Drew <ddrewc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>The Associated Press confirmed Sunday that Fallon indeed will succeed
Conan
>on Late Night, with a news conference planned for Monday to announce the
>arrangement, according to "a person close to the negotiations who spoke
on
>condition of anonymity because the announcement hadn't been made."
>On 2008-05-06 1:30 p.m., Joseph Nebus verbated:
>> Has Jimmy Kimmel got something that really powerfully commends
>> him to a talk show host role?
>I assume you meant Fallon, not Kimmel. I, too, have been wondering how
>Fallon became the overwhelming favorite to succeed Conan. It seemed that
no
>other potential candidates even came within shouting distance of Fallon.
Oh, yes, you're right. I did mean Fallon. Man, it's an
inconvenience to have two Jimmys in late-night office, or at least
sort-of in office. Anyway, yeah, I'm curious about the selection
process involved too.
>Fallon's body of work on ``Saturday Night Live'' certainly qualifies him
>for consideration to star in a show of some sort, but it would be a
stretch
>to say that anything in his ****tfolio ``powerfully commends'' him to host
a
>late-night comedy/talk show in particular. On SNL he showed evidence of
an
>endearingly goofy, devil-may-care charm in lots and lots of sketches. He
>also co-hosted Weekend Update with Tina Fey (badly, in my opinion,
because
>he couldn't keep a straight face while delivering the punch lines), and
>flashed an Adam Sandler-esque talent for musical parody.
Ah, all right ... well, yeah, Weekend Update has got some of
the traits that a talk-show host needs, particularly in the resemblance
to a monologue and the doing of desk bits. There's not the interviewing
****tion of the job, except with, like, A Whitney Brown or a similar
absurdly impossible character, but on the other hand Fallon does seem
willing to do sketch comedy. While Conan's got sketch-comedy talents
he really doesn't play characters in the sketches with the slight and
somewhat self-deprecating exception of Noches del Pasion.
>Something that should not be underestimated is that Lorne Michaels thinks
>highly of Fallon, and Lorne has a lot of pull with the NBC folks. As we
>know, Lorne's opinion paved the way for Conan's selection, survival, and
>eventual success as host of Late Night.
That's true and I suppose it isn't to be disregarded easily.
Michaels does seem to have a skill at picking out talents, even if
things like those unspeakably awful Saturday Night Live character
movies are the side-effects.
> Almost no one
>thought Conan was right for the job at first, and he turned out
splendidly.
Heck, nobody thought Conan was right for the job before about
1996, us excepted, but he did grow into the role.
>All in all, I'd rather see Fallon take a crack at it than less-funny guys
>like, say, Carson Daly or Ryan Seacrest.
I have to admit liking Daly's introductory press conferences
as a bit, but that doesn't stop me switching over to ESPN Classic for
25 minutes of aged pro wrestling while waiting for Cheap Seats.
Well, I'll try to be optimistic.
--
Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
