MovieChat Forums > The Late Show with Stephen Colbert (2015) Discussion > Bye Bye 'Real' Stephen

Bye Bye 'Real' Stephen

posted 9 years ago by dvd123
41 replies | jump to latest

I've seen this in the restaurant industry countless times. A new place opens, doesn't do as well as it could, brings in consultants to try to 'fix' it, and the consultants end up killing the place even faster.

However long this show had left before Licht, now that he's on board, those days are exponentially fewer. Contract or not, CBS will find a way out of this. They may try and save some face by orchestrating as graceful of an exit as possible, and that might push Stephen's fate off a few months, but, no matter which way you look at it, the writing is on the wall.

When Stephen was talking about creative fulfillment, I'm not sure unemployment was part of that vision, but he had better start getting used to the idea.

[–] haynese_98 9 years ago

I think Colbert went into this thing way, way too confident. The stained glass ceiling was the key foreshadow of things to come. Every night he comes out the band blares and the crowd is instructed to go wild like he's the 2nd coming of JC(Johnny Carson and/or Jesus Christ.

Colbert just doesn't look right behind Dave's old desk. Would Jon Stewart fare any better? Uh, yes. Definitely.

Shall we play a game?

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

Colbert is good at political satire and snarky interviews with politicians and religious bigots etc. The Colbert Report character worked for him. But he is not good at interviewing other types of guests and celebrities and being charming. Jon Stewart is way better at it. He should have been the choice for this show.

[–] glasshull 9 years ago

On his old show he had one guest. They'd talk a long time and what we saw was the best parts in an edit. With 3 guests they don't have that luxury.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

No. He interrupted in that show too but it worked due to the character he was playing. We tolerated it.

This program is much longer than that. Old show was only effectively 15-20 minutes.

It's not about time. Even when he had a guest for 2 segments, it wasn't any different.

[–] jcrew617 9 years ago

Yeah, Colbert makes the celebs really uncomfortable. They're not really sure what to expect, especially the younger actors who aren't political or intellectual.

[–] BilboTheDefiler 9 years ago

I think Colbert went into this thing way, way too confident.

YES. some might even call it arrogant.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

The arrogance he has showed in the way he interviewed and treated his guests. I also think the budget might have gone to the roof on his frivolous and extravagant spending on set and props (they showed unused props in one episode) without anything to show for it.

[–] haynese_98 9 years ago

Yeah, it looks like Colbert took Dave's old job for granted..shouldn't have done that.

Shall we play a game?

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Yes, Colbert is just exhausted from all the accounting, prop buying and scenery building. You'd think they'd have other people do take care of these things.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

I was referring to financial cost of it not that he was doing all the admin tasks. They had a producer come on the show and showed all the props he ordered and the cost of them. Even Colbert admitted those were ridiculously and expensive and were never used. Knowing you are a blind fanboy, I expected you to have watched that segment.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Name-calling really underscores your level of relevance. Classy.
--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

Boohoo..I'm sorry I hurt your feeling :-(.
Anyway, of course you can't answer and defend. Because I stated the facts of what is happening to the show and it's official and in the news. Only you can deny and defend reality. Your non-answer says it all.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

You view exchanges on this forum as some sort of competition, do you? I've merely acknowledged the flow of presumptive condescension in some corners of this forum. It's quite enlightening.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

NO. You always post the opposite of the common views and facts to want too look different and more intellectual. You do that everywhere. It's not working.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

NO. You are projecting. You are the one who is condescending and it makes others competitive when they actually post well known views and facts from news and you disagree for the sake of disagreeing. You always post the opposite of the common views and facts to want too look different and more intellectual. You do that everywhere. It's not working.

[–] glasshull 9 years ago

I noticed that.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

I've merely acknowledged the flow of presumptive condescension in some corners of this forum.

LOL. Pot calling the kettle black much?

Remember, we attack Stephen- totally legal, completely socially acceptable. I might even go as far as to say that criticizing celebrities/those in power isn't just socially acceptable, it's downright patriotic, because speaking truth to power is one of the principles that this country was founded on.

So we attack Stephen, and you attack/mock us. Technically, what you're doing is legal, but only because cyberharrassment laws are still in their infancy. But what you're doing is absolutely not socially acceptable.

If you don't want to be called names, it's incredibly simple, fix your moral compass and stay on topic. Stop making this personal, because it isn't.

[–] Zak_007 9 years ago

Ha..ha.. Yes. The resident personification of condescension calling me that :-). I LMAO :-). I can quote his condescending postings all day. He posts something opposite just to appear (pseudo) intellectual.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

The empire strikes back. The force is strong. Cool. I neither require nor seek your approval. Now, who wants pie?

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] glasshull 9 years ago

This is New Steven. Bye-bye old Steven. This Steven grins and dances, sings little ditties.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

Old Stephen left the building a year and four months ago. It's the dancing, grinning, ditty singing, present-day Stephen that is not long for this world. Well, at least not long for public consumption. New showrunner or not, he's not staying on the air long- not with the ratings he's getting.

[–] ipsofatso 9 years ago

BS dvd123. CBS will probably be quite happy, like they were with Letterman, to have him hold down the #2 ratings spot, which is what he has been doing. If you don't like him please don't watch him but don't spout off like you know what's going on in Les Moonves's head and stop with your one-person campaign to get his show cancelled.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

I've said it before, I don't want to see Stephen go off the air. I'd rather have spineless wishy washy Stephen than no Stephen at all.

Did you read my other post regarding the "#2 spot?" As I said in the other thread, Stephen is currently losing to Kimmel (That's #3 for those keeping score ;) ). I'm sure he's #2 season to date, and possibly year to date as well, but he's not #2 this month- and in TV land, what you're doing now is what matters, not how you did 9 months ago.

And every single prediction that I've made so far has come true. I said that if Stephen kept getting .3 ratings in the demo, Moonves was going to get involved. Stephen did, and Les showed up right on cue. And Stephen is STILL getting .3s- two .3s last week. The business of TV isn't rocket science. Nobody needs a crystal ball to get into Moonves's head. If you get crap ratings, the network may try to fix you, but they'll only try to fix you for so long. Moonves will not put up with .3s indefinitely. Every percentage point Stephen drops represents millions of dollars lost. This is not a charity.

Stephen is failing all on his own. He doesn't need my help.

[–] DanTannaFan 9 years ago

Yes, you are right. This is the new Stephen. If he was just going to do the exact same thing that he did on The Colbert Report, then he'd still be there doing that show. He's on network t.v. now and the rules are different (i.e. then they are for cable). Also, why should a man who is now in his 50's continue to do the same routine as he did when he was younger. When you reach your 50's all of this will make more sense, I suppose .... ?

All of Stephen's fans have aged as well, and aging means change and progression. While I miss The Colbert Report, I realize that it was time for Stephen to move on and do something different. I love his new show .... uh, with the only exception being that "hammy" band leader Batiste. Wish they'd get rid of him ..........

[–] SolariS6 9 years ago

Batiste annoys the hell out of me every time I see his pompous mug. I can't believe he's still on, there's zero chemistry between them and he has almost no personality or conversation skills.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Sure Batiste is a terrific musician, but what must they have been thinking?! History speaks for itself as testament to the notion that musicianship is merely a secondary consideration when hiring a show's bandleader! Let's not forget Steve Allen's Skitch Henderson, Paar's Jose Mellis, Cavett's Bobby Rosengarden, Carson's Doc Severensen, Arsenio's Michael Wolff, Letterman's Paul Shaffer, Leno's Branford Marsalis and Kevin Eubanks, Kimmel's Cleto Escobedo, Dennis Miller's Andy Summers, Conan's Max Weinberg and Jimmy Vivino. Each and all were and are extremely quick-witted and experienced, loquacious and outgoing cutups. None of them has ever exhibited even a hint of awkwardness as fluid conversationalists. You don't think for a moment that Fallon's crew hired the Roots because they're a great band, do you!?

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] SolariS6 9 years ago

I picked up some sarcasm in your post due to the exclamation points but I don't think that was your intention so here goes: I neither have nor ever will watch enough Fallon to judge The Roots conversational ability and am only familiar with a couple of the other ones, but The Roots as a band objectively evolved Hip-Hop beyond it's confines to matter as a significant group in it's overall history, no matter one's subjective opinion.

Musicianship goes hand in hand with those other traits in that setting of almost daily national exposure. In my opinion, there's no trade-off between the two to cut a clean line worthy enough to make an exception, especially when the former overrides the latter as strongly as this. I'll bet none of those you mentioned were, or are, as bad as him, personality and presence wise.

There's a reason why this show doesn't focus on Batiste as much as it used to (AFAIK), but his continued presence is still mind-boggling considering how little chemistry they have. Maybe Stephen or CBS believe he doesn't need a secondary partner to carry him so they've relegated him to the role of strictly bandleader, even more so after his failures.

The way he looks at the camera and dances with that pompous awkwardness doesn't work for me in any way. He doesn't fit Stephen's tone but in a show trying to pander to a broad demographic, maybe that was the original goal.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Maybe Stephen or CBS believe he doesn't need a secondary partner to carry him so they've relegated him to the role of strictly bandleader

Atta boy. Now you're getting it. Like ALL the other bandleaders mentioned in the long history of late night talk shows, Batiste was hired for his exceptional musicianship, not as a sidekick who happens to lead a band. I don't accept your premise. Imposing your own parameters on the gig doesn't make it so. And no, three exclamation points do not denote sarcasm. It's the wording of my comment that did that.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] SolariS6 9 years ago

Atta boy. Now you're getting it.

I should've just ignored you being the condescending douchebag that you are.

And no, three exclamation points do not denote sarcasm. it's the wording of my comment that did that.

It was your excessive usage of exclamation points that hinted at sarcasm as something more than just one's writing style and personality which wasn't confirmed until this reply.

I don't accept your premise. Imposing your own parameters on the gig doesn't make it so.

Are you going to apply that to your own perspective too or just others? The show focuses on Batiste and includes him in conversations with Stephen which fall flat for reasons mentioned. He needs some secondary skill besides music to be utilized in that regard.

I didn't say he needs sidekick credentials but there's a middle-ground and a minimum of those secondary traits required for someone in his position for those few interactions, and screen presence when he's the sole focus subject. Think for a minute before putting words in my mouth and being a smartass who believes he's smarter than everybody else.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Are you going to apply that to your own perspective too or just others?

and am only familiar with a couple of the other ones

I have imposed no requirements, but instead referenced tradition that trails back decades -- you know, all the other guys you've never heard of or seen.

there's a middle-ground and a minimum of those secondary traits required for someone in his position

Batiste doesn't live up to your expectations. I get that. But based on every other bandleader who has held a similar late night position, Jon neither excels beyond nor falls below them. Although only months into this sort of position and exposure, I'd say he meets a minimum, established standard in that his interplay is an inconsequently brief aspect of the show. I also doubt Andy Richter spent much time practicing scales at Juilliard. Jon and Andy have different job descriptions, which is the entirety of my point.

Neither of us speaks for the "broad demographic.' We simply hold differing opinions.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

Neither of us speaks for the "broad demographic.' We simply hold differing opinions.

LOL. Said by the single person on this forum who doesn't have a serious problem with Batiste's banter. I know you like to try to be blissfully unaware of opinions other than your own, but it isn't a matter of differing opinions on who likes/doesn't like Batiste, but, rather, differing levels of hostility- who hates him less and who hates him more.

The last time this topic came up, you were certain that Batiste was going to improve over time. How's that going for you? ;)

"Batiste isn't/wasn't intended to be a sidekick" "He'll improve" "He's comparable to other band leaders in history." LOL Your solitary game of fan excuse bingo never ceases to entertain. Keep doubling down on your opinion of one.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

You certainly didn't refute my point that taken as a group late night bandleaders have never been loquacious. But Jon Batiste deserves "hostility" and "hate?" I choose to reserve my "serious problems" to matters of actual consequence. Rather than defend Batiste's lack of verbal skills, I believe that in the scope of things, it's practically irrelevant. The guy was hired as a musician and should be judged accordingly.

Yours is an ongoing grudge with Colbert that began in September, the very day after his first Late Show aired. You were compelled to address strangers in these words:

So when I do fall head over heels in love with a celebrity, it's kind of a big deal. And there's no celebrity, past or present, that I cherished as much as I cherished you. . . This grinning, unconfrontational Stepford Wife is a hollow shell of you. You were punk rock, this guy's Disneyland. You changed the world. He sells some hummus.

Your pedantic negativity began on day one and has continued unabated to the point of hackneyed cliche. Batiste is merely collateral damage. As choosing not to watch what doesn't entertain you is clearly out of the question, one is left to wonder what your end game is, here.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

We're examining histories, huh? :) Absolutely, I've been proudly venting my frustration with Stephen and his show since day one. As have others. But, while I've been continuously calling out Stephen for betraying his politics and his core audience, you've seen fit to attack countless strangers here with your ceaseless condescension and derision. No doubt about it, I am a butthurt ex-fanboy who really needs to get over the fact that my hero is now a zero. But you, you are a sociopath.

If you really want to preach about negativity, it's time to look in the mirror. How many forum members have you denigrated? How many times have you been called a douche? At this point, I don't think you could stop mocking people if you tried. Perhaps, in real life, you're a half decent guy, and this darkness only exhibits itself in your online persona. Perhaps, in time, you'll develop some empathy and grow out of this. But right now, you are a cockroach, and, if you continue to attack well mannered members in this fashion, we will continue to crush you like the bug that you are.

[–] ColinInLa 9 years ago

Like it or not, your repetitive public displays of pettiness are not above reproach or denigration. Justifying childish name-calling and vindictiveness with the royal we accomplishes nothing, especially when you opt to ignore counterpoint on the subject at hand. Do not assume that I seek your approval.

The Colbert Report is over and Steven Colbert no longer produces a product that interests you. Yet you obviously gain some sort of pleasure out of steadfastly analyzing and denouncing his current effort, as if he will yet somehow resurrect himself in your revered estimation. I've finally become bored with pointing out the obvious; that's your issue to resolve. It's been swell.

--------------------
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

It's been swell.

LOL. Like you could ever stifle your sarcasm. Evil is your oxygen. You couldn't avoid the darkness if you tried. Stephen's betrayal of his core audience and subsequent cratering not only interests me, it's probably the most fascinating thing in media in the last decade. I'm not going to lie, losing a hero was incredibly sad, but seeing him so swiftly condemned for his actions is gratifying. As long as he fails- and boy is he failing (two more back to back .3s last week), I will be there to witness his demise. And as long as I do so, I will have something to say, and you, you will continue to attack, like you always have.

We (and you're absolutely blind if you think it's just me) will continue to crush you until this show ends, which, if everything continues as it's going, will be within the year.

[–] Flame_Wielder 9 years ago

"The one thing they love more than a hero is to see a hero fail." - Green Goblin (Spider-Man)

I guess that about sums you up, doesn't it? You certainly seem to be enjoying his failure.

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

Yeah, I lost my favorite TV show of all time, the only show that I've ever believe could fix, in it's small way, a broken political system, and I've been throwing parties ever since. Right *rolling my eyes* Did you even read this entire discussion, or did you just skim over the last post and decide to jump in with your worthless, two bit amateur psychoanalysis?

If you'd taken the time to read the entire conversation, you'd have seen this:

So when I do fall head over heels in love with a celebrity, it's kind of a big deal. And there's no celebrity, past or present, that I cherished as much as I cherished you. . . This grinning, unconfrontational Stepford Wife is a hollow shell of you. You were punk rock, this guy's Disneyland. You changed the world. He sells some hummus.

There's not a day that goes by that the I don't miss the Colbert Report. My quality of life is immeasurably lower without it. Full Frontal is okay, in it's own way, as is Last Week Tonight, but nothing is ever going to fill the hole left by the Report. Does it help to know, with the mass exodus in viewers, that I'm not alone in my pain? A tiny bit. But nothing will ever truly ameliorate the pain of losing this show.

And, for the record, when I talk about 'losing a hero,' I'm not talking about Stephen. Stephen wasn't/isn't a hero that's fallen from grace. He was never a hero to begin with. I made the idiotic mistake of associating an actor with the role he played. The hero I lost was the construct of an award winning writing team, played by actor, who, for years, resented the role. That's not a hero. That's just a spineless loser, completely oblivious of the positive impact he was making. Colbert isn't/wasn't Spider Man, he's just Tobey Maguire.

[–] Flame_Wielder 9 years ago

I get it, you're upset. I can't say I feel exactly the way you do (although I also really miss The Colbert Report), but I get that you feel that way. That's fine. But there's no need to criticize other people, like me and that other person a few posts above.

your worthless, two bit amateur psychoanalysis

What was the point of this attack? I may not agree with you, but I'm not against you. I'm not your enemy here, okay?

[–] dvd123 9 years ago

Ummm... you stuck your nose into a very heated discussion with an obviously extensive history and accused me of green goblinesque schadenfreude. At least, that's what I thought you were implying. If that was not your intent, I apologize.

As far as the 'other person' goes... Colin has a long history of bullying members who express negative opinions of the Late Show, like a 12 year old in a One Direction fan forum defending Harry Style's honor. What you're seeing here is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of how constantly denigrating he is. From day one, many members have expressed disappointment with Stephen and with the new show, and, from day one, Colin has been there to mock us. Most people back down from his bullying. I'm not. If it looks like I'm being mean, it's because there's more to this than this single conversation.

So, you and me, we're good. But don't try to get between Colin and I. In every way, I have the ethical, moral, and legal high ground.

[–] Flame_Wielder 9 years ago

I meant no offense with that quote. I had seen some of your posts where you mentioned how much better you liked Stephen when he was doing The Report, and how much you disliked his current persona. It made me think of the quote from Spider-Man, because you seem to perceive him differently now than before. A person you once admired has become a shadow of his former self. From reading your other posts in other threads, it seemed that, while you may not have been enjoying his perceived failure, it appeared not to bother you. Again, I mean no offense. I can't judge you merely by what I see you write on an IMDb messageboard, and maybe I just misinterpreted your comments. In short, the quote was just meant to be clever, not offensive.
I don't know Colin or his history, nor you and yours, for that matter, so I prefer to remain neutral in regards to your discussions.

[–] DanTannaFan 9 years ago

Agreed !