What I'm curious about is did Conan bring in at least a few new writers when he moved to LA -- or did he just bring in the NYC crew? Because it's not enough just to tell the same old guys that they need to make some changes. The same writers aren't going to be capable of making the changes NBC wanted. To make those changes, the show needed some fresh voices. And, I don't consider a masturbating bear "edgy" -- to me, it's just dumb. If I remember correctly, the article about Kimmel was after the fact, so I don't really recall how much time he was given to make the changes ABC requested. I do remember that he was ordered by ABC to make the show more appealing to women. And, I believe he succeeded. I do believe Conan should have been given more time to improve the product. I'd love to know if he took NBC's request seriously.
________________________________ From: tvornottv@googlegroups.com [mailto:tvorno...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Bruggeman Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 5:45 PM To: tvornottv@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Ebersol: "What this is really all about is an astounding failure by Conan" Well, I think he tried. He hasn't been successful to date, but I'd suggest he was trying to do different things. Examples: Conando, learning stuntwork with Steven Ho, bits in front of the Universal tour tram, stunts like the monster truck smashing pumpkins and the human cannonball bits (I think the concussion might have quashed some of this, which is too bad). Yeah, it's sort of what Dave did, and what Jimmy does now (playing video games and carnival games with guests), but a bit more mainstream. I'm not sure if his visiting the neighbors bits are really that new, but along with Conando seemed to be part of his recognition that he was in Southern California. Dubbing the anime stuff was new, but wasn't really broadening his audience. Making it younger, yes, but that clearly hasn't been the biggest priority for NBC. Now he did ditch a few things that were considered too edgy for 11:30 (that bear, playing with his nipples), but making new stuff seems more effective than just ditching the old. He might have also tried to do more with his musical skills, and more with Andy than "Andy'll Try It". A good point of comparison might be some assessment of the changes Kimmel made (which I take on faith, as I've rarely been compelled to watch him) and how long he had to make those changes. Was it longer than seven months? And yes, Zucker still is an asshole. David ________________________________ From: "Pollak, Melissa F." <mpol...@nsf.gov> A different perspective Too smart? Hardly. I find Conan's comedy silly and juvenile (for the most part). I know I wasn't the target audience when he was on at 12:30, but I should have been in it after he took over The Tonight Show. Remember how ABC told Kimmel that he needed to "broaden his appeal" -- to women? Well, Kimmel listened and followed orders. The result? He's still on the air and doing fine. Conan should have listened, too. He needed to make some changes -- to appeal to an audience other than (mainly) the college crowd -- and he didn't, I guess. For me, if I'm still up and if Letterman's in repeats or has a guest I don't care to listen to, I'll switch to ABC. That said, Zucker's still an asshole. <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en>
-- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to tvornottv@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tvornottv-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
