allowing conspiratorial paranoia to a place next to actual debate. For every “evil Bush” point you can muster, I can hand you worse actions by FDR, Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Nixon and Reagan.

  74. Hopscotch says:

    Listen to Martin S, Melquiades.
    Every time you fart, he will shit.
    Every time you laugh, he will cackle.
    Every time you speak, he will yell.
    Martin S knows all…he can hand you the time a 12 year old Jimmy Carter pulled his sister’s pony tail and made her cry, or the time young Dick Nixon stole a piece of gum from his parent’s store.

  75. Martin S says:

    Hopscotch – “And I’ve lived in a red state and blue state and Stewart is popular in both. If he’s so irrelevant how come John McCain’s been on his program about five times? How come Sen. Biden has been on there three times? How come his book was on the best seller’s list for a year? He’s very well known…”
    The best number DS does is 2 million. That’s 1.5 million less than WWE or Spongebob. Is WWE popular with the same red/blue staters you know, because it’s more popular than Stewart in the same demographic. As for books, Mick Foley’s book was on NYT #1 bestseller list, and # 1 spot, for a very long time. Does that make him qualified to host the Oscars? What about O’Reilly? He tops DS by at least 1 Million viewers every night, and has multiple bestselling books. Should he host?
    As for guests – Stewart had Clinton on, the show did 1.9 Million. If the guy is so popular, how could he not do 2.5 – 3 Million viewers with such a guest? The answer is that DS has an niche audience. It’s not playing to the masses, but an insular group. If DS is that popular, CBS would have moved it to network years ago. They own Comedy Central. Nothing is stopping them. But they don’t, because they know it will only reach, another million viewers – and that doesn’t cut it. Hell, Arrested Development got the ax with a viewership of 6.5, and now Showtime is thinking of grabbing it because that would be a huge hit for them. Do we see the difference in standards now? Move The Oscars to cable, and Stewart makes sense.
    I think this discussion is a perfect compliment to the BBM threads. It’s another example of a niche audience thinking they are the masses. That isn’t meant as a crack at anyone’s personal life. Lives are subjective. I’m commenting on businesses that are supposed to be in the mass market game, targeting smaller and smaller groups. For example, DS isn’t just for 18-34 year olds, it’s 18-34 year olds who are liberal or left-leaning. Then the PR people go out and tout it as a pop culture hit, when by sociological standards, it’s actually a huge subculture hit. In the early/mid 90’s, DS or BBM would still be known as having a cult following. Hell, the X-Files had a cult following and that showed cracked 10 million, weekly.

  76. David Poland says:

    Be nice, guys.
    But I will tell you that another comment I made in the interview is that if they really wanted to boost ratings, they’d have The Desperate Housewives hosting. It might be horrible, but there would be a ratings jump, skimpy gown after skimpy gown.
    Now, THAT would be desperate.

  77. Martin S says:

    Nice response Hopscotch.
    Here’s one – FDR had the vast majority of letters between soldiers and their families open and read to find out who was saying what and if any were spies. The only difference between that and the NSA phone taps, is technology.
    But let me not interrupt the leftie fantasy. History is only Kennedy Assasination, Vietnam, Watergate, Iran-Contra, Clintonia, and Flordia 2000. Excuse me. I forgot.

  78. Hopscotch says:

    My last entry was a little mean Martin S., but that’s because I get a little sick of all of these sound boards going “Bush hasn’t done anything that — didn’t do.” who cares? People are judged by the times they live in. So my reponse just came out of that.
    Ratings and awareness are not the same thing. I certainly KNOW who Sean Hannity is, but I’ve never listened to his radio show or watched his yelling hour on Fox News. Michael Moore has also had a best selling book and a substanial following. I don’t think he should host.
    But…the Oscar producers are concerned about ratings and I think they went with Stewart because while he’s not well known, he certainly is likable. He’s not an alienating guy. Most people watch the show to see a) who wins, b) what are people wearing and finally c) is the host funny.

  79. jeffmcm says:

    I believe I read somewhere that Stewart was offered the opportunity to move to one of the networks and declined because of the added levels of corporate oversight he would have to deal with. I could be mistaken about that, though.
    Martin, is your argument that because Presidents of the past did crappy things, that Bush should get a pass?

  80. Crow T Robot says:

    Fuck you all for turning a good discussion about hosts into a Crossfire thing. Fuck. You. All.

  81. grandcosmo says:

    >>>>>”If anyone thinks that the Oscars will be some sort of leftist wankfest now that Stewart’s the host, they are obviously delusional”
    When has it been anything else? When was the last time a actor or actress took the podium to speak out in favor of a conservative issue? When was the last time an avowed conservative film won any award much less got nominated?
    Its been the likes of Michael Moore, Errol Morris, Vanessa Redgrave, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Sacheen Littlefeather, “Hearts and Minds”, “Reds”, etc. for decades.

  82. DanYuma says:

    Well, who ARE the conservative filmmakers in Hollywood? Whenever the LA Times or whoever goes out to find one, they inevitably turn up Lionel Chetwynd, and if you can remember three things he ever worked on, my hat’s off to you. John Milius tends not to get hit up for these articles because at heart he’s really an anarchist (if he was a real to-the-bone conservative, he wouldn’t have made that draft-dodging sequence in BIG WEDNESDAY), and after that, who is there? Patricia Heaton? Bo Derek? The worst thing you can be in Hollywood is to be a known conservative. Schwarzenegger only got the vote for governor because Hollywood expected he was going to reverse the town’s fortunes as far as outsourcing production to Vancouver, New Zealand and Eastern Europe, and he’s probably on such wobbly waters now because he hasn’t been able to come through. (And even he is a moderate Republican, how ironical that the Terminator should turn out to be pro-gun control.)

  83. Hopscotch says:

    Tom O’Neill was on Fox News reiterating those sentiments, and I’d just like to say…
    Oh shit, I’m sorry I have to go. I’m late for my Bush-Bashathon, afterwards I need to beg my parents for more money because I’m too lazy to get a job, followed by performing abortion on an underage teen, followed up by my daily bong hit and concluded with me hugging trees on my street.
    Oh the life we liberals lead.

  84. sky_capitan says:

    “I’m sure Jim Carrey could kill the room for one bit. But he can’t shoulder an entire show.” -Hopscotch
    Jim Carrey would be a fantastic choice. I think he’d shoulder an entire show easily… it’s not like he has to go nuts everytime he’s on camera. He can be amusing just introducing the next presenters. Why wouldn’t they ask a ‘star’ in his/her prime to host? Notice I said PRIME? (Who the hell is Billy Crystal and Whoopi Goldberg anway? I think I watched some story on them on the History channel). I’d actually watch if Carrey hosted, rather than getting internet updates on who won.
    Besides, I think Carrey would want to do it.

  85. jeffmcm says:

    “>>>>>”If anyone thinks that the Oscars will be some sort of leftist wankfest now that Stewart’s the host, they are obviously delusional”
    When has it been anything else?”
    THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? If you’re used to the Oscars being a liberal wankfest, then Stewart couldn’t possibly change things, now could he? And he’ll probably be funnier as host than Letterman or Goldberg.

  86. grandcosmo says:

    There isn’t any. I wrote off the whole thing years ago.

  87. Sanchez says:

    Carrey would be 1,000 times better than Stewart.

  88. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Is it too late to have a write-in vote for Best Actor In A Musical/Comedy at the Globes for Rufus. That was a Grade A performance up there.

  89. Nicol D says:

    Thanks for your comment. I suppose I go hard on Stewart because at least with a show like crossfire you know what you get. Two hard partisans hacking it out. I find it entertaining. Like the WWE Smackdown of politics.
    I know far too many young people who buy into the whole ‘media is corrupt’ line that Stewart trades in and then ONLY get their news from Stewart. They see his heavily slanted comedy as straight news and then come away thinking that the NYTimes is a hard right wing newspaper. They can’t discern comedy and entertainment from news.
    Stewart plays into this view and really sees himself as a fair news commentator. Carlson (who is pretty good with zingers himself) called him to the mat and I think Stewart lost.
    Even if we disagree on Stewart thanks for your comments though. Best.
    As for my other comments. I have never heard anything that makes Stewart seem humble.
    Last year he was asked to host the Magazine Publishers of America for 2005 and insulted them all. At first people thought he was joking. He wasn’t, he used the occasion to be a ‘prick’. He believes his own hype.
    Did you see him the night Bush won re-election. He almost cried. He really thought HE had made the difference.

  90. jeffmcm says:

    You must be watching some other Jon Stewart. The entire thrust of the Crossfire interview was that he also believes that it’s insane that people take his show seriously as news and that the actual news should have higher standards. He does not think of himself as a fair news commentator at all.

  91. martin says:

    best host, funniest and classiest, in the last decade has been Steve Martin. Don’t think Stewart will beat that.

  92. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    I still love that line Billy Crystal had in 2004 where he said (and I paraphrase) “Last time I hosted the awards it was a much different time. Bush was president, we were at war with Iraq and” i forget the rest. But it was funny cause… well, you get the idea.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon