MovieChat Forums > The Late Show with Stephen Colbert (2015) Discussion > Letterman's show was so much more refine...

Letterman's show was so much more refined than Colbert's


The announcer, the music, Dave and his monologue and the whole production was so smooth and easy to watch. Colbert's is a frenetic mess with the goofiness and the skits, it's like they don't know what to do but they feel they must at least catch up with Fallon.

I would say Colbert's team should just do better but man, the show has dug such a deep hole. Colbert had his chance and it sure looks like he blew it.

Kind of miss the old Dave fellow.

Shall we play a game?

reply

I loved Letterman but even the early days were rough around the edges. Here is a link to a Late Night after 3 years on the air. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fC1Y3LuhcY The first bit about the desk was "goofy"; at the 8:30 mark, the discussion about Phil Collins is awkward; and the whole set/audience gives that feel it is being filmed in someone's basement. I love Colbert on the old show and the new one. I hope he is given time to find his stride. He really needs better guests on a more consistent basis and musical acts that don't make me cringe. Although I fast forward to the comedy bits usually, I hope it all works out. And for what it's worth, I think my favorite show in this genre is Graham Norton.

reply

I love Graham Norton...but Colbert with multiple guests would be a real cluster-you-know-what! He can barely share the spotlight with one person, let alone 4.

I just don't think this particular gig is for him. :(

reply

I agree and sorry if my Norton reference implied Colbert should change his format. Not at all. I just think we all need to give him plenty of time to work things out because he is overall talented and funny.

reply

Dave had 30 years to perfect his show. Stephen's had a year to find his own voice after being a character for a decade.

reply