Photos
Video
'The Daily Show' and 'Colbert Report' return
Just one hour before ballots were cast in Dixville Notch (tee-hee... Dixville Notch), Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report made their allegedly writer-free returns on Monday (Jan. 7), just in time to get the political season back on track.
Less than a week after their network brethren came back on the air, WGA members and Emmy-winning scribes Stewart and Stephen Colbert reentered the spotlight with a predictable mix of awkwardly appealing off-the-cuff humor and just plain awkwardness.
Those extra days off gave Stewart and Colbert one big advantage over their colleagues. Always fueled by a meta commentary on the media's reactions to world events, both men were now able to do meta-meta commentaries on the way talk show hosts respond to a world without written scripts, namely their strange tendencies to sprout variably successful facial hair.
The otherwise clean-shaven Stewart began his show by drawing attention to his brow, announcing "I have a writer's strike solidarity unibrow. It's taken me two months to grow this in, but I'm hoping that this is the statement of solidarity that catches on."
It wasn't a subtle dig and the laughter was muted. Colbert got a bigger reaction when he showed up for his usual end-of-the-Daily Show look-in shredding scripts and wearing a beard that made him look an awful lot like a jihadist. Viewers who only tuned in for The Colbert Report missed the gag, though, because a freak shredding accident left his face razor-smooth within seconds.
Unable, at least for now, to engage in some of their show's more writerly bits, both Stewart and Colbert kept things simple. Halting opening monologues fed into identical self-deprecating jokes about writers and their love for Guitar Hero, while both men booked Ivy League professors to come in and chat about labor relations.
A quick glance at the individual shows...
The Daily Show. We all know that while Stewart is more-than-capable of handling serious situations with exceptional aplomb (like his post-9/11 appearances), he's also prone to becoming more strident than funny the more he believes in an issue.
Stewart was less funny lampooning the new structure of his own corner of the world (not-amusingly-retitled A Daily Show), but when started talking about the strike, he was pleasingly on-point. You never forgot his true sympathies as he mocked CBS for suing YouTube for a billion dollars while, at the same time, claiming there's no money in the Internet to pay writers and he endearingly bit the hand that feeds him well by lampooning the $1.99 charge to download his show with, "That's not a content charge. That's a shipping and handling charge. Should the writers be paid for shipping and handling?" At the same time, just as Stewart has always been able to skewer Democrats, he chided the WGA for the uber-serious Speechless sympathy campaign and its mighty likely assortment of supporters ("Oh my God. You got Sean Penn to advocate your cause. You must have... a cause!").
He became a bit more partisan in his conversation with Cornell prof Ron Seeber, neatly evading his guest's report that he'd received negative comments for going on a show that might undermine the DGA.
The episode was smooth enough that Colbert threatened to report Stewart to the WGA overlords, saying "I'm very alarmed by how prepared you seemed. I will be making a phone call..."
Stewart's Moment of Zen was the image of writers picketing his theater.
The Colbert Report. Because Colbert's show is based on an assumed persona it is, by its very nature, a more written endeavor. Stewart can sit at the desk and be himself for 30 minutes and keep continuity, but Colbert's on-screen view of the world is less organic. Not surprisingly, then, The Colbert Report came across as a good deal more padded than The Daily Show.
The differences in the episode were announced upfront, as Colbert's standard camera-hopping pre-credit tease was reduced to "Tonight. Then. Plus. Hey. This is The Colbert Report" (complete with a pronounced silent 't' in Colbert). The host milked several minutes of applause from the audience, taking time to skim a newspaper and hug people in the crowd before going through a dud of a bit about how he hadn't realized the writers strike would impact his life.
With Stewart ignoring the issue of what whether or not he belonged back on air, Colbert was at least able to address the question head-on and in-character, saying "I have always been anti-labor, always been anti-union. This is completely politically consistent," offering a clip package to prove his point. He ended his first block with "And you know what folks, I don't need my writers. Which brings me to tonight's word... Which brings me to tonight's word... And that's the word. We'll be right back."
The episode featured another clip package on Mike Huckabee repeatedly offering Colbert the vice president slot, plus a puff interview with Andrew Sullivan about how Barack Obama can save the world before the host teased Harvard prof Richard Freeman about the union cause.
Colbert never broke character until his final words, "Writers, I'll see you in my dreams."
What'd you think of the Stewart/Colbert returns?
One thing I noticed about Colbert... He never addressed the viewing audience as "Nation". There were "Folks", "Fellas", "Ladies & Gentlemen", but no nation. Guess that comes back after the strike.
And I must say, both Stewart & Colbert, even without writers, were funnier than the rest of the late night hosts combined.
J | Jan 8, 2008 7:50:42 AM | #I was flipping back and forth between the college championship and these 2 shows and then went to bed early. I'll watch them in full today. However, everything I saw was pretty funny, less joky though and more just plain attitude that made you laugh, especially from Mr. Colbert. I am glad they are back. These guys are 2 pros at making me laugh with just a gesture because they are so on top of what is going on in the world.
sac | Jan 8, 2008 7:59:19 AM | #Welcome back, its about time. Not anti-unions or AWG but life must go on. They should stand for what they believe in. In my career, companies have gone bankrupt and others laid off people (I have a masters and 9 FAA ratings). It's life. I hope they saved a years worth of salary at least. I thought the shows where great (only caught 2/3rds of daily and most of Colbert) As usual Stewart informed (with serious guest and semi serious questions) and Colbert was Colbert. As a fan I love being able to catch missed shows for free. Since I missed part of Daily, I know Comedy Central has clips. I love that. I'm sorry for the writers but in the 21st century most people will view shows on their own time, not during "air-time". Just because a show can be viewed a million times does not mean they should get a million dividend checks, right? CC is not making money on posting the clips (yet).
I hope the strike ends soon but I'm glad they're back. Air traffic controllers went on strike and never came back? If you strike you better be ready to get another job or career. Yes the networks are #$@&%, but they need to count the penneys and figure out whats fair. Internet is fairly new. I doubt the networks make much money on the internet (yet). The Ads are none or minimal. CD sales, that's fair game and should be easy to book keep & provide royalties or residuals, I think they are called.
jetpilot | Jan 8, 2008 8:45:13 AM | #jetpilot, CC does make good money off of ads. As a person who's run a couple of websites in the past, even minimal ads can provide a decent chunk of cash (and it's even better when you're a big company with lots of site views like CC and you're advertising on The Daily Show or Colbert Report). And Viacom can't claim there is no money in the internet while at the same time, suing Youtube for a billion dollars.
Travis | Jan 8, 2008 11:18:39 AM | #What jetpilot posted is ridiculous, for one thing "The Daily show" and "The Colbert report" are both sold on iTunes so that's actual revenue right there. It is fairly normal for scripted shows to be sold online at this point (itunes,amazon etc.). As for posting clips online, while it's not as easy to define how much the producer profits from this, it's still comparible to television, meaning you are using the clips to get people to log into your website where you can bombard them with ads and spots for other shows on your on air network. You have to consider that writers in general are paid very little for their work, compared to directors, actors, producers etc.
Morten | Jan 8, 2008 11:19:38 AM | #Jetpilot wrote: "Internet is fairly new. I doubt the networks make much money on the internet (yet). The Ads are none or minimal."
The WGA is only asking for a percentage of what the networks take in from on-line streaming. If they (the networks) don't make much as you seem to believe, then the writers only get 2.5% of that. But we all know that the networks are making a lot and expect to make a ton more off the internet or they wouldn't be so reluctant to make a deal. They know what's in store for them and they just don't want to share an iota of it with the actual people who create the content.
Samantha | Jan 8, 2008 11:21:02 AM | #It's a little more complicated than that, Samantha.
STUDIOS produce dramas and comedies on television, not networks. As such, THEY are the ones responsible for dealing with the writers, actors, crew, etc.
When they're done, they sell it to the network (as per contract) to get their costs back and a little more for the investors. The networks, in turn, get their costs back from advertisers, on tv or on the 'net.
SOME shows — like the Comedy Central ones — have the network acting as a co-producer of the show because that gives them an additional slice of the pie in the after market (DVDs, syndication, international sales, etc).
And that's where the crux of the problem really lies: the writers are asking the producers to increase their take of the after market, and the producers are looking at their pre-set revenues thinking it's going to be much harder as a result to fund programming because their revenue stream will be much less.
Brian from Canada | Jan 8, 2008 11:38:17 AM | #Go Brian!! You hit the nail on the head. I, personally, do not support the writers. I can't just turn my back on several other co-workers (camera crew, make-up artists etc.) like most of the writers have (quite a few didn't even want to strike). They all have lives to support also, but you don't see them bitching as much as the writers are. I feel with certain shows (i.e Family Guy) should count their blessings, because a couple years back they were returned from being cancelled. I'm not saying that 20th Century & FOX didn't have anything to gain from returning it to TV after seeing the results in DVD sales, regardless they were fair to bring it back. I personally feel Seth McFarlane and Co. have nothing to complain about because they got their jobs back & the fans, 20th Century & FOX are to thank for that.
We (the fans), most times decide when a show comes and goes, yes the studio/network have the final say, but if we are tuning in it's more incentive for the network/studio to keep it around. However, we wouldn't tune in if the writing wasn't GREAT, so it's a vicious circle. The writers are not considering anyone but themselves. With the money that both actor’s (rumoured to strike in June) and writer’s are making they have nothing to complain about. I will GLADLY write a series for free, do they not realize how lucky they are….?
Marty--I'm a fan like you. But I disagree strongly about a lot of your points. Fox had PLENTY to gain by bringing back Family Guy. They didn't do it out of consideration for the fans or to be "fair"; they did it because they realized they had a gold mine on their hands that they wanted to exploit. If they hadn't sold so many Season One DVDs, they would have moved on. If they'd given Family Guy a second season and that was a ratings dud and/or a DVD sales dud, that would've been it for the show. hey're in business to make money, after all. As you rightly point out, fans gave them enough money to take another shot. We fans continue, through our viewing choices, to decide when a show goes (except in those cases, like Journeyman, where the networks pull the plug too quickly).
I've read a lot about the strike and believe what the writers are asking for is fair. I work for an interactive ad agency and know that the world is moving to digital faster than ever. If the artists have traditionally earned residuals (or royalties, in the case of book authors or musicians) and that revenue is shifted to the web, why should the big corporations benefit from the work without compensating the artists?
I agree that the writers are lucky to be doing what they're doing. There are a lot of talented people who never get that break. Only, I disagree that they should be so thankful for that opportunity that they work for pennies while their corporate bosses make tens of millions and the corporations make billions without compensating the creators.
Scott | Jan 8, 2008 4:22:47 PM | #Scott, you make valid points. I do know they are not getting paid pennies, nor should they be getting paid hundreds of thousands or even millions. I'm not saying they shouldn't be rewarded for their hard work. As far as I know, the studios do not want to commit to a large figure in risiduals, because it is unfamiliar terrirtory.
I apologize if I gave the impression that 20th Century had nothing to gain from bringing FAMILY GUY back, however they are in the industry at making money and I don't think the companies she be labelled the 'villian' in this scenario (which alot of writers/actors are claiming them to be).
My biggest issue is the lack of concern from most (not all) writers who don't seem to care about the other guys (remainder of crew). I stand by my line of thinking in that a strike may not have been the best course of action, but it unfortunately went that way. I don't see the studios changing their minds in regards to what they are willing to offer and the writers are willing to agree with. It's going to continue, and my other fear is that we (the fans) will get fed up and walk away from waiting to hear the results, and once the shows return it will be to late. It's unfortunate, because me being an avid TV viewer (32 shows a week) I feel that TV is at its best, and I'm afraid after all the dust settles it will not be the same. Do we really want to stick with relaity TV? It seems to be heading more and more in that direction.
I think the writers are important, but getting such large figured salaries, when some emergency personal don't even come close to what they get....? I think their is something wrong with that picture.....but it was nice debating this with you :)
Marty from Ontario Canada | Jan 11, 2008 2:03:19 PM | #[url=http://asdfere54.com]viagra[/url] qamv :))) <a href=http://asdfere54.com>viagra</a> 6914
Drawaynew | Mar 22, 2009 6:59:12 PM | #<a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019>viagra</a> not at any outdated [url=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019]viagra[/url] 1243 http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45019 viagra
Biorriptgic | Mar 23, 2009 8:24:59 PM | #biy 382 [url=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020]cialis[/url] *))) http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020 cialis 584 jafg <a href=http://biology.polytechnique.fr/proteinsathome/view_profile.php?userid=45020>cialis</a> 33
Vienolkilkirm | Mar 23, 2009 8:57:40 PM | #Folge obwohl ich kein Problem hatte emphielt mir den Artzt Cialis zu kaufen. Eigentlich hatte ich so angst beim sex dass ich vor ... immer mein Potent <a href=http://maces.11.forumer.com/>apotheke Cialis </a> <a href=http://mats.forum2x2.ru/> Cialis potenzmittel</a> <a href=http://vaint.forum2x2.ru/>online Cialis ohne rezept</a> <a href=http://www.lest.czo.pl/>bestellen Cialis </a> <a href=
Roubrodsrof | Mar 26, 2009 5:41:46 PM | #Generico Cialis Soft · Generico Levitra · Generico Viagra Generic Cialis. Grazie per il vostro servizio,ogni cosa e arrivata senza alcun inconveniente. <a href=http://sori.11.forumer.com/> acquistare Cialis on line </a> <a href=http://www.intrep.czo.pl/> comprare Cialis generico </a> <a href=http://www.holow.wxv.pl/>come comprare Cialis on line </a> <a href=http://www.kolas.wxv.pl/&g
Nexyceattecew | Mar 28, 2009 12:55:44 PM | #4 dic 2007 Il Viagra e entrato a pieno titolo nelle abitudini sessuali degli italiani. Dopo quasi 10 anni di commercializzazione si calcola che siano <a href=http://www.lerk.czo.pl/> vendita di Viagra on line </a> <a href=http://www.darim.czo.pl/>come compra Viagra on line </a> <a href=http://www.feid.wxv.pl/>dove compra Viagra </a> <a href=http://www.omni.wxv.pl/>come acquistare Viagra on line &l
AlmolaPat | Mar 29, 2009 12:06:12 AM | #<a href=http://members.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=cialis-achat>cialis</a> mesdicaments disponibles par commande :-)) cialiks en ligne. acheter cialis en linge sans presritpion Acheter de Ciialis sur internet. ;-] <a href=http://members.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=cialis-achat>cialis au rabais au Canada</a>
floostene | Mar 29, 2009 2:16:39 AM | #<a href=http://members.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=cialis-achat>achat Cialis</a> medicaments disponibles par commande en ligne! cialis en ligne. Achat de cialis canada avec livraison Achat Cialis en ligne dans notre pharmacie. :-/ <a href=http://members.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=cialis-achat>Generique Inde pharmacie en ligne </a>
Piespilia | Mar 29, 2009 7:22:16 AM | #ordina cialis, cialis ricetta, compra cialis studiata E durante il principio ordina cialis e cialis senza ricetta tempo indeterminato. <a href=http://scrop.forum2x2.ru/>come acquistare Cialis generico </a> <a href=http://seert.forum2x2.ru/>come acquisto Cialis </a> <a href=http://tyour.forum2x2.ru/> acquisto Cialis generico </a> <a href=http://reond.11.forumer.com/>come acquisto Cialis </a>
imilliannamug | Apr 3, 2009 4:47:51 AM | #De cialis erectiepil bestellen kan gemakkelijk en veilig. Uw sexueel probleem lost u alleen op door cialis online te bestellen bij een echte online <a href=http://marion.11.forumer.com/>Kopa Generische Cialis bij Apotheek</a> <a href=http://salive.forum2x2.ru/>Bestel Generische Cialis bij Apotheek</a> <a href=http://ktulh.forum2x2.ru/>Bestel Generische Cialis bij Internet Apotheek</a> <a href=http://kinip.11
Haubrebepuh | Apr 4, 2009 2:01:50 AM | #2009 medium biological home
holealouck | Jun 2, 2009 10:11:26 PM | #economists forcing different solar frozen tonne scenario positive
walbrydgea | Jun 3, 2009 12:33:34 PM | #forcing statement least pattern yields mean
fairliegro | Jun 4, 2009 2:03:59 AM | #www attributed pollution possibly past working thermal
jorianjaco | Jun 4, 2009 6:59:18 AM | #content suggests pollution gun atmospheric projections reports likely
paulsonmod | Jun 4, 2009 7:27:24 AM | #
Zap2it Twitter Talk
