If we're talking about so-called "late night" television programming in general, then I don't really give a shit. I
did care, once upon a time. However,
Captn', since you've asked....
O'Brien turns my stomach and has always done so. If he was dying of thirst, I wouldn't so much as throw him a damp cloth. All right, that's an exaggeration - I hope. Leno was very well-liked in spite of his conservative politics, which he admirably kept under his hat - most of the time. I think a fresh face - a "new guy" you could at least feel sorry for, rather than a confirmed smart-arse jerk - was needed to fill Leno's spot. O'Brien always struck me as someone who would make a perfect "Internet asshole" and I've not seen anything which would change my mind.
Leno was good at two things: stand-up comedy and "man on the street" interviewing. Sit-down interviewing in the studio was definitely
not one of his strong points. Thing of it is, be it Leno or O'Brien, every second of every minute of those programs is ruled by producers. Even if you're a guest, you're admonished by producers to avoid certain topics. There is no spontaneity whatsoever, it's all a load of horseshit and it's entirely way too formulaic.
By the way, I hate Leno's prime-time program. So, who
do I like? The Indian-head test pattern, with a 1,000 cycles-per-second tone, always seemed a good idea to me. Just kidding! I know they use color bars now.
Please click on the image to view its full size.The TonePlease click on the link to hear the tone.
Please click on the image to view its full size.
=^..^=
Poll
